Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
You know, I was going to say that it should be top 10 and then make fun of your ranking. But as I thought about it - you are right. It doesn't belong too high. Good job here.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
timschochet's thread- Mods, please move this thread to the Politics Subforum, thank you (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Yank - question - when you put Van Buren next in line, does that mean you are doing these in order? - I actually like Van Buren, typically he's overlooked.
About your civil rights assessments...
MVB helped keep the country together. The need or desire for expansion - let's face it there was a whole continent and them some waiting to be claimed for the USA - was important but the timing and how that was done so as to prevent secession and regional pressures was a huge responsibility. IMO MVB handled that really well.
He was also the last VP to get elected until George HW Bush.
About your civil rights assessments...
...something to keep in mind that MVB's staying out of Mexico also meant that he did not excite Southern interests also. Thus the Whigs rising up in this time was no coincidence.
MVB helped keep the country together. The need or desire for expansion - let's face it there was a whole continent and them some waiting to be claimed for the USA - was important but the timing and how that was done so as to prevent secession and regional pressures was a huge responsibility. IMO MVB handled that really well.
He was also the last VP to get elected until George HW Bush.
Last edited by a moderator:
John Bender
Footballguy
Gonna have to actually read all this President stuff too. Looks great.
Tim if you want me to take my shtick elsewhere, just say the word, it's no problem.
Tim if you want me to take my shtick elsewhere, just say the word, it's no problem.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
William Henry Harrison (1881)
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Harrison was only President for a month. It’s going to be hard to grade him in any category and in doing so all you can look to is really his inauguration speech. So we will go there. He said in his speech that he would refuse a second term and would weaken the executive branch allowing Congress to run the country. He basically said that in as much as he was President, he wasn’t going to do anything leadership wise. Much of his campaign was vague and he didn’t serve long enough to actually do anything that would show his ability to lead a nation. He has to get a 1 here simply because there is no other number you can give him.
War & Crisis
He didn’t face any. He pledged no interference in the economy at all, which would mean that the depression would continue its natural course. He would not veto any bill unless he thought it was unconstitutional, meaning that he probably wouldn’t have had a ton of domestic policy fights on his hands. And on slavery he stated that each state should have the power to choose for themselves, which would have caused a ton of problems throughout the country and possibly sped up the Civil War – it certainly would not have slowed it or stopped it from happening. If we take him at his word that he was going to be a weak figurehead, then by definition he wasn’t going to be a good crisis manager. Another low mark.
Economy
He didn’t support the treasury idea of Van Buren’s and wasn’t going to be involved in the economy at all. You can’t give him a 1 here though because the economy was identical when he died as when he took office.
Foreign Policy
He had no policy. In his speech he said that he would have a strong defense and stay away from wars in foreign lands. Every President says that for the most part. If you want to give him credit for not starting a war in a month you could do that.
Executive Skills/Congress
He specifically said he wouldn’t have any and would let Congress lead the nation. That doesn’t give him a 1, but he certainly doesn’t get a 10 either.
Justice/Rights
He would have supported growing slave power. But he didn’t live long enough to do that. In as much as he didn’t advance the cause of civil rights he didn’t hurt them. He gets credit by default for that.
Context
There is none. There just isn’t enough time in office to define anything. His speech was in keeping with the Whig party’s platform. He was going to stand as an opposite President to Jackson and Van Buren and he was going to lead by not leading. Even if you believe in small government, it still needs strong leadership. He promised nothing of the sort.
Conclusion
Harrison’s presidency is rightfully a footnote in our history because you have no choice to do it. He gets a 1 for persuasion, 1 for crisis, 2 for economy, 2 for foreign affairs, 2 for Congress, 3 for civil rights and 1 for context. Clocking in an awe inspiring 12 total raw points. He was a solid member of our history leading up to being elected President. But then his legacy ended before it could get started. His death created a crisis that the country had to endure for the first time – the death of the President.
Public Acumen/Persuasion
Harrison was only President for a month. It’s going to be hard to grade him in any category and in doing so all you can look to is really his inauguration speech. So we will go there. He said in his speech that he would refuse a second term and would weaken the executive branch allowing Congress to run the country. He basically said that in as much as he was President, he wasn’t going to do anything leadership wise. Much of his campaign was vague and he didn’t serve long enough to actually do anything that would show his ability to lead a nation. He has to get a 1 here simply because there is no other number you can give him.
