Government

You May Agree With Richard Dreyfuss – Just This Once

The actor Richard Dreyfuss and I do not occupy the same political space, at least I did not think so.  Last month Jonathon Seidl reported on Dreyfuss’ support for the uncivil comments made by Ed Schultz about Dick Cheney. And Dreyfuss is also the guy who wants President Bush and his administration tried for high crimes, and would actually vote against re-electing President Obama if his opponent would indict Bush. Really, he said that at CPAC.


.

Dreyfuss also spouted more strange statements;

But then came Presidents Day and an Op-Ed piece penned by Richard Dreyfuss. It is titled “Let Abe and George stand apart” and is worth a read.

On Nov. 19, 2009, the anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, I was a speaker at ceremonies at Gettysburg.

I was so honored by the invitation to speak, I hardly remember what I said. But there was a singular idea I knew I had to mention: By creating Presidents’ Day, which meant efficiently combining George Washington‘s and Abraham Lincoln‘s birthdays, we had lost both men – and forced them to share acclaim with far lesser Presidents such as John Tyler, Benjamin Harrison and Franklin Pierce.

This is an all-too-familiar journey for our country. We opt for convenience instead of close scrutiny. In this case, we choose easy faux-devotion – and make impossible the substantive understanding of two great leaders’ contributions, personalities, virtues and flaws. Worse still, by removing their names from the now-antiseptic celebration, we have made Washington and Lincoln seem as small as politicians whom history has arbitrarily thrown up to the heights of our system.

When I was a young man, young enough to receive American Heritage magazine in hardback, I remember reading an essay that compared the two men, described in the article as polar opposites. One phrase stuck out (time may have changed a direct quote to a memory that is still a truth): Washington was great because he set the boundaries and established the rituals of the presidency; Lincoln was great because he stretched the Constitution as far as he dared.

My respect for Washington was born in that moment. Before that he’d seemed pretty dull. I was already deeply bound by affection and the drama of Lincoln’s life; his mind, temperament, skill at law and politics were already known to me. He was, I thought then and think now, the only President who could have been as successful as Charles Dickens had he chosen to pursue literary glory instead of a political life.

Today, our young people digest ideologically cleansed myth that tiptoes around truth. We allow vague conversations about American exceptionalism, but we are cautious to the point of paralysis when we ask ourselves what it truly means. Remember and respect this fact: We were born by the ripping into shreds of history’s secret truth, the curse of caste and class that had been the world’s lot forever. We created a system that complements mankind more thoroughly than any other, actualizing the revolutionary doctrine that the ruler and the ruled could be one thing, that those who came from aristocratic bloodlines were given the same starting point as those who were born to the most common.

In Washington and Lincoln could be the whole story of America, from soup to nuts, if we only told the tale well. But we don’t anymore; we are impatient, and time is money, and, after all, Franklin Pierce and Warren Harding are also the tale of the nation, aren’t they?

No. These were ambitious, small men who pursued personal or regional interests above national ones. By letting them, along with Tyler and the Harrisons (both William Henry and Benjamin) and James Buchanan, coopt Presidents’ Day, we have raised them to the stature of the first President and the awe of the 16th. We have made the office, rather than the quality of performance in the office, the prize.

Is that American, in the best sense?

So let us restore separate, special celebrations of George and of Abraham. On Lincoln’s Birthday, we can celebrate liberty, the preservation of the Union and the end of slavery, which made the world sit up and take note that here was a country unlike any other. On Washington’s Birthday, we can honor a man who set the bar for civilized and noble behavior.

This way, we won’t just blather about American exceptionalism, we will begin to actually articulate its meaning, through examples of how our democratic system endows common citizens with great power.

Otherwise, we are living in an Alice in Wonderland world of common senselessness. Just what content is taught in our civics classes today escapes me. Perhaps this is because some Democrats may secretly be anxious that their kids may learn civics and decide to be Republicans, and Republicans may share the same anticipatory dread, that their children may become Democrats.

If we teach civics correctly – as a subject inextricable from honest history – we accept that risk. In fact, we celebrate it. Everyone should be happy to sign on. The fact that they are not is more than puzzling, it is dreadfully senseless.

