latest news proposition 8 image
wiremaxman
What did he actualyl do? He goes out there, wins 8 battle,s losses 8 battles, not a great general as you can esee. Then he retires somehow becomes president doesn't don aything important and for some reason he becomes bafther of america. Seems very overaated. I couldhave done everything he did. The most overrated person in history.
Answer
To best answer your question I am posting an article from the N.Y. Post
Before I do I would like to say that I have reservations about whether or not you or anyone else would have the integrity to do what Washington did certainly there are no polititions today who have the same virtues as Washington.
Maybe a little more research on your part would enlighten you.It is most certainly not as cut and dry as eight battles won,eight battles lost,retirement and then "SOMEHOW" becoming the 1st president.
Washington was indeed a man of great moral fiber and virtue,a humble patriot who believed in freedom as a human right.
Enough from me here is the article from the N.Y.Post that I promised :
by Rich Lowry
July 3, 2008
'DECADES later the Declaration of Independence was canonized as American scripture," historian Walter McDougall writes of the nation's founding document, "but in 1776 it was generally read once - in army camps, taverns, and village greens - cheered, and forgotten."
Its fate might have been to be forgotten forevermore, if it weren't for George Washington and his Continental Army. When our great adventure in liberty still seemed an impossible risk, they were the embodiment and vindicators of the Declaration. Our nation was born on the shoulders of an army, whose exertions and principled patriotism gave the famous parchment its life.
Besides the Continental Congress - which hardly covered itself in glory - the Army was our first national institution. It joined together well-mannered Virginians, quarrelsome Yankees and backcountry riflemen in an incubator of the nation.
Independence from Britain was hardly a unanimous proposition. John Adams thought a third of the country supported it, a third opposed and a third was neutral. It was on the Army that independence would stand or fall, and Gen. Washington's strategic imperative was always to preserve the Army to preserve the nation.
He knew if he kept the Army alive, eventually the British would tire. And keep it alive he did, though sometimes by the barest of margins. After the war, Washington marveled that "such a force as Great Britain has employed for eight years in this country could be baffled in their plan of subjugating it, by numbers infinitely less, composed of men oftentimes half starved, always in rags, without pay."
Washington gathered around him an officer corps he called his military family. They were talented and devoted to him and - more importantly - to the principles of the cause. Washington's chief of staff, Alexander Hamilton, insisted that the rights of man "are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature by the hand of the divinity itself and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power."
A revolution always faces at least two threats - from its outright enemies and from its friends, who often betray it and seize power for themselves.
As important as any of Washington's military successes was the example he set in dealing with the Continental Congress and - despite all the frustrations getting his Army paid and equipped - deferring to civil authority. As the French author Chevalier de Chastellux said during the Revolution, "This is the seventh year that he has commanded the army and he has obeyed Congress: More need not be said."
When, at the war's end, a colonel sent Washington a letter suggesting he become king, he wrote back a stern rebuke. Washington biographer Richard Brookhiser - whose latest book is "George Washington on Leadership" - notes that Washington asked for written confirmation from his aides that his reply had been sent, the only time he made such a request during the war.
Of course, when the war ended, he resigned his command and returned to Mount Vernon. Upon hearing the news, an astonished King George III said, "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world." Before he did, Washington had a last instance of drama with his Army. Camped in Newburgh, NY, at the end of the war in 1783, the Army grew restive because Congress was tardy in paying it. Insurrection was in the air.
In a tense meeting with his officers, Washington told them that in rejecting rebellion, "You will give one more distinguished proof of unexampled patriotism and patient virtue, rising superior to the pressure of the most complicated sufferings; And you will, by the dignity of your Conduct, afford occasion of Posterity to say, when speaking of the glorious example you have exhibited to Mankind, 'had this day been wanting, the World had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining.' "
The day wasn't wanting, nor were the men in arms who vindicated the Declaration.
End Article.
Hopefully this article has garnered a bit of repsect for Washington in your eyes.
I will agree with you the to an extent the founding fathers of this nation have been lionized by history,but I believe that these men were great men who had the fortitude and audacity to stand up to the tyranny of King George III and fight for the liberation of America.
So even if history has painted them as more glorious heroes than what they actually were,their patriotism and acts of bravery and self sacrifice set them far above the polititions(and for that matter most citizens) of modern times.
To best answer your question I am posting an article from the N.Y. Post
Before I do I would like to say that I have reservations about whether or not you or anyone else would have the integrity to do what Washington did certainly there are no polititions today who have the same virtues as Washington.
Maybe a little more research on your part would enlighten you.It is most certainly not as cut and dry as eight battles won,eight battles lost,retirement and then "SOMEHOW" becoming the 1st president.
Washington was indeed a man of great moral fiber and virtue,a humble patriot who believed in freedom as a human right.
Enough from me here is the article from the N.Y.Post that I promised :
by Rich Lowry
July 3, 2008
'DECADES later the Declaration of Independence was canonized as American scripture," historian Walter McDougall writes of the nation's founding document, "but in 1776 it was generally read once - in army camps, taverns, and village greens - cheered, and forgotten."
Its fate might have been to be forgotten forevermore, if it weren't for George Washington and his Continental Army. When our great adventure in liberty still seemed an impossible risk, they were the embodiment and vindicators of the Declaration. Our nation was born on the shoulders of an army, whose exertions and principled patriotism gave the famous parchment its life.
Besides the Continental Congress - which hardly covered itself in glory - the Army was our first national institution. It joined together well-mannered Virginians, quarrelsome Yankees and backcountry riflemen in an incubator of the nation.
