Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community (https://thetfp.com/tfp/)
-   Tilted Politics (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/)
-   -   Greatest American (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/74122-greatest-american.html)

Mephisto2 10-27-2004 10:12 PM

Greatest American
 
The BBC ran a very entertaining and educational series a couple of years ago with a view to identifying the Greatest Briton of all time. You can check the show's website here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/program...tbritons.shtml

In an attempt to get away from the factional bickering on this board as the election draws nearer, I was wondering if people would be interested in a thread that discussed the Greatest American of all time. Chances are politicians will make up a high number of nominations, so I'm posting this thread on this board. However, don't let that stop you from suggesting industrialists, military men (or women), scientists etc.

Personally, I feel there shall be some easy choices for the top 5 at least. These will probably include

Abraham Lincoln
Thomas Edison
Ulysses S Grant
Dwight D Eisenhower
Thomas Jefferson
John F Kennedy
and so on.

My nomination is Abraham Lincoln, probably the best President the US has ever had. The reasons should be obvious, but I shall list some of the more notable.

- He was a great leader during the countries most dangerous time.
- He was a politician who accepted he did not represent all Americans, but reached out to try to "save the Union."
- He alone (until US Grant) understood the gravity of the Civil War and what it would take to win it.
- He emancipated the slaves.
- He wrote some of the most moving, and still relevant, speeches in American political history.
- He was the master of the pithy remark.

Some interesting reading can be found at the following sites:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/al16.html (I find it surprising that Lynne Cheney's bio is linked off Lincoln's! But let's not get off topic)
http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/
http://showcase.netins.net/web/creative/lincoln.html
http://members.aol.com/RVSNorton/Lincoln2.html



Who would you nominate and why? And if you disagree with my suggestion, please give reasons.


Here's hoping for a non-partisan, interesting thread in these stressful times...


Mr Mephisto

bling 10-27-2004 10:20 PM

Lincoln, yeah - the greatest President, by far. He's essentially mythological at this point.

Other great American's:

Benjamin Franklin, the greatest politician.
Grand Master Flash
Ted Williams
The pizza cook at Brothers Pizza just outside Philly. Though he may be an Italian national.
Tom Waits
Martin Luther King Jr.
Malcolm X
The guy that first started distributing Ketel One vodka

maybe not in that order ...

Mephisto2 10-27-2004 10:30 PM

Ahh... but you've got to pick one and give some reasons.

That's half the fun and is educational for the rest of us. :)


Mr Mephisto

bling 10-27-2004 10:32 PM

The pizza cook at Brothers Pizza just ouside Philly.

Man he could throw down some damn good pizza. For real, this guy was no joke.

guy44 10-27-2004 10:32 PM

Babe Ruth. He was the greatest American of his time, and probably all time. His story is legend and his myth is bigger than anyone in American culture. People who do great things are said to have completed a Ruthian feat. Nobody has ever been as ubiquitously followed in the U.S. Perhaps a different definition of "great" has to be used for him, but I think he counts.

I also think, in a more traditional way, FDR needs to be mentioned.

bling 10-27-2004 10:35 PM

Interesting stat about Babe Ruth - He hit more homeruns in one year than any other team, all players combined. And he did this twice.

Mephisto2 10-27-2004 10:45 PM

The Greatest American of all time was a baseball player?!

Well, I can't say I expected that nomination. :)

Spoiler: I wonder how long before someone nominates Bush?


We need reasons people! Please let them.



Mr Mephisto

Locobot 10-28-2004 02:19 AM

The answer is quite clear:
http://www.leenite.org/jonisland/graphics/jon~leno.jpg

above all others there is only
Lovitz



I would say Mark Twain-Samuel Clemmons but I'm too tired to defend that choice at the moment.

roachboy 10-28-2004 06:33 AM

in addition to mark twain:
nathaniel west
dalton trumbo
orson welles
thomas pynchon
djuna barnes
gertrude stein

the greatest americans are those who oppose everything about america.
in the main, you do not hear much about them

irateplatypus 10-28-2004 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy
the greatest americans are those who oppose everything about america.
in the main, you do not hear much about them


i hear variations of this from my most liberal aquaintainces. at best i feel the sentiment is hackneyed, at worst damaging.


Abraham Lincoln - easily my top choice for the reasons listed above

Honorable Mention:

Dwight D. Eisenhower
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Nathan Hale
Ronald Reagan
Thomas Paine
Frederick Douglas
Teddy Roosevelt
John Glenn

the_marq 10-28-2004 07:14 AM

Canada (the CBC) is actually running a progam that mirrors the BBC one from a few years ago. http://www.cbc.ca/greatest/standings/

I know not many Americans will know who's who on this list, with the one noteable exception of Gretzky, but it's a motherfuckin' tragedy that Don Cherry is even listed.

Anyway, you can now go back to your greatest American thread, I'm going to start a new thread in the Canada Forum.

Harry Cox 10-28-2004 07:18 AM

Do you people realize that Abraham Lincoln never cared about freeing the slaves?

I would say that the greatest American is one who risks his/her life to give us the freedoms that we take for granted on a daily basis. I also have a lot of respect for guys like Malcolm X who were willing to sacrifice themselves to advance their cause. Who hear has read his "Ballot Or The Bullet" speech? It's too bad that he was a racist for most of his life and that no one really remembers the end of his life when he renounced his racist past.

roachboy 10-28-2004 07:20 AM

don cherry the trumpet player? or the hockey coach? or another don cherry?

irate:
if you understand that the best thing about america is the tradition of dissent, then there is nothing either hackneyed or damaging about it.
unless you dislike that tradition for some reason, in which case your objection can be reduced to an aesthetic one.

lincoln is easier to endorse as the finest american if you do not actually read his speeches--check out the debates with john calhoun over the question of slavery (0if you have not) and see if you still think lincoln was the best the americans have done.

i would take any of the folk on my list over him in a minute.

tecoyah 10-28-2004 07:22 AM

I will nominate Stephen Hawking....but the reasons will not be clear for a couple decades.

dksuddeth 10-28-2004 07:23 AM

Something I could never understand is how people think Lincoln was the greatest president ever. He wasn't about freeing the slaves, he was about keeping the Union together and practically threw away the US constitution to do so. Lincoln was probably one of the WORST presidents because of this.

Greatest american ever, in my opinion, would be FDR. Pulled the country out of the depression using extremely orthodox methods and helped fight tyranny in europe during WW2. Follow that with Truman, the man had balls of Steel to drop the bomb, twice, and take full responsibility for the decision.

hannukah harry 10-28-2004 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot
The answer is quite clear:
http://www.leenite.org/jonisland/graphics/jon~leno.jpg

above all others there is only
Lovitz



I would say Mark Twain-Samuel Clemmons but I'm too tired to defend that choice at the moment.


don't forget that lovitz played a particular religoius fellow of some distinction on SNL... i think his greatness transcends national boundries... :D

powerclown 10-28-2004 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Here's hoping for a non-partisan, interesting thread in these stressful times...

To go along with the other recent, non-partisan threads you started?

Bush flip-flops on Iraq
Bush thinks God wants him as President
US Deficit Graph
Do you EVER listen to or accept a story from the "other side"?
Soldier files suit to avoid Iraq tour
CIA broke the Geneva Conventions... again
Bush predicted no casualties
Anti Kerry film cut
Interesting article on Afghanistan
Iran endorses Bush
Anti-Kerry film backlash for Sinclair
So who do you think won the third debate?
Rumsfeld admits no link between Saddam and Al Queda
US reports finds that Iraq had no WMD
Don't tax the rich says Bush - WTF?!
US Intelligence report on Iraq
Let's jump on the band wagon!! Or is it gravy train?
Now this is scary...
Why I believe Bush will win

You're quite the enigma, mephisto!
:lol:

tecoyah 10-28-2004 09:01 AM

Now, Now...lets play nice

I was rather hoping for a non-partisan thread as well

cthulu23 10-28-2004 09:10 AM

Greatest American? Why, Willam Katz, of course. He was the Greatest American Hero at the very least.

http://www.tvtome.com/images/shows/0/5/86-9433-sm.jpg

Kadath 10-28-2004 09:10 AM

How about Thomas Alva Edison?

For Presidents, FDR is the obvious choice.

Believe it or not, cthulu, it's just me.

roachboy 10-28-2004 09:26 AM

why edison? because of the incandescent light bulb?
if you are thinking in terms of people who have developed either objects or processing for producing them that have greatly influenced the way of life now, you probably would have to include henry ford in there.
for the assembly line.
for pioneering consumer credit
for the logic of high-wage jobs for working people.

but he was also a scumbag.
so i dont know.
the more i think about this, the more confused i get about the criteria for "greatness"

Suave 10-28-2004 09:35 AM

Dave Chapelle, obviously.

Willravel 10-28-2004 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tecoyah
I will nominate Stephen Hawking....but the reasons will not be clear for a couple decades.

:lol: totally agreed! I second that nomination because Professor Stephen Hawking is more likely than anyone to unify General Relativity with Quantum Theory. That would arguabally be the most important accomplishment of science...ever. Physics Colloquiums - Quantum Cosmology, M-theory and the Anthropic Principle (1999) gave me goosebumps. The idea that strings are actually a super membrane and that there are 11 dimentions and possibily limitless amounts of other realities....*passes out*.

His dealing with his ALS is an inspiration in and of itself.

One problem. He's a brit!

aliali 10-28-2004 10:02 AM

Einstein over Hawking if you are going to go that way.

Twain over all others if you are going to go that way. (nathaniel west, dalton trumbo, orson welles, thomas pynchon, djuna barnes, gertrude stein???)

Carlin over Chapelle if you are going to go that way.

If you are serious about it, Grant and Kennedy don't make the list.

Irateplatypus has a good list, but the top two should be:

James Madison--Father of the Constitution (18th Century)
Lincoln--preserver of the Union (19th Century)

Honorable mention to MLK--(20th Century).

Any 21st Century nominations? (Bono is not an American).

Coppertop 10-28-2004 10:20 AM

Uh, not to nitpick, but Einstein and Hawking are not American, yes?

Here's my vote:

http://www.suprmchaos.com/bill-hicks_061503.jpg

Coppertop 10-28-2004 10:27 AM

Or how about:

http://www.cmsaunders.free-online.co...cs/chomsky.jpg

"... arguably the most important intellectual alive." -NY Times

mattevil 10-28-2004 11:02 AM

I'm going to nominate Mark Twain.
Personally I think Lincoln is overrated.

tecoyah 10-28-2004 11:12 AM

Guess I was just Wishing Hawking was American.......


All right....Carl Sagan
Got me interested in science as a kid.....very inspiring

irateplatypus 10-28-2004 12:15 PM

roachboy,

i whole heartedly agree with you that one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) thing about America is the tradition of dissent. however, i believe the credit goes to those who love the American ideal enough to tolerate those who oppose her... not to those in opposition. if you endure the dissention of others, that is is what makes a great American. it takes no courage or greatness to step on toes, it does take greatness to have the crushing of your own toes taken with grace and civility.

rukkyg 10-28-2004 12:33 PM

FDR.

But then, he came after Hoover, a perfect example of ineptitute. Sounds like a foreshadowing of events to come.

Kadath 10-28-2004 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy
why edison? because of the incandescent light bulb?
if you are thinking in terms of people who have developed either objects or processing for producing them that have greatly influenced the way of life now, you probably would have to include henry ford in there.
for the assembly line.
for pioneering consumer credit
for the logic of high-wage jobs for working people.

but he was also a scumbag.
so i dont know.
the more i think about this, the more confused i get about the criteria for "greatness"

Edison held over 1000 patents. To boil him down to the light bulb is pretty funny. Without him we wouldn't be even near where we are today, and he did it all without schooling.

Mephisto2 10-28-2004 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown
To go along with the other recent, non-partisan threads you started?

Bush flip-flops on Iraq
Bush thinks God wants him as President
US Deficit Graph
Do you EVER listen to or accept a story from the "other side"?
Soldier files suit to avoid Iraq tour
CIA broke the Geneva Conventions... again
Bush predicted no casualties
Anti Kerry film cut
Interesting article on Afghanistan
Iran endorses Bush
Anti-Kerry film backlash for Sinclair
So who do you think won the third debate?
Rumsfeld admits no link between Saddam and Al Queda
US reports finds that Iraq had no WMD
Don't tax the rich says Bush - WTF?!
US Intelligence report on Iraq
Let's jump on the band wagon!! Or is it gravy train?
Now this is scary...
Why I believe Bush will win

You're quite the enigma, mephisto!
:lol:

Well, thank you for going to the trouble of actually looking up my threads. Actually, should I say a LIMITED, FILTERED and therefore DOCTORED list of my threads.

It's nice to be the target of such a blatant troll.

If you actually read them (the ones you cherry picked there mate), you will see that unlike a lot of the Kerry supporters here, I explicitly, repeatedly and consistently state that I do not "hate Bush", that I believe he is supported by intelligent people, that lots of what Kerry stands for is debatable, that no one is perfect. I always so others respect and enjoy debating with them.

The basis for this thread, is to start a non-partisan, non-political debate... Something on the politics board that doesn't focus on the election. A "break" if you will. I find it amusing you miss the entire point.

If you have a problem with my threads, please refrain from posting or reading them. If you have something to contribute here, please play along.


Mr Mephisto


PS - I won't even start with actually analyzing my threads and asking how they are partisan. You will note that most of them begin with a news item and then ask others to debate or discuss the item. Yeah... I'm really a rampant political animal who has hidden agendas.... Good grief.


PPS - did you actually READ any or all of those threads? For example, the one "Do you EVER listen to the other side" was absolutely non-partisan and was soliciting negative comments about the reader's "own sides"... You miss the entire point. Political debate, by its very nature, is biased to a certain degree

powerclown 10-28-2004 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Well, thank you for going to the trouble of actually looking up my threads. Actually, should I say a LIMITED, FILTERED and therefore DOCTORED list of my threads.

Sorry, did you want me include the porn threads you started, too?
;)

My favorite, great Americans are the Three Stooges, as they suceeded so brilliantly at making people laugh.

quicksteal 10-28-2004 02:04 PM

Lincoln sure couldn't pick a general, but he was a great American.

For the greatest American, I'd choose Thomas Jefferson, because he was so forward-thinking. He wrote the Declaration of Indepencence so well, especially the part "all men are created equal," implying that slaves were people too. He was against slavery, and freed his slaves when he died. As president, he funded the Lewis and Clark missions, encouraging our spread into the rest of the continent. The Louisiana Purchase was such a bargain, and France was glad to give it to us. He founded the University of Virginia. Jefferson really pushed us forward from his role in America.

Mephisto2 10-28-2004 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown
Sorry, did you want me include the porn threads you started, too?
;)

What's your point? How about the threads and posts in the general board, the members board, the entertainment board, the motor board, the nonesense board, the computers board etc etc etc.

Or are you trying to pass a value judgement on the quality of people's contribution to TFP?

I apologised for an unwarranted snide comment. To be honest I don't expect the same from you.

Quote:

My favorite, great Americans are the Three Stooges, as they suceeded so brilliantly at making people laugh.
OK

Mr Mephisto

roachboy 10-28-2004 02:31 PM

if edison is a great american, then--seriously---why not henry ford?

Mephisto2 10-28-2004 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy
if edison is a great american, then--seriously---why not henry ford?

Henry Ford, though a racist and a great exploiter of workers, could be described as a great American. He revolutionized the production cycle (actually, I think he more or less invented it!). The impact of his industrial vision was immense.

He just wasn't a nice guy.

Mr Mephisto

hannukah harry 10-28-2004 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Henry Ford, though a racist and a great exploiter of workers, could be described as a great American. He revolutionized the production cycle (actually, I think he more or less invented it!). The impact of his industrial vision was immense.

He just wasn't a nice guy.

Mr Mephisto


i think you'll find that most people who acheive "greatness" were not nice people. luck and circumstance may allow the nice guy to become great at times, but many who make themselves great do it by stepping on those beneath them.

Mephisto2 10-28-2004 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannukah harry
i think you'll find that most people who acheive "greatness" were not nice people. luck and circumstance may allow the nice guy to become great at times, but many who make themselves great do it by stepping on those beneath them.


That's a fair comment. But some of them are more "not nicer" than others... if you know what I mean. :)

Let's take Lincoln. He wasn't perfect, but I don't believe he had a bad bone in his body. He certainly did not stomp all over people like Ford.

Kennedy, on the other hand, is often described as a great American, yet he was a liar, a philanderer and (some could argue) brought the world close to nuclear war.

Good and bad. Two sides of the same coin.


Mr Mephisto

bling 10-28-2004 02:57 PM

Grand Master Flash was a nice guy.

Gatorade Frost 10-28-2004 03:03 PM

Al Gore.

Inventor of the internet.

Free porn. All the time.

And because without him the last 4 years wouldn't have been quite as interesting.

There's too many Americans that were great to choose just one. Personally I'd take Lincoln off of the list because he was a divider who got shot at the opportune time. JFK's life was too short to really see what would've come out of his presidency and that's something very regrettable.

I'd like to say FDR for his leadership during WWII and through the great depression.

dksuddeth 10-28-2004 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
That's a fair comment. But some of them are more "not nicer" than others... if you know what I mean. :)

Let's take Lincoln. He wasn't perfect, but I don't believe he had a bad bone in his body. He certainly did not stomp all over people like Ford.

yet he did restrict civil liberties way beyond any other president, past or present, and even had people arrested (most notably a supreme court justice) who disagreed with his decision for the war.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Kennedy, on the other hand, is often described as a great American, yet he was a liar, a philanderer and (some could argue) brought the world close to nuclear war.

It could also be argued that he prevented it by blockading russian missiles to cuba.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Good and bad. Two sides of the same coin.

couldnt agree more. :thumbsup:

flstf 10-28-2004 05:24 PM

Too many to mention and no real standout. Maybe FDR - after the great depression, Lincoln - president during our darkest hours, Eisenhower - fantastic post war economic expansion in the 50s. Many of the founding fathers.

Don't know how much these guys had to do with the results of the times. But with the exception of the founding fathers, I think the great experiment of American democracy has lasted this long mostly in spite of our leaders and not because of them.

Suave 10-28-2004 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aliali
Carlin over Chapelle if you are going to go that way.

Carlin was really funny back in the 70s and maybe 80s (even 60s if he was doing comedy then), but I saw some of his recent standup, and it was worse than unfunny. It was stupid and irritating. He just bitched and moaned and threw in as many swears as he possibly could, and I honestly wanted to somehow punch him through the TV.

daswig 10-29-2004 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
And if you disagree with my suggestion, please give reasons.


(pulling out my big honkin book of Lincoln quotes)

Here's one for you, Mephisto...

Quote:

Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled or hanged.
What's more interesting is that he actually carried through on it, having an Ohio Congressman named Vallandigham arrested, tried by a military tribunal, stripped of his citizenship, and deported.

Or, how's this on race relations? Source: http://www.nps.gov/liho/debate1.htm First Lincoln-Douglas debate

Quote:

"My first impulse would be to free all the slaves, and send them to Liberia,-to their own native land. But a moment's reflection would convince me, that whatever of high hope, (as I think there is) there may be in this, in the long run, its sudden execution is impossible. If they were all landed there in a day, they would all perish in the next ten days; and there are not surplus shipping and surplus money enough in the world to carry them there in many times ten days. What then? Free them all, and keep them among us as underlings? Is it quite certain that this betters their condition? I think I would not hold one in slavery at any rate; yet the point is not clear enough to me to denounce people upon. What next? Free them, and make them politically and socially our equals? My own feelings will not admit of this; and if mine would, we well know that those of the great mass of white people will not. Whether this feeling accords with justice and sound judgment, is not the sole question, if, indeed, it is any part of it. A universal feeling, whether well or ill-founded, cannot be safely disregarded. We cannot, then, make them equals. It does seem to me that systems of gradual emancipation might be adopted; but for their tardiness in this, I will not undertake to judge our brethren of the South."
Or this?

Quote:

I don't want to read at any greater length, but this is the true complexion of all I have ever said in regard to the institution of slavery and the black race. This is the whole of it, and anything that argues me into his idea of perfect social and political equality with the negro, is but a specious and fantastic arrangement of words, by which a man can prove a horse-chestnut to be a chestnut horse. [Laughter.] I will say here, while upon this subject, that I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so. I have no purpose to introduce political and social equality between the white and the black races. There is a physical difference between the two, which, in my judgment, will probably forever forbid their living together upon the footing of perfect equality, and inasmuch as it becomes a necessity that there must be a difference, I, as well as Judge Douglas, am in favor of the race to which I belong having the superior position. I have never said anything to the contrary, but I hold that, notwithstanding all this, there is no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. [Loud cheers.] I hold that he is as much entitled to these as the white man. I agree with Judge Douglas he is not my equal in many respects-certainly not in color, perhaps not in moral or intellectual endowment. But in the right to eat the bread, without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns, he is my equal and the equal of Judge Douglas, and the equal of every living man.
From the Second debate: http://www.nps.gov/liho/debate2.htm

Quote:

I do not now, nor ever did, stand in favor of the unconditional repeal of the Fugitive Slave law. (skip a bit) As to the first one, in regard to the Fugitive Slave law, I have never hesitated to say, and I do not now hesitate to say, that I think, under the Constitution of the United States, the people of the Southern States are entitled to a Congressional Fugitive Slave law. Having said that, I have had nothing to say in regard to the existing Fugitive Slave law, further than that I think it should have been framed so as to be free from some of the objections that pertain to it, without lessening its efficiency.


Sounds like quite the White Supremacist, doesn't he?

The Emancipation Proclaimation was a tool to use against the South during the war. You'll remember that NORTHERN slaves had to wait for the ratification of the 13th Amendment to be freed...which happened well AFTER Lincoln's death.

Or how about Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeus corpus in 1861, and his imprisonment of a decent chunk of Maryland's legislature in Fort McHenry? Let me ask you this...what would you think if Bush had filled Gitmo with Congresscritters who opposed the war? Because that's pretty much what Lincoln did. The Supreme Court said basically "You can't do that, that's unconstitutional!" in U.S. v. Merryman, issuing a writ ordering the release of the imprisoned lawmakers. Lincoln's response? He ignored it and left them in jail. Eventually Congress passed a law giving him that power....but only AFTER he'd already purged everybody that disagreed with him (like Vallandigham).

So, I guess Lincoln has some problems as far as considering him the greatest American...unless, of course, Julius Caesar was the greatest "president" of the Roman Empire...

Locobot 10-29-2004 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy
why edison? because of the incandescent light bulb?
if you are thinking in terms of people who have developed either objects or processing for producing them that have greatly influenced the way of life now, you probably would have to include henry ford in there.
for the assembly line.
for pioneering consumer credit
for the logic of high-wage jobs for working people.

but he was also a scumbag.
so i dont know.
the more i think about this, the more confused i get about the criteria for "greatness"

Not to downplay Ford's accomplishments, but I think his rabid anti-semitism takes him out of the running for "greatest American." His assembly line was based on the 19th century Chicago stockyards which featured specialized workers to complete the dis-assembly of animals.

daswig 10-29-2004 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bling
Lincoln, yeah - the greatest President, by far. He's essentially mythological at this point.

Unfortunately, mythology all too often isn't really based upon reality.

Lincoln was a petty tyrant.

daswig 10-29-2004 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth
Something I could never understand is how people think Lincoln was the greatest president ever. He wasn't about freeing the slaves, he was about keeping the Union together and practically threw away the US constitution to do so. Lincoln was probably one of the WORST presidents because of this.

Greatest american ever, in my opinion, would be FDR. Pulled the country out of the depression using extremely orthodox methods and helped fight tyranny in europe during WW2.

I'd suggest you need to read up on some of the things FDR did. Topping the list would be his Court Packing scheme. Lincoln ignored the Supreme Court. FDR beat it into submission, and we're just now getting over it. See U.S. v. Lopez, (1992).

Locobot 10-29-2004 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig
(pulling out my big honkin book of Lincoln quotes)

Here's one for you, Mephisto...

What's more interesting is that he actually carried through on it, having an Ohio Congressman named Vallandigham arrested, tried by a military tribunal, stripped of his citizenship, and deported.

Not doubting your veracity here, but can you point us to a source for this?
Quote:

Or, how's this on race relations? Source: http://www.nps.gov/liho/debate1.htm First Lincoln-Douglas debate

Or this?

From the Second debate: http://www.nps.gov/liho/debate2.htm

Sounds like quite the White Supremacist, doesn't he?
Well sure he sounds like a white supremacist now, but he was saying these things 145 years ago. You have to understand that these postions were considered radically progressive at the time. Sending the slaves back to Africa was a common abolitionist plan. In fact it is the final didactic message of Uncle Tom's Cabin, heard of it? Liberia was founded as an American colony of ex-slaves so it was infinitely preferrable for slaves to the South's plan of perpetual work without pay for them, their children, their children's children etc.
Quote:

The Emancipation Proclaimation was a tool to use against the South during the war. You'll remember that NORTHERN slaves had to wait for the ratification of the 13th Amendment to be freed...which happened well AFTER Lincoln's death.
Well on paper, sure, the reality at the time was a different story. Lincoln knew what he was doing when he wrote the Emancipation Proclaimation. You have to remember that freeing all the slaves would have have been highly unpopular even in the North.
Quote:

Or how about Lincoln's suspension of the writ of habeus corpus in 1861, and his imprisonment of a decent chunk of Maryland's legislature in Fort McHenry? Let me ask you this...what would you think if Bush had filled Gitmo with Congresscritters who opposed the war? Because that's pretty much what Lincoln did. The Supreme Court said basically "You can't do that, that's unconstitutional!" in U.S. v. Merryman, issuing a writ ordering the release of the imprisoned lawmakers. Lincoln's response? He ignored it and left them in jail. Eventually Congress passed a law giving him that power....but only AFTER he'd already purged everybody that disagreed with him (like Vallandigham).

So, I guess Lincoln has some problems as far as considering him the greatest American...unless, of course, Julius Caesar was the greatest "president" of the Roman Empire...
Not sure I understand your Julius Caesar-Abe Lincoln analogy. Are you saying that had he lived Lincoln would have declared himself emperor for life? I don't really see that in his personality. It's funny that you feel the need to assassinate our first Republican's character. You're not one of those "the South really won" people are you? Because the South got their asses collectively kicked in the civil war, even with the greatest American general, Robert E. Lee, commanding their army.

host 10-29-2004 03:41 AM

Lincoln would not be acceptable to many republicans if they knew more about
his sexual orientation. Here are some excerpts from the 2004 North Carolina
Republican Party Platform; as an example............
Quote:

<a href="http://www.blogactive.com/">NC GOP Remains Mum on Anti Gay Flyers</a>
4. We believe homosexuality is not normal and should not be established as an acceptable "alternative" lifestyle either in public education or in public policy. We do not believe public schools should be used to teach children that homosexuality is normal, and we do not believe that taxpayers should fund benefit plans for unmarried partners. We oppose special treatment by law based on nothing other than homosexual behavior or identity. We oppose actions, such as “marriage” or the adoption of children by same-sex couples, which attempt to legitimize and normalize homosexual relationships. We support the Defense of Marriage Act and will support a constitutional amendment to ensure that marriage is limited to the union of one man and one woman. We commend private organizations, such as the Boy Scouts, which defend moral decency and freedom according to their own well-established traditions and beliefs.

3. America's defense must come second to none. The Republican Party of North Carolina opposes any attempts to weaken our national defense. We support efforts to: (1) restore the ban against known homosexuals in the military
In his twenties, Lincoln slept in the same bed with a man
named Joshua Speed. Poet Carl Sandburg did not hide this side of Lincoln in his
Lincoln biography, "The Prarie Years".......
Quote:

<a href="http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/49/news-ireland.php">http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/49/news-ireland.php</a>
Was Abe Lincoln Gay?
The blockbuster book that will change America’s history
by Doug Ireland

One of the few traditional Lincolnists to describe (however obliquely) the lifelong Lincoln-Speed relationship as homosexual was the Illinois poet Carl Sandburg, in his masterful, six-volume Lincoln biography. In the tome titled The Prairie Years (1926), Sandburg wrote that both Lincoln and Speed had "a streak of lavender, and spots soft as May violets." "I do not feel my own sorrows more keenly than I do yours," Lincoln wrote Speed in one letter. And again, "You know my desire to befriend you is everlasting." In a detailed retelling of the Lincoln-Speed love story — including the "lust at first sight" encounter between the two young men, when Lincoln readily accepted Speed’s eager invitation to share his narrow bed — Tripp notes that Speed was the only human being to whom the president ever signed his letters with the unusually tender (for Lincoln) "yours forever" — a salutation Lincoln never even used to his wife. Speed himself acknowledged that "No two men were ever so intimate." And Tripp credibly describes Lincoln’s near nervous breakdown following Speed’s decision to end their four-year affair by returning to his native Kentucky.
My vote would go to Tesla.....he never got the credit, reward, or reputation
for the true genius of his inventions.........Edison got the credit for electrifying the U.S. in the late 19th century, but it was Nikola Tesla
who designed and built the practical AC electrical generation and distribution system that won out over Edison's unworkable
DC current design. In the 1940's, Tesla finally was acknowledged as the
first to patent wireless radio, not Marconi !
Quote:

Unlike the Bremer administration in Iraq in 2003, Tesla was
able to build his newly designed AC generators in Westinghouse's factory and
install them at the Adams Power Station no. 1 at Niagara Falls in just one
year's time in 1895. Three of his 1895 generators were still in operation 58
years later, in 1953! <a href="http://americanhistory.si.edu/archives/d8047c.htm">http://americanhistory.si.edu/archives/d8047c.htm</a>
Quote:

<a href="http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_warcur.html">http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_warcur.html</a> In November and December of 1887, Tesla filed for seven U.S. patents in the field of polyphase AC motors and power transmission. These comprised a complete system of generators, transformers, transmission lines, motors and lighting. So original were the ideas that they were issued without a successful challenge, and would turn out to be the most valuable patents since the telephone.....

.......With the breakthrough provided by Tesla's patents, a full-scale industrial war erupted. At stake, in effect, was the future of industrial development in the United States, and whether Westinghouse's alternating current or Edison's direct current would be the chosen technology.

It was at this time that Edison launched a propaganda war against alternating current. Westinghouse recalled:

I remember Tom [Edison] telling them that direct current was like a river flowing peacefully to the sea, while alternating current was like a torrent rushing violently over a precipice. Imagine that! Why they even had a professor named Harold Brown who went around talking to audiences... and electrocuting dogs and old horses right on stage, to show how dangerous alternating current was. ..........

.....The Columbian Exposition opened on May 1, 1893. That evening, President Grover Cleveland pushed a button and a hundred thousand incandescent lamps illuminated the fairground's neoclassical buildings. This "City of Light" was the work of Tesla, Westinghouse and twelve new thousand-horsepower AC generation units located in the Hall of Machinery. In the Great Hall of Electricity, the Tesla polyphase system of alternating current power generation and transmission was proudly displayed. For the twenty-seven million people who attended the fair, it was dramatically clear that the power of the future was AC. From that point forward more than 80 percent of all the electrical devices ordered in the United States were for alternating current.

<a href="http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_whoradio.html">http://www.pbs.org/tesla/ll/ll_whoradio.html</a>
Tesla filed his own basic radio patent applications in 1897. They were granted in 1900. Marconi's first patent application in America, filed on November 10, 1900, was turned down. Marconi's revised applications over the next three years were repeatedly rejected because of the priority of Tesla and other inventors.

....But no patent is truly safe, as Tesla's career demonstrates. In 1900, the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company, Ltd. began thriving in the stock markets—due primarily to Marconi's family connections with English aristocracy. British Marconi stock soared from $3 to $22 per share and the glamorous young Italian nobleman was internationally acclaimed. Both Edison and Andrew Carnegie invested in Marconi and Edison became a consulting engineer of American Marconi. Then, on December 12, 1901, Marconi for the first time transmitted and received signals across the Atlantic Ocean.

Otis Pond, an engineer then working for Tesla, said, "Looks as if Marconi got the jump on you." Tesla replied, "Marconi is a good fellow. Let him continue. He is using seventeen of my patents."

But Tesla's calm confidence was shattered in 1904, when the U.S. Patent Office suddenly and surprisingly reversed its previous decisions and gave Marconi a patent for the invention of radio. The reasons for this have never been fully explained, but the powerful financial backing for Marconi in the United States suggests one possible explanation.

Tesla was embroiled in other problems at the time, but when Marconi won the Nobel Prize in 1911, Tesla was furious. He sued the Marconi Company for infringement in 1915, but was in no financial condition to litigate a case against a major corporation. It wasn't until 1943—a few months after Tesla's death— that the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Tesla's radio patent number 645,576. The Court had a selfish reason for doing so. The Marconi Company was suing the United States Government for use of its patents in World War I. The Court simply avoided the action by restoring the priority of Tesla's patent over Marconi.
Tesla was a truly remarkable, naturalized American citizen. He was the emitome of the spirit that America was once known for. It is entirely fitting,
in view of the way his contributions changed the lives of so many people,
that he be considered "Greatest American".

daswig 10-29-2004 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot
Not doubting your veracity here, but can you point us to a source for this?

Sure. Here you go: This is the first page that turned up on a google search for "Vallandigham"

http://www.civilwarhome.com/vallandighambio.htm

Quote:

On 13 Apr. 1863, Maj. Gen. Ambrose E. Burnside, Commmander of the Department Of The Ohio, had issued General Order No. 38, forbidding expression of sympathy for the enemy. On 30 Apr. Vallandigham addressed a large audience in Columbus, made derogatory references to the president and the war effort, then hoped that he would be arrested under Burnside's order, thus gaining popular sympathy. Arrested at his home at 2 a.m., 5 May, by a company of troops, he was taken to Burnside's Cincinnati headquarters, tried by a military court 6-7 May, denied a writ of habeas corpus, and sentenced to 2 years' confinement in a military prison. Following a 19 May cabinet meeting, President Lincoln commuted Vallandigham's sentence to banishment to the Confederacy. On 26 May the Ohioan was taken to Confederates south of Murfreesboro, Tenn., and there entered Southern lines. Outraged at his treatment, by a vote of 411 -11 state Democrats nominated Vallandigham for governor at their 11 June convention.

daswig 10-29-2004 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot
Not sure I understand your Julius Caesar-Abe Lincoln analogy. Are you saying that had he lived Lincoln would have declared himself emperor for life? I don't really see that in his personality. It's funny that you feel the need to assassinate our first Republican's character. You're not one of those "the South really won" people are you? Because the South got their asses collectively kicked in the civil war, even with the greatest American general, Robert E. Lee, commanding their army.

Lincoln never had a need to declare himself dictator for life. Remember, this was well before there was a 2 term limit on holding the presidency, which came about after FDR. As for "The South really won", well, that's debatable. Yes, the North won militarily. Yes, the slaves were freed (not that slavery was the reason for the Civil War; it wasn't, since under Scott v. Sanford, slavery as an institution was preserved by the courts). But if you look at what happened after Reconstruction, the South did indeed manage to preserve much of their way of life for many years by replacing slavery with Jim Crow. Much of what they lost militarily, they regained politically, and fairly well abrogated the equal protection guarantees under the 14th Amendment until the 1960's, and the "States Rights" argument persists to this day (for example, Kerry's position on gay marriage and Dean's position on gun control were States Rights arguments.) Does that count as a "win"? I dunno.

daswig 10-29-2004 12:19 PM

If I had to pick just one American as the "Greatest American", I'd have to go with Teddy Roosevelt. He turned the US from a provincial power into a world power, and did it while fighting corruption at all levels and not violating the Constitution.

Stompy 10-29-2004 12:22 PM

George W. Bush

1. He's the most honest and up front president we've had in the past 30 years.
2. He got rid of Saddam. This is a good thing because Saddam was about to create weapons of mass destruction to use against those who love freedom.
3. The war on terror will totally eradicate all freedom-haters across the globe.

Re: 2 and 3, I love my freedom. I don't want people to hate me because I'm free! I don't want to die by a WMD!

4. He has a clear and concise plan for everything. These can be viewed at http://www.georgewbush.com/

If that isn't the greatest american, then I don't know what is!

dksuddeth 10-29-2004 12:39 PM

THIS is why I wouldn't consider GW Bush one of the greatest americans.

from the article: In an act that foreshadowed the future Bush II administration's astonishing usurpation of liberties, the Bush owners created the Arlington Sports Facility Development Authority. The Development Authority was granted the right to issue bonds along with the ominous power of eminent domain. This unnecessarily granted power was immediately abused as the Development Authority condemned 12.7 prime real estate acres adjacent to the construction site that was situated near Six Flags Amusement Park. Eminent domain was only enforced after the owners refused the Development Authority's low-ball bid of $817,220. This outrage prompted a court case in which the jury awarded the landowners heirs $7.2 million for the purchase cost of the land plus interest.

Stompy 10-29-2004 12:58 PM

Yeah but... he's protecting us from the freedom-haters! Isn't it important that you keep your freedom?!

dksuddeth 10-29-2004 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy
Yeah but... he's protecting us from the freedom-haters! Isn't it important that you keep your freedom?!

I'd also like to keep my property.

Stompy 10-29-2004 01:07 PM

(I know, I was being sarcastic ;))

dksuddeth 10-29-2004 01:14 PM

gotcha, :thumbsup:

Sun Tzu 10-29-2004 01:15 PM

Homer Simpson?????

Thats what the world thinks?? I dont know whether I should be laughing or disturbed.

My vote goes for Neil Armstrong.

Coppertop 10-29-2004 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu
Homer Simpson?????

Thats what the world thinks?? I dont know whether I should be laughing or disturbed.

My vote goes for Neil Armstrong.

Well, Homer certainly represents America.

Mephisto2 10-29-2004 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig
(pulling out my big honkin book of Lincoln quotes)

Here's one for you, Mephisto...

"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested, exiled or hanged."

I think you're misunderstanding this. If Kerry and Fonda were traitors, as you have repeatedly stated, then so was Vallandigham. You can't have it both ways. :)

Quote:

What's more interesting is that he actually carried through on it, having an Ohio Congressman named Vallandigham arrested, tried by a military tribunal, stripped of his citizenship, and deported.
Exactly as you have suggested for Kerry and Fonda. I can't remember, but I think you even went so far as to suggest hanging.

With regards to Lincoln's position on slavery, there have been literally hundreds of books written on the man and many on this specific subject.

Just two examples.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books


If you want to use quotations from Lincoln on slavery, how about these?

Quote:

Resolutions upon the subject of domestic slavery having passed both branches of the General Assembly at its present session, the undersigned hereby protest against the passage of the same.
They believe that the institution of slavery is founded on both injustice and bad policy; but that the promulgation of abolition doctrines tends rather to increase than to abate its evils.
They believe that the Congress of the United States has no power, under the constitution, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the different States.
They believe that the Congress of the United States has the power, under the constitution, to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia; but that that power ought not to be exercised unless at the request of the people of said District.
The difference between these opinions and those contained in the said resolutions, is their reason for entering this protest."

Dan Stone,
A. Lincoln,
Representatives from the county of Sangamon
and

Quote:

You know I dislike slavery; and you fully admit the abstract wrong of it. So far there is no cause of difference. But you say that sooner than yield your legal right to the slave -- especially at the bidding of those who are not themselves interested, you would see the Union dissolved. I am not aware that any one is bidding you to yield that right; very certainly I am not. I leave that matter entirely to yourself. I also acknowledge your rights and my obligations, under the constitution, in regard to your slaves. I confess I hate to see the poor creatures hunted down, and caught, and carried back to their stripes, and unrewarded toils; but I bite my lip and keep quiet. In 1841 you and I had together a tedious low-water trip, on a Steam Boat from Louisville to St. Louis. You may remember, as I well do, that from Louisville to the mouth of the Ohio there were, on board, ten or a dozen slaves, shackled together with irons. That sight was a continual torment to me; and I see something like it every time I touch the Ohio, or any other slave-border. It is hardly fair to you to assume, that I have no interest in a thing which has, and continually exercises, the power of making me miserable. You ought rather to appreciate how much the great body of the Northern people do crucify their feelings, in order to maintain their loyalty to the constitution and the Union.

I do oppose the extension of slavery, because my judgment and feelings so prompt me; and I am under no obligation to the contrary.
Quote:

If A. can prove, however conclusively, that he may, of right, enslave B. -- why may not B. snatch the same argument, and prove equally, that he may enslave A?--

You say A. is white, and B. is black. It is color, then; the lighter, having the right to enslave the darker? Take care. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with a fairer skin than your own.

You do not mean color exactly?--You mean the whites are intellectually the superiors of the blacks, and, therefore have the right to enslave them? Take care again. By this rule, you are to be slave to the first man you meet, with an intellect superior to your own.

But, say you, it is a question of interest; and, if you can make it your interest, you have the right to enslave another. Very well. And if he can make it his interest, he has the right to enslave you.
Quote:

I think Slavery is wrong, morally, and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread in these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually terminate in the whole Union.
Quote:

I do not perceive how I can express myself, more plainly, than I have done in the foregoing extracts. In four of them I have expressly disclaimed all intention to bring about social and political equality between the white and black races, and, in all the rest, I have done the same thing by clear implication.

I have made it equally plain that I think the negro is included in the word "men" used in the Declaration of Independence.

I believe the declara[tion] that "all men are created equal" is the great fundamental principle upon which our free institutions rest; that negro slavery is violative of that principle; but that, by our frame of government, that principle has not been made one of legal obligation; that by our frame of government, the States which have slavery are to retain it, or surrender it at their own pleasure; and that all others -- individuals, free-states and national government -- are constitutionally bound to leave them alone about it.

I believe our government was thus framed because of the necessity springing from the actual presence of slavery, when it was framed.

That such necessity does not exist in the teritories[sic], where slavery is not present.

...It does not follow that social and political equality between whites and blacks, must be incorporated, because slavery must not.
Quote:

I do not wish to be misunderstood upon this subject of slavery in this country. I suppose it may long exist, and perhaps the best way for it to come to an end peaceably is for it to exist for a length of time. But I say that the spread and strengthening and perpetuation of it is an entirely different proposition. There we should in every way resist it as a wrong, treating it as a wrong, with the fixed idea that it must and will come to an end.

I could go on and on.

I think you need to read that book of Lincoln quotations a bit more carefully.


Mr Mephisto

MSD 10-29-2004 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dksuddeth
It could also be argued that he [Kennedy] prevented it by blockading russian missiles to cuba.

Kennedy ordered the ships to fire to enforce the blockade. Cuban commanders were authorized to launch in that event. Khrushchev ordered the ships to turn away, thereby averting war. Cuba already had missiles. They were operational.


What about Henry Ford?

The guy who helped to finance Hitler's rise to power, donated $40,000 (not adjusted for inflation) to print German translations of anti-semitic pamphlets, kept his Grand Cross of the Order of the German Eagle despite the protests of Jewish froups like the ADL until he died in 1947, and owned a newspaper that published such pieces fo propaganda as The International Jew and The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion? That guy was a great American?

bling 10-29-2004 11:28 PM

It seems like all the "great" American's have skeletons either in their closet or hanging on their front porch.

Except Grand Master Flash.

:thumbsup:

hammer4all 10-29-2004 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coppertop
Or how about:

http://www.cmsaunders.free-online.co...cs/chomsky.jpg

"... arguably the most important intellectual alive." -NY Times

I would like to second that nomination.

dksuddeth 10-30-2004 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct
Kennedy ordered the ships to fire to enforce the blockade. Cuban commanders were authorized to launch in that event. Khrushchev ordered the ships to turn away, thereby averting war. Cuba already had missiles. They were operational.

It was that or allow cuba to have even MORE missiles, instead it forced russia to remove the ones that were there.

flstf 10-30-2004 09:10 AM

Wow, this thread started out asking for Great Americans and almost every one that folks listed has been trashed by others. I guess it goes to show how difficult it is to live a public life and not have held some beliefs that seem so politically incorrect in modern times. No matter how progressive and bold thay may have been in their time.

So I guess I'll change my vote to Harley and Davidson, who started the company that makes the machine that gives me so much pleasure today, LOL.

dksuddeth 10-30-2004 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flstf
So I guess I'll change my vote to Harley and Davidson, who started the company that makes the machine that gives me so much pleasure today, LOL.

damn fine idea. I'm changing mine to Harley and Davidson also. :thumbsup:

Clark 10-30-2004 08:16 PM

I do not know his name but the greatest American was the son of an immigrant who worked hard his whole life and brought is family to the next level his children were the first in there family to graduate collage and they (the children) made shore to pass on the values of there father that served them so well.

All the people discussed so far were grate leaders and athletes but any truly grate American will always be anonymous that is the American way.

Edit: I could have the gender all wrong but the piont stands.