War & Crisis
He didn’t face any. He pledged no interference in the economy at all, which would mean that the depression would continue its natural course. He would not veto any bill unless he thought it was unconstitutional, meaning that he probably wouldn’t have had a ton of domestic policy fights on his hands. And on slavery he stated that each state should have the power to choose for themselves, which would have caused a ton of problems throughout the country and possibly sped up the Civil War – it certainly would not have slowed it or stopped it from happening. If we take him at his word that he was going to be a weak figurehead, then by definition he wasn’t going to be a good crisis manager. Another low mark.
Economy
He didn’t support the treasury idea of Van Buren’s and wasn’t going to be involved in the economy at all. You can’t give him a 1 here though because the economy was identical when he died as when he took office.
Foreign Policy
He had no policy. In his speech he said that he would have a strong defense and stay away from wars in foreign lands. Every President says that for the most part. If you want to give him credit for not starting a war in a month you could do that.
Executive Skills/Congress
He specifically said he wouldn’t have any and would let Congress lead the nation. That doesn’t give him a 1, but he certainly doesn’t get a 10 either.
Justice/Rights
He would have supported growing slave power. But he didn’t live long enough to do that. In as much as he didn’t advance the cause of civil rights he didn’t hurt them. He gets credit by default for that.
Context
There is none. There just isn’t enough time in office to define anything. His speech was in keeping with the Whig party’s platform. He was going to stand as an opposite President to Jackson and Van Buren and he was going to lead by not leading. Even if you believe in small government, it still needs strong leadership. He promised nothing of the sort.
Conclusion
Harrison’s presidency is rightfully a footnote in our history because you have no choice to do it. He gets a 1 for persuasion, 1 for crisis, 2 for economy, 2 for foreign affairs, 2 for Congress, 3 for civil rights and 1 for context. Clocking in an awe inspiring 12 total raw points. He was a solid member of our history leading up to being elected President. But then his legacy ended before it could get started. His death created a crisis that the country had to endure for the first time – the death of the President.
Shankopotamus
Footballguy
19. Cantaloupe
GOOD: A star at continental breakfast at the Hampton Inn when bacon is not available, and there is a family of four, nominal aggregate weight 1000 pounds, crowded around the self make waffle iron trying to figure out how to use it.
Lets face it you aren't touching the watery scrambled eggs, the toast comes out whiter than Michael Jackson circa 1992, and no one wants honeydew.
GOOD: A star at continental breakfast at the Hampton Inn when bacon is not available, and there is a family of four, nominal aggregate weight 1000 pounds, crowded around the self make waffle iron trying to figure out how to use it.
Lets face it you aren't touching the watery scrambled eggs, the toast comes out whiter than Michael Jackson circa 1992, and no one wants honeydew.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
Yes, I'm doing them in order of service. It makes my job easier because I am doing this far differently than tim.
MVB is an interesting character. I gave him high marks for foreign policy but I understand what you say about expansion as well. His low crisis management score has more to do with the economy than anything. And the 5 in context of the times was a higher than he deserved, save for the cool hand he used with expansion. He might still see a bump after the raw numbers are done.
Yankee23Fan
Fair Tax!
timschochet
Footballguy
I like it.
John Bender
Footballguy
Too much controversy. Gonna avoid. Tomato is actually my favorite food, so it wouldn't be fair anyway.
TheAristocrat
Footballguy
@ JB. Too awesome.
msommer
Footballguy
John Bender
Footballguy
Pumpkin> YER OUTTA HERE
timschochet
Footballguy
99. John Brown
The crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood.
Abolitionist and terrorist John Brown first became known to the American public in 1856, when he and his family kidnapped 5 pro-slavery men on the Kansas border and hacked them to death with broadswords. Following this brutal act, Brown disappeared from abolitionist circles, except to secretly meet with several of its more famous leaders such as Frederick Douglas, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry Thoreau. At these meetings Brown proposed a revolution to end slavery in the South. Most of the rational men he met believed he was insane, though his cause was righteous.
In 1859 Brown tried to carry it out at Harper's Ferry. It was a futile effort. He was captured (by Robert E. Lee and JEB Stuart), tried, sentenced to death and hung. However, during his trial Brown made several comments that demonstrated his belief in himself and the justification of his cause. The north admired this immensely and treated him as a martyr. The South was outraged by the North's reaction, and was determined to leave the union.
It may be noted that Brown's slave insurrection achieved little and lasted for less than a fortnight, while the Nat Turner rebellion a few decades earlier lasted for weeks and created havoc throughout the South, especially Virginia, which saw the deaths of hundreds. Why then is John Brown on this list and Nat Turner is not? The answer is timing. John Brown's rebellion was a key event, perhaps THE key event which led to the Civil War.