Mr Dreyfuss is credited as “an actor and chairman of the Dreyfuss Initiative, a non-profit devoted to civics education.”

Comments (126)

1 2 3 4
  • Creestof
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:06pm

    Last two videos I’ve seen of this idiot was where he was drunk in an airport and being extremely rude to reporters and at a porn convention eating hot dogs and acting as a judge. What a dismal fall for a once great actor.

    Report Post »  
  • Rob
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:05pm

    Ruck Fritchard Dryfuss

    Report Post »  
  • Fight for America
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:03pm

    Dreyfus lost me a long time ago – don’t watch his movies, his appearances and the only thing I read here is the title promo.

    Blaze – please, do better with selecting someone for me to spend my time on.

    Report Post »  
    • proudconservative
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 10:48pm

      If you took the time to read the transcript you would see that this was a very worthy piece to post on the blaze. Dreyfuss made perfect sense for a change with what he was saying and I agreed with that 100%.

      Report Post »  
    • woodyb
      Posted on February 23, 2011 at 12:37am

      @ PROUDCONSERVATIVE –

      Me too, I can‘t believe how many posts were apparently made by folks who didn’t even read the article!!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
  • RightPolitically
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:00pm

    I agree that George Washington’s birthday, as well as Lincoln’s should celebrated once again on each of their respective birth dates as before. But let’s be honest here instead of being politically correct for a change. When Martin Luther King was given HIS OWN special day, the first President and winner of the American Revolution, giving us the country in the first place, along with the President who is credited with saving the union (and freeing the slaves) got LUMPED TOGETHER. Now, MLK does deserve a holiday, I am not disputing that. However, without Washington and Lincoln, what would we have? NO COUNTRY!

    Report Post » RightPolitically  
  • stinkybisquit
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:59pm

    Nothing of James K.Polk?

    Report Post »  
  • neverquiet
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:48pm

    As our “educational” system continues to gloss over OUR history, we lose sight of the parts that made us the Greatest Republic the world has seen. If all that is pointed out is the terrible things in our past, is it any wonder that we see a generation of young people who think socialism is “better.”
    In this instance, Drefyuss makes a point about how WE have let how OUR country be potrayed. Read, study and know your history.
    “History’s like a story in a way: it depends on who’s telling it.” …..Dorothy Salisbury Davis

    Report Post »  
  • jhaydeng
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:46pm

    We are in “The End Times” if Dreyfus is writing absolutely brilliant stuff like that. It actually hit home. Credit where credit is due!!! Nice job shark boy!!

    Report Post »  
  • flyoverbob
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:45pm

    why interview these people?They live in a fantasy world where they demand green m &m’s in their dressing room,and they get it.It is plain to see he is on heavy meds.go back to make beleive please.

    Report Post »  
  • CANDLEMAKER
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:42pm

    Another blow hard rich Hollywood actor that lives in lala land.

    Report Post »  
  • cognitivedissonance
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:29pm

    Wait! Hold on a second! Do you people even read your own ******* website, just yesterday there was an op-ed posted (://www.theblaze.com/stories/presidents-have-to-share-a-holiday-but-mass-state-workers-score-on-two-bogus-days-off/) that criticized the fact that Massachusetts had two extra holidays and held up Presidents Day as an example of what should be done with holidays (combining them into one) and today you are supporting the idea that we split Presidents Day into two holidays.

    cognitivedissonance  
  • 13th Imam
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:26pm

    Now the Mass unions can have another day off with pay. Soon there will be a call for Ted Kennedy Day in honor of a lying murderer.

    Report Post » 13th Imam  
  • NYSTREETKID
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:23pm

    One time in our Nation, Men could and did have diffirent points of view in government,Adams and jefferson did not see anything the same,accept one “The Nation as a whole”. I see that “We the people” is now them and us. I can not say this is wrong. The county has moved to far from it point of Start. There are two Nations. They will never work for the same goals. The left and the right want it there way only. This was the many problem with the Great new idea of america. If all are not going in the basic direction It would rip it self apart. Look at WI, The left and right we not change. 20% one way and 20% the other. In hindsight the most truly heartbreaking is the 60% thaT JUST DO CARE WHO WINS

    Report Post »  
  • 912828Buckeye
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:23pm

    Man ……. And I thought I had baggy eyes!

