Tag: American History

Constitution Day–17 September

I believe that this day should be a more important holiday than any of our others….this is the day the new US Constitution was approved….the day that America became a functioning entity.

I shall start with my opinion–While I believe the DoI was an important document that set the whole thing in motion….I also think that this document was a rehash of what Paine wrote in Common Sense….the approval of the Constitution set up the framework of a new country….and the as they say the st is history.

A few facts about Constitution Day…..

Constitution Day celebrates the signing of the United States Constitution on September 17, 1787.

What the Day Commemorates
  • The Signing: Delegates to the Constitutional Convention signed the foundational document in Philadelphia.
  • The Birth of Government: While July 4th marks independence, September 17th marks the creation of the federal government and framework of laws.
  • Citizenship: It is also known as Citizenship Day, recognizing all who have become U.S. citizens through birth or naturalization.
How It Is Observed
  • Education: Federally funded schools and colleges must hold educational programs about the U.S. Constitution.
  • Civic Reflection: Communities use the day to reflect on the rights, liberties, and responsibilities of American citizenship.
Independence Day
  • Date: Celebrated on July 4th.
  • Meaning: It marks the adoption of the Declaration of Independence in 1776, which stated that the American colonies were free from British rule.
  • Celebration: It is a major federal holiday with paid time off, parades, fireworks, and public gatherings.
Constitution Day
  • Date: Celebrated on September 17th.
  • Meaning: It marks the signing of the U.S. Constitution in 1787, which created the rules and system for the federal government.
  • Celebration: It is a federal observance, also known as Citizenship Day, but it does not include a federal day off work. Schools and government agencies hold educational programs about the Constitution.

How many people know what the 4th of July signifies?  How about the 17th of September?

This is an important day in the history of this country and should get much more attention than it does for without the Constitution Washington, after the war, would have returned to his plantation and oversaw his slaves and crops.

Another thing the debate around the Constitution was public….the Federalist Papers and the ‘Anti-Federalist Papers’ were printed for all to see and know what the delegates were doing….

(This is included for those that are interested enough to check it out)

https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text

The Anti-Federalist Papers

The American public was privy to what both sides were aiming for with the new government.

When was the last time you got to see or read the real debate on an issue by the government…..today we get snippets from different sources that seldom tell the whole story.

These days the Constitution seems to mean very little to politicians and the population….it is used as some sort of dodge to action on some issue mostly not in the interest in the country or its people.

WE have ‘holidays’ for this person or that but the Constitution is not ever in the conversation and that is so sad that they people, especially students, are unaware of the importance of the document.

A few facts about the Constitution….

Constitution Day, also known as Citizenship Day, is an important federal observance in the United States. On September 17th each year, Americans commemorate the signing of the United States Constitution in 1787. This pivotal document laid the foundation for the nation’s democratic principles, rights, and freedoms. While Constitution Day primarily celebrates American history and citizenship, its significance transcends national borders and holds relevance in the international landscape.

Constitution Day’s historical roots can be traced back to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, where delegates from the 13 American colonies gathered to address the shortcomings of the Articles of Confederation. The convention, held from May 25 to September 17, 1787, resulted in the creation of the United States Constitution, a document designed to establish a more perfect union and safeguard individual rights.

The U.S. Constitution remains the oldest written national constitution still in use. It has withstood the test of time, serving as a beacon of democracy globally. It outlines the division of powers, ensuring that no single branch of government becomes too powerful, thereby preserving the democratic ideals upon which the nation was founded.

The Constitution’s Bill of Rights guarantees fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, religion, and the right to a fair trial. These rights have become a cornerstone of American society, shaping the nation’s identity and inspiring similar rights protections worldwide.

Constitution Day underscores the importance of the rule of law. It reinforces the notion that even the highest authorities in the land are bound by a set of rules and principles, fostering a culture of accountability and justice.

Now let me ask you….does any of that hold true today?

I say that the lack of the Constitution importance to America has been greatly ignored in all aspects of American life….and now we are paying for it.

We should be proud of the accomplishments of the Convention that gave birth to the Constitution instead we are too damn busy hating our neighbors because they do not adhere to some sick ideology.

I believe that this country will continue to sink further into chaos until we all embrace the tenets set forth by the Constitution and that will be a disaster.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Declaration Of Independence

Today we celebrate the signing of the DoI which lead to the conflict that gave America it’s independence from Mother England.

The document that we celebrate was not the brain child of Jefferson…..as many would like to believe…..personally I think he was just writing a document from notes he had not much original thought there.

All that aside….what is this post about?

Thanks to Benjamin Franklin’s “Poor Richard,” for two decades every member of the Continental Congress was well aware that “haste makes waste.” But the days of late June and early July 1776 cast doubt on the universality of Franklin’s prudent proverb.

By that spring, the colonies had moved closer to independence. Individual colonial assemblies had developed their own list of grievances and calls for independence, many patterned on Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of the Causes and Necessity for Taking up Arms from the previous year, and on his mass-distributed 1774 pamphlet, A Summary View of the Rights of British America. Colonies were also drafting their own state constitutions to be adopted in a free United States of America.

Jefferson had sequestered himself at his beloved Monticello, suffering from migraines. No doubt the stresses of drafting ideas for Virginia’s constitution and grieving the loss of his mother, who died at the end of March, contributed to his condition. But in May, he descended from his Olympus and made the ten-day journey to Philadelphia to join the Second Continental Congress. He originally found rooms in the city center, but by May 23, Jefferson and his fourteen-year-old slave, Robert Hemmings, had found quieter quarters in the Graff House at Seventh and Market Streets. Jefferson had with him his recently acquired writing desk and Windsor chair.

On Friday, June 7, Richard Henry Lee, Jefferson’s fellow Virginia delegate, presented to the Congress Virginia’s resolution on independence: “these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States.” During debates on the Lee Resolution on Saturday and Monday, John Dickinson of Pennsylvania, Robert Livingston of New York, and Edward Rutledge of South Carolina argued that the colonies were not ready for independence. Samuel Adams and his cousin John took the other side, stating that the citizens were “eager” and “ahead of Congress” on independence

https://www.coolidgereview.com/articles/declaration-not-all-jefferson

It is my opinion that we celebrate on the wrong day…..yes the DoI is integral part of our fight for independence but I think that the real celebration should be on Constitution Day in September for that is when it officially became the United States of America.

The DoI was a list of grievances against England but these were covered in Paine’s Common Sense…..

Common Sense provided a persuasive argument to leave England and their model of governance for a republic directly elected by the people. While it deals largely with the American case, it also considers larger topics of political philosophy—anti-monarchism, theories that republics will engage in less conflict, and discussions of the state of nature and how the first societies were created. Common Sense answers the question: What does the ideal government look like? In these ways, it is more relevant today than ever.

This is for those that have NO idea what Paine was writing about….it is quick and painless….

https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/commonsense/summary/

Please remember that there is more to today than beer and BBQ…..it was the beginning of this great country and should be remembered as such.

I you are out celebrating please be careful and do not drive and drink…..if you are participating in the fireworks tradition be extra careful.

I hope everyone has a wonderful day and as always….Be Well and Be Safe….

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Old Professor’s Classroom

Think about he richest cities in the US today….now think back over a hundred years ago….the richest city in the US was Natchez, Mississipppi

If asked to name the richest county in America in 1860, most people would guess New York, Massachusetts, or Pennsylvania.

They’d be wrong.

On the eve of the Civil War, that distinction belonged to Adams County, Mississippi – home to Natchez. According to 1860 census data, Adams County ranked at or near the top nationally in per-capita wealth, a remarkable distinction for a county on what was then America’s southwestern frontier. Contemporary accounts and historians have often described Natchez as having more millionaires per capita than any other American city. At a time when one million dollars represented an almost unimaginable fortune, an extraordinary concentration of wealth sat atop a bluff overlooking the Mississippi River.