Independence from Britain was hardly a unanimous proposition. John Adams thought a third of the country supported it, a third opposed and a third was neutral. It was on the Army that independence would stand or fall, and Gen. Washington's strategic imperative was always to preserve the Army to preserve the nation.
He knew if he kept the Army alive, eventually the British would tire. And keep it alive he did, though sometimes by the barest of margins. After the war, Washington marveled that "such a force as Great Britain has employed for eight years in this country could be baffled in their plan of subjugating it, by numbers infinitely less, composed of men oftentimes half starved, always in rags, without pay."
Washington gathered around him an officer corps he called his military family. They were talented and devoted to him and - more importantly - to the principles of the cause. Washington's chief of staff, Alexander Hamilton, insisted that the rights of man "are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature by the hand of the divinity itself and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power."
A revolution always faces at least two threats - from its outright enemies and from its friends, who often betray it and seize power for themselves.
As important as any of Washington's military successes was the example he set in dealing with the Continental Congress and - despite all the frustrations getting his Army paid and equipped - deferring to civil authority. As the French author Chevalier de Chastellux said during the Revolution, "This is the seventh year that he has commanded the army and he has obeyed Congress: More need not be said."
When, at the war's end, a colonel sent Washington a letter suggesting he become king, he wrote back a stern rebuke. Washington biographer Richard Brookhiser - whose latest book is "George Washington on Leadership" - notes that Washington asked for written confirmation from his aides that his reply had been sent, the only time he made such a request during the war.
Of course, when the war ended, he resigned his command and returned to Mount Vernon. Upon hearing the news, an astonished King George III said, "If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world." Before he did, Washington had a last instance of drama with his Army. Camped in Newburgh, NY, at the end of the war in 1783, the Army grew restive because Congress was tardy in paying it. Insurrection was in the air.
In a tense meeting with his officers, Washington told them that in rejecting rebellion, "You will give one more distinguished proof of unexampled patriotism and patient virtue, rising superior to the pressure of the most complicated sufferings; And you will, by the dignity of your Conduct, afford occasion of Posterity to say, when speaking of the glorious example you have exhibited to Mankind, 'had this day been wanting, the World had never seen the last stage of perfection to which human nature is capable of attaining.' "
The day wasn't wanting, nor were the men in arms who vindicated the Declaration.
End Article.
Hopefully this article has garnered a bit of repsect for Washington in your eyes.
I will agree with you the to an extent the founding fathers of this nation have been lionized by history,but I believe that these men were great men who had the fortitude and audacity to stand up to the tyranny of King George III and fight for the liberation of America.
So even if history has painted them as more glorious heroes than what they actually were,their patriotism and acts of bravery and self sacrifice set them far above the polititions(and for that matter most citizens) of modern times.
what news channel do you trust the most?
larry h
there are many news sourses out there. Which one do you trust for the truth in news without some agenda behind it?
Answer
Fox News. They give unbiased reporting.
Most people don't know the difference between a "talk show" and news. The simple minded liberals watch the Fox talk shows and think it is the news.
You see much more in-depth reporting on Fox than on any other station. Of course the conservative slant of the talk show hosts bring in the money where they can pay for good journalism. If you're a journalist, you are doing your best to get to Fox as all others are failing and you will eventually be out of a job. Fox only gets the cream of the crop journalists.
Just flip back and forth between a breaking story on Fox and then CNN, and it is a no-brainer who gives the best coverage. MSNBC and the other 3 networks are jokes. They just don't have the resources that Fox has.
I have been amazed time and time again when Fox reported something first and was accurate. CNN came out with the breaking story later and made mistakes. Even hours later CNN was missing the actual story.
Look at Katrina, Israel Attacks Gaza/Hamas, Russia and Georgia Go To War, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich Arrested for Corruption, Proposition 8 Passes, Fidel Castro resigns as President of Cuba, Internet Overtakes Newspapers as News Outlet, India Bombings, Eliot Spitzer, Hadron Collider, etc. If you like news, you will know flipping between CNN and Fox that Fox is best. MSNBC is simply a joke... CNBC is not bad even covering outside their focus. CBS, ABC is a joke. NBC is still far behind CNN and Fox, but not as bad as the rest.
Fox News. They give unbiased reporting.
Most people don't know the difference between a "talk show" and news. The simple minded liberals watch the Fox talk shows and think it is the news.
You see much more in-depth reporting on Fox than on any other station. Of course the conservative slant of the talk show hosts bring in the money where they can pay for good journalism. If you're a journalist, you are doing your best to get to Fox as all others are failing and you will eventually be out of a job. Fox only gets the cream of the crop journalists.
Just flip back and forth between a breaking story on Fox and then CNN, and it is a no-brainer who gives the best coverage. MSNBC and the other 3 networks are jokes. They just don't have the resources that Fox has.
I have been amazed time and time again when Fox reported something first and was accurate. CNN came out with the breaking story later and made mistakes. Even hours later CNN was missing the actual story.
Look at Katrina, Israel Attacks Gaza/Hamas, Russia and Georgia Go To War, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich Arrested for Corruption, Proposition 8 Passes, Fidel Castro resigns as President of Cuba, Internet Overtakes Newspapers as News Outlet, India Bombings, Eliot Spitzer, Hadron Collider, etc. If you like news, you will know flipping between CNN and Fox that Fox is best. MSNBC is simply a joke... CNBC is not bad even covering outside their focus. CBS, ABC is a joke. NBC is still far behind CNN and Fox, but not as bad as the rest.
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment