Lincoln Discussion Symposium

An update on Andrew Johnson's effectiveness as President:

http://news.yahoo.com/andrew-johnson-wor...08446.html

“the modern hostility to Andrew Johnson, I believe, mostly comes from comments he made that are racially insensitive.”

That'll do it.

I've done quite a bit of research on old Andy. I've found contemporaries that will defend him but no one who actually liked him or thought he was a good president. The radicals always get the blame but in reality there were more Democrats and moderate republicans than radicals. Andy just treated them all as enemies.

Gene Smith, who wrote American Gothic about the Booth family, also wrote a book on Johnson and his impeachment. I have not read the book, but I remember Gene telling me that he gained a new respect for Andrew Johnson while doing his research. I don't remember the reasons he gave, however. Gene died this past summer, so I can no longer ask him -- unless I can convince Shirley MacLaine to channel him for me. If such powers exist, I wish I had them. I have a very long list of people from the past that I want to talk with.

Albert Castel-Author of[The biography of Andrew Johnson].He wrote,That his contempories said,"That if Andy Johnson were a snake,he would hide in the tall grass and bite the legs of children as they ran through it."I will admit that his life was full of tragic circumstances!He is not one of my favorite presidents!

Andrew Johnson's racism makes him generally a contemptible human being, but certainly not an anomaly in the 19th century. What makes his intractable prejudices of importance is his position. With the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation and the passage of the 13th amendment, the times called for someone who could further help the freedmen down the path they were on--not stand in their way. As president, he had an obligation (call it a moral one or simply a political one) to help bring about a radical change in the way Americans saw the former slaves, and there he failed miserably.

If Lincoln had not been assassinated, it remains quite possible that Reconstruction would have been a failure, but the political battle between Lincoln and the Radicals would have been far less vitriolic than it was under Johnson. Lincoln knew that politics often required compromise, which Johnson seemingly didn't, or if he did he didn't care. As Annette Gordon-Reed once pointed out, Lincoln's hardscrabble roots gave him an empathy with other people and allowed him to hold firm beliefs while seeing the other fellow's view. For Johnson, it made him a bitter man who felt it necessary to win against his "betters" regardless of the cost. What makes a president successful or a failure is how he handles the crises thrown his way. While Lincoln had missteps and failures, he never lost sight of the big picture. Johnson was so obsessed with the petty details and imagined slights against him, his presidency was doomed from the start.

Best
Rob

(12-27-2013 08:46 PM)L Verge Wrote: [ -> ]...unless I can convince Shirley MacLaine to channel him for me. If such powers exist, I wish I had them. I have a very long list of people from the past that I want to talk with.

I wouldn't waste Shirley's time on Andrew Johnson.

Actually, I would love to sit at a table with Johnson and Buchanan 150 years later and ask them questions about their actions. Laurie, go ahead and ask Shirley.

Do you happen to have her private number? Or, what channel do you use to channel such people?

I think I can get it using Roku. I know I can get the Walking Dead.