Executive Echos

[Chief Executive]

No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency; and in the important revolution just accomplished in the system of their united government the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities from which the event has resulted can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage.

From George Washington's First Inaugural Address
April 30, 1789



I AM again called upon by the voice of my country to execute the functions of its Chief Magistrate. When the occasion proper for it shall arrive, I shall endeavor to express the high sense I entertain of this distinguished honor, and of the confidence which has been reposed in me by the people of united America.

Previous to the execution of any official act of the President the Constitution requires an oath of office. This oath I am now about to take, and in your presence: That if it shall be found during my administration of the Government I have in any instance violated willingly or knowingly the injunctions thereof, I may (besides incurring constitutional punishment) be subject to the upbraidings of all who are now witnesses of the present solemn ceremony.

George Washington's Entire Second Inaugural Address
March 4, 1793

[withoutcanseco]

completely unintelligible.

[Soul Queen]

No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of men more than those of the United States. Every step by which they have advanced to the character of an independent nation, seems to have been distinguished by some token of providential agency; and in the important revolution just accomplished, in the system of their united government the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities from which the event has resulted, can not be compared with the means by which most governments have been established, without some return of pious gratitude, along with an humble anticipation of the future blessings which the past seem to presage.

From George Washington's First Inaugural Address
April 30, 1789

Maybe it would help if there were commas. (what do I know?) (I added a few). (Maybe not?)

Though reading this I don't agree that Belief in a country should be solely based on that God has blessed this nation. The first inaugural address was also a very different time in our history.

How is this quote relevant now?

Or is it another idea that government is the Invisable Hand and we should be happy for it?

Speak Up, Chief Executive, whoever you may be!

[JVO]

I also have a problem with the idea that America was in some way blessed by a higher power. Obviously the high power must have some sort of hated of native americans and africans if He has selected us to be the "chosen ones". This statement also seems to fly in the face of Seperation of Church and state. We are definitely a religious country.

Cool quote though, keepim coming CE.

[bubz_bluez]

i agree JVO they hate Native Americans for obvious reasons THEY WERE FUCKIN HERE FIRST! and they hate African's cause they still wish they were our slaves! repulicans are always up to no good......Hey JVO when did the south switch sides? they were Democrates at one point.......know what im talkin about?

bubz

[JVO]

i agree JVO they hate Native Americans for obvious reasons THEY WERE FUCKIN HERE FIRST! and they hate African's cause they still wish they were our slaves! repulicans are always up to no good

Well I am not sure that Republicans have anything to do with it considering this quote was made 85 years before the birth of the Republican Party. BTW the first Republican was President Lincoln and he was the one who freed the slaves. So it may be a little unfair to tag racism on the party who freed the slaves, nominated AA Supreme Court Justice, Appointed first AA Sec. of Defense and first AA National Security Advisor. I can also promise you that when an AA is elected President, he or she will be a Republican. Certainly there are racist Republicans, but there are racist Democrats too. Racism knows all parties.



Hey JVO when did the south switch sides? they were Democrates at one point.......know what im talkin about?

Before, during, and after the Civil War most southerners were Democrats. At that time the Democratic party was essentially a State's Rights party, which meant that they believed that an individual state had the right to do pretty much whatever they wanted (like slavery). Lincoln formed the Republican party as a way of showing that the Republic should come before the individual states. This idea is what created the Civil War. The war was not about slavery, it was about who had control; the state or the federal gov't. During FDR's (who was a democrat) administration many southerners really fell in love with FDR and with the Democratic party because of FDR's "New Deal" programs which instituted many public programs which greatly helped those who were suffering during the Great Depression in the South. This trend pretty much continued until Ronald Reagan's administration. One of the main points for Reagan was the increase in subsidies given to farmers. This created a sub party known as Reagan Democrats. These people voted mostly democrat in state and local elections, yet they voted for Reagan both times (even though the first time he was running against a fellow southerner in Jimmy Carter) in the Presidential elections. Also remember the last two Democrats to be President were both from the South (Carter from Georgia, and Clinton from Arkansas) Now the distinction is not really North v. South but Urban v. Rural. If you look at states whose population mostly consists of urban dwellers (California, New York, Illinois, New England) they almost always vote Democrat. If you look at states whose population consists of rural dwellers (including almost all Plain states and southern states) they almost always vote Republican. In any Presidential election the most important states are always: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Michigan (also called Battleground states). The reason why these states are so important is because their population is split down the middle with half of the people living in the country and the other half living in cities and because each of them is worth a bunch of electoral points. (Think about Missouri for example, there are millions of people in KC and St. Louis who always vote Democrat and there are millions of people in between who vote Republican). The reason why rural areas are more likely to vote for Republicans is because the Republican party is a very "farm friendly" party. In many respects the Republican party has created a welfare (ironic isn't it) program for farmers. Also the values of those who live in rural areas are very close to the values of the Republican party. Values like: Be a Christian, Work hard, Stay away from titty bars, Keep birth control out of schools, keep a tight knit family, don't be gay, right to life, etc. Whereas in cities the values are very different and are much more in accordance with the Democratic party. Values like: Freedom to be whatever religion or lack of religion you want, helping those who can't help themselves, affirmative action, right to choose etc.

Another interesting seperation between the parties is in education. Typically the more educated you are the greater the chance that you will vote Democrat. BUT, the richer you are the more likely you are to vote Republican. The perfect example of a prototypical Democrat would be an Anthropology Professor at Harvard who has 8 different degrees and makes about $150,000.00 a year. The perfect example of a prototypical Republican would be some guy who dropped out of high school to start his own business, which is now a multi-billion dollar industry and makes $15,000,000.00 a year.

The separation of the parties is now much more about values and the economy then about what part of the country you live in (except for the states noted above). Also probably at least 25% of people who vote in elections are not people who vote along party lines (like me for example). Many of these people certainly consider what party a candidate is, but focus more attention on what type of leader they think the person will be and what values do they have. That is why Pres. Shithead won the last two elections. People had a very hard time identifying with Al Gore, who seemed unfriendly and introverted, and many people did not trust John Kerry because of his propensity of being a political whore. Whereas, like it or not, people like Shithead. And they trust that he will always do what he says, and that he will remain loyal to his beliefs despite any opposition. Most importantly, American's like strong leaders and until the Democrats are able to find some more, the Republicans are going to continue winning elections.

Hope that answers your question.

[bubz_bluez]

i know that they used to be domacrates ........nvm

if you didnt know about the switch from democrate to republican JOV explains it well

bubz