This Message Not Approved by the NSA
Posted on 08/19/2013 7:54:54 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda
If he tries to challenge hitlery, he’d better stay away from Ft. Marcy Park...
Our next president will be whichever puppet Soros chooses. President Jarrett will probably still be ensconced in the WH.
I used to think he was just an old fool prior to the debate with Paul Ryan. However after he flashed those maniacal Joker grins at the debates, I think he is just plain dangerous.
Joe traded his cow to get them.
Good one!
[Joe, you really need think this thing through. Remember Vince Foster.]
Of course, Garner wasn’t a moonbat, and he also lived almost another 3 decades. He probably would’ve been a good President, too (as opposed to FDR). Barkley, on the other hand, wouldn’t have lived to the end of his term (he died in ‘56 just after he made a Senate comeback in ‘54). Truman greatly erred in 1948 not choosing a younger, viable Democrat to groom to succeed him (perhaps someone like Sen. Warren Magnuson of Washington, then in his first Senate term).
Why are those dudes all wearing Meshach Taylor masks ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrYCrdJyaDg
EIther that or the flares supposed to be from the muzzle of his rifle...
The Vice Presidency was irrelevant then unless the big man died. The last sitting VP at that point to have been nominated (by the breakaway Southern rats) was Breckenridge in 1860. Few even tried to get nominated AFAIK (Garner, Barley, who else?). Nixon was the next, 100 years later. He was also the youngest since Breckenridge. Is that it? That electable sorts were not chosen as VP? VP TR would have run if McKinley had lived.
I guess an electable choice by Truman could have changed it sooner than Nixon. Was it the modern media that gave the VP it’s relevance back? Now a Dick Cheney type who never intended to run to succeed his boss, is a throwback.
I know what I did with Barkley. Don’t say it. ;D
It’s that odd obsession you have with that grain.
I think FDR was considering a successor (at least beginning with 1940) when he chose Wallace as VP (with his divisiveness being the reason he was forced from the ticket in ‘44), and the same when he submitted the names of Justice Bill Douglas and Senator Truman. These were people that would likely run to succeed him in contrast to so many prior choices (when the VP was often an elder statesman, and more than a few died in office).
Of course, another problem with VPs, for someone who served in the job for 4-8 years, their power was almost nil in contrast to a job they would’ve held before that, and would’ve had to make the case that they were up for the challenge of jumping from a long stