Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Listen to the Buck Sexton Show Live on TheBlaze Radio

Business

It’s ‘Washington’s Birthday’: Here Are His 5 Most Important Warnings to Congress

Feb. 18, 2013 8:45am Becket Adams

George Washingtons 5 Most Important Warnings to Congress on Presidents Day

YouTube

Although commonly referred to as “Presidents’ Day,” Feb. 18 is legally recognized as “Washington’s Birthday” (his actual birthday is Feb. 22).

However, as the Washington Examiner notes, we don’t dedicate this day to Washington because he is the greatest U.S. general (he isn’t) or even the greatest president (the case can certainly be made for others). No, though Washington’s performance in both categories is deserving of high praise, we honor him for the precedent and example he set.

“He held the proverbial ring of power, and he gave it up of his own accord,” the Washington Examiner notes.

“Washington’s selflessness separates him from lesser men who won much greater military victories but were vanquished by the temptation of power — Julius Caesar before him and Napoleon Bonaparte afterward.”

He refused this power because he believed in the cause of the republic.

Understanding the pitfalls of organized government, Washington in his 1796 farewell address to Congress urged U.S. lawmakers to guard against unnecessary wars and racking up unsustainable public debt, among other things.

Considering the fact that the nation’s capital has in recent years become a spectacle more deserving of mockery than praise, perhaps it’s worth revisiting some of his warnings to Congress.

–

On the Constitution:

The White House

This government … has a just claim to your confidence and your support.

Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government.

But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.

On ‘Progressive’ Ideas:

‘George Washington’ by John Trumbull

Towards the preservation of your government … resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown.

In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable.

On Political Parties:

history.com

Let me now … warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.

But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

On War:

‘Washington Crossing the Delaware’ from the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art

Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all.

[...]

The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. … The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy.

The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives.

The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

On Public Debt:

sonsofthesouth.net

As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear.

The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.

So there you have it. Enjoy “Washington’s Birthday” (which is technically Feb. 22). Without him, we probably wouldn’t have the Constitution or, you know, a United States of America:

–

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

Featured image Getty Images. This post has been updated.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (221)

normalmom
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:38am
publiuspencliman… You need to look into history, there have been slaves LONG before this country began. Many of the slaves from Africa were people snagged and drug away by their own people for money. Even in the Bible it talks about slavery, people who owed became slaves to those they owed to in order to pay back. No slavery was not the right thing to do, (by the way Washington didn’t have slaves he paid his) but the first step was to separate from England. Sometimes a goal takes many small steps before succeeding.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:01pm
  While we are celebrating Anniversaries, why don’t we celebrate our
  
  100th ANNIVERSARY !!!!
  
  INCOME TAX !!!!!
  
  Yes, a federal income tax was brought forth in 1913, due to the FEDERAL RESERVE ACT.
  
  Everybody celebrate !!!! Yahooooo !!!!
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:24pm
  “by the way Washington didn’t have slaves he paid his”
  
  Haha. It’s you who needs to look at history. Slaves were occasionally paid for labor under the slave system at the discretion of their master’s. For example, in cities slaves often worked regular employment and owed their master’s a high percentage of their earnings. Receiving money doesn’t mean you are not a slave.
  
  Being a slave means that you are considered property and that you can be bought, sold and inherited. In the American context, it also means that your children are automatically slaves owned by your owner (children “follow the condition of the mother”).
  
  George Washington had slaves. In fact, he deserves credit as one of the only Founding Fathers to have emancipated his slaves upon his death (now, how could he do that when he didn’t own slaves?).
  
  I know that there have been slaves throughout history, but that doesn’t actually change the facts of the situation. You can say that Washington was a “man of his times,” but in that case maybe we should give ourselves due credit. We live in a time in which is it absolutely unthinkable that we would own another human being, regardless of race. It’s awfully silly that Beck wants to cast Washington as warning us about contemporary “progressive” ideas, when one of those ideas was the abolition of slavery.
  
  And please–don’t pretend to be able to lecture me on history. I don’t get my history from blogs and political websites.
  
  Report this comment
- sillyfreshness
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:09pm
  The “chosen people” controlled Marxist Media has made it now where MLK day is a much, much bigger and more important event that George Washington’s birthday. Washington is now just considered an angry old white dude-according to the “chosen people” and blacks.
  
  Report this comment
- Xiccarph
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:12pm
  I always find it amusing that those who continue to live in the past and condemn the history of slavery in the US as a political tool for today, but ignore the existence of slavery for tens of thousands of years before the US came into existence covering both the prehistoric and historic periods. Slavery was recognized as an “incompatibility” of the early US vision, but it was also recognized that the country would not have been formed without putting aside the issue of slavery among the colonies. It was on the way out of favor, and even if the Confederacy had won the war, it would eventually have disappeared. Slavery was NOT the prime cause behind the War between the States..it was primarily economic, taxes, and 10th A. issues. Slavery was only raised by Lincoln in mid-War to gain support for the VERY UNPOPULAR view of the war in the north. And talk about the a tyrannical crackdown…do some real historical research and dig into the lengths that the Lincoln administration went to to suppress and punish anti-war sentiment. My suggestions to those who keep harping on the existence of slavery in the early US, is to get yourselves into a historical context mindset and go after 21st Century slavery which is rampant still on this planet…yet ignored because it isn’t seen as relevant to the progressive activist agendas who still use early US slavery a parallel to the modern US to foster divisionism.
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:13pm
  The first slaveowner in America was a Black man.
  
  Anthony Johnson was an Angolan held as an indentured servant by a merchant in the Colony of Virginia in 1620, but later freed to become a successful tobacco farmer and owner. Notably, he was the first to hold a black African servant as a slave in the mainland American colonies. Upon his death in 1670 a court ruled that he was “a ***** and by consequence, an alien”, and the colony seized his land.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Johnson_(colonist)
  
  I generally don’t use WIKI except in situations such as this, where if they HAVE TO ADMIT something that is Politically incorrect, that it is pretty much substantiated as fact.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:42pm
  “I always find it amusing that those who continue to live in the past and condemn the history of slavery in the US as a political tool for today, but ignore the existence of slavery for tens of thousands of years before the US came into existence covering both the prehistoric and historic periods.”
  
  How is anyone “ignoring” the long history/prehistory of slavery? The fact that these practices are roughly as old as human society never excuses them. After all, political/social inequality based on monarchical/aristocratic succession and heredity are political concepts that are just as old, and our republic was formed to destroy these institutions.
  
  My point is that when you stupidly and mindlessly paint the Founders as saints, which they most obviously were not, you ignore the social, political and economic inequalities that have historically persevered in spite of American ideals. You cannot pretend to be respecting America’s history or its Founders while blatantly misrepresenting it/them for your own political purposes.
  
  Report this comment
- triper57
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:12pm
  publiuspencilneck:
  
  So why is it that slavery is still practiced in a majority of the world today. And I consider that it is practiced in this country as well. Since we condone it and support those countries that do allow it’s survival. Only now it is even more heinous than before. You sir are a useless tool.
  
  Report this comment
- justplainkev
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:13pm
  Actually, G. Washington didn’t own most of his slaves. He wanted to free them before he died but couldn’t because they were tied to Martha’s estate. Upon retirement, Martha had 200 slaves. The President may not have agreed w/slavery, but for practicle purposes they weren’t getting a very good return siting a third as too young or too old, a third unproductive & the other third as productive leaving a 130/140 unproductive mouths to feed. Upon his death in Dec. 1799, only three years after leaving office, his wife still owned their slaves. They also had a woman slave in the White House who escaped twice, the second time never to return.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:14pm
  SillySally way to work that 1% ows crap into a GW piece. Dude, you are eat up with it. Get a support group going with Jihad Jerk, MorsiEngineer69, and A User. POS crying over 1% of our population owning you? Weak POS at that.
  
  Report this comment
- checkingbothsides
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:15pm
  That’s simply not true. Washington certainly did have slaves. He even planned to kidnap one that ran away. He DID however, sign into his will that they be freed upon his and Martha’s death, so I give him credit for that. Jefferson made the same pledge, but unfortunately he was in so much debt when he died they had to be sold to cover it.
  
  Report this comment
- JacquesChirac
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:28pm
  So Pubertus, in your own words…
  
  “you ignore the social, political and economic inequalities that have historically persevered in spite of American ideals.”
  
  …you apparently feel that there are still social, political and economic inequalities in this…country today. And I guess that you are just fine with someone else taking whatever you have – whether you earned it or not – and giving it to someone who doesn’t have it. Even if that “someone” has not worked at all or nearly as hard as you, you are a happy idiot who doesn’t mind someone in a far-off city deciding and taking from you as THEY see fit. Don’t deny it, Pubertus. IN YOUR OWN WORDS, inequalities have historicallly PERSEVERED…
  
  I am NOT in your camp on that, and never, ever will be. Call me whatever adjectives Jeaneane Garafalo, et.al., tell you to call me, but you and I see things differently. Very, very differently.
  
  When pressed by the chief priests and scribes on the issue of paying taxes, Jesus Christ said to give to Caesar what is Caesars. You know, try as I might, I have never been able to find the verse where Jesus says, “And let Caesar take whatever else of yours he wants because he knows best how to re-distribute the wealth…”
  
  And yet you are fine with it because inequalities have historically PERSEVERED…
  
  I guess hard work – historically – has never led to rewards, either, right?
  
  I will never, ever see your POV on this point, Pubertus…
  
  Report this comment
- JacquesChirac
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:38pm
  btw Pubertus – weak try on your part on the old bait and switch.
  
  The first POTUS had five warnings for Congress, and you try to turn the discussion into a debate on slavery.
  
  I can only guess what you will say when the emperor gives way to queen hilarious in 2017 and leaves with five warnings for Congress.
  
  STOP THE PRESSES!!!! The emperor speaks!!!! How dare you NOT heed his warnings!!!
  
  Hang in there, Pubertus – the emperor won’t be done then, either. He’s going to makes Robespierre look like a saint!
  
