CaughtintheMiddle1990
12-13-2010, 07:21 AM
There are quite a few people whom I really admire, and like, personally who either weren't Conservative, or they weren't clearly so.
Teddy Roosevelt is one of them. He is, in some ways, a hero of mine. As I do drift more to the right in my views, I do still support TR. Even Reagan did, long after he became a Republican. I think, while he was wrong on some issues, right on others, he was a proud American, and I kind of agree with his stance that you're either an American or you're not. I admire the fact that he wasn't politically correct, that he was a brave warrior, and to quote Nixon on him, "He was always in the arena--tempestuous, strong, sometimes wrong, sometimes right. But he was a man."
I know some Conservatives hate him for his later stances with the Bull Moose party, or his views on race, but I think his overall pride in America, and his actions as President overcome it. And I can't blame someone who might've been a racist when racism was common; We're all subject to our upbringings. However, he didn't make racism a public policy like Wilson did, and that is admirable, and he actually furthered the cause of civil rights by having the unprecedented and utterly unpopular move of inviting Booker T. Washington to the White House for dinner--making him the first African American to do so.
I agree with the regulations that he put in place, especially in the context of the era, and the fact he didn't act on blind ideology in doing so. He read the book The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, but didn't just emotionally jump and introduce regulations because of it--He had a lot of people go and investigate to see whether the claims about the food industry were true and only began introducing regulations when the reports came in saying that in a great many instances, the horrors depicted in the Jungle were generally true. And his regulations weren't stifling, overzealous or overly complex as they are today--They were common sense. I very much disagree with Glenn Beck portraying him as some American hating Nazi.
MLK is another. The man was probably a Socialist of some sort--Not a Maoist or a Leninist--but a light Socialist, and yes, he was a cheater in his personal life, and did support reparations--These are all things I disagree with, all character flaws; BUT I believe that not only his message, but his actions, overcome his flawed beliefs or personal failings. He was a black man who grew up in an age where America wasn't the kindest it could be to the black population--That's not an indictment on America, but simply a truth--and King was a very intelligent man, very charismatic, a good speaker, and in the environment he grew up in, he could've easily become a racist and radical like Malcolm X.
He could've used his position of great influence over the black community to inspire uprisings, violence; To inspire further division and hate as X tried to. He could've been a separatist who felt that blacks and whites couldn't live together, or gone so far as to say blacks deserved their own nation, like black nationalists have. But he didn't. He rose above his time and place, and brought to the masses, joining both black and white in a message of forgiveness and peaceful cooperation. He used his position and his influence for good. He told his followers to take the bigotry hurled at them and not respond with violence, or hate in return but with love and peaceful protest. The man may have been flawed in his own ways, but I believe he rose above those flaws and was a great American.
Truman is also another. The man, while right wing of modern liberals, would probably still be a Liberal in today's political spectrum, but he was a guy who loved his country, and ended World War II as quickly as he could, so that fewer Americans would die and we could resume the business of peace that much faster. He could've easily went with more morally unquestionable doctrine of conventional war with the Japanese and went ahead with our planned invasion, which might possibly have sentenced millions of American soldiers to death--But instead he made one incredibly brave and tough decision and dropped the Bomb in order to prevent this. AND HE NEVER REGRETTED IT. He also wasn't all that subject to special interests for a Liberal Democrat--He did stand up to the unions when their strikes threatened the course of our country's commerce, which I feel is a common sense move, but how many modern Democrats would stand up to unions? Union membership reached a deep low during his Administration, or so I have read. I also admire the fact that he was a soldier AND a businessmen before becoming President--It's been a long time since we had a businessmen in office, and a long time since we had a president who was both a businessmen and veteran. He wasn't a patrician; He was a plain speaking, utterly common man from Missouri who didn't expect to become President (Not even he knew how sickly FDR was) but stood up to the challenge and did very well with it. Also, I find the fact that he was a staunch Anti-Communist admirable and he started the system of loyalty oaths before McCarthy even came on the scene.
He also didn't show any leniency or mercy for the Rosenbergs, even though if he wanted he could've issued a pardon, and they were made examples out of for their traitorous acts. He had his failings as President, with Korea and China, but I think overall he does deserve the ranking he often gets with historians as one of the best--At least, one of the best of modern times.
Teddy Roosevelt is one of them. He is, in some ways, a hero of mine. As I do drift more to the right in my views, I do still support TR. Even Reagan did, long after he became a Republican. I think, while he was wrong on some issues, right on others, he was a proud American, and I kind of agree with his stance that you're either an American or you're not. I admire the fact that he wasn't politically correct, that he was a brave warrior, and to quote Nixon on him, "He was always in the arena--tempestuous, strong, sometimes wrong, sometimes right. But he was a man."
I know some Conservatives hate him for his later stances with the Bull Moose party, or his views on race, but I think his overall pride in America, and his actions as President overcome it. And I can't blame someone who might've been a racist when racism was common; We're all subject to our upbringings. However, he didn't make racism a public policy like Wilson did, and that is admirable, and he actually furthered the cause of civil rights by having the unprecedented and utterly unpopular move of inviting Booker T. Washington to the White House for dinner--making him the first African American to do so.
I agree with the regulations that he put in place, especially in the context of the era, and the fact he didn't act on blind ideology in doing so. He read the book The Jungle by Upton Sinclair, but didn't just emotionally jump and introduce regulations because of it--He had a lot of people go and investigate to see whether the claims about the food industry were true and only began introducing regulations when the reports came in saying that in a great many instances, the horrors depicted in the Jungle were generally true. And his regulations weren't stifling, overzealous or overly complex as they are today--They were common sense. I very much disagree with Glenn Beck portraying him as some American hating Nazi.
MLK is another. The man was probably a Socialist of some sort--Not a Maoist or a Leninist--but a light Socialist, and yes, he was a cheater in his personal life, and did support reparations--These are all things I disagree with, all character flaws; BUT I believe that not only his message, but his actions, overcome his flawed beliefs or personal failings. He was a black man who grew up in an age where America wasn't the kindest it could be to the black population--That's not an indictment on America, but simply a truth--and King was a very intelligent man, very charismatic, a good speaker, and in the environment he grew up in, he could've easily become a racist and radical like Malcolm X.
He could've used his position of great influence over the black community to inspire uprisings, violence; To inspire further division and hate as X tried to. He could've been a separatist who felt that blacks and whites couldn't live together, or gone so far as to say blacks deserved their own nation, like black nationalists have. But he didn't. He rose above his time and place, and brought to the masses, joining both black and white in a message of forgiveness and peaceful cooperation. He used his position and his influence for good. He told his followers to take the bigotry hurled at them and not respond with violence, or hate in return but with love and peaceful protest. The man may have been flawed in his own ways, but I believe he rose above those flaws and was a great American.
Truman is also another. The man, while right wing of modern liberals, would probably still be a Liberal in today's political spectrum, but he was a guy who loved his country, and ended World War II as quickly as he could, so that fewer Americans would die and we could resume the business of peace that much faster. He could've easily went with more morally unquestionable doctrine of conventional war with the Japanese and went ahead with our planned invasion, which might possibly have sentenced millions of American soldiers to death--But instead he made one incredibly brave and tough decision and dropped the Bomb in order to prevent this. AND HE NEVER REGRETTED IT. He also wasn't all that subject to special interests for a Liberal Democrat--He did stand up to the unions when their strikes threatened the course of our country's commerce, which I feel is a common sense move, but how many modern Democrats would stand up to unions? Union membership reached a deep low during his Administration, or so I have read. I also admire the fact that he was a soldier AND a businessmen before becoming President--It's been a long time since we had a businessmen in office, and a long time since we had a president who was both a businessmen and veteran. He wasn't a patrician; He was a plain speaking, utterly common man from Missouri who didn't expect to become President (Not even he knew how sickly FDR was) but stood up to the challenge and did very well with it. Also, I find the fact that he was a staunch Anti-Communist admirable and he started the system of loyalty oaths before McCarthy even came on the scene.
He also didn't show any leniency or mercy for the Rosenbergs, even though if he wanted he could've issued a pardon, and they were made examples out of for their traitorous acts. He had his failings as President, with Korea and China, but I think overall he does deserve the ranking he often gets with historians as one of the best--At least, one of the best of modern times.