Ustwo 10-30-2004 08:38 PM

A big part of the issue is what makes someone 'Great'.

Were they a Great American because without them America would have failed as a nation?
or were they are Great American because they embodied the American Ideal?

For the first, it would have to be Abraham Lincoln. While any of the founding fathers also fall into this category, Lincoln faced the first real challenge where if he failed the US would cease to exist as the US.

For the second, it would be Teddy Roosevelt. He was everything an American should be, his life couldn't have been written any more 'American' then it was.

Ustwo 10-30-2004 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clark
I do not know his name but the greatest American was the son of an immigrant who worked hard his whole life and brought is family to the next level his children were the first in there family to graduate collage and they (the children) made shore to pass on the values of there father that served them so well.

All the people discussed so far were grate leaders and athletes but any truly grate American will always be anonymous that is the American way.

Edit: I could have the gender all wrong but the piont stands.

Thats what great about America.

But if being Great means being 'uncommonly good' then the people you speak of, who number in the millions do not count, they are average, and luckly in the US average is pretty damn good compared to most.

SecretMethod70 10-30-2004 08:47 PM

not to be cliche, but Martin Luther King Jr.

As far as an inventor-type person, by far Nikola Tesla. He's the most underrated inventor in history as far as I'm concerned, and 1000x more important than Edison when it comes to electricity. If people had listened to him more we would have advanced much faster in electrical technology and safety.

As for the Lincoln debate, he was a great man and president, yes. I do agree with this. He learned over time to control his temper in a manner very few do. However, he was not the great president the myth makes him out to be. One must keep in mind that due to the circumstances of the civil war he pretty much had carte blanche to do whatever he wanted with the government.

Paradise Lost 10-30-2004 09:21 PM

I can't believe only one person here said Thomas Jefferson, you people are crazy! I remember
reading a quote recently about when one of our Presidents gathered 40-some Nobel Prize
laureates at the White House, and remarked that the White House had never had as many
brilliant minds in it at one time than it did right now, with the possible exception of when
Thomas Jefferson worked alone.

The guy was a Jack of All Trades, but was more than likely a Master of all of those Trades.
The man was not only one of the pre-eminent founding father, but probably loved his
country more than anyone else at the time, and tried his damndest to make it the best
it could be in its early years. Not only that, but the people of France also loved him, being
that he was Ambassador there for many years after the Revolutionary War. Tried many
times to outlaw slavery during his days as a Congressman in the Virginia Congress - among
many of the other things he did for us.

Teddy Roosevelt is a close second. The guy was everything a President should be, and, as
he said, Probably had more fun doing that job than any one else before him, or since.
He was energetic, popular, and did everything in his power to do what he thought was the
best for the country. I think he could have cared less how the nation was scewed, or what
Congress was trying to do, he did what he thought would make the best impact on his
country as a whole. For instance, just look at his devotion to the Nation Forest Service...
Besides, the guy lived in Poland, Ohio most of his early years, and that's just freakin awesome!

Konichiwaneko 10-30-2004 10:22 PM

My Personal Hero - American Hero - Oh all Time


Robert E. Lee.


General Lee believe in what was closest to his heart. He fought for his state, his people. He was respected on both sides, to such a degree that even after the war whole lines of union soldiers bow in respect.

General Lee was intelligent, charismatic, and a born leader. He was asked to fight against odds that he eventually couldn't matched, and made something out of it.

He is what I believe America should stand for. You don't have to believe in our government, but believe in our people and fight for them. Our loyalty is to those who we love, and our land. In our happiness others will thrive.

General Lee was a good man, and he along with others like my Father, Abraham Lincoln, Kublai Kahn, and other leaders have my utmost respect.

You don't have to be in the perfect situation, you don't have to be the perfect person, but as long as you try to be as much as you can be, you can be a good man.

Konichiwaneko 10-30-2004 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

- He was a great leader during the countries most dangerous time.
- He was a politician who accepted he did not represent all Americans, but reached out to try to "save the Union."
- He alone (until US Grant) understood the gravity of the Civil War and what it would take to win it.
Mr Mephisto

Mr. Mephisto, before I start I want to tell you I hold you with the utmost respect and though we don't agree with political views I am honor of your contributions, mostly of the nude variety, to the tfp. I ask you these question not to stir you up only to get a reply.

I notice you put these qualities for President Lincoln, I would like to see how you compare these traits to your political beliefs.

Lets start with this one

- He alone (until US Grant) understood the gravity of the Civil War and what it would take to win it.

I believe General Grants strategy during the war was call "The grinder". Essentially it was pretty much throwing our men, not caring for casualties, to oppress the opponent. I'm sure back then it would be the same as now, people were appalled...yet the strategy worked in the end all history shows us that now. My question to you, would you accept President Bush if he was vindicated at the end, that his strategy that people saw was a huge mess turned out right?

- He was a politician who accepted he did not represent all Americans, but reached out to try to "save the Union."

Lincoln saw the United states as a great whole, not as a disfunctional society. Do you think Senator Kerry's constant berating of our government and it's disfunctional state going to backfire on him? What if he does aquire the president posistion, and in his 4 or 8 years can't fix what he considers broken. Do you think our people would subconciouslly feel that we are a broken society and nothing can fix us?


- He was a great leader during the countries most dangerous time.

President Bush is far from being a great leader, I think both left and right can agree on that. Yet earlier you listed General Grant as an example, and history told us that he was terrible at his job as both general and president yet he got the job done. Do you think that President Bush can once again be vindicated because of this over time?


I know you will give a good answer Mr. Mephisto.

host 10-31-2004 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70
not to be cliche, but Martin Luther King Jr.

As far as an inventor-type person, by far Nikola Tesla. He's the most underrated inventor in history as far as I'm concerned, and 1000x more important than Edison when it comes to electricity. If people had listened to him more we would have advanced much faster in electrical technology and safety.

As for the Lincoln debate, he was a great man and president, yes. I do agree with this. He learned over time to control his temper in a manner very few do. However, he was not the great president the myth makes him out to be. One must keep in mind that due to the circumstances of the civil war he pretty much had carte blanche to do whatever he wanted with the government.

Why do many people admire wartime civilian and military leaders, specifically
generals and politicians, instead of those who impacted our country
through their inventive genius or their humanitarian insight and example?
<a href="http://www.teslascience.org/">Tesla Wardenclyffe Project</a>
Quote:

Question
Do we (you) know more details about Tesla's ideas about and use of electrical currents for healing the human body? Or about helping the body the way he thought he was doing with the treatments he gave himself?

Response
by Margaret Cheney (December 19 postings).....click on this link:
<a href="http://www.pbs.org/tesla/dis/responses.html">http://www.pbs.org/tesla/dis/responses.html</a>
<a href="http://www.pbs.org/tesla/dis/cheney.html">http://www.pbs.org/tesla/dis/cheney.html</a>
Tesla's ideas on medical treatment with electricity are in widespread use today, as in diathermy or deep-heat for injuries, arthritis, etc.; the application of x-ray, microwave and radiowave to destroy cancer cells, and for healing bones and tissues. The magnetic resonance imaging machine (MRI) is measured in Tesla Units. Tesla's idea of bathing in "cold fire" or a low-power therapeutic device, is believed to have a psychosomatic effect beyond the mechanical. (For more on this: Tesla, Man Out of Time, Cheney; Tesla, Master of Lightning, Cheney and Uth.)
More reading on Tesla at PBS website.
<a href="http://www.pbs.org/tesla/res/res_arts.html">http://www.pbs.org/tesla/res/res_arts.html</a>

In his battle against Tesla, Edison fought to preserve his monopoly on the
NY City direct current (DC) power generating and distribution newtork that
his company was building and profiting from. Edison had briefly employed Tesla and had reneged on paying Tesla a promised $50,000 bonus. DC
was an inferior technology because it required bulky copper wires and
heavy transformers to distribute electricity even short distances from power
plants, and offered a much greater risk of electrocution to people in DC electrified homes or businesses. Edison created a smear and disinformation campaign against Tesla and his superior alternating current (AC) power
system design, which included demonstrations where stray animals were
executed by Edison employees using AC current to falsely persuade the
public that AC current was more dangerous. Tesla worked closely with the
Westinghouse company to build powered generators and motors that
displaced and eliminated Edison's DC powered products. Edison intended for
his smear term "westinghoused" to be interchangeable with the word
"electrocuted". <a href="http://physics.about.com/cs/physicists/a/tesla1_4.htm">http://physics.about.com/cs/physicists/a/tesla1_4.htm</a>

superiorrain 10-31-2004 04:49 AM

There is no funnier american that Bill Murray. So thats my vote for the greatest American. He has made people laugh all over the world and isn't laughter the most important thing in life. What a gift, i thank you America for producing such talent.

Maveric 10-31-2004 05:39 AM

A pioneer in the field of telecommunications, Alexander Graham Bell
aside from antiseptics/medicine which saved mankind, telecommunications has been one of the greatest human achievements to forward mankind's developement...

Maveric 10-31-2004 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konichiwaneko
My Personal Hero - American Hero - Oh all Time


Robert E. Lee.

You don't have to be in the perfect situation, you don't have to be the perfect person, but as long as you try to be as much as you can be, you can be a good man.

I'm sorry but I see this as flawed logic, imho. It's kinda like saying, Hitler was a "great" man because he was only doing what he thought was best for his country and the world...

just my $.02

jonjon42 10-31-2004 06:16 AM

Gertrude Stein
Mark Twain
Ben Franklin
Orson Wells
Igor Stravinsky (became an American citizen eventually :-D )

ah yes
and tesla is a good name to be on the list too. Art and science deserve high standings on this list of the great Americans.

Konichiwaneko 10-31-2004 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maveric
I'm sorry but I see this as flawed logic, imho. It's kinda like saying, Hitler was a "great" man because he was only doing what he thought was best for his country and the world...

just my $.02

"You can be a good man"

You have choice in that one line. THe person given the oppurtunity can choose to use what was given to him to be a person of a great caliber.

I didn't mean it to say "If you have the power, you will be a good person".

I see your point though, just wanted to tell you why I wrote that line.

Choice is what defines our life, if I was given the power of my land I can choice either to do good or bad, my actions would reflect into history books.





Concerning Idolization of War Figures, I believe a majority of it is because they excelled under conflict. War Figures tend to lay a more audible and visual foundation to our civilization. Throughout our history most of our civilization had it's peak when a former General or military person took an action or took control.

The founding of our country, the roman empire.

In the past through war we laid the foundation to our society, and then we let politics and civilians nuture and fertilize our ideals.

Now that war has merged more into a capatilistic battle field where the betterment of our society is not how much land we claim and people we rule, that's finite, but technology and innovation. Companies are battling each other to evolve humanity.

I think some of you would severly disagree with me, because it's a matter of point of view, but the healthiest thing about war is it allows us to be put in a situation far beyond what we consider normal and in that you have innovations and thought ideas that spawn from that which would of either gone stagnent or laid dorment for who knows how long.

I honestly believe, war is a catalyst for human thought and action, and that's why the idolization of War Figurines (Even if they are haunted by ghost, or just damn bad people in general) are on the top.

Maybe in 50 years, people would say things like bill gates, because the newspapers now show a person that was dislikable, but the history books in the future, with only their summaries will show a person more palatable and lacking those negative traits against them.



I've found this tread very interesting though seeing everyone people listed. Like I agree with Secret Method, I like MLK jr., but I think also he was a womanizer and he had affairs (from what I remember Neal Boortz saying), which are traits that disgust some people. The overall person, I cannot judge his personal affairs, I thought was a good person. Also I loved Bill Clinton, his charisma was wonderful and he was articulate...but he's political view points differ from me and he was a cheater. You don't have to be ghandi to be loved.

Vic Vega 10-31-2004 09:52 AM

How about Doyle Brunson?

What can I say -- I love poker, and he's the one who literally "wrote the book" on it.

Ustwo 10-31-2004 10:33 AM

Its quite simple.

War is more important than art in terms of a nations survival.

All the art in the world won't save you from the barbarian horde. No ones family was killed by the power of a painting.

Art may inspire action, but it is the action that makes the difference.

hammer4all 10-31-2004 02:51 PM

Quote:

WAR IS A RACKET

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few – the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.
"I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National city Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902–1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested." --Major General Smedley Darlington Butler

Mephisto2 10-31-2004 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo
A big part of the issue is what makes someone 'Great'.

Were they a Great American because without them America would have failed as a nation?
or were they are Great American because they embodied the American Ideal?

For the first, it would have to be Abraham Lincoln. While any of the founding fathers also fall into this category, Lincoln faced the first real challenge where if he failed the US would cease to exist as the US.

For the second, it would be Teddy Roosevelt. He was everything an American should be, his life couldn't have been written any more 'American' then it was.

Excellent point. I like your thinking here Ustwo.


Mr Mephisto

Mephisto2 10-31-2004 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Konichiwaneko
Mr. Mephisto, before I start I want to tell you I hold you with the utmost respect and though we don't agree with political views I am honor of your contributions, mostly of the nude variety, to the tfp. I ask you these question not to stir you up only to get a reply.

You won't stir me up at all! I enjoy debate and learn from others all the time. Your questions below are very interesting ones and they made me think quite a bit before replying. That's what this is all about! :)

Quote:

I notice you put these qualities for President Lincoln, I would like to see how you compare these traits to your political beliefs.
Sure thing.

Quote:

Lets start with this one

- [i]He alone (until US Grant) understood the gravity of the Civil War and what it would take to win it.[/u]

I believe General Grants strategy during the war was call "The grinder". Essentially it was pretty much throwing our men, not caring for casualties, to oppress the opponent. I'm sure back then it would be the same as now, people were appalled...yet the strategy worked in the end all history shows us that now. My question to you, would you accept President Bush if he was vindicated at the end, that his strategy that people saw was a huge mess turned out right?
Well, let's answer the last question first. Would I accept Bush if his strategy turned out right in the end? Yes. Yes I would. That is, insofar as it's up to me.

There are som differences though. First and foremost, the Union, the whole United States, is not fighting a Civil War now. It is not in the utmost danger of collapsing. And Bush is not throwing men and women into combat in the same way as Grant did.

Grant and Lincoln "did the numbers". They knew the Confederacy couldn't keep up with the casualties that the North could. But that was a sign of the times. No one, no President could do that today. Times have changed. People's beliefs in what is worth dying for has changed. And a lot of Americans don't believe that it's worth dying to ensure the Vice-President's cronies get some juicy oil contracts in Iraq (joke... kinda).

So in summary, if Bush were "proved right" would I accept him? Of course. But I honestly don't think he will be proved right in his war in Iraq, his environmental policy, his social policy. That's the problem with a lot these things. They're very subjective. The Civil War was pretty "cut and dry". Either the North won and preserved the Union, or the South won and destroyed the Union. I don't believe there's such an easy logic to the Iraqi conflict.


Quote:

- He was a politician who accepted he did not represent all Americans, but reached out to try to "save the Union."

Lincoln saw the United states as a great whole, not as a disfunctional society. Do you think Senator Kerry's constant berating of our government and it's disfunctional state going to backfire on him? What if he does aquire the president posistion, and in his 4 or 8 years can't fix what he considers broken. Do you think our people would subconciouslly feel that we are a broken society and nothing can fix us?
Well, whilst Lincoln tried to reach out and understood, especially before the Civil War broke out that it was incumbent upon him to govern by the law and for those who also did not support him, he was never afraid of lambasting or criticising the "opposition". And don't forget that Bush does the same! So, to be honest, I'm not sure if using Kerry's political criticism of the right is appropriate as a foil in this case. Bush attacks and criticises the left just as much (if not more).

Will Kerry's berating back-fire on him? Well, I don't think so. No more than Bush's berating has back-fired on him. There will always be people who argue for either side.

What if he doesn't "fix" things? I don't think any one man can fix the things broken in any society. Especially Kerry if the Congress has a Republican majority! :)

Will people continue to think the US is dysfunctional? Well, I don't think it is. It obviously is functional as a society. There are things that are not working right. Kerry and Bush both agree on that. But they both have different political agendas and political beliefs. My preference are for those promulgated by Kerry, but that doesn't mean I don't understand, or that I disrespect those of Bush and his supporters.


Quote:

- He was a great leader during the countries most dangerous time.

President Bush is far from being a great leader, I think both left and right can agree on that. Yet earlier you listed General Grant as an example, and history told us that he was terrible at his job as both general and president yet he got the job done. Do you think that President Bush can once again be vindicated because of this over time?
Well, I don't know if you could say Grant was terrible at his job as a general. Certainly as a President, but I'm not sure as a general.

Do I think Bush will be vindicated over time? Well, that depends upon the end result. I personally don't believe his strategy (if you will) is the best way to address the threats and challenges that America faces. Who know (though) what history will tell us. In a hundred and forty years from now, maybe Bush will be considered a great President. I don't argue that possibility. My gut feeling is that he won't be, but I've been wrong in the past. :)

Let me tell you one of the main reasons I don't think Bush will be considered a great President. Simply because of the polarization of US politics. I honestly believe he doesn't really care that much for those that disagree with him. The opposite can be said for Lincoln, who very much cared what the opposition felt and tried to always walk a middle ground (before civil war made this impossible).

Finally, if you are asking if Bush will ever be considered as great, or in the same league, as Lincoln, then no. I don't think so. Ever.

Let me add that I think the "right", the conservatives, the Republicans have produced many great politicans and Presidents. Lincoln himself for example. Even Reagan could be considered a great President (even though I don't support Reaganomics and some of his rush towards militarization), but he's certainly head and shoulders above Bush in stature, intelligence, charm and capabilitiy. Colin Powell would have made a great President. Cain would have made a great President.

But Bush? My honest opinion is no.

So I guess "my beef" (if you will) is not with conservatism as a whole, but with Bush in particular. I honestly don't think he's that great.


Quote:

I know you will give a good answer Mr. Mephisto.
Not sure if this is up to your expectations! LOL



Mr Mephisto

Ustwo 10-31-2004 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

Let me tell you one of the main reasons I don't think Bush will be considered a great President. Simply because of the polarization of US politics. I honestly believe he doesn't really care that much for those that disagree with him. The opposite can be said for Lincoln, who very much cared what the opposition felt and tried to always walk a middle ground (before civil war made this impossible).

