I guess I ain’t most people, then.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Actually, McKinley was essentially an innocent bystander on the Spanish-American War. He opposed the war but Congress declared war anyway despite his objections.
I wouldn’t call Andrew Johnson capable. He was however the first president to be impeached, and coming within one vote of removal makes him historically significant. LBJ, I would argue, is more historically significant than Teddy Roosevelt. He presided over the Great Society (maybe somewhat forgotten as an overarching label, but programmes like Medicare and Medicaid have a hugely important legacy to this day), the major civil rights legislation of the past century, the Vietnam War, and the key era of the Apollo Program, even if Nixon got to pull a “Refrigerator Perry” and finish the drive into the end zone.
My “most” might be disputable, but “nothing could be further from the truth” is laughable.
LBJ’s legacy is basically tainted by the Vietnam War. But he also is known for the Great Society, his role in the Civil Rights movement, etc. If he hadn’t started Vietnam, he would have been considered one of the greatest presidents. (Of course, he was also followed by the worst president in history, so that kind of helps him out a little bit)
First assassination of an American president caught on film, I’m assuming? Because the first ever assassination caught on film was that of King Alexander of Yugoslavia in 1934.
While Kennedy’s assassination may have been the only successful Presidential assassination caught on film, the attempted assassinations of Ford and Reagan were both filmed.
LBJ didn’t start Viet Nam. That was Eisenhower almost ten years earlier.
For certain, very narrow, definitions of “start.” It was nobody but LBJ who turned it from advice and support from military specialists into a meat grinder into which we fed thousands of conscripted young men.
Yeah, that was an overstatement, and not at all true with regard to his domestic achievements…
I once posted this very short history of the American involvement in Vietnam, which tries to explain which President did what.
I don’t mean to say that LBJ was to blame necessarily, but more so that he was unpopular in his time and received blame for the Vietnam War, to the extent that he didn’t run for a second term after having been elected to either one of the or the largest popular vote landslide ever. Nobody runs on the Democratic ticket saying that he’s an LBJ Democrat, and if you ask an average Texan, even a Texan Democrat, and tell him that the JFK assassination was tragic, but at least we got LBJ, you’ll get a surprised look most likely.
Andrew Johnson was impeached by the Republicans, and he is consistently rated as one of the worst presidents.
Not exactly. Alexander Graham Bell wanted to locate Guiteau’s bullet–this being 20 years before the advent of X-ray equipment. The doctors, however, stupidly insisted on putting Garfield on a bed with an innerspring mattress, which defeated the purpose of Bell’s metal-detecting probe! :mad:
The bullet was in his chest but it was not in a vital area. Garfield would have survived if the bullet had just been left undisturbed inside him.
But the doctors kept trying to remove the bullet. Their attempts caused an infection and then spread the infection and it was this rather than the initial shooting that killed Garfield.
On a side-note, Washington was killed by his doctors as well.
<<On a side-note, Washington was killed by his doctors as well.>>
Yeah…didn’t they keep bleeding him–like they did Lord Byron? :mad:
[humorless]
James Garfield was shot on a Saturday. He (eventually) died on a Monday.
[/humorless]
McKinley was killed, and an unstable nut case (Roosevelt) took over. Roosevelt had a weird mixture of imperialism and messianic Christianity driving him. He was the ultimate missionary-all those heathen brown people would flock to the enlightened rule of the Americans.
Only it didn’t work out that way-the USA found itself embroiled in a decade long war in the Philippines (the "insurgency), and Cuba didn’t much care to be a defacto colony of the USA.
At least Roosevelt believed in his own BS-all of his sons served in WWI (one was KIA).
History would have been a lot different, had McKinley not been assassinated.
Oh yes, history would have been very different if the US hadn’t taken part in the whole imperialism / colonialism land rush of the early 20th century. I imagine that the Philippines would have been all peace and pony-parties if the Germans had annexed them instead of the US.
Not.
The peace treaty with Spain–with provision for the outright annexation by the United States of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the entire archipelago of the Philippines–was signed almost three years before McKinley’s assassination.
And it’s McKinley who is widely reported to have said