Posted on 06/26/2005 6:55:16 PM PDT by EUPHORIC
I didn't follow the show, but I saw part of tonight's episode. I'm happy with President Reagan's win, but I probably wouldn't have placed him that highly. I haven't considered the question all that closely, but I have a few thoughts. I'll give something of a list, but it is more off the top of my head than a reflection of deep thought. Mostly, I look for people with some admirable qualities who were uniquely qualified to play the big part that they played in our history.
1. George Washington - I think George Washington was uniquely qualified to lead the Continental Army and to be our first president. He didn't have as extensive a military background as I had once thought, but he was a long-time soldier. He could be something of a player, but he played his part for the good of the country. I don't think anyone else could have led the army through the war or had the prestige to preside over the Constitutional convention and then be the first president.
2. Thomas Jefferson - Thomas Jefferson made two huge contributions. First, we needed the Declaration of Independence. We needed a statement of why we wanted independence and what principles we wanted to establish. Maybe all of the ideas weren't his, but he communicated them very effectively. Secondly, he made the Louisiana Purchase and created the Corps of Discovery to explore and lay claim to the land that we had just bought. Maybe many others would have been smart enough to make the purchase, but President Jefferson had the right scientific mind to appreciate the value of exploration and appreciate Meriwether Lewis as the guy who should lead the expedition. Lewis in turn was smart enough to recognize what William Clark could bring a leadership that he didn't have. The Louisiana Purchase and the Lewis and Clark Expedition started the United States on the march to the Pacific that would be part of building our greatness.
3. Andrew Jackson - Andrew Jackson was a young soldier in the American Revolution and then fought Indian tribes that threatened the Southeast. When the treaty ending the War of 1812 was signed, it left each side in possession of whatever land it controlled when the treaty reached America. The Battle of New Orleans came after the treaty was signed but before the treaty crossed the Atlantic. If the British had won, they would have controlled New Orleans and been in a position to put a stranglehold on commerce down the Mississippi and expansion to the West. I don't think that many other men of that time could have led the defense of New Orleans as General Jackson did. Andrew Jackson later took initiative to beat the Spanish and give us Florida. As president, he also stood against South Carolina's attempt to seceed around 1830. Without that stand, maybe the United States would have come unraveled a state at a time long before 1860.
4. Abraham Lincoln - Abraham Lincoln's choice is fairly obvious. He wanted nothing more than to hold the nation together as one nation. He would have compromised on anything else including slavery, but at his election, the South seceeded. He made some mistakes, but he learned. Too many people who find power forget how to learn. Abraham Lincoln held his army together and eventually held the country together.
5. Sam Houston - Sam Houston's life was not without mistakes. He had a bad marriage. Not all that happened was his fault, but the situation was ugly. At times in his life, he was a horrible alcoholic. However, he was a war hero from his teens and served as the governor of Tennessee. In the 1830's and 40's, he made all of the right moves to take Texas from Mexico and add it to the United States. He received a great deal of criticism on many points, but he made the right choices in subtle situations to take Texas from Mexico. Without his making the right choices, maybe Mexico would still own the entire Southwest. Sam Houston was a big part of our push to the Pacific Ocean.
I'd probably put Ben Franklin in the top ten. He made important contributions at the start of our country and was an inventor and businessman as well as a statesman. He was an early definition of what it meant to be an American.
I'd put Ronald Reagan in the top ten as well. The most bloodthirsty ideology of all time has been communism, and he recognized the evil of communism and led the fight against it. It's harder to say how his contribution will play out in the long run. To make his contribution really worthwhile, we need to take this country in the right direction today.
Another person in my top 50 or maybe top 100 would be President George H. W. Bush. I'd put him above his son, our current president. George Bush (41) led an amazing life. He volunteered for the war at the age of 17 and was the youngest combat pilot in WWII. He generally performed well but was shot down once and survived. He came home to get a degree from Yale and play college baseball. He worked in the Texas oil business. While he's not a true self-made man and undoubtedly had help from his family connections, the oil business is still a neat part of our history. He was elected to Congress, headed the CIA, and was an ambassador to China. He was vice-president to President Reagan and was loyal to the president. While President Reagan gets most of the credit for ending the Cold War, President Bush (41) was in office when the Berlin Wall fell and when the Soviet Union collapsed. Maybe both of those things would have happened anyway, but maybe a Dukakis presidency would have allowed European communism to recover. I don't like everything that he did as president, but he wasn't a bad president. He led well during the first Gulf War, and I really don't have a big problem with his not taking Bagdad. If we hadn't made such a big mistake in '92, I think he would have brought down Hussein through other means in the 90's. Finally, he saw his son become president. Overall, that's a great American life.
Bill
"Rush Limbaugh should have been in the top 5."
That would have been sweet
"Rush Limbaugh should have been in the top 5."
That would have been sweet
"Rush Limbaugh should have been in the top 5."
That would have been sweet
Triple-post
What would happen if all the states left?
"The libs can find solace in the fact that they won #2 and #3."
Questions:
How the heck is Lincoln a liberal?
Was MLK pro-life? Or not?
"Americans are a stupid lot, with no historical sense whatsoever."
Well, apparently some americans are also quite rude.
Because some of us disagree with you, we are now stupid?
Unbelievable.
No, because Americans put MLK, Oprah, Bill Clinton and Elvis in the top ten they are very stupid and historically ignorant. And yes, Reagan was a very great man. But no, he does not belong above George Washington or Lincoln.
Oh I can tell you the answer. LOL!
Why can't you answer my simple question?
"No kidding, the endless radio commercials for it were getting on my nerves. Remember the choices listed in those radio spots? Washington, MLK, Oprah and Muhammad Ali"
I'm kinda surprised the ads didn't feature Ceasar Chavez and Mumia the Murderer.
What doesn't?
When Reagan ran for the White House in '80 and '84, I was too young to vote. However, I got to vote for him in this contest and I bet there were many other young Reagan fans out there doing the same, winning another for The Gipper!
"And yes, Reagan was a very great man."
Glad we can agree on something. Sorry I called you rude.
Goodnight montag, All.
uh, father of the republican party?
#3 is a mystery to me, too. then again, I'm not sure what franklin was doing in the top 5, either.
I think if you drop on of those two out of the top 10, GWB shoots into the top 5. wouldn't THAT drive the liberals crazy.
Thanks for the link to the DemUnderground, and, also, thanks for the warning about the language. WOW! I read a few posts, and then realized I didn't care what they had to say, I wasn't going to wade through a whole stream of that kind of language. By the way, Geo. Washington gets my vote for #1, but Mr. Reagan is right up there.
Right. I just don't see how you put an "administrator" (someone who takes what's there and works it, no matter how well) over the visionary who "created" it in the first place.
If MLK sired as many children as rumored, then he might actually be the father of our Country.
Agreed. Well said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.