  Let’s hear it for “The Greatest Revolution!!!”
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:40pm
  JacquesChirac,
  
  When you can construct an argument that doesn’t make a whole host of nonsensical and arrogant assumptions about me, then I would be happy to respond to you. Instead, you would prefer to create some goofy commie straw man. I’m sure that the Founding Fathers would be proud. Surely this is what they imagined when they created a republic based on rigorous public debate.
  
  If you have a problem with “persevered,” then we can say “persisted.” Whichever you like. The point is that those qualities have existed throughout our history to our detriment as a “free country.”
  
  Report this comment
- ronrayguns
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:43pm
  Hey Mom, quite trying to reason with an ‘educated elite east coast atheist’, it’s an impossible task. Although if you were to take one of his classes, I’m sure he could enlighten you on the true progressive agenda.
  Total capitulation to the UN agenda, hydroponic vegetable gardens on some downtown city abandoned high rise roof, close to train station where you either take the train to glorious new factory, or the other destination…..the camps. You will have no need of your polluting combustion engine, coal fired power plant for electricity, to power your electric car, that makes sense. Also you will hurry in early mornink to stand in bread lines for your one loaf, one roll of toilet tissue, and required reading of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. So in summation, if you had attended either Woodstock, Berkeley, Haight-Ashbury, or Greenwich Village to acquire your purple microdot, or commonly referred to as purple man, then you would truley understand this commentors gibberish, eh pubes? Now get your clothes on and get to class, momma’s made your lunch. Sad little marxist–a true learned example of histoire, right? Most assuredly. Sad little Marxist, I suppose Che was a hero when he murdered those teachers in Havana schools, in plain sight of 5 and 6 graders. You unabomber. Never learn, never learn, quoth the raven, nevermore.
  
  Report this comment
- mr.goodvibe
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:48pm
  Publiusproletariat
  
  Report this comment
- beenaroundyaknow
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 3:25pm
  Slavery in the Americas did not begin with the 13 colonies. Slaves were here long before in the Caribbean and in South America, both blacks and the native peoples as slaves to the Spaniards and also to other native tribal peoples.. Many were brought to the colonies because the blacks were more immune to yellow fever and malaria prevalent in the southern colonies. White indentured servants often did not survive there servitude because of the diseases.
  
  Report this comment
- Clownzilla
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:09pm
  @publiuspencliman
  
  You are an arrogant Communist and I don’t need to use any fancy words to explain that to you.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:15pm
  “Hey Mom, quite trying to reason with an ‘educated elite east coast atheist’”
  
  Ha! I wasn’t aware that she, or anyone else here, had even tried to “reason” with me. So far I’ve heard a lot of childish name-calling, and a lot of false history, but very little reason.
  
  Report this comment
- IntransigentMind
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 5:11pm
  Well, George Washington was a smart guy. Speaking of warnings conservatives ought to heed, here’s one from a guy who doesn’t seem to be dead: http://markamerica.com/2013/02/18/the-conservative-savior-trap/
  
  Report this comment
- lanimom229
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 6:24pm
  Michael Moran ~ Thank you for the link for the information you provided. I have been looking for this information for years. I knew of the first slave owner being Black from David Barton, but could never find proof. I have told this to a few people and they didn’t believe me ~ so now I know where I can send them. Thank you so much.
  
  Report this comment
- JacquesChirac
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 7:08pm
  Oh Dear Pubertus,
  
  Nonsensical and arrogant assumptions? Please…prove me wrong. I WANT a rigorous public debate on this – it is YOU who turns away.
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:06pm
  @lanimom229
  
  It is my absolute pleasure :)
  
  Report this comment
- santababy52
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 4:03am
  @ Publius–I don’t think anyone in this discussion is trying to justify slavery, at least it doesn’t appear to me that way. I certainly don’t but I can admire Washington his leadership humility along with other qualities I admire. He understood the nature of mankind that allowed him to predict what could happen with an unchecked government therefore he could advise on his ideology regarding the items discussed in this article; political parties, war, & public debt. Even as a liberal, you would likely agree with his comments, even though he owned slaves. but you don’t comment on the article, you simply wait to attack, like a lion pondering it’s prey. I can tell before I get to the end of a person’s comment that you will be next with an insult or argument before I ever see your name. Your game is to accuse, insinuate, & appear as though you are taking the moral high ground. Your Tea Party remarks show your ignorance of a conservative mindset. Some here are more educated than others just like those on your left side who want their Obama phone & their “Obama money”. People’s life experiences generally shape their political mindset, ie; how they’ve been indoctrinated by their families, schools, churches, a loved one, what they read, and positive & negative encounters with the govt., etc., so lighten up & get your thrills in a healthier way. Anger only hurts you. No one else cares that you are mad. I learned that one the hard way.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 9:41am
  JacquesChirac,
  
  “Please…prove me wrong. I WANT a rigorous public debate on this – it is YOU who turns away.”
  