That fact surprises us not simply because it involves Mississippi, but because it challenges an assumption many Americans hold about economic history: that today’s centers of wealth have always occupied the top tier of the nation’s economy. But Natchez tells a different story. Economic power is rarely permanent. It follows transportation networks, technology, markets, and opportunity – often leaving yesterday’s boomtowns behind.

To understand Natchez’s rise, start with the Mississippi River. Long before railroads, interstate highways, and commercial aviation connected the nation, rivers served as America’s primary transportation system. The Mississippi and its tributaries formed the most important commercial network on the continent, linking vast stretches of the interior to New Orleans and international markets. Goods that might take weeks to move overland could be transported efficiently by water, making river towns natural centers of trade and investment.

Natchez occupied one of the most strategic locations along that network. Rising high above the floodplain on dramatic bluffs, it offered protection from flooding while maintaining direct access to river commerce. By the early nineteenth century, steamboats moved constantly along the Mississippi, carrying passengers, mail, manufactured goods, agricultural products, and information. Communities along this watery highway enjoyed advantages that would later belong to railroad junctions, interstate crossroads, and major airports.

Geography provided the opportunity. Cotton created the fortune.

https://www.realclearhistory.com/2026/06/10/when_americas_richest_city_was_in_mississippi_1187096.html

That’s right the nation poorest state today was once one of the richest.

My my how things have gone wrong.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

150 Years Ago Today

The nation is celebrating our 250th birthday and I would be remiss if I failed to include the anniversary 150 years, of the Little Big Horn….since my grandfather was full blood Choctaw he would haunt me if I neglect to stick to Custer.

A little history….

The Battle of the Little Bighorn, fought on June 25, 1876, near the Little Bighorn River in Montana Territory, pitted federal troops led by Lieutenant Colonel George Armstrong Custer (1839-76) against a band of Lakota Sioux and Cheyenne warriors. Tensions between the two groups had been rising since the discovery of gold on Native American lands. When a number of tribes missed a federal deadline to move to reservations, the U.S. Army, including Custer and his 7th Cavalry, was dispatched to confront them. Custer was unaware of the number of Indians fighting under the command of Sitting Bull (c.1831-90) at Little Bighorn, and his forces were outnumbered and quickly overwhelmed in what became known as Custer’s Last Stand.

https://www.history.com/articles/battle-of-the-little-bighorn

The day is important in American history….

On June 25, 1876, Lt. Col. George Armstrong Custer and an entire battalion of the 7th Cavalry Regiment rode to their deaths and into American legend on the ridges north of Montana’s Little Bighorn River. The battle was decided in a few hours. Its meaning remains contested 150 years later.

Little Bighorn stands alongside Yorktown, Gettysburg, and D-Day in the pantheon of iconic American battles. But it is a curious addition there, in that it was a small engagement, fought by just a few hundred men on a compact piece of terrain. More curiously still, it was a loss. Not just a loss — a disaster. And more than any other American battle, it has become identified with a single man. Most Americans know it not by its place, but by its protagonist: “Custer’s Last Stand.”

Relative to those multi-corps- and army-sized battlefields, its small scale and remarkable preservation make Little Bighorn an excellent staff ride for junior leaders, allowing participants to study leadership, terrain, and small-unit combat at a very human level. Yet the closer one looks at Little Bighorn, the larger it becomes.

https://warontherocks.com/the-importance-of-the-battle-of-the-little-bighorn/

The Nations that took part in the attack are doing a job on history so that the affair will not be forgotten.

The 150th anniversary of the Battle of the Little Bighorn is weeks away, and tribal leaders are working to ensure their perspective of one of the most significant battles in American history is preserved and shared with the public.

Northern Cheyenne Tribal Vice President Assistant Eugene Little Coyote said the spot marks where four Cheyenne warriors and five Lakota warriors first engaged Custer’s troops on June 25, 1876. He named the four Cheyenne warriors as Bobtail Horse, Dull Knife, Roan Bear, and Calf.

Tribal leaders said the marker will explain how a small group of Cheyenne and Lakota warriors prevented the 7th Cavalry from crossing the river and reaching the nearby village.

“Had they not engaged them and stopped their advance across the river, Custer’s troops would have gotten into our villages and just killed a lot of people,” Little Coyote said. “So this was a pivotal moment at the beginning of this, the Custer side of the battle.”

Watch the story below:

The Nations took it to the ‘man’ (if he could be called that) and did what needed to be done.
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”

A Historically Ignorant President

Our brainless Donny has a full schedule of ‘celebrations’ for our 250th anniversary….a UFC cage match. a street race, a county fair, etc etc etc…..all the mind numbing crap and little about what this country went through in that 250 years.

But what can we expect from a historically ignorant president?

Last week, Donald Trump’s rolling assault on the physical landscape of the capital set its sights on yet another historical landmark. The fountain in the World War II memorial, Trump declared, looked “in pretty bad shape on the bottom,” in need of a makeover “duplicating” that for the nearby Reflecting Pool, though “maybe with a slightly different color … a lighter blue.”

But as we head toward Trump-led celebrations of our country’s semiquincentennial featuring a UFC cage fight in a 5,000-person arena thrown up on the White House lawn, we need to recognize that his onslaught against our history has also extended far beyond the physical.

Not long ago, two watchdog groups sued the Trump administration over the White House’s internal guidance that email exchanges between executive branch officials could be peremptorily deleted, escaping preservation for the historical record. A blatant violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, the memo leaned on a Justice  Department move declaring this act itself unconstitutional. While this time, a court then ruled in favor of the watchdogs, this administration’s efforts to vanish its own public record advance its sweeping campaign to expunge realities as well as richness from American history, to reduce it to tales of untethered “heroes” that will drain its democratic lifeblood.

In April, the Organization of American Historians convened its annual conference in Philadelphia. New York Times reporter Jennifer Schuessler described the tone of this gathering of American historians as “anxious.” This attendee felt a more widespread emotional undercurrent: anger. That feeling has been stirred far more by the Trump administration’s designs on American history than by other worries reported by Schuessler, including historians’ “declining authority” as growing numbers of Americans take up history telling via TikTok, YouTube, and other media that are available to everyone.

I, along with many other historians, am far less bothered by TikTok history than by the sheer scope and brazenness of this top-down White House–led assault on history.

https://newrepublic.com/article/211170/trump-250-commemorating-history-ignorant-president

As a political historian I am disgusted with the gaudy display of insensitivity shown by this idiot that claims to be a ‘stable genius’ and yet he cannot see past the infantile cheap tricks he calls ‘celebrations’.

Anything to say?

Something to think about../..this is how the 1876 celebrations went….

In the summer of 1876, the United States was preparing for its 100th birthday with patriotic celebrations. In its first century, the country had grown from 13 states to 37, with Colorado poised to become the 38th state weeks after July 4.

But while Americans felt proud, many were also worried. “The country was filled with anxiety for the future,”

https://www.history.com/articles/american-centennial-1876-celebrations

A little history goes a long way.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

As We Approach 250 Years

Soon we will be celebrating this country’s 250th year in existence (some say it may be the last celebration we have)…and since moist Americans are completely ignorant about our history I thought I would do my part to try and help them understand our history and why we did the things we did.

One of the best summations of our collective history was done by US Military Academy historian, Maj. Danny Sjursen…..I include his series here from the very early days to the election of Barack Obama…it is a lot to take in but it does give a complete background to the events that made this country.

If you truly love this country then I suggest to read these and see just why….

Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; Part 4; Part 5; Part 6; Part 7; Part 8; Part 9; Part 10; Part 11; Part 12; Part 13; Part 14; Part 15; Part 16; Part 17; Part 18; Part 19; Part 20; Part 21; Part 22; Part 23; Part 24; Part 25; Part 26; Part 27; Part 28; Part 29; Part 30; Part 31; Part 32; Part 33; Part 34; Part 35 ; Part 36.

There is also another source that makes for excellent learning…..Howard Zinn’s , A People’s History Of The United States, can be found everywhere and especially on Amazon.

I want everyone to know our history all the good, the bad and the ugly for all of it is what made us what we were.

Please let me know what you thought of the series.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“Lego ergo scribo”

The Worst President Ever

Now I could go on a diatribe about Donny referencing his many fuck ups but his last chapter has not been written yet.

And now time for the old professor to drop some history.

The worst president to many political historians was Buchanan the 15th president of the United States.

Historians often label James Buchanan as one of the worst presidents in United States history. His presidency was marked with conflict, a conflict that had been brewing for over thirty years. Yet, Buchanan’s actions, and at times his inactions, aggravated sectional tensions to the point where the Union dissolved.

James “Old Buck” Buchanan was born to wealthy Irish immigrants on April 23, 1791, in rural Cove Gap, Pennsylvania.   He entered Dickinson College at the age of 16, two years later he graduated with honors. After his graduation in 1809, Buchanan studied law and as his legal career grew so did his political one. Buchanan served in a reserve unit during the War of 1812 and did not experience any combat, and shortly after the war, the Old Buck served in the Pennsylvania State Legislature before his election to serve in the United States House of Representatives from 1821 until 1831, where he sat on the House Judiciary Committee.

…
Buchanan’s presidency was marred with conflict; however, one of the most significant events of his presidency began to unfold even before his inauguration. At the heart of the Dred Scott v. Stanford case was the status of slavery in the territories, an issue that had plagued American politics since the Missouri Compromise. Buchanan desperately hoped that the Supreme Court would unequivocally settle this massive issue before his inauguration in March of 1857. In violation of presidential ethics, on February 3, 1857, the president-elect began corresponding with Justice John Catron of Tennessee. Buchanan inquired as to when the country would learn about a decision and if the decision would be narrowly focused or broad. In his response, Catron did not answer as to when a decision would be handed down but did mention that the territorial question would be involved. On February 23, 1857, Justice Robert Grier of Pennsylvania responded to an earlier letter of Buchanan and tipped him off to the coming decision, writing “six if not seven will declare that the compromise law of 1820 to be non-effect.” With this prior knowledge in his inaugural address, Buchanan referred to Dred Scott as a decision that would “speedily and finally” resolve all questions about slavery in the territories, and he would “cheerfully submit to that decision.”

https://www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/james-buchanan

There is more if you are interested…..

Read more about the worst presidential scandals.

Read more about the Worst Presidents methodology.

Donny may one day be known for nothing other than feeding his own ego but until then Buchanan is still the worst president.

I know most people could care less about our history and that should be a shame for we are where we are today because ignorance has prevailed.

Any opinions?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Those Past Constitutional Amendments

Let’s have some fun and learn something.

You got it!  The Old Professor is going to drop some history that most have no idea about.

How well do you know your history of this country?  (Purely rhetorical because most know little to nothing)

There has been numerous amendments considered to the Constitutional but we shot down….but what would this country look like if they had passed?

The United States Constitution had been in effect for little more than a year when Congress first moved to amend it. On September 25, 1789, the legislature sent a dozen proposed amendments to the then-13 states (soon to be 14) for ratification, as the law required. By December 15, 1791, the necessary three-fourths of states had ratified 10 of the 12 amendments, which collectively became known as the Bill of Rights.

Another 17 amendments have been ratified in the 234 years since, for a total of 27. But these measures represent just a tiny fraction of the amendments that have been proposed in Congress over the years—nearly 12,000 to date.

“The U.S. Constitution was intended to be amended,” writes historian Jill Lepore in her new book, We the People: A History of the U.S. Constitution. However, “almost all efforts to amend the Constitution fail. Success often takes decades. And for long stretches of American history, amending the Constitution has been effectively impossible.”

Most proposed amendments die quietly in congressional committees (if they even get that far), with only a few sent on to the states for ratification. At present, there are six proposed amendments awaiting possible state ratification—one of them dating back to 1789.

Many failed amendments have involved fairly minor administrative matters. But others would have changed the American government in substantial ways and possibly altered the course of history.

Here are a dozen of those failed amendments and what they set out to accomplish.

In 1866, Missouri Representative George Washington Anderson proposed dropping “United States” from the country’s name and simply calling it “America.” The current name was “not sufficiently comprehensive and significant to indicate the real unity and destiny of the American people as the eventual, paramount power of this hemisphere,” he argued, albeit unsuccessfully.

