George Washington, Still #1
Ron Chernow’s bestselling and comprehensive biography, Washington: A Life, chronicles the struggles and achievements of George Washington from his early years to his death. The most compelling part of the book? When Chernow discusses how Washington, with a little help from the other Founding Fathers, shaped the three branches of government, the executive, legislative, and judiciary, as Americans know them today.
During the Constitutional Convention of 1787 the delegates hoped that Congress would be the main branch of government. Chernow explained to PJ Media that the first article of the Constitution is “devoted, not to the Presidency, but to Congress, while Article II is devoted to the Presidency. It is very short, vague, and general.” Washington had to deal with squabbling lawmakers — similar to today’s Congress — during the Revolutionary War. He quickly realized that the legislative branch had trouble exercising leadership. As Chernow describes, his experience with the legislature led Washington to ensure that the executive branch would define the political agenda — a step away from the intentions of the Framers. John Yoo — author of Crisis and Command: A History of Executive Power from George Washington to George W. Bush — agreed that “Washington filled in the gaps to figure out how the Constitution would operate. He set the precedent, and trends for the president, ever since.”
The maneuvering surrounding the Jay Treaty, which ended the British threat to the western territories for seventeen years, is a shining example. In an attempt to squash the treaty — though the Senate had already ratified it — Congress requested all the papers related to Jay’s mission. Refusing to comply, Washington, according to Yoo, “refused to grant access to the House because it had no constitutional role in treaty making.” In addition, he established the precedent of executive privilege concerning national security disclosures when he refused to turn over papers that would “do the public harm.” In another instance, Washington enhanced the executive’s power by invoking the Neutrality Proclamation, which had declared America’s impartiality towards France and England. By declaring neutrality through a proclamation, rather than a treaty, Washington bypassed the Senate. This, Chernow emphasized, “was a key assertion of executive power. Washington had clarity of vision. He could identify goals and not be sidetracked.”
Washington helped strongly define the separation of powers. When Congress tried to exert its power over the president by insisting it had to approve of the firing and hiring of cabinet members, Washington opposed it. After Vice President Adams voted to end the tie, defeating the measure, Washington set the tone for all future presidents: Congress would consent but not advise who was chosen. Chernow pointed out that Washington would “henceforth communicate with that body [Congress] on paper rather than in person and trim ‘advice and consent’ to the word consent.”
‘Washington, Yoo concludes, “is the greatest of all our Presidents, with Lincoln a close second.’
With all due respect, no one is even in the same ballpark as George Washington. The greatest American of all time…no one else is even close.
This makes Washington sound an awful lot like activist judges who make law rather than interpreting law, filling in those gaps in the Constitution.
It also makes him sound like a benevolent dictator in describing the means he sought to circumvent the congress. Obama is often criticized for this.
Subverting checks and balances is what Batman does. Our very first lawless, law abiding super-hero couldn’t tell a lie or leave important matters to the great unwashables.
No surprise then that Lincoln is a close second here, the man who subverted and circumvented law to get his way.
The lesson is the same as it is with kings: due to the ability to abuse power, the American presidency needs a good man at the helm because ignoring law can be done at will. Gerrymandering the entirety of Latin America as potential voters albeit temporarily illegal ones is Obama’s claim to this dubious fame as is his disastrous appointment of Holder to head up the DOJ which apparently was done to flout the law and not obey it.
Today we have a President who obeys and ignores law at will, in the truest tradition of the Presidency. In that tradition, Obama observes what history he chooses to as he chooses to and the result is a blithe and casual racist and anti-American seeking the deconstruction of the company of which he is the CEO. Though they have the same means at their disposal, President Obama seeks to be the complete opposite of what Washington was. Had Obama been President back then, he likely would have sent cannon and powder to every native American tribe to the East together with a unilateral declaration confining the US to its then present borders. Rather than overseeing the birth of a nation, Obama would have overseen its abortion but you know, it’s better late than never.
To everything there is a season…
You forgot to mention that Obama left a new “Trail of Tears” with all of the socialist bills he and all of his socialist cronies jammed through Congress, like Obamacare, the gigantic “stimulus” that was more of a pork handout and which stimulated nothing, nationalizing GM, Chrysler, the Banks, just to name a few. Obama will be remembered with more scorn than Jimmy Carter, and THAT takes a lot of doing.
There is a great gulf between Washington’s actions and activist judges. Washington’s decisions were made at a time when the Constitution was newly written and the full implications of the provisions in it poorly understood. We knew what we had written but not how to enact it because it had no real precedent. Modern activists judges operate in a system well defined and tried for two centuries. They cannot claim ignorance of precedent. Their duties and the laws of the land have been long established and understood. They seek to expand their power. Washington was trying to establish exactly where power began and ended for a brand new government.
“First in war, first in peace, first in the hearts of his countrymen.”
True of Washington then, and now.
Will we ever again have men of such great character, men of proven courage and experience, dedicated first and foremost to the country and not their own political ambitions, leading us?
I remain confident we will.
We have such men and women among us now. They must merely step forward and answer the call to duty. Above all, the rest of us must step up as well and defeat the vermin of our society who wield far more power than they deserve. For me, the two enemies we now face, and they are existential threats, are leftists and islamists. Both can be defeated if we but have the courage necessary to overcome the plague of political correctness.
Well I’m glad to see that you are clear-headed enough to equate political rivals with people who blow up our buildings or crash airplanes into them. That’s helpful.
Leftist means something different to different people. To me, true leftists were the communists of the Soviet Union, Red China, North Korea, Cambodia etc., etc. These leftists killed hundreds of millions of people. And I remember an old friend, a communist in the 1930′s, telling me that the distinction between liberal, socialist, and communist was only one of degree; and that one led on to the other. I, too, fear the country going far left as much as fear the Islamification of Western Christian Civilization. In either case we lose what is most precious to us, our liberty.
I have yet to read Chernow’s biography of Washington; however, I read his biography of Alexander Hamilton and found it exceptional.
Washington has always been a personal favorite. As a military historian, I especially appreciate his ability and determination during the American Revolution. Here was someone who had to build an army to face the greatest power on earth and he had to build it from scratch. Although he made mistakes, he rarely made the same one twice.
Washington’s greatest feat is that he walked away from power. No small thing. And went home to Mount Vernon. Didn’t meddle. How many others can claim that? Has Clinton retired to Arkansas? No, just the other week he was holding court behind the presidential seal.
He puts all other revolutionary figures in history to shame.
When told Washington would leave office and not establish a permanent reign, George lll said, “if he does he will be the greatest man on earth”.
Said in the time when monarchs ruled and Washington probably could have done as he pleased.
Truly “the indispensable man”.
See Lord Byron’s Ode to Napoleon, which says that Washington was greater than Napoleon and calls Washington the “Cincinnatus of the West,” meaning, that like Cincinnatus, the Roman who gave back his power of dictator after he had successfully led the Romans to victory in war and then returned to his farm, so did Washington. He established the precedent of presidents serving just two terms in office.
Did he have his own logo?
And wasn’t he a little wooden in the speechifying?
And my God, he didn’t even write one autobiography.
It was yesterday, Dec. 14, 211 years ago that Washington died. Not that long ago. My mother who is 90, has been alive almost 1/2 the time of the history of the Republic since his death. How so very short are American memories.
Two impacts/relfections upon reading Chernow’s Washington. First, amazement at his entire life. I hike, hunt and travel through many of the parts of Virginia and West Virginia that GW surveyed, owned land, etc. The strength and stamina of his youth, knowing this land now and imagining it then, was extraordinary. So the first impact is one of awe on how such a great man was created through his experiences and his own efforts. His moral bearing and absolute fear of being perceived as anybody but the highest gentleman drove him incessently. You just become so very humbled of the great men of this era and what they accomplished and the incrediable risks they took.
The second impact or emotion after relfection is one of deep shame. Shame of how weak, uneducated, and banal America has become. Honor is truly dead in all the public and most private professions. Being able to buy an IPOD does not equal freedom. Dancing with Stars does not equal education. Slavish devotion to unthinking criticism of all things American does not equal patriotism.
A comment my wife made really sums it up. Many of these changes, underway for decades, really manifested themselves during the idiot Bush Jr.s terms and of couurse fully blossomed as the usurper took office. My Dad died a few years back. He was a Bataan Death March POW survivor and great father. My wife said, “Thank God, your father is not alive to see this now”.
We are truly surrounded by traitors and plagued by the spies and consorts of our enemies. The difference between now ane then is, George Washington didn’t hesitate to severely punish, and often hang, such scallywags.
How venal a people we, and our institutions, have become.
The Big Boo
Can’t wait to read Chernow’s life of Washington. A worthy biographer for a worthy subject. Washington was “the real deal” in everything he was and did. All of Washington’s contemporaries, whether they agreed him or not, were in awe of the man’s unassailable character. That’s a term that isn’t attached to people much anymore, and certainly not politicians. Washington was our greatest “public man”, a man who took up arms and then office out of duty, not ambition. A passionate man, Washington consciously developed the almost superhuman self-discipline that fueled his rise in Virginia planter circles, his endurance in war and the pressures of office.
P.S. – Those out there who deplore the “tone” of political discourse today should read what the Jeffersonian press was saying about Washington during his second term. THAT was politics at it’s nastiest.
Washington’s birthday should be restored as a national holiday
Donna, and Lincoln’s as well. One measure of our decline, Presidents Day ??
And this for MLK, who was on the sidelines until he came out against the Vietnam War. Nope, Washington & Lincoln first.
Before reading Chernow’s book, my thought is that Lincoln would be my choice as #1, because he had no unity to start his administration, most of his cabinet were not from his party. Washington had unity (they even wanted to make him a King), the war was over and Washington had all this (lead America to victory)to capitalize on.
“most of his cabinet were not from his party.”
All of Lincoln’s original cabinet members were Republicans…if memory serves.
Some of them had been Democrats before there was a Republican Party…but, you can’t really blame them for not being Republicans when there wasn’t any such thing.
Our nation was truly blessed to have as a leader, our first President, George Washington. However it is ironic that his name as capitol of our nation is sullen by the dishonest and corrupt policticians who inhabit its confines.
“sullied”