    Report Post » 912828Buckeye  
  • eat-more-bacon-USA
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:19pm

    It is an odd feeling to talk about Presidents’ Day at a time when the United States does not have a President.

    Report Post » eat-more-bacon-USA  
  • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:19pm

    @dakota

    Agreed, this shows his true passion and feelings about the holiday and the two presidents as the individuals and parts in American history they have played. The more into the lives of the presidents and their staff I dig, the more remarkable the stories become and come to life. For often beyond the legends and accepted stories, are truths to reveal humanity at the best, the worst, the most grieved, and most beloved. They show themselves as who they are, at the time they are, and how the world looked through the eyes of their times, and not of ours via history.

    Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • riseandshine
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 12:38am

      i’m with you snow, as usual. i agree with the great majority of opinions here. i will always sound off when the topic is anything to do with terrorism or the bush administration. while terrorism is absolutely real….it isn’t always by the hands of those who are blamed…in the case of 9/11…muslims DID NOT take down the twin towers and building #7…they were taken down by controlled demolition. PEOPLE, JUST WATCH BUILDING #7 come down….and thats only a small piece of the mountain of evidence about what did and what didn’t happen on that day….until about 5-6 months ago, i bought the bin laden thing. but after seeing the evidence, i know it’s all bullcrap.

      Report Post » riseandshine  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 9:04am

      Whee!!!!!!!!!!!!

      Report Post »  
    • Hisemiester
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 3:53pm

      What you see is what you get. Wonder where the planes went, with all their fuel? What looked like explosions set off on the lower floors were the floors collapsing on top of each other causing excessive weight to be placed on each floor in turn. Walla. down comes the towers.

      Report Post »  
    • turgon
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 7:17pm

      hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

      Report Post » turgon  
  • thepatriotdave
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:17pm

    I’m wondering why would anyone at CPAC want to interview him in the first place. Hell, if that man got near one of my microphones I would rip the wires out so he couldn’t be heard.

    http://tinyurl.com/4rv8xsm

    Report Post » thepatriotdave  
  • beverlee
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:16pm

    We all predicted you’d say that!

    Report Post » beverlee  
  • mossbrain
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:15pm

    Blowhard in a bowler. What’s up with the stupid hat? What a bunch of meaningless claptrap he spouts. Just a pouring of the empty into the void when he opens his mouth.

    Report Post » mossbrain  
    • franknshadow
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:43pm

      Except for this time he makes perfect sense.. Guess the broken clock analogy applies…

      Report Post » PrfctlyFrank  
  • 912828Buckeye
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:13pm

    He couldn’t remember his speech at Gettysburg and he’s a
    “ professional” actor. Pathetic.

    Report Post » 912828Buckeye  
  • Upsetcitizen
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:13pm

    he is way drunk, maybe high too

    Report Post »  
    • CatB
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:44pm

      A friend of mine loaned him his VW back in the 1960′s .. Richard made a little “run” … when he got the car back it was “littered” with weed throughout the upholstery and floors … I think all those years of drug abuse have taken their toll on old Richard.

      Report Post »  
    • Grady Curve
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 10:54pm

      Dont bogart that joint richard….

      Report Post » Grady Curve  
  • Dakota
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:12pm

    It was very good….and with the passion that it portrayed…who gives a rip about his politics…it was good.

    Report Post »  
  • Upsetcitizen
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:11pm

    he looks drunk

    Report Post »  
  • Showtime
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:09pm

    Maybe (((GB))) sent him the material!

    Report Post » Showtime  
  • Showtime
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:08pm

    Yep! I definitely agree with that one!

    Report Post » Showtime  
    • RLTW
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 11:35pm

      I think we need a bigger boat.

      Report Post »  
  • fertlmind
    Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:07pm

    long winded isn’t he?
    Is he acting,…. I can’t tell
    I guess thats why he is famous

    Report Post » fertlmind  
    • chips1
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 8:14pm

      He sure knows how to work his “JAWS”

      Report Post »  
    • crackerone
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:41pm

      Can’t read what he says. Who cares? He is nauseating!

      Report Post »  
    • brliantedj
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 9:44pm

      Richard sounded like he’d thrown back a few, didn’t he?

      Report Post »  
    • LSX
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 10:45pm

      Too bad JAWS didn’t gobble him up.

      He is such a waste of oxygen.

      *

      Report Post » LSX  
    • HillBillySam1
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 11:00pm

      Of course he is long winded……like many awesome Progressives, he is an orator!!! I loved him in “Mr. Holland’s Orifice” and one other movie……let’s see, I can’t quite remember the name……something to do with a feminine hygiene product……oh, yeah…..“Always”……..he is indeed a National treasure unto himself…..

      Report Post »  
    • Kurty C Wipe
      Posted on February 21, 2011 at 11:48pm

      Mental disorder yep. He is why I do not oppose abortion. Oh ya, we are Broke, but only for the next 100 years.

      Report Post » Kurty C Wipe  
    • ishka4me
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 12:31am

      he call that 3 sheets to the wind. Mr. dryfus made many “pour” decisions before the interview

      Report Post »  
    • JoeAmerica
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 1:08am

      Dreyfuss is a great actor and humanitarian. Truly a shinning part of our society!

      Report Post » JoeAmerica  
    • dr_funk
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 1:21am

      In other words, he’d rather not have any convictions.

      Report Post »  
    • Sheepdog911
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 6:51am

      He’s an actor, why would anyone with more than two functioning brain cells pay attention to anything he has to say? As an actor, he has never lived in the real world and has to express some whacko thoughts to stay in the press and feel relevant.

      Report Post » Sheepdog911  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 7:24am

      It would seem that the article took a jab at President Harding as to call him less than a great President. Inspite of the fact that when he took over as President after Wilson the country’s debt was spiraling out of control and it was on the brink of a depression with debt and joblessness.. And without playing the blame Wilson game he turn the country around in less than two years. he also was a stroing supporter of African American civil rights and the rule of law and passed the first anti- lynching legislation. He also passed the firsty welfare act in the U.S.A. it was designed to help children of poorer families get medical and food assistances help they needed. He was attacked by the Democrats for putting alot of his freinds in government positions something Wilson did without a pepe from the Repuiblicans.

      Report Post »  
    • GhostOfJefferson
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 7:41am

      Are you people kidding? He struck a home run and you’re complaining because he said it in more than 10 single syllable words? Surely you jest?

      Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • nzkiwi
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 7:54am

      He’s pissed. Off his face. (NZ expressions for inebriated.)

      Report Post »  
    • AzDebi
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 8:46am

      Go back and read the transcript of what he said…“civics education”…he reeks of PC…Why not call it what it is..“AMERICAN HISTORY”? He’s finally getting “some form” of patriotism? Good for him…

      Report Post » AzDebi  
    • Smitty1969
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 9:28am

      I think Dreyfuss is still a big Lib but has learned not to trust big government. I have watched him over the last few years and he has changed his ways a little bit.

      Report Post » Smitty1969  
    • mom2my2
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 10:31am

      Everyone is so ready to slam a Democrat that you don’t even listen to what he says. You’re just as bad a the Dems.

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 3:22pm

      @Smithclar3nc3:
      Harding didn’t really do much to end the depression of 1920-1922, except to cut spending and lower taxes, which was a foregone conclusion in the aftermath of the most expensive war the country had ever fought. Wilson had already begun to do so and Harding simply carried that policy forward.

      Both Wilson and Harding put lots of their friends in office; the difference was that Harding’s friends looted the Treasury for personal gain.

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 4:09pm

      LLOYD, you should consider opening a book once and awhile before posting. Wilson raised personal and corperate tax to the end of his presidency,He campaigned for his second term by promising to stay out of WW1 a promise he kept all of two months. Willson established the IRS,The federal Reserve,the league of nation(U.N.),He segregated the military,was a proponent of eugeneics,and barred blacks from going to a ivy league college. And those are the easy ones to name off. as for Harding this should get you started
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_G._Harding

      Report Post »  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on February 22, 2011 at 5:54pm

      @SMITHCLAR:
      You might consider brushing up on your history too!