Mr Mephisto

You do know that people in the North that spoke against the war were put in jail without trial?

We had riots in NY the likes of which we have not seen before?

Don't use rose tinted glasses to look at the civil war or Lincoln.

Mephisto2 10-31-2004 04:12 PM

Yes I do know that Ustwo. I'm also quite familiar with the anti-conscription riots (in which the Irish were very much involved unfortunately) that wracked New York.

Who is using rose tinted glasses? You yourself nominated Lincoln as (one of) the greatest Americans.

Funny how you can criticise me for sharing one of your opinions.

But hey, thanks for your concern. :)


Mr Mephisto

Konichiwaneko 10-31-2004 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
You won't stir me up at all! I enjoy debate and learn from others all the time. Your questions below are very interesting ones and they made me think quite a bit before replying. That's what this is all about! :)



Sure thing.



Well, let's answer the last question first. Would I accept Bush if his strategy turned out right in the end? Yes. Yes I would. That is, insofar as it's up to me.

There are som differences though. First and foremost, the Union, the whole United States, is not fighting a Civil War now. It is not in the utmost danger of collapsing. And Bush is not throwing men and women into combat in the same way as Grant did.

Grant and Lincoln "did the numbers". They knew the Confederacy couldn't keep up with the casualties that the North could. But that was a sign of the times. No one, no President could do that today. Times have changed. People's beliefs in what is worth dying for has changed. And a lot of Americans don't believe that it's worth dying to ensure the Vice-President's cronies get some juicy oil contracts in Iraq (joke... kinda).

So in summary, if Bush were "proved right" would I accept him? Of course. But I honestly don't think he will be proved right in his war in Iraq, his environmental policy, his social policy. That's the problem with a lot these things. They're very subjective. The Civil War was pretty "cut and dry". Either the North won and preserved the Union, or the South won and destroyed the Union. I don't believe there's such an easy logic to the Iraqi conflict.




Well, whilst Lincoln tried to reach out and understood, especially before the Civil War broke out that it was incumbent upon him to govern by the law and for those who also did not support him, he was never afraid of lambasting or criticising the "opposition". And don't forget that Bush does the same! So, to be honest, I'm not sure if using Kerry's political criticism of the right is appropriate as a foil in this case. Bush attacks and criticises the left just as much (if not more).

Will Kerry's berating back-fire on him? Well, I don't think so. No more than Bush's berating has back-fired on him. There will always be people who argue for either side.

What if he doesn't "fix" things? I don't think any one man can fix the things broken in any society. Especially Kerry if the Congress has a Republican majority! :)

Will people continue to think the US is dysfunctional? Well, I don't think it is. It obviously is functional as a society. There are things that are not working right. Kerry and Bush both agree on that. But they both have different political agendas and political beliefs. My preference are for those promulgated by Kerry, but that doesn't mean I don't understand, or that I disrespect those of Bush and his supporters.




Well, I don't know if you could say Grant was terrible at his job as a general. Certainly as a President, but I'm not sure as a general.

Do I think Bush will be vindicated over time? Well, that depends upon the end result. I personally don't believe his strategy (if you will) is the best way to address the threats and challenges that America faces. Who know (though) what history will tell us. In a hundred and forty years from now, maybe Bush will be considered a great President. I don't argue that possibility. My gut feeling is that he won't be, but I've been wrong in the past. :)

Let me tell you one of the main reasons I don't think Bush will be considered a great President. Simply because of the polarization of US politics. I honestly believe he doesn't really care that much for those that disagree with him. The opposite can be said for Lincoln, who very much cared what the opposition felt and tried to always walk a middle ground (before civil war made this impossible).

Finally, if you are asking if Bush will ever be considered as great, or in the same league, as Lincoln, then no. I don't think so. Ever.

Let me add that I think the "right", the conservatives, the Republicans have produced many great politicans and Presidents. Lincoln himself for example. Even Reagan could be considered a great President (even though I don't support Reaganomics and some of his rush towards militarization), but he's certainly head and shoulders above Bush in stature, intelligence, charm and capabilitiy. Colin Powell would have made a great President. Cain would have made a great President.

But Bush? My honest opinion is no.

So I guess "my beef" (if you will) is not with conservatism as a whole, but with Bush in particular. I honestly don't think he's that great.




Not sure if this is up to your expectations! LOL



Mr Mephisto

I think those are great and well thought out answers, and I like you Mr. Mephisto. You would be someone worth talking to in real life, and seem to stand well on your belief.

I think you bring up very vaild points, and I'm going to study your approach for little bit.

Ustwo 10-31-2004 04:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Yes I do know that Ustwo. I'm also quite familiar with the anti-conscription riots (in which the Irish were very much involved unfortunately) that wracked New York.

Who is using rose tinted glasses? You yourself nominated Lincoln as (one of) the greatest Americans.

Funny how you can criticise me for sharing one of your opinions.

But hey, thanks for your concern. :)


Mr Mephisto

Lincoln was basically the same as Bush, he polarized the nation so badly that half of it revolted. Bush spoke of compromise and new tone etc, but his opposition would not listen and did not care. Lincoln didn’t bring the nation together, but several 100 thousand bodies did. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t a great man.

That being said, Bush won't be equal to Lincoln in greatness reguardless of the outcome in the Mid East. The stakes are not the same.

Mephisto2 10-31-2004 05:05 PM

So looks like we agree Ustwo. :)

Mr Mephisto

daswig 10-31-2004 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
I think you're misunderstanding this. If Kerry and Fonda were traitors, as you have repeatedly stated, then so was Vallandigham. You can't have it both ways. :)

Exactly as you have suggested for Kerry and Fonda. I can't remember, but I think you even went so far as to suggest hanging.


Actually, it was Lincoln who suggested hanging, not me. Please reread the original quote. Hanging would undoubtedly NOT pass Constitutional muster nowadays.

If it was good enough for Lincoln, one of our most revered Presidents, to do to Vallandigham, it's good enough for Fonda and Kerry.

Mephisto2 10-31-2004 07:26 PM

I wasn't referring to the original quote. I was saying that I thought you had, in another thread, stated that Kerry and Fonda as traitors should have been hanged.

Maybe you didn't. I can see how I could have been confusing.


Mr Mephisto

Ustwo 10-31-2004 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
I wasn't referring to the original quote. I was saying that I thought you had, in another thread, stated that Kerry and Fonda as traitors should have been hanged.

Maybe you didn't. I can see how I could have been confusing.


Mr Mephisto

I would have deported them to N. Vietnam, would be a fitting punishment.

alansmithee 10-31-2004 08:15 PM

I would either nominate FDR or Kurt Vonnegut.

I still don't think FDR gets the credit he should. It was primarily his ideas that led the way through arguably 2 of America's 3 most trying periods.

Mephisto2 11-01-2004 05:01 AM

Why Kurt Vonnegut?

Apart from writing some very strange fiction, what has he done? Just curious...

Mr Mephisto

Tophat665 11-01-2004 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stompy
George W. Bush

Wrong!
Quote:

1. He's the most honest and up front president we've had in the past 30 years.
If by honest you mean psychologically incapable of telling the truth, then correct. Otherwise, Wrong!
Quote:

2. He got rid of Saddam. This is a good thing because Saddam was about to create weapons of mass destruction to use against those who love freedom.
Wrong! It's been proved to everyone but Fox News that Saddam was not about to create WMDs. If it was a good thing, it was because Hussein was a tyrant, and removing him has brought peace and stability to the people of Iraq. Oh. Wait a second. Wrong!
Quote:

3. The war on terror will totally eradicate all freedom-haters across the globe.
Truly, they will be voted out of office.

Quote:

Re: 2 and 3, I love my freedom. I don't want people to hate me because I'm free! I don't want to die by a WMD!

4. He has a clear and concise plan for everything. These can be viewed at http://www.georgewbush.com/
It can also be viewed at <a href="http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&passage=revelations&version=NIV">http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?language=english&passage=revelations&version=NIV</a>.

Quote:

If that isn't the greatest american, then I don't know what is!
And that is why I have difficulties giving Bush supporters any credit at all.

adysav 11-01-2004 05:46 AM

As a non-American I'm probably missing a lot of information and my list of prospective greats is undoubtedly shorter.

My nomination is Cassius Marcellus Clay, AKA Muhammad Ali.
An effortless master of his trade, but still committed to being the best he possibly could.
A man who was a great personality and one who stood up for what he believed was right. He was made a United Nations Messenger of Peace.

alansmithee 11-01-2004 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
Why Kurt Vonnegut?

Apart from writing some very strange fiction, what has he done? Just curious...

Mr Mephisto

It is what he has written. I think the ideas in his writing are much more than "strange fiction". It is just unfortunate that he got started writing when alot of Americans were not interested in reading anymore. The ideas in his stories stand up to anyone, IMO. As far as I'm concerned, he is the greatest American writer ever

Lebell 11-01-2004 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
So looks like we agree Ustwo. :)

Mr Mephisto

!?!?!

Is it the apocolypse??


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360