The 7 Most Badass Founding Fathers
2. Samuel Adams
Of all of the Founders of the American Revolution, Samuel Adams was perhaps the revolutionary-est. And if for nothing else, the fact that his revolutionary fervor and tactics toward Loyalists during the Revolution has some modern-day liberals blasting him as no more than a common thug, Samuel Adams gets the title of badass.
It was Adams’s letter calling for cooperation among the colonies that led the British to send troops to occupy Boston in the first place. Adams’s response: to quit calling for cooperation and start coordinating it. His “committee of correspondence” system linked patriots throughout the colonies and formed the organizational basis for the Revolution to come.
Stories of the extent of Sam Adams’s involvement in the Boston Tea Party range from one of his fiery speeches merely being the accidental inspiration for it, to his actually putting on war paint and throwing crates into the harbor.
“No taxation without representation” was the unifying theme behind much of Adams’s rhetoric, including this line from his speech protesting the Sugar Act:
For if our Trade may be taxed, why not our Lands? Why not the Produce of our Lands & everything we possess or make use of?
John Roberts, call your office.
Thomas Jefferson called Samuel Adams “truly the Man of the Revolution.” For his fearless and tireless efforts to form a new nation, no matter how many troops King George sent to quiet things down, Samuel Adams was a badass.
This post is full of win. Have a great Independence Day!
Here is an index to my best Fourth of July blogs. http://clarespark.com/2012/07/04/index-to-fourth-of-july-blogs/. It warns us of the distortions to the Founders’ Dream, starring 19th century hero Charles Sumner, who viewed the Declaration of Independence as the foundation of the republic and a liberal state comprised of individuals, not races or ethnicities.
I think the greatest mistake that the otherwise prescient Founders made was not enshrining the Declaration of Independence in the Constitution as the first of eleven amendments known as the Bill of Rights (there are, of course, ten).
To the Founders it was “self-evident” (“You have to even ask?” they might have said) that the Constitution was meant to work in the spirit of the Declaration. Subsequent generations lost sight of that. Even as early as the mid 19th century Lincoln had to reaffirm the importance of the sentiments of the Declaration as one of our governing documents. Remember that there are several Justices on the SCOTUS who are dismissive of the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration, and that “Consent of the Governed” is not in the Constitution, but in the Declaration. I’ve had “smart” people laugh at me for even suggesting that the Declaration was a governing document. FWIW: Congress in the 1870′s issued an Act reafirming the Declaration’s importance in our governance. But that was a very long time ago, and it was insufficient anyway.
We can still call for an amendment enshrining the sentiments — including Natural Rights — into the Constitution.
I once attended a lecture by Milton Friedman, during which he told us of a Washington episode that’s not as well known as it should be. Apparently, during the disorganized aftermath of the war, Washington’s lieutenants hatched a plan to make him king — and secured the agreement of the great majority of his troops. But Washington learned of the plan, called his officers together, and scotched it firmly. Had it not been for his conviction that monarchy was not for America, we might well have a king today.
What’s that you say? We do have a king today? Hmmm…
I’m am suddenly reminded of a line from a book, about a character who was pretty clearly inspired by Washington:
“And then he’d capped it, confounded history and all self-sure witnesses and heaped up honor and glory beyond all that had gone before by voluntarily stepping down[...]”
First person who recognizes it get a cookie.
The Mountains of Mourning by Lois McMaster Bujold.
Do I get a cookie?
I am not familiar with this work, but I do know what King George III said of Washington. When he asked what the victorious general would do now that he actually had won this pesky independence, he was told, “It is said that he will go back to his farm.”
George III, astounded, could only reply, “If he does that, then he is the greatest man in the world.”
As far as Alexander Hamilton… no doubt the Colonel was quite a good shot. A lot of evidence suggests that he intentionally wasted his shot, rather than risk killing his opponent, who was only the sitting Vice-President of the United States.
4. Voyager: George III
When the King kicked the colonies to the curb as it were, our founders understood what it was that the Lord (natures’ God) had indeed handed to them. FREE land. When the King realized his mistake he tried to revoke the edict. Our founders revolted at the attempt. Let FREEDOM RING!
“kiched to the curb”. yeah, that’s about how being an enemy of the state of ‘new kenya’ feels these days. i heard our founding fathers were real happy with the country/gov. they had created, once the wars w/ england were over.
a lot of generations of American’s had stronger (military) enemies than they were. no country wanted to be part of any u.s. invader, since the Civil War ended. i guess other countries figured that if yanks would fight each other that hard, what horrors would befall an invader? the japanese never wanted to try it, even with most of our military muscle extended toward europe at that time. ‘they expected a gun behind ever bush’. sounds about right.
most recently we have become a nation who plays at war by allowing polititians to waste our brave American soldier’s lives, trying not to win (no names pls.). maybe is it the natural progression once there is nobody stronger (or wealthier) to rot from within, hence once again the possibility of having to wet the ground with the blood of partiots.
if you were a commie trying to take over this wonderful, beautiful country of ours, overall, what would you have done differently? i’m drawing a blank.
have a good 4th., and know there will be a good time for Patriots here again.
If anyone wants to see REAL acting, check out Richard Schumann’s portrayal of Patrick Henry at Colonial Williamsburg. You can google him on Youtube as well.
I have two observations about this list. One’s a backslap, the other’s a quibble.
I’m glad to see Henry and John Laurens on the list. It’s one of my interesting what-ifs: What if John Laurens, hero of the Revolution and young (and very wealthy) scion of the powerful Laurens family, had survived that silly skirmish (the war was virtually over, and they were fighting a small English foraging party) and lived to be one of South Carolina’s political elite, and an *abolitionist* at the same time. Maybe he would have drifted rightward as he grew older (as Jefferson did) but maybe their ideals would have reinforced one another, and they might have led an actual abolition movement in the South. During the Revolutionary era, there were relatively few Southerners who insisted that slavery was a positive right; in most instances (Washington’s for instance) they’d have told you it was a neccessary evil, and a relic of the past.
The quibble is with Patrick Henry being here. I am aware of the two famous quotes that he left us (“If this be treason, make the most of it…” and “Give me liberty or give me death.”) but I believe that most Americans are unaware of a further quote, which is considerably less positive. Yes, Henry was a proponent of the Bill of Rights, but he also was a fervent opponent of the Constitution in any case. During the Ratification debate in Virginia, he was asked to explain his opposition, and one of the reasons he gave was rather simple: “They’ll take your n*ggers away.” Seriously. You have to look a bit on the internet to find this quote, but it’s there, because he said it. His supporters, over the years, have essentially buried this one quote, and he’s essentially known for the other two. I think that should change.
In sum: Laurens, pro-freedom, good; Washington, Franklin, et al, sorta pro-freedom, still good; Henry, pro-freedom (for himself and his friends), but pro-slavery also, not so good.
I don’t quarrel strongly with your revulsion tot eh quote, but I do suggest caution in judging historical figures with modern day sensibilities.
Had we been as scrupulous in the 19th century about minority rights as we are today, the United states would never have stretched from sea to shining sea, and the world would be far the worse for it today. Instead we aggressively sought the territory out west from bot Mexico and the Indians (as they were known then) and took it from both, much as any other 19th century power would have done.
I don’t completely disagree with your point, it’s just that this list is about more than just understanding people, it’s about revering them. Washington’s a good example. We don’t revere him for his adherence to slavery (he undoubtedly disliked the system); we revere him in spite of it. Make no mistake, he definitely participated actively, not just in owning slaves. Ron Chernow’s recent biography of Washington lays out in embarassing detail how as President, Washington avoided his slaves becoming automatically free by residing in Philadelphia for more than 3 months. He kept shuttling them back and forth between there and Mount Vernon, and lying to them about why, so that they wouldn’t get suspicious.
This doesn’t (to my mind anyway) undermine his status as arguably our greatest President (I’m often in the Lincoln camp, but it’s really a toss-up), at least not much. As far as I’m concerned, *this* is the sort of thing we should explain via the “product of his times” meme: he was uncomfortable with slavery, and clearly disliked the system, but at times acted in his own self-interest.
Henry was a member of the House of Burgesses, and did pretty much nothing other than make a pair of fiery speeches. Without them, he’d be very very obscure. The slavery quote is, to my mind anyway, not on the same level as Washington’s actions: he wasn’t being visionary or prescient or anything, just baldly acting in the interests of himself and those of his class. Not exactly exemplary.
Gimme a break. Henry’s “liberty or death” speech is a passionate denunciation of the ideas behind slavery, whether or not Henry realized it at the time. And the father of the Bill of Rights can hardly be described as “baldly acting in the interests of himself and those of his class.” To use one out-of-context quote to dismiss this clear advocate of freedom is unjust.
Next to Patrick Henry, the best, most pro-freedom politicians of today look like craven statists. So I don’t appreciate smears of him.
Neither the Spanish nor any of the American Indian tribes recognized individual rights and property rights–including the 5 civilized tribes of the American Southeast. The continent was not owned by anyone and was lawless. American settlers established property rights and the rule of law in wilderness that knew neither. This is very different issue than the slavery, an obvious catastrophe to the American Revolution. But still the northern states were the only society in human history to fight a war justified in part to win freedom for another racial group–a fact often ignored by many “African-Americans” today.
“Arguments among “historians” that any other president should be placed at the top of the list of American greats are plain ignorant.”
Yeah, Lincoln has his faction. I wouldn’t want to try judging between the two of them. Maybe there live among us some obscure souls who could at need perform well enough in office to rate a distant #3–because that’s the caliber of leadership we need now.
Yeah, Washington and Lincoln were both larger than life figures. As for number 3, there’s a lot of competition. TR and Reagan are definitely in the running for their efforts at making the US a great nation and a superpower, alongside a number of founding father presidents. Coolidge and Ike deserve a better place than they typically get for leaving well enough alone.
On the left side of the aisle, you have Truman and FDR, from back when mainstream democrats cared about defending the United States from its enemies. They aren’t top 5 material thanks to their economic policies, but definitely top 10.
Oh, George Washington could be far more of an American Badass than most have thought.
Especially some guy named Sharpwriter on Deviantart.
His take on George:
http://sharpwriter.deviantart.com/art/George-Washington-ZombieHunter-200895876?q=gallery%3Asharpwriter%2F179817&qo=18
Yep. George Washington, Zombie Hunter. Guy also does Ronald Reagan riding a flag-carrying Velociraptor. Serious awesomesauce, AND on the right side of the aisle: double win.. .
Those portraits are very silly. The idea of Ronald Reagan riding a velociraptor while shooting what looks to be an M3 grease gun! Pah!
(Reagan would of course have been on a T-Rex and would surely have been wielding at least a decent assault rifle, not some sissy SMG).
I agree with you as far as the T-Rex goes, but NOTHING that fires .45acp can be properly classified as “sissy”.
James, I’m a 1911 man, but really, the .45 ACP cannot be compared to a rifle cartridge. If you have room for an assault rifle, an SMG is just a stupid choice. Power, barrel length, sights, rate of fire – the assault rifle is better in every way.
Even among SMGs, the grease gun is unimpressive. Firing one requires patience, as you wait for that massive bolt to cycle and finally spit out another round.
Okay, I know it’s not that slow, but get used to an M-16 and it will feeeel that way!
This is simply wonderful…. Thanks to the author–and may the blessings of God steel us in the Fight.
We got rid of the last King – now we must do it again – the “committee of correspondence” will be in touch!
The difference between the old slavery referred to in the blog is not much different from that of today…the only difference is that the slaves of today’s welfare do not have to work for what they get.
Work may not be necessary but there is certainly a price paid for those benefits – the loss of self-respect and human dignity.
It is not the people on welfare who are the slaves.
For your consideration:
Rev. C.L. Bryant’s film “Runaway Slave”:
http://www.runawayslavemovie.com/
A dependency agenda must capture and retain captives.
Truly wonderful piece of vital American history.
I second Francis’ mention above. After all Washington did and the influence he wielded, he set the tone and precedent for the peaceful transition of power and was the father of term limits.
Also I’m glad you didn’t include Thomas Jefferson in this list. He has never been one of my favorite badasses and was one of the world’s biggest global spendthrifts.
I do think John Adams might be in a top ten list. He is rarely give enough credit for his many contributions and his years-long antagonism with Jefferson is enough to make me respect him even more.
BTW, we should remember both Adams and Jefferson died within hours of each other on the 4th of July, 1826.
Thanks again for this wonderful piece.
…and James Madison died 5 years later, to the day. July 4, 1831. That’s him standing next to Washington in Emil Leutze’s famous “Washington Crossing the Delaware”, in case you don’t know (I didn’t really pay attention, until reading “Washington’s Crossing, a little while ago).
It’s always weirded me out that three American Presidents have died on July 4. See, coincidences do happen!
James Monroe, actually.
Glad to see Samuel Adams on this list. Very underated in my mind as a Founding Father.
Could not agree more with Samuel Adams. Often forgotten and underrated.
I vote an “honorable mention” for Ethan Allen. Now HE was a true badass.
Ethan Allen was bumped from the list by the Laurenses who have never gotten their just due. I
f John had lived he would have been. a MAJOR figure. I wish my friend Thomas Fleming would do a book about them!
Ever been to Rockford? If you ever get this way give me a shout.
Benedict Arnold was obviously TOO bad-assed to make this list.
excellent article! john roberts, call your office, ha! passing this onto my teens, you have an excellent writing style.
And what of today’s men? How do their iron spines stack up to the old guys, and their willingness to tolerate slings and arrows from the “smart set?” Scott Walker makes the cut. Christie, perhaps. Palin, no doubt.
Today, it’s only a public skewering that they risk, a prospect even a good man like John Roberts shrinks from.
Hamilton and the young Laurens were the best of friends and carried on an active correspondence. Hamilton did not try to shoot Burr. As for his finally getting a command, Hamilton led a detachment of men under cover of night to take the last redoubt at Yorktown, sealing the fate of the British in the battle that turned the tide of the war. Before storming the redoubt that night, Hamilton had his men empty their muskets so as not to lose the element of surprise by having someone’s gun go off by accident. Naturally they forced a surrender without firing a shot, taking the small fortification with fixed bayonets on empty firearms. This is as badass as you can get.
“Though he was involved in everything from diplomacy to espionage to strategic planning, Hamilton badgered Washington throughout the war for the chance to return to a battlefield command. His mentor finally relented near the war’s end, and Hamilton again served with distinction.”
At Yorktown – “On 28 September these armies began siege operations, using the traditional European system of approaches by parallel trenches. In order to complete the second parallel, Washington ordered the seizure of two British redoubts near the York River. The French were assigned the first, Redoubt No. 9, and the American Light Infantry under Lt. Col. Alexander Hamilton the second, Redoubt No. 10. On the evening of 14 October, as covering fire of shot and shell arched overhead, the Americans and French moved forward. The Americans, with unloaded muskets and fixed bayonets, did not wait for sappers to clear away the abatis, as the French did, but climbed over and through the obstructions. Within ten minutes the garrison of Redoubt No. 10! was overwhelmed. The French also met with success but suffered heavier losses.”
http://www.history.army.mil/images/artphoto/pripos/revwar/Yrktn.jpg
Cold Steel
Samuel Adams was also the coiner of the Revolutionary slogan, “No king but King Jesus!”
I’m SHOCKED that no one – especially the author – thought to include Dr. Joseph Warren!
Physician, spy, Soldier, – he did it all. He may have been one of the Patriots most responsible for our nation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Warren
Orion
I don’t think he qualifies as a founding father, because he wasn’t a political figure or a man with a lot of writing (that I’m aware of), but Daniel Morgan was a cross between Clint Eastwood, DIck Winters, and Chuck Norris.
He learned to fight guerrilla wars from Indians, invaded Canada, disobeyed orders from Nathaniel Greene to defeat Lt Col Tarleton at Cowpens, and later put down the Whiskey Rebellion as a favor to Washington.
Complete and total bad ass.
Let us also not forget that while John Paul Jones gets credit as the founder of the US Navy, he was also very much involved in the founding and building up of the Russian navy (known there as Pavel Invanovich Jones). I’ve always felt that, with the fall of the Soviet Union, we should’ve bought the two carriers under completion at the time and had them fitted out as trials and test ships for new systems (better than letting them fall to potential enemies). This would’ve helped the new nations involved and we could’ve named one after Jones, a man admired by both country’s navies.
I’ll also agree with the suggestion of Ethan Allen as “first runner-up”.
Regarding Benedict Arnold, if he hadn’t listened to his wife and stayed true to the Continental Congress, I’d agree he would belong on a list like this. As ’tis, no, I don’t believe he belongs.
I’d like to see Gen. John Glover on here, the man responsible for sneaking Washington out of Manhattan and into Trenton. Admittedly this is partly because he’s a distant ancestor, but also definitely one of the unsung contributions to winning the war.
An excellent and inspiring article. Just one quibble on a factual point and one other comment.
Patrick Henry was selected by Virginia as a delegate to the Federal Convention but never attended at Philadelphia. He became a leading opponent of the new government.
It was Henry who introduced the proposal in the Virginia Ratifying Convention that became the model for the U.S. Bill of Rights. However, it was George Mason who actually wrote that model. Mason also wrote Virginia’s 1776 Bill of Rights and Constituion and contributed extensively to the U.S. Constitution in Philadelphia.
Mason was certainly no badass and would never be listed in an article like this. He was just a giant of American constitutionalism.
Regarding Hamilton, I recall reading a gun enthusuiast magazine article when I was very young. Basically, it was about a gunsmith who had the opportunity to disassemble the pistols used in the duel. The details now some 35 or 40 years behind me are fuzzy, but basically I think the pistols were supplied by a Hamilton associate. According to accounts, Hamilton fired over Burr’s head. Hamilton supporters I believe claim this was deliberate, while Burr’s supporters claimed he was too eager.
At any rate, the dissassembled gun revealed an interesting quirk. If the shooter pushed forward on the trigger, it would set it to a hair trigger condition. Such a light trigger pull would normally allow for more accurate shooting.
Since Hamilton sourced the pistols, I seem to recall the article conjecturing that he potentially knew of this feature and attempted to use it in the duel, but the light trigger pull resulted in his pistol going off before he intended, resulting in the aforementioned shot going over Burr’s head.
This is all pre-internet, but someone may be able to find a reference.
The pistols did have a hair trigger, but I am unsure as to whether this is something that anyone could be certain to have used after they had been fired.
It’s a good list, but it certainly would have been better without the tedious and junvenile use of the term “badass” – how old is the author, seventeen? I guess even many conservatives can’t avoid being dumbed-down in modern America.
That’s a fairly bad-ass observation! But haven’t you ever laughed at a Chuck Norris joke?
Agreed. I don’t think that this slang terminology has a place in a serious discussion about our founding fathers. And by the way, I am a descendant of a signer from South Carolina, Thomas Heyward, Jun. He was captured at Charleston and was imprisoned at Saint Augustine for the remainder of the war. While there he wrote the words for a song that was sung to the tune of God Save the King.
Amen. It would seem that most everyone these days cannot resist the temptation to add a rather sleazy tone to whatever they are writing in an effort (typically fruitless) to sound hip.
Phooey on you guys wanting gravitas in your historical discussions. If labeling this fearless group with a term that gets even one teenager to levy his hormonal state with a bit of reason and interest in how colorful and amazing the whole of our nation’s formation is; go for it! Maybe next they’ll be reading David McCullough…
Sam Adams The Official Beer Of The Revolution.
Although he may not qualify as a founding father, he is definitely the biggest badass of the Revolutionary War: Samuel Whittimore. http://www.revolutionarywararchives.org/whittemore.html
At 80 years old–after a career in the Kings Army– he killed three British grenadiers on the opening day of the war. He was shot in the face with a .69 caliber musket ball and stabbed 13 times with bayonets and left for dead after being struck in the head with a musket butt. He was later found, still conscious, trying to load his musket. Of course, he survived another 18 years, until age 98.
American Badass.
Good post, but if anything it understates George Washington’s bad-assedness. For example, when Washington left weeping the “room full of possibly rebellious soldiers whose rightful pay was being withheld by the Congress,” he did that with one line and one gesture — pausing in his effort to read aloud from a letter, he removed a pair of spectacles from a pocket and apologized that he had “grown not only gray but somewhat blind in the service of his country,” upon which every man in the room spontaneously burst into tears. The British had the world’s preeminent military machine, yet — as Ron Chernow relates in his fabulous new biography, “Washington: A Life” (at page 458):
“In the end, [Washington] had managed to foil the best professional generals that a chastened Great Britain could throw at him. As Benjamin Franklin told an English friend after the war, ‘An American planter was chosen by us to command our troops and continued during the whole war. This man sent home to you, one after another, five of your best generals, baffled, their heads bare of laurels, disgraced even in the opinion of their employers.’”
And of course there’s the opinion of the chief among Washington’s defeated enemies (from page 454):
“One day [King George III] asked [American expatriot painter Benjamin] West whether Washington would be head of the army or head of state when the war ended. When West replied that Washington’s sole ambition was to return to his estate, the thunderstruck king declared, ‘If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world!’”
So Nathanael Greene is chopped liver or something?
There’s different types of bad-asses. I always thought John Hancock was one of the biggest bad-asses around back then. Harvard grad and one of the wealthiest men of his time (think Bill Gates of the Revolution), he risked it all (and his position as confidante of the politically powerful) for the Cause (for the first 6 months after the Declaration of Independence was published, his name – as President – was the only name publicly attached to the document). As a smuggler, he walked the wild side. As a party animal, he could rival Franklin (read the complaints about his lifestyle – he’d ride to sessions of the Continental Congress in a chariot worthy of Imperial Rome accompanied by dozens of horsemen). An interesting guy, one of many at that time. Where are those now?
Hancock like Allen would have made a top
10 list.
Overlooked (again) is General John Stark of New Hampshire. A humorous take on the man is here:
http://www.webcomicsnation.com/ericburns/stark/character.php?character_ID=238
I always look for the name of my antecedent Dr. Joseph Warren on such lists. A fiery protege of Samuel Adams, Warren wrote the Suffolk Resolves, was a leader in Boston, sent Paul Revere and William Dawes on their rides, was an organizer of the Tea Party and pretty much gave the British serious headaches. He once addressed the public in a church as British soldiers sat the front row prepared to arrest him. He was a tall and handsome widower with China-blue eyes who (perhaps) may have gained access to British secrets by romancing the young wife of Gen. Gage. A harvard-educated physician, Warren was offered the command at Breed’s Hill. He turned it down, leaving military command to the more experienced and chosing to fight in the trenches. He was shot in the head during the final retreat, as combatants on both sides — so the family story goes — yelled at him to get down. He became the first officer and patriot leader to die in the revolutionary conflict. His friend Paul Revere launched an expedition weeks later to retrieve Warren’s body and give him a proper burial (the Brits, surrounded by so many dead brothers from that bloody battle, had not been kind to his corpse). Abigail Adams lamented of his death in a letter to her husband. Gage sent his wife back to England on a ship filled with wounded British soldiers. Interestingly, the then-patriot comrade Benedict Arnold established a fund to help support Warren’s orphaned children. Warren was young, 36 or 38 when he died. Like young Laurens, a great loss.
Definite thumbs up on Daniel Morgan. The list should include Henry Knox, who at the ripe old age of 25 commanded the movement of 60 TONS of cannon, shot and supplies from Ft. Ticonderoga (captured by Ethan Allen) to Boston in the dead of winter. Those cannon were instrumental in driving the British from Boston.
Love Joseph Warren. Like John Laurens one can only imagine his influence had he lived. He is the major fugure in Thomas Fleming’s great book about Bunker Hill, We Are Enemies Now.
good and worthy men. surely there must be room for the forgotten john hanson, the first president under the articles of confederation.
I would distinguish between mostly pure military leaders, e.g., John Paul Jones, Nathaniel Greene, Henry Knox, and Ethan Allen on the one hand, and pre-war revolutionary leaders and post-war political leaders on the other. Hence, I would remove Jones from the list, but add George Mason — an anti-Federalist leader more influential than even Patrick Henry –, in addition to John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.
The leading Anti-Federalists, who have proved to be prescient with regard to the dangers of a stronger central government, were crucial to the eventual founding document, as some have commented. But for them the Bill of Rights wouldn’t exist. Thus, Mason should be on the list.
How John Adams could be excluded from a list of key founders is puzzling to say the least. He could be difficult, and was a bit of a prig. But so what. He was one of the overall pre-Revolutionary, during-the-war diplomatic, and post-war constitutional leaders. He must be on the list. His bad-assness comes not from military or physical prowess, but from legal and policy genius.
Similarly, how James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution” who was influenced by the Anti-Federalists, and who served as a bridge between the more liberal, urban-oriented Hamilton and the more conservative, agrarian-based Thomas Jefferson, could be off a short list of key founders is mind-boggling. I realize that the author’s emphasis is on military and physical prowess, but there are other ways to effect revolution. But for Madison’s ability to navigate the shoals of distinct cultural and economic differences among the states and regions of the fledgling country, the modern, post-Articles USA likely would not have been created. An argument can be made that this would have been preferable in the long run, but that is another discussion entirely.
Finally, I reject the notion that Jefferson should not be on the list. As the author of the primary political document that got most of the colonies riled up for rebellion (Declaration of Independence), notwithstanding Lexington and Concord, as well as his diplomacy during the war and his leadership afterwards, history acknowledges that he was clearly one of the key founders. Yes, he made his mistakes, such as initially supporting the French Revolution. Yet he acknowledged that error later. Of all the founders, he was a genius ranking with Franklin and Hamilton.
“Badass”?
I think Hamilton would have had another duel had you referred to him that way while he was alive.
Grow up.
I would distinguish between mostly pure military leaders, e.g., John Paul Jones, Nathaniel Greene, Henry Knox, and Ethan Allen on the one hand, and pre-war revolutionary leaders and post-war political leaders on the other. Hence, I would remove Jones from the list, but add George Mason — an anti-Federalist leader more influential than even Patrick Henry –, in addition to John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.
The leading Anti-Federalists, who have proved to be prescient with regard to the dangers of a stronger central government, were crucial to the eventual founding document, as some have commented. But for them the Bill of Rights wouldn’t exist. Thus, Mason should be on the list.
How John Adams could be excluded from a list of key founders is puzzling to say the least. He could be difficult, and was a bit of a prig. But so what. He was one of the overall pre-Revolutionary, during-the-war diplomatic, and post-war constitutional leaders. He must be on the list. His bad-assness comes not from military or physical prowess, but from legal and policy genius.
Similarly, how James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution” who was influenced by the Anti-Federalists, and who served as a bridge between the more liberal, urban-oriented Hamilton and the more conservative, agrarian-based Thomas Jefferson, could be off a short list of key founders is mind-boggling. I realize that the author’s emphasis is on military and physical prowess, but there are other ways to effect revolution. But for Madison’s ability to navigate the shoals of distinct cultural and economic differences among the states and regions of the fledgling country, the modern, post-Articles USA likely would not have been created. An argument can be made that this would have been preferable in the long run, but that is another discussion entirely.
Finally, I reject the notion that Jefferson should not be on the list. As the author of the primary political document that got most of the colonies riled up for rebellion (Declaration of Independence), notwithstanding Lexington and Concord, as well as his diplomacy during the war and his leadership afterwards, history acknowledges that he was clearly one of the key founders. Yes, he made his mistakes, such as initially supporting the French Revolution. Yet he acknowledged that error later. Of all the founders, he was a genius ranking with Franklin and Hamilton.
The list is not of “key” founders or “influential” founders. That was not my assignment. Other than number 1, if I had to rank by that category, they would be in a different order, and some would not be here at all.
It was Ben Franklin who wrote an essay titled, “Fart Proudly.”
No kidding. Talk about a bad ASS! (Sorry.)
After I made my own list of “7 Most Impressive Founding Fathers” and clicked on the link to compare it with those in the articles list, I discovered that I should have been listing the 7 Most Badass Founding Fathers, a very different list. Thank you, Mr. Bowdler, for tricking me into wasting my time.
Two more facts that show how dangerously determined a couple of our Founding Fathers were.
When Benjamin Franklin went to France, he not only was acting as our first ambassador to same, he was also setting up a spy network on the Continent. Yes, Ben was our first spymaster; William O. “Wild Bill” Donovan. head of the WW II Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the ancestor of the CIA, considered him a role model.
Speaking of role models, there are a lot of reasons John Paul Jones is considered the archetype of what a naval officer should be. One being his determination to always improve his ability to wreak havoc on the enemy. After the famous duel between the Bonhomme Richard and HMS Serapis, Jones learned that following her captain being returned to England in a prisoner exchange, he was knighted. His response?
Two men not to be trifled with, in my humble opinion.
cheers
eon
Patrick Henry? Samuel Adams? Ben Franklin? George Washington? All these men together at one time and one place? Did not the Creator have a Hand in this? Was God Granting so Much at one time to establish the “Shining City on the Hill”?
So may great minds, so many brave men and women…was this just a coincidence?
Unless we remember He Who Hath Blessed us, can we survive as a nation?
If we forget our Maker, will He forget us?
Pray for America.
I appreciate the comment number 48. by Joseph Rush Wills. He is fully correct. This, all of this, in the colonies that turned the world upside down, all of this was purely the Hand of God. They were faithful, faith living, Christian people, those colonists. And their ideas of liberty, hard work, achievement, and self governance came from their Biblical faith. They trusted God to lead them in this incredible endeavor, to throw off the ties and chains of Britain.
And they succeeded!
Because their trust was in God Almighty.
Where is your trust today? Our coins say “In God we trust.”
But do you really? Unless we do individually and collectively our doom is just a matter of months or few years.
How can you possibly not have Benedict Arnold on this list?
Yes, I know, he switched sides midstream and fought against us. But hey, who doesn’t want to burn New London, CT?
Still though, his exploits in taking Ticonderoga (which provided the artillery needed to take Boston), as a naval commander on the lakes, and his expedition through Maine to besiege Montreal (a siege maintained through a brutal winter) should have been enough to make this list.
Top that off with the fact that Arnold was the hero of the battle of Saratoga and you have the most badass Founding Father of them all.
As a battlefield commander, Benedict Arnold was far more effective than George Washington.