      The top marginal income tax rate for the fiscal year:
      1917-1918 = 67%
      1918-1919 = 77%
      1919-1920 = 73% (Wilson’s last full year in office, note rates did in fact begin to go down)
      1920-1921 = 73%
      1921-1922 = 56% (Harding’s first full year in office, rates dropped more steeply than before, but Wilson did NOT go on raising them to the end of his presidency as you state)
      My source for these figures is http://stronglyprogressiveincometax-spit.blogspot.com/2010/02/appendix-i-us-marginal-income-tax-rates.html; what’s yours?

      Wilson never promised to keep the US out of WWI, though he was willing to let his backers in 1916 use the slogan “He kept us [note past tense] out of war.” When the Germans for the first time began deliberately targeting and sinking US shipping in early 1917, he faced a stark choice: acquiesce in flagrant violations of American neutral rights, or ask Congress to declare war. The former course would have been not only a humiliation for the US, it would probably have precipitated the collapse of the economy, which by 1917 was in the third year of a boom fuelled by war exports. So–very reluctantly–he asked Congress for a declaration of war.

      Fiscal and monetary matters? There were four presidential candidates in 1912, every one of whom–Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt, President Taft and the Socialist Debs–was on record as favoring a progressive income tax. It would surely have been even more onerous, and more “progressive,” if TR or Debs had won! Similarly, few people by 1912-1913 opposed some sort of central bank. Taft would have promoted one centered on Wall Street, Teddy one highly centralized in Washington, and Debs might well have gone all the way and just expropriated all private banks once and for all, in the unlikely event that he had won. Wilson as a Democrat actually opposed concentration of too much power of any kind in Washington; remember, until the New Deal, it was the Dems who tended to be the more states-rights, limited government party. So what we got instead of highly centralized monetary controls was the Federal Reserve System of regional banks, with such minor financial centers as Richmond and Atlanta having the same status (if not the same assets) as New York and Boston. Not until the 1930s did the FRB in Washington begin to assert itself.

      Eugenics and racism I give you! Wilson was after all a southerner, born and bred. He had no objection to eugenics, though he wasn’t as forceful in advocating it as Teddy. But this has little to do with the history of post-World War I economy. In fact, Wilson was so preoccupied with the peace settlement after 1918 that he had little to say about domestic affairs except, just before leaving for Paris, “From no quarter have I seen any general scheme of `reconstruction’ emerge which I thought it likely we could force our spirited businessmen and self-reliant laborers to accept with due pliancy and obedience.” (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=FA0813FB3A5F1B7A93C1A91789D95F4C8185F9) In other words, he endorsed laissez-faire, though quite a bit more pompously than Harding or Coolidge (after all, he was a college professor).

      Hope this encourages you to study history more deeply, and not to be misled by the “terrible simplifiers.”

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Lloyd Drako
      Posted on February 23, 2011 at 2:27pm

      @Smithclar3nc3:
      Sorry to have had to school you so hard, but after stating that it was not your intention to play the blame-Wilson game, that is exactly what you did!

      However, on reflection, I can see that the point of your original post was that Harding was not so bad as he is often made out to be, and this is quite true. As you say, he had good impulses;he favored Federal action in the areas of child welfare, women’s rights and civil rights, though he didn’t push very hard for any of these. His budget-balancing was certainly needed, though the initiatives came more from Charles Dawes and Andrew Mellon than from Harding himself. He made some bad (mostly lower-level) appointments, which left his administration tainted by scandal, but he also made some very good ones: Mellon at Treasury, Hughes at State, and Hoover at commerce, where he did more good than later in the White House.

      Personally, leaving aside his adulterous sex life, he was a genial, generous, warm-hearted man. As they say, the kind you could have a beer with–except that he preferred bourbon.

      Best wishes whether you read this or not, Lloyd

      Report Post » Lloyd Drako  
    • Bluebonnet
      Posted on February 24, 2011 at 4:05pm

      @Dr Funk. You said it best. I thought he said a lot of words and answered nothing, said nothing.

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love