A small and inconsequent thought.

[fpb]

This is the most impressive American election in living memory. The two candidates, both outstanding, are an intellectual and a war hero. Can history help us to pick a winner? I don't think so. You see, of the three (in my view) greatest presidents in American history, one - Washington - was a war hero; another - Lincoln - was an intellectual; and the third - Theodore Roosevelt - was an intellectual AND a war hero. The game is perfectly even.

Comments

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

I agree; I think we have excellent choices :-)

[redcoast.livejournal.com]

Teddy? Really?

[fpb.livejournal.com]

That is my view. What would be yours?

[redcoast.livejournal.com]

Well, I don't know, I've not really ranked them. I like Teddy generally, but he was a bit American Imperialist for my tastes.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

Ah, but at the time, being an imperialist was exactly what America needed. You may not be aware of it, but in 1892 the USA pulled out of a war with Italy they had practically started already (over 13 Italian-born criminals lynched by a mob in New Orleans) because it was realized at the last minute that America had only four warships in service - and Italy, not the strongest European power by any means, had 73. This sort of thing is why the Emperor of Germany, for one, confidently expected Spain to beat America six years later. After the shock of the Civil War, America had turned its back on war to a damaging and dangerous extent; if Italy was able to push it around in 1892, just imagine if Britain or France or Germany had got the same notion! It was necessary for America to become internationally respected and feared enough to avoid any further such threats. The policy of American self-assertion had started before Theodore's presidency, after the 1892 shock, but he carried it through admirably and with a suitable sense of place and circumstance.

[super-pan.livejournal.com]

Argh. That John McCain is a war hero is incontrivertable. But I declare, that man has sold out every conviction he ever had. And I mean literally. Every position he ever had that marked him as a "maverick", is the opposite of what he proposes now, from offshore drilling, to torture, to taxes, to abortion (I know this position is important to you, and I respect people who feel strongly about this from either position, but he has taken BOTH positions, which to me says he doesn't care either way, which is worse than any strong opinion). I do not consider him a sincere human at all. I realize I am very partisan and biased, but I can't of anything that he champions now that is any different than George Bush.

[fpb.livejournal.com]

I can't imagine where you got the notion that John McCain changed any position on abortion. He was temporarily in favour of embryo experimentation, but his record on abortion is 100% negative - just ask NARAL. As for offshore drilling, don't you think that some small things have changed? As for torture, show me where he has changed his position (and both candidates have promised they will close Guantamano). I do not blame you, but I would say that you have been getting some pretty weird news. Perhaps you should listen to the conservatives when they tell you that the mainstream media are biased and in Obama's pockets. (Indeed, they are so to an extent that bothers him. He has, for instance, stated clearly that any member of his campaign caught making an issue of candidates' families will be sacked, but this has done nothing to stop the media's assault on Sarah Palin's family.)