Weighing in from across the Atlantic, the Illustrated London News mocked the proposal as the “verbal appropriation of a hemisphere.”

Just one hemisphere wasn’t enough for Lucas Miller, a first-term representative from Wisconsin. On a single February day in 1893, he introduced 46 bills, one of which would have changed the country’s name to the “United States of the Earth.”

Miller’s rationale, in his own words, was that “it is possible for the republic to grow through the admission of new states into the union, until every nation on earth has become part of it.” Another source suggests that he might also have settled for the “United States of the World.” Miller’s proposal was widely ridiculed at the time, and perhaps unsurprisingly, the congressman didn’t return for a second term.

(Read On)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/twelve-failed-constitutional-amendments-that-could-have-reshaped-american-history-180987425/

There are a couple that would apply to the situation today….

Abolishing the Senate….not bad should be considered because the Senate is where good bills go to die.

Numbers 8 and 9 deserve consideration…

Numbers 10 -12 should already be part of the Constitution….

If you read the article then I would like to hear your thoughts on these past proposed amendments to our Constitution.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

The Evil We Embrace

Note:  This was draft I was saving for when the country gets into the meat of the next election but my blogging buddy, Judy Thompson, over at https://sayitnow.wordpress.com/ asked a question about political parties whether there should be a 3rd or maybe none at all….so I decide to answer her with this post (it will be back during the next election).

College of Political Knowledge

American Politics And The Process

Paper #1

“However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”

― George Washington

George was a sharp person and foresaw the problems these ‘parties’ will cause and yet the people flock to these unprincipled ‘people’ en masse.
“Evil’….yep the party system is evil look what it has done and continues to do this country.
I have been write against the whole two party system for decades….I feel that this country as long as it embraces this stupidity is doomed to failure.
Look what these monstrosities have done to the political system of this nation…they have made the divide deeper and more dangerous….they seldom deliver the needed programs and policies to keep this country moving forward….the candidates promise the world and deliver crumbs

Like many Americans, I have been increasingly disappointed by the candidates promoted by political parties because they tend to back candidates who are ultimately focused on personal gain and/or only advancing issues predetermined by party priorities while moving further away from responding to the needs of their constituents. According to The Guardian, in the 2024 election, the number of eligible voters who did not cast their ballot is more than the total of those who voted for either of the party candidates. So, maybe the real issue is that our political party system just isn’t working for most Americans anymore. Assuming this is even partially true, what if, instead of just complaining about the parties or holding our noses and voting for the “lesser evil” every November, we actually fired the parties—took away their grip on our democracy and built something better.

For decades, we’ve been told we only have two choices. But more and more Americans don’t feel truly represented by either major party. We’re exhausted by the noise, the blame games, the endless culture wars that solve nothing and only serve to increasingly marginalize portions of our citizenry. Americans want real solutions on housing, healthcare, education, wages, and the future we’re leaving for the next generation. And we’re not getting them. So, maybe it’s time to ask a radical but necessary question: What if the problem isn’t just the candidates but the political party system that keeps producing them?

The Case for Firing the Parties

A. They Were Never Supposed to Be Permanent

Political parties aren’t mentioned anywhere in the U.S. Constitution. The Founders didn’t design a system based on organized political factions. In fact, they explicitly warned against it. George Washington, in his 1796 farewell address, foretold that political parties would eventually “become potent engines” for individuals to seize and abuse power, dividing citizens and distracting the government from serving the public good. In a letter written by John Adams in 1780, he regarded the division of the republic into two great parties as “to be dreaded as the greatest political evil.” In a 1789 letter from Thomas Jefferson, he wrote: “If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all.”

Yet political parties arose almost immediately after the Constitution was ratified. These early versions of political parties formed largely out of necessity to organize debates and mobilize voters. Political parties were tools for winning elections. But over time, the tool began to control the system itself. Today, parties aren’t just optional organizers of ideas, they have become gatekeepers of power, often more loyal to themselves than to the people they claim to serve.

https://thefulcrum.us/bipartisanship/dangers-of-two-party-system

Our political system without these beasts would be more open and would promote collaboration between the politicians without the restraints of some silly party mechanism.

