Replies

enumerated: "Some people are naturally subservient and fawn over their “betters”.
There are tons of Americans who get all giddy over the British royal family.
Explain that one to me.
It’s just weird."

Totally agree, and what's even more weird is when they treat Hollywood actors(!!) as if they were royalty.
You got me on that one.

enumerated: "There is no question that Lincoln and Kennedy have achieved something akin to sainthood simply by being assassinated."

I remember Kennedy's assassination quite well, but how many today remember the deaths in office of Presidents:

William Henry Harrison -- died in office 1841
Zachary Taylor -- died in office 1850
James A Garfield -- assassinated 1881
William McKinley -- assassinated 1901
Warren G. Harding -- died in office 1923

You may remember that McKinley was honored by naming Alaska's highest mountain for him, name changed in 2015 to Denali.

Point is: even assassination does not guarantee perpetual fame & honor.

enumerated: "There’s nothing wrong with admiring a good leader - I admired Reagan - I admire Trump.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who admire Lincoln and Kennedy for the right reasons - those aren’t the people I’m calling disgusting."

In my memory of Kennedy he was growing increasingly unpopular in the fall of 1963 and certainly would not have performed as well against Republican Goldwater in 1964 as LBJ did.
Assassination changed all that.

And something similar happened with the near assassinations of both President Reagan and Pope John Paul II.
It gave them a boost in popularity that lasted the rest of their lives.

enumerated: "I think anointing sainthood to past leaders like Lincoln does a disservice to everyone - and calling him the Great Emancipator - as if one man freed the slaves."

No... there are two Presidents in US history who truly do stand above all others because of the degree of difficulty of their challenges and the astonishing successful results.
Those are Washington and Lincoln, all others are several steps below them.
Lincoln the Great Emancipator did in fact free the slaves -- first by Presidential proclamation, then by Constitutional Amendments, it's most unlikely that anyone else among competitors in the election of 1860 could have, or would have, achieved what Lincoln did.

Sure, lots of posters say: only at horrendous costs in blood & treasure.
But I don't blame Lincoln, I blame Davis who both started the war and refused to stop it on any terms better than Unconditional Surrender:

“Those are Washington and Lincoln, all others are several steps below them.”

Washington, yes. Following the revolution, he was offered kingship, and turned it down! He made mistakes, but that single act of pure statesmanship puts Washington far above all other presidents, including Lincoln.

I’m not going to try and relitigate the Civil War. To the victors go the spoils, not least of which is the privilege of recording history in a favorable light.

“Point is: even assassination does not guarantee perpetual fame & honor.”

Of course not. There either has to be some extenuating circumstances of great import, or perhaps, notice, a leftist leaning. Leftists couldn’t care less about McKinley, but they adore any modern Dems like Kennedy (who was also made a big deal of before the killing - he was “handsome” and “young” albeit Catholic, and people were oohing-aahing already over him).

Garfield was hardly in office when he was shot, unfortunately. He had no “background” to build up, and no great drama like Lincoln.

But it is a trend that does tend to happen.