In my thread on the Civil War we engaged in a lengthy debate about whether or not John Brown was a terrorist using the modern sense of the word. I believe he was. He led an organized small group with the purpose of spreading violence, fear, and mayhem in order to achieve specific but wide political goals. To me, that meets all the necessary requirements for a terrorist. Brown was our Osama Bin Laden. Had Bin Laden been captured and tried, his defense would have been much like John Brown's who said:
If it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit; so let it be done.Next up: The former marine who would dominate the country for 5 crucial years...
The crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood.
Abolitionist and terrorist John Brown first became known to the American public in 1856, when he and his family kidnapped 5 pro-slavery men on the Kansas border and hacked them to death with broadswords. Following this brutal act, Brown disappeared from abolitionist circles, except to secretly meet with several of its more famous leaders such as Frederick Douglas, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Henry Thoreau. At these meetings Brown proposed a revolution to end slavery in the South. Most of the rational men he met believed he was insane, though his cause was righteous.
In 1859 Brown tried to carry it out at Harper's Ferry. It was a futile effort. He was captured (by Robert E. Lee and JEB Stuart), tried, sentenced to death and hung. However, during his trial Brown made several comments that demonstrated his belief in himself and the justification of his cause. The north admired this immensely and treated him as a martyr. The South was outraged by the North's reaction, and was determined to leave the union.
It may be noted that Brown's slave insurrection achieved little and lasted for less than a fortnight, while the Nat Turner rebellion a few decades earlier lasted for weeks and created havoc throughout the South, especially Virginia, which saw the deaths of hundreds. Why then is John Brown on this list and Nat Turner is not? The answer is timing. John Brown's rebellion was a key event, perhaps THE key event which led to the Civil War.
In my thread on the Civil War we engaged in a lengthy debate about whether or not John Brown was a terrorist using the modern sense of the word. I believe he was. He led an organized small group with the purpose of spreading violence, fear, and mayhem in order to achieve specific but wide political goals. To me, that meets all the necessary requirements for a terrorist. Brown was our Osama Bin Laden. Had Bin Laden been captured and tried, his defense would have been much like John Brown's who said:
If it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I submit; so let it be done.Next up: The former marine who would dominate the country for 5 crucial years...
rockaction
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
John Brown - yeah I guess I have a problem with folks who helped start the Civil War, that's kind of like ranking Jeff Davis in the mid tier if greatest presidents. - I hope Frederick Douglas goes relatively high compared to this hotheaded schmuck who helped drive our country to war.
Don Quixote
Footballguy
Is there an honorable mention list? Kind of curious who Brown was ranked ahead of. (Cantaloupe too.)
timschochet
Footballguy
As I post the list I'll probably bring up people who I considered but didn't quite make the top 100. I mentioned Joe Namath in the Billie Jean King posting, and Babe Zaharias. In the John Brown posting, I mentioned Henry Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson- both of them are among our greatest Americans, but neither quite got into my top 100. Frederick Douglas of course is in and will be mentioned later. But other famous slaves, such as Nat Turner, Sojourner Truth, and Harriet Tubman didn't make the final cut.
rockaction
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Holy moley you left Babe off the list? Get outta here. I agree it's tomato time!
timschochet
Footballguy
It's a question of impact on society. Babe was a greater athlete no question, but Billie Jean was far more significant.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
The whole thingTom Hagen said:Bender's Youtube videos
G
General Tso
Guest
I too am very down on pumpkins. They have been artificially propped up up by Halloween and Harvest Fairs. Posers.msommer said:
Last edited:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Antigourdite.John Bender said:
G
General Tso
Guest
I like the BJK pick.Question though - if we throw fruit at Tim, what do we throw at Bender?rockaction said:
rockaction
Footballguy
John Bender
Footballguy
nice rockWell played
John Bender
Footballguy
Wocka Wocka wocka
Peyton Marino
Footballguy
John Bender
Footballguy
2 a day GB.
Takes me a bit to think of funny premises for each one.
Also uploading the YouTube videos is a pain in the ###, but now part of the package
Takes me a bit to think of funny premises for each one.
Also uploading the YouTube videos is a pain in the ###, but now part of the package
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I'm glad you're giving WHH some score here. It seems unfair or unfortunate that some could be dead and through no fault of their own end up with some of the worst in US history. Given they did little harm it seems to me guys like this should either get a DQ or somehow end up shmushed in the middle somehow. Maybe some of the worst of the worst will end up with negative scores, at any rate I hope you're deducting for some of the worst acts in our history, not just adding for the good things.Yankee23Fan said:
rockaction
Footballguy
John Bender said:
Herbie and US3?