  A debate on what? Who you think I am? Your post was full of bizarre, disconnected thoughts about what you assume I believe in. You never approached anything in your rambling that resembled an actual assertion that wasn’t just an ad hominem attack.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 9:52am
  SantaBaby,
  
  Thank you for actually offering an intelligent response that didn’t rely entirely on name-calling.
  
  “He understood the nature of mankind that allowed him to predict what could happen with an unchecked government therefore he could advise on his ideology regarding the items discussed in this article; political parties, war, & public debt.”
  
  My point is that Conservatives like to take Washington’s musings and simply expect them to apply to contemporary situations, when in fact much of this rhetoric was deeply contradictory at the time. The idea that, for example, Washington opposes modern “Progressive” ideas, is simply ludicrous, or that Washington would necessarily be opposed to health care or social services spending. It seems to me entirely ridiculous that RINO-hunting Tea Partyers want to claim Washington’s non-partisan rhetoric as their own (he would be run out of the modern Republican party for a lack of ideological purity and for the crime of being a moderate). Or that Tea Partyers and Beck followers laud the rhetoric of the highly-educated Founders while purging modern political discourse of any kind of intellectualism.
  
  In short, my point is that by both deifying and cherry-picking the words of the Founders, Conservatives produce a self-serving and highly selective history of our country, which is entirely the opposite of what the Founders wanted in a republic sustained by rigorous and reasoned debate.
  
  Report this comment
- Stoneez
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 8:30pm
  Trying to reason with an over-educated imbecile (name-calling), who is more interested in reading his or her own post, all the while smirking at themselves in the mirror as they artfully conquer their “simpleton” rivals…….is a waste of time.
  
  Report this comment
UNALIEN
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:36am
the Left is at war, they control the media, government and most of the culture,,, they goal is to destroy the culture of individualism and replace it with collectivism…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Linda2955
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:26pm
  agree
  
  Report this comment
normalmom
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:30am
We need men like this. Right now the politicians in office are a waste of tax dollars. We are truly back into a taxation without representation position right now. This government right now has pretty much thrown out the constitution as to what it truly meant. People if you don’t want to become a country lead by a dictator you need to study real history surrounding this nation when it first began. don’t go by what is in public schools it has been twisted for the progressives who really and truly are communists.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:25pm
  How is it that you are not represented? Do you vote?
  
  Report this comment
- branch manager
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:20pm
  Yo pubeless, Yer a pretty fart smeller.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:43pm
  Touchee
  
  Report this comment
- donwann
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 12:25am
  I vote for the candidates that make sense and have common sense. I vote for the candidates that I believe will best follow the guidance provided by our Constitution and not some left leaning liberalists. I try to vote for candidates that support and encourage hard work instead of a handout from the government! The majority of wealthy Americans got that way because someone was willing to work hard and take risks. They didn’t get it from government entitlements!!!
  
  Report this comment
Tracy F
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:29am
If only our country’s leaders would read, learn and listen. The so-called “intellects” of today seem completely silly when compared to the intellects of our constitution. Those people loved their country and understood the hearts and desires of freemen because that is what they fought for. Our “leaders” of today want to crown themselves kings and rulers and adorn themselves with unworthy praise. They mock us and our constitution from their perches and deem us to be fools for still believing President Washington.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:28pm
  “If only our country’s leaders would read, learn and listen.”
  
  Haha. Sorry, but the American electorate as a whole (and the Tea Party in particular) is largely focused on electing the most ant-intellectual anti-science cave men possible. If Washington gave these speeches today, Fox News would attack him as a professorial egg-head. If Washington, who believed strongly in science, confessed to believing in evolution, he would turn off most of the readers of The Blaze.
  
  Report this comment
- mr.goodvibe
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:41pm
  Ah yes, science, intilectualism, Marx and Engels are proud of you comrade! Your Dialetic Materialism is showing.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:14pm
  Mr. Goodvibe, that kind of nonsense is why none of you would have elected Washington.
  
  Report this comment
bankerpapaw
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:16am
Regarding that last picture: I’m afraid the boat of state has sunk and the tiger has eaten Mr.
Washington. Pray for our nation.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jungle J
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:13am
Washington owned slaves so his words are meaningless. If that be true anyone who has violated law or good sense at some time in their life should have their tongue removed. Take a flashlight with new batteries and go into “your closet “and search. Then hang those hidden things in your front yard for all to see. Only the sane understand.Many Americans would choose Charles Manson over George Washington…that speaks loudly and clearly to our troubles…mental illness and its rampant increase.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:30am
  1) Getting a parking ticket, or having “skeletons in your closet,” are not the same things as oppressing an entire race of people, denying them freedom and holding them in perpetual servitude for their entire lives (as well as owning their children).
  
  2) That certainly doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t ever listen to Washington. It means that the founders had major flaws that we have had to deal with, and that the rhetoric of freedom has often ignored many in this country.
  
  Report this comment
- team1blazer
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:31am
  You are a progressive troll, so your words are less than meaningless, they are treasonous.
  
  Report this comment
- Zod Cranards
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:34am
  To follow your logic, unless your life Jungle J is totally sinless, we should all disregard anything you have to say, right? Washington may have had slaves but your man B.O. favors the legalized murder of non-voters-via abortion so which is worse?
  
  Report this comment
- lifeofajerk
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:38am
  George washington also treated his slaves like regular employees. His wife was heavily anti-slave and as a result his “slaves” made a better living for themselves than a lot of non slaves.
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:58am
  jungle J
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:13am
  
  “Washington owned slaves so his words are meaningless.”
  
  It is the ignorance of the people, such as this comment from JungleJ, that exemplifies the problem we face as a civilization.
  
  It is the quote posted herein, that is truly Meaningless.
  
  Report this comment
- WestTexasProud
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:59am
  No more evident is the prevalence of mental illness on display than in your comment. Washington’s ownership of slaves in no way invalidates the truth of his statements. Truly sad that there are people who would rather glaze over truth with an adolescent, cursory assessment of a man who made your liberal free speech possible. I think your “slavery” comment is a cover up to mask your inability to comprehend words with more than two syllables and actually have any meaningful convictions with respect to the wonderful history of this once great nation.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:30pm
  “It is the ignorance of the people, such as this comment from JungleJ, that exemplifies the problem we face as a civilization.”
  
  I’d say that the bigger problem is people like you–people with so little understanding that you can’t even tell that Jungle J was being sarcastic.
  
  Report this comment
- LukeJura
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:42pm
  He owned slaves because it was illegal to free them. He left money for their education and future needs. Not exactly slavish. So his words are more meaningful than your uninformed pontifications. He was a truely selfless man. Bite your tongue on his birthday.
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:08pm
  Okay Pubic, Fair enough.
  
  if you want to consider a simple mistake, Ignorance. be free to be ignorant.
  
  Report this comment
LukeAppling
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:13am
As a testament to politically correctness America, through it’s failed public school system has dumbed down American history lumping all Presidents into a silly President Day holiday in order to make what Washington and Lincoln had to say much less critical. The 60′s radicals are behind the indoctrination of our children and Obama is helping to destroy history so he can rewrite it in his favor just as was done to FDR. FDR said this about big government”"The lessons of history … show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit.”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- santababy52
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 3:06am
  Yet FDR started the whole ball rolling for all our entitlement programs. I don’t think he practiced what he preached. Do you?
  
  Report this comment
alinmatt
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:50am
The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. – George Washington
Could this be applied to Muslim nations (our habitual hatred for) and Israel (habitual fondness)? Our foreign policy is nuts and I think Washington would agree.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- santababy52
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 3:00am
  With all the political correctness and the fairly recent rise in anti-semite activity, do you really think there is hatred of Muslim and favor toward Israel? Based on what I read in the news I believe we are truly going in the opposite direction that you stated. If what SNL did this past weekend on their skit called DJesus Unchained, how fast do you think Iran and other Muslim countries would be killing Jews and Christians?
  
  Report this comment
john vincent
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:39am
‘The nation, which indulges toward another an habitual hatred, or a habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave.’ -on war, G. Washington

Some great insight coming from a man who by experience, had credentials to speak. The thought occurred to me that here was a man, who many years earlier as a youth enlisted in the cause of General Braddock, dealt first hand with foreign oppression, (French) coupled with domestic traitory
(Indians) and tried to save the life of the general near Pgh, risking his own hide. It was a disastrous defeat due in part to the overly confident Braddock who needed not scouts and lauded ‘we will then go north.’ But Washington, like cream rising to the top, took command and led the remaining 500 British back east.

This ‘time of war’ no doubt formed great molds in Washingtons mind as to war. A truly great leader leads by experience, and recognizes the pitfalls of prejudice and arrogance.

I think it would be safe to say that Mr Washington would consider our current president a major usurper of the office he held so dear, and possibly go so far saying ‘this man does not have America’s interest at heart.’

Just ask yourself: who is Obama fond of, and who does he hate?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- pantokrator
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:12pm
  “Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it. It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.”
  
  This is one of my favorite parts of his Farewell Address. There’s no one word to describe just how correct he was in this.
  
  Report this comment
- john vincent
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:40pm
  -pantok
  
  a cogent addition, tkx.
  
  btw, are u at liberty to describe how it came to be you chose pan…..or since some of us know it is a greek reference to Alm…ty, just curious
  
  Report this comment
- pantokrator
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 1:09pm
  I actually learned the word from the name of a band I listen to from time to time. I’ve now come to learn that it evidently is Greek for ‘Lord of Hosts’, or basically a depiction of Jesus Christ. I liked the name, and for whatever reason, it was the first thing that came to mind when I was choosing a name for my alias on TheBlaze.
  
  And yes, I am a strong believer in Christianity. :)
  
  Report this comment
- oudbob
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 6:17pm
  Obozo is fond of anybody who will give him money to piss away and hates those who won’t. That still doesn’t mean he won’t throw the ones he is fond of under the bus; no matter the color of their skin.
  
  Report this comment
garbagecanlogic
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:37am
Why is it that the people of Washington’s generation seemed to have common sense, and, the people in Washington seem to have NO sense?