Gerrymandering would not be an issue….

I say the sooner we get rid of these thugs the sooner this country will return to its place as the trend setter for democracy.

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Donny Changes Presidents

During his first presidency Donny was all a tither over Andrew Jackson….I think because Jackson loved being a bully….and now in his second term Donny has a new idol, McKinley.

In his first term, President Trump’s favorite commander-in-chief, other than himself, was Andrew Jackson, the hatchet-faced, self-made populist who relished turning Washington upside down. Now he’s partial to the barrel-chested, unfailingly polite William McKinley, a champion of American expansionism as well as of tariffs, Trump’s favorite second-term policy. Trump’s shift, rather than merely swapping one infatuation for another, demonstrates how his mindset and priorities have evolved, the AP reports. The Republican president’s admiration for McKinley fits with his current politics, which are different from when Trump first took office in 2017. A key political target for Trump back then was the elites, which his administration predicted might crumble in the face of a Jackson-like working class uprising.

In his second inaugural address, Trump lauded McKinley as a “natural businessman” who “made our country very rich through tariffs and through talent.” Trump used a Day 1 order to restore the name of North America’s tallest peak to Mount McKinley and he has repeatedly named-checked the 25th president more recently, while his weighty tariffs have left the world bracing for the kind of trade war not seen since the days of the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890. The White House says the shift isn’t a departure from Trump’s first-term goals, but simply his leaning harder into new tools—in this case, tariffs—to achieve them.

“President Trump has never wavered from his commitment to putting working-class Americans above special interests, and his channeling of President McKinley’s tariffs agenda is indicative of how he is using every lever of executive power to deliver for the American people,” said spokesman Kush Desai. The president’s Jacksonian impulses aren’t all dormant. He imposed some first-term tariffs and now is shaking up Washington with his efforts to slash the federal workforce and stock the bureaucracy with loyalists. He’s also prioritized antagonizing “elites” at Ivy League universities and top law firms.

(Click for more, including the other side of McKinley’s tariffs that Trump doesn’t mention.)

He adores McKinley because basically of tariffs…..but McKinley mismanaged so many things during his tenure as leader of the ‘free world’….

It is true that the self-styled “tariff man”—his political opponents preferred the more derisive “Napoleon of protection”—was the biggest public face of mercantilism during America’s high-tariff era of 1870–1912. As a congressman, he wrote what came to be known as the “McKinley tariff” of 1890, and as president he signed another increase in 1897.

But a funny thing happened after the U.S. came out of the Panic (and subsequent four-year depression) of 1893: Goosed by sharp increases in domestic iron and copper production, Americans had too many goods chasing too few consumers. And McKinley himself began agitating to tear down some of those trade barriers

“What we produce beyond our domestic consumption must have a vent abroad,” he said in September 1901 at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York. “The excess must be relieved through a foreign outlet, and we should sell everywhere we can, and buy wherever the buying will enlarge our sales and productions, and thereby make a greater demand for home labor. The period of exclusiveness is past,” he continued. “The expansion of our trade and commerce is the pressing problem. Commercial wars are unprofitable….If perchance some of our tariffs are no longer needed, for revenue or to encourage and protect our industries at home, why should they not be employed to extend and promote our markets abroad?”

McKinley’s presidency was ended by an assassin’s bullet the very next day.

Even before his late-life pivot to freer trade, McKinley had long been a champion of reciprocity, i.e., the bilateral, mutually beneficial reduction of targeted, asymmetrical tariffs. Or, as he put it in his first inaugural address, “the opening up of new markets for the products of our country, by granting concessions to the products of other lands that we need and cannot produce ourselves, and which do not involve any loss of labor to our own people, but tend to increase their employment.”

https://reason.com/2025/04/06/trump-is-wrong-about-mckinleys-tariff-legacy/

Who will get the nod next year?

He picks the worse to emulate….but that is always expected…..

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”