Word.
John Bender
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
98. Joseph R. McCarthy
I have here in my hand a list of 205 that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.
I really did not intend to place "Tailgunner Joe" on my list. I was looking at some true American heroes, like Audie Murphy, or Daniel Inouye (Inouye's story, involving the Hawaiian Japanese 442nd Regiment in World War II, is one of the great war sagas of all time.) There were some great writers and poets I was considering, like Walt Whitman and William Faulkner. I was even thinking about saving a space for noted humanitarian Margaret Sanger, and fully prepared to defend that against the crapstorm that was sure to follow.
But here's the thing: for a period of 5 years, from 1950 to 1954, Joe McCarthy was the most powerful non-Presidential politician in American history. That is significant, and can't be ignored however much I much want to. And what's fascinating about this is that, though McCarthy was certainly a populist of the highest order, he lacked all of the qualities that one typically associates with populists. He wasn't a good speaker. He wasn't good looking. He didn't dress well (he looked seedy and sweated whenever on television.) He lacked charisma. He had none of the charm or good humor that defined, for example, Huey Long or even our current day Donald Trump.
McCarthy's message was nothing new, either. Dozens of conservative politicians, including, notably, Richard Nixon, had been warning about Communism for years. For 2 years prior to McCarthy's first famous speech on the issue at Wheeling, West Virginia, the House on UnAmerican Activities had been investigating Communists in the movies, on TV, in the State Department. What we now think of as "McCarthyism" was going full blast. And Joe wasn't even particularly good at talking about it. Yet somehow he rose above all of the others and became the spokesman. Weird, but sometimes American politics are inexplicable. How is Donald Trump currently polling at twice all other GOP candidates? Everybody has a theory, but nobody really knows why. There are many reasons why the American public in 1950 was ready to listen to someone warning them about Communist spies everywhere. They had been treated to a real one in Algier Hiss. They were shocked by the number of Hollywood writers and directors who took the 5th Amendment when asked about their beliefs. And of course, China had been lost to the Communists, and Russia had exploded a hydrogen bomb. So they were worried and suspicious. But why Joe McCarthy? Good question.
Of course, after McCarthy became famous some very bright people started working for him, including the brilliant Roy Cohn, one of the more fascinating characters of the era. His secret gay relationship with David Schine would end up bringing McCarthy down, since Cohn didn't want Schine in the army, which caused McCarthy to attack the army, which allowed for televised hearings. Joseph Welch was a big hero, but the real key was the public seeing for the first time what a bully McCarthy was. After those hearings, he faded into obscurity before finally dying a few years later. His time was very short. Nonetheless, he has to be on this list.
Next...his invention would create decades of human misery...
I have here in my hand a list of 205 that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.
I really did not intend to place "Tailgunner Joe" on my list. I was looking at some true American heroes, like Audie Murphy, or Daniel Inouye (Inouye's story, involving the Hawaiian Japanese 442nd Regiment in World War II, is one of the great war sagas of all time.) There were some great writers and poets I was considering, like Walt Whitman and William Faulkner. I was even thinking about saving a space for noted humanitarian Margaret Sanger, and fully prepared to defend that against the crapstorm that was sure to follow.
But here's the thing: for a period of 5 years, from 1950 to 1954, Joe McCarthy was the most powerful non-Presidential politician in American history. That is significant, and can't be ignored however much I much want to. And what's fascinating about this is that, though McCarthy was certainly a populist of the highest order, he lacked all of the qualities that one typically associates with populists. He wasn't a good speaker. He wasn't good looking. He didn't dress well (he looked seedy and sweated whenever on television.) He lacked charisma. He had none of the charm or good humor that defined, for example, Huey Long or even our current day Donald Trump.
McCarthy's message was nothing new, either. Dozens of conservative politicians, including, notably, Richard Nixon, had been warning about Communism for years. For 2 years prior to McCarthy's first famous speech on the issue at Wheeling, West Virginia, the House on UnAmerican Activities had been investigating Communists in the movies, on TV, in the State Department. What we now think of as "McCarthyism" was going full blast. And Joe wasn't even particularly good at talking about it. Yet somehow he rose above all of the others and became the spokesman. Weird, but sometimes American politics are inexplicable. How is Donald Trump currently polling at twice all other GOP candidates? Everybody has a theory, but nobody really knows why. There are many reasons why the American public in 1950 was ready to listen to someone warning them about Communist spies everywhere. They had been treated to a real one in Algier Hiss. They were shocked by the number of Hollywood writers and directors who took the 5th Amendment when asked about their beliefs. And of course, China had been lost to the Communists, and Russia had exploded a hydrogen bomb. So they were worried and suspicious. But why Joe McCarthy? Good question.