Praise Be To Obama. Psalm 109:8

The U.N. Out Of The U.S.
The U.S. Out Of The U.N.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- SOUNDTHETRUMPET
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:47am
  Simple people in Washington are corrupt
  
  Report this comment
- normalmom
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:17am
  Money is the first thing that comes to mind. Bought off by special interest groups.
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:52am
  “The real truth of the matter is that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
  
  – President FD Roosevelt (1933-1945)
  
  Report this comment
- michaelmoron
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:08pm
  @GarbageCanlogic
  
  ProbIemSoIver wanted you to see this:
  
  “United Nations in New York, NY is a PRIVATE COMPANY categorized under United Nations. Our records show it was established in 1945 and incorporated in New York. Register for free to see additional information such as annual revenue and employment figures.”
  
  http://www.manta.com/c/mmb5y6t/united-nations
  
  So you want this PRIVATE COMPANY off our SHORES ??????
  
  SO DO I !!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
ValidFib
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:10am
It’s funny how the left has discounted the incredible and profound knowledge of our forefathers by promoting the idea that they were nothing but white, rich slave owners and therefore irrelevant in today’s modern times. We’re seeing that same twist in logic here. Unfortunately for us, they want us to Mao and Saul Alinsky for guidance.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:08am
  Funny how Conservatives deliberately take quotations out of context or misquote them entirely to fit their political agendas, and then they accuse the other side of having no respect for our history.
  
  Report this comment
- ValidFib
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:25am
  then please explain this quote by Michelle Obama during her Democratic National Convention speech: ‘Barack stood up that day,’ talking about a visit to Chicago neighborhoods, ‘and spoke words that have stayed with me ever since. He talked about ‘The world as it is’ and ‘The world as it should be…’ And, ‘All of us driven by a simple belief that the world as it is just won’t do – that we have an obligation to, fight for the world as it should be.”
  
  If not George Washington then I wonder who — or whose values — should determine what “the world… should be?”
  
  Report this comment
- team1blazer
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:35am
  To publlius…please explain how Washingtons words have been taken out of context. It is liberal progressive idiots who take words out of context.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:32pm
  “It is liberal progressive idiots who take words out of context.”
  
  Wow! What can I say? Obviously I am defeated by the “I know you are but what am I” defense.
  
  Clearly the Founding Fathers would applaud your maturity and rhetorical abilities in public debate!
  
  Report this comment
rochrealtor
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:07am
Happy birthday…Mr. Washington…Were were nothing without you.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jman-6
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:04am
Remember he who controls the education of the citizenry holds the power to alter the course of a nation in a single generation. The bible warned of this many times. GOD SPEED

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RJJinGadsden
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:33am
He certainly pegged the party system correctly. Apparently, he was well aware of the troubles with such a party system in England while serving as an officer in the Royal Army.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- huey6367
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:51am
  Washington was smart enough to not belong to a political party.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:16pm
  Washington would be under constant attack from the modern Republic Party for being too moderate.
  
  Report this comment
Buchanan16
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:23am
This is why I love TheBlaze. The stories on here like this one are too cool, especially the last picture.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
denkat56
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:10am
His knowledge and his ability to know his own failings and mans invulnerabilities makes him pretty smart. Maybe Jefferson,and all the rest who created the constitution had it right in the first place. Our boy king Obama won’t like this.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jman-6
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:01am
  The reason they forknew all this is they all were students of the bible!
  
  Report this comment
bdandsl
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:09am
First and foremost to restore America – Educate ourselves and our children in factual American History and The Constitution.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:17am
  Sure, as long as you don’t think this means taking quotations out of context to make them fit your contemporary political views.
  
  Report this comment
- jman-6
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:58am
  He knew this because he was a student of history of the greatest book, the bible! It warns to never neglect your history as who controls education can change the course of a nation in one generation. The Israelites are a perfect example. GOD SPEED
  
  Report this comment
- NoMoMrNiceGuy
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:24am
  Contemporary political views ? Out of context ? My dear pencil guy – Values – morals and principles do not change over time just because a population becomes “more enlightened” Oh no my friend. The fact is that you are unable to understand them because it would require a spine and some effort and having to admit that you are fallible. If this site is such a pain to you then I suggest you flock with your lost sheep elsewhere because you are wasting life force and energy that will not be a distraction to the truth. Good day sir. HOOAH !
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:12am
  “My dear pencil guy – Values – morals and principles do not change over time just because a population becomes “more enlightened””
  
  You mean like the values, morals and principles used to justify slavery, indian removals and massacres, violent opposition to Catholic immigration, segregation, denial of the vote to women, etc.?
  
  Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:08am
This article makes me wish I knew how to save it as a PDF, instead of printing it. Would that there were a “Save to PDF” button upstairs next to niTwit and deFacebook…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- matamoros
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:16am
  use PDF995 or CutePDF, they are both free. These are print drivers that convert anything you’re looking at on the screen, into a PDF file. I personally user PDF995; it works great. It’s free.
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:28am
  Thank you Matamoros! I’ll try both and see which one fits my needs. ;-)
  
  Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:04am
His words make a substantial case for throwing a large number of Congressional representatives, along with Obama, into jail!

Not to be forgotten are those living yet retired members of Congress that may also be as culpable as the aforementioned bunch.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:10am
  If you read the quotations and came away with the idea that Washington wanted you to jail your political opponents, then you’re just a whack-job.
  
  Report this comment
- progressiveslayer
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:23am
  PUBLUS No it’s you who has it wrong because quite a few members of this regime should be in prison for the Benghazi coverup alone,that’s just one reason and there’s many more.Barry’s trashing the constitution and he should be in prison,case closed.
  
  Report this comment
- JGraham III
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:31am
  I read somewhere that to violate one’s oath of office is considered to be a felony, namely perjury. That is in itself grounds for impeachment. The Executive and the Judiciary are subject to impeachment; the Legislative branch is subject to the public’s refusal to re-elect. The oath in question is that which states that a person will “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America”. When such individuals that commit felony perjury by violating their respective oaths of office are removed they can be charged in court and treated like any other citizen who commits any felony. Regrettably it takes other public officials with the intestinal fortitude to perform this obligation; to refuse to act in the face of such crimes as the above is in itself a violation of that same oath. Since the Federal gov’t is ‘old friends together’, we are indeed in a pickle.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:13am
  I also read somewhere that, in a system with the rule of law, the courts determine issues like treason on a non-partisan basis. Maybe I’m just an idealist…
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:49am
  PubliusPencilman – If you read my post and came away with the idea that I wanted to jail political opponents, then you’re just an illiterate whack-job.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:33pm
  “His words make a substantial case for throwing a large number of Congressional representatives, along with Obama, into jail!”
  
  And what subtlety am I missing there?
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 2:11pm
  Pencil neck, the subtlety that you should keep them company. On general principles of being a bulk purchasing owner of white guilt and not enough common sense.
  
  Report this comment
Gonzo
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:00am
We have pretty much ignored all that good advice.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Mil-Dot
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:14am
  Not only have the current and past politician criminals ignored his advice, they have defecated on it and laughed.
  
  Report this comment
- braddock66
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:40am
  The 5 justices that gave us Mandatory Health Care should be jailed
  
  Report this comment
- WakingSheep
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:50am
  Thank the Republicrats.
  
  Report this comment
DougHuffman
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 8:59am
On ‘Progressive’ Ideas, I am pleased that DaBlasé’s headline writer chose that word, about which we need a national dialogue for the children to learn just what it it and the evil that it represents.

Progressivism is the idea than men can become godlike and evolve to live without laws. Progressivism is at the heart of leftism, libertarianism, and American style democracy.

Unfortunately our Founding Fathers didn’t have the word top damn right along with democracy.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:15am
  Yeah, what’s funny here is that the Washington quote on “Progressive” ideas comes from his Farewell Address, in which he implores both the North and the South to accept the status quo of slavery in order to prevent a fractured union.
  
  So, in other words, the Progressivism that Washington is warning against is the abolition of slavery.
  
  Report this comment
- tradcatholicgirl
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:43pm
  Publius,
  
  Washington was wise enough to know that the nation, in its infancy, was not strong enough to survive the battle between abolition and the economic dependency of its “southern” colonies.
  
  It would have destroyed the union , and those pro-slavery states would have gone on growing the slave trade anyway. Fighting that “good fight” right after the American revolution would not have saved one person from the slave trade.
  
  Sometimes people wiser than we have thought through all the possible actions to their logical consequences, right to their conclusions.
  
  Educate yourself.
  
  Report this comment
- Grunt49
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:29pm
  My apology’s DOUGHUFFMAN for commenting on your post. My comments are addressed to Publius.
  I have read the entire “Washington Farewell Address”, and no where in it does he implore the northern and the southern states to maintain slavery. I would suggest you follow your own advice and only comment on things you are certain are true. Putting your own opinion into your quotes is just what you accuse everyone who doesn’t agree with you of doing. You must be a Republican for they were the party of abolition during the War Between the States. It was the southern Democrats who were apposed to freeing the slaves. I know this is a contious statement, but sometimes we have inconvenient truths.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 9:57am
  Grunt49,
  
  You are missing the historical context of the speech itself, and particularly the political fallout after the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793.
  
  Report this comment
RightThinking1
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 8:56am
I would have been happier if this had appeared on the 22nd.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Master_and_Commander
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:24am
  I know right? I was about to say the same thing, what’s up with the headline saying it’s his birthday today…
  
  Report this comment
- Winedude
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:52am
  Thank Trickie Dicky Nixon for changing the two separate holidays in February to a single “Presidents’ Day”.
  
  Report this comment
- DZ-015
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:30pm
  Winedude: Nixon did no such thing. There was no federal holiday for Lincoln’s birthday on February 12, but there was one for Washington’s birthday on February 22. All he did was sign a bill assigning the Monday closest to many Federal holidays as being the day to celebrate them. There is no federal holiday called President’s Day. It is still Washington’s Birthday; however, both Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck seem to have bought into the error now used by retailers to fill Sunday newspapers with misleading sale advertisements.
  