Of course, after McCarthy became famous some very bright people started working for him, including the brilliant Roy Cohn, one of the more fascinating characters of the era. His secret gay relationship with David Schine would end up bringing McCarthy down, since Cohn didn't want Schine in the army, which caused McCarthy to attack the army, which allowed for televised hearings. Joseph Welch was a big hero, but the real key was the public seeing for the first time what a bully McCarthy was. After those hearings, he faded into obscurity before finally dying a few years later. His time was very short. Nonetheless, he has to be on this list.
Next...his invention would create decades of human misery...
rockaction
Footballguy
I figure now is as good as any time on the board to post this. McCarthy is a sad event in American history; sadder because there was so much treason that justified him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUD0MUmcDmM
timschochet
Footballguy
Nice use of music there.
As to your comment "so much treason", not really. Algier Hiss and the Rosenbergs were guilty* (despite liberal professors trying to prove their innocence for decades to follow), but most of those accused were innocent. In Hollywood, some of the writers like Dalton Trumbo. Lillian Hellman, and Howard Fast were Communists but so what? They weren't traitors.
*NOTE- When I said the Rosenbergs were guilty, there appears to be some recent evidence that Ethel Rosenberg was not really involved, and should not have been put to death.
As to your comment "so much treason", not really. Algier Hiss and the Rosenbergs were guilty* (despite liberal professors trying to prove their innocence for decades to follow), but most of those accused were innocent. In Hollywood, some of the writers like Dalton Trumbo. Lillian Hellman, and Howard Fast were Communists but so what? They weren't traitors.
*NOTE- When I said the Rosenbergs were guilty, there appears to be some recent evidence that Ethel Rosenberg was not really involved, and should not have been put to death.
rockaction
Footballguy
I'd respond that communists are inherently traitorous when allowed to operate within Western capitalism. It puts me with the dinosaurs, but I'm happy that way.
At the risk of going off of the rails, Barton Fink was probably the best example of an anecdotal example of creeping communism within that sphere.
Just an off-handed comment. Love that movie.
The Coen brothers can flat write and understand poly philosophy. It's ridiculous for modern entertainment.
rockaction
Footballguy
By the way, without being hifalutin or having pretense, I hope either Lemuel Shaw or Herman Melville make your list just because of the background and story.
It's ridiculous.
It's ridiculous.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
Neither.
Shaw is someone I never really considered. Melville I gave a LOT of thought to. I made a list of all American novelists. Melville and Faulkner were the most difficult to leave out of the top 100 but I couldn't find a place for them.
G
General Tso
Guest
Cotton pickin ##### he was.
rockaction
Footballguy
Melville, in my humble opinion, is the best English writer this side of Shakespeare. He writes in metaphors that have three meanings per sentence. I have never read Moby ****; his political and social short stories are enough. I'm actually scared of Moby **** and don't like the sea, so that's my personal take. But Bartleby The Scrivener and Paradise of Bachelors And Tartarus of Maids stand up to any literature. Ever.
Shaw created the standards for basic tort law, riparian rights, and was the longstanding expounder of workman's comp up until the 20th century. And he was Melville's father-in-law, who kidnapped his own daughter back from Melville because Herman was abusive toward her, and was accused of awful things. He bashed Shaw and Shaw's mercantilistic leanings repeatedly in his writings.
It's just a story that demands telling, and thus I have done so.
Last edited by a moderator:
G
General Tso
Guest
timschochet
Footballguy
I don't disagree about Melville. He is very possibly our greatest novelist. But in order to make the top 100, there has to be an amount of social significance as well, and while Melville certainly has it, the writers I have chosen (and there's not too many of them) I believe have more. But that's a very subjective opinion I admit.
timschochet
Footballguy
I also considered three playwrights from the 20th century: Eugene 0' Neil, Arthur Miller, and Tennessee Williams. Their output is as important to American letters as Chekov is to Russia and Bernard Shaw to England. But again I just could not find any room for them.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Outrage upon outrage upon disgrace here. I have to get some more tomatoes I'm all out.
rockaction
Footballguy
Totally.
I just love the Shaw/Melville yarn. Happened across it in law school, and am lucky for the education.
Similar threads