  Report this comment
NoMoMrNiceGuy
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 8:55am
My man GW ! You made it – you knew it – you warned us forward and we are ignoring it. Shame on us !

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Linda2955
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:28pm
  yes—never to be seen again
  
  Report this comment
ibanrfknm
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 8:54am
That was truly the greatest generation.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:21am
  Yes. The “Greatest Generation” was willing to enslave and torture black people.
  
  Report this comment
- ibanrfknm
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:39am
  You sir are a moron.
  
  Report this comment
- ibanrfknm
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:49am
  Slavery has been with us since the beginning of time. Ever since man first organized into cultures and communities he has enslaved his fellow man. We live in a very unique period in world history. A time, the only time, that slavery has been abolished. That effort took many lives and 500 hundred years, but now slavery is seen as an aberration.
  
  Report this comment
- stablepar
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:21am
  slavery wasn’t limited to blacks. whites were enslaved and yes some blacks owned slaves. yes slavery has been with the world for thousands of years. if you have debt and a boss to some degree you are enslaved. can’t wait to see how much we have to owe china before this country gets put in shackles. semper fi
  
  Report this comment
- bloomytoad
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 10:28am
  Unlike the “greatest generation” that only enslaved and tortured citizens who happened to be of Japanese descent.
  
  Report this comment
- JeffersonsPen
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:12am
  @publiuspencelman. Stop with the slave crap! England installed slavery prior to are Independance. 12 of the 13 colonies had slaves prior to Independance. Jeffersons first draft of the Declaration of Independance include “mancapation” for “All”. but Benjamin Franklin new the first step was for all 13 colonies to adopt it…………….and they would not have if it was included. These men new that day would come and it did ………………….at the tune of over half a million casualties during the Civil War. SO PUT A SOCK IN IT !
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:15am
  Hahaha. Most of the responses here are along the lines of: “Well! someone else did it first!” Hahaha. Does it make it less of a crime if England and any number of African tribes also practiced slavery?
  
  What childish nonsense
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 11:36am
  ” if you have debt and a boss to some degree you are enslaved. ”
  
  Sure, but “to some degree enslaved” isn’t the same thing as a person owning you to the extent that they are in their legal rights to consider you their property and whip/cut/attack/kill you whenever they like. Having a boss is not the same thing as having no legal rights whatsover, and having your children by law born into slavery for their whole lives.
  
  So why exactly do you think you need to pretend that slavery wasn’t all that bad? What possible reason would there be to so ineptly attempt to minimize the crimes of the peculiar institution?
  
  Report this comment
- GunsBlazin
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:35pm
  Hey, Pubeless….you’re a ******* fool. A misguided product of our education system. Have you ever heard of “indentured servitude”? Yeah, that’s right. White folks were slaves too, right along side blacks. Lucky for them they were white and could blend in easier. So, when they escaped it they were more difficult to pick out in a crowd.
  Now go watch Roots or something. Maybe search tmz for some talking points.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 12:45pm
  “Have you ever heard of “indentured servitude”?”
  
  Yes, I have. Indentured servitude was a contract entered into by someone in which they would agree to a set term of labor in return for something (i.e., passage to the new world).
  
  That, of course, is not slavery. Indentured Servants were “enslaved” for a term, not their whole lives. It was still illegal to kill a servant because they were not considered property, and servants could enforce contracts because they were considered human beings by the court system. Just as importantly, if an indentured servant had a child, that child was not considered a slave. In slavery, families were held by owners for generations.
  
  So no, indentured servitude and slavery are not the same thing. Even if they were, does that make the enslavement of blacks any more tolerable?
  
  Report this comment
- mewnani
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 4:49pm
  Yes, yes they were. They fought tooth and nail for freedom and got it, and did everything in their power to preserve it. (And for those saying he’s terrible cause he owned slaves, SHUT UP. You cannot judge a man on one sin or vice. Everybody has their flaws and it’s not your place or right to judge them on it.)
  
  Report this comment
- santababy52
  Posted on February 19, 2013 at 2:27am
  Hey Publius, every generation had their horror stories. I wonder what history will say about this generation? I know as a “baby boomer”, there are plenty of ugly people that will be used to define all of us who do not fit into the category the history revisionist will use. I hope they don’t use you for an example, we’re doomed.
  
  Report this comment
huey6367
Posted on February 18, 2013 at 8:53am
Whatever happened to leaders like this? Principled. Disaplined. Honest. We have not had a leader since Reagan. He (Washington) steered this country in the right direction and those that followed (with the exception of a few) distroyed all the good he accomplished.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- ginger100
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:02am
  choom gang’s in charge now.
  
  Report this comment
- PubliusPencilman
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:20am
  Maybe we don’t get leaders like this because we have an electorate that thinks “disciplined” is spelled “disaplined.”
  
  Report this comment
- huey6367
  Posted on February 18, 2013 at 9:25am
  But what about those before Obie. Bush? Clinton? HW Bush? Carter? Ford? Nixon? Johnson? etc. Where is the leadership in any of those?
  
  Read and understand the portion about political parties. Washington did not belong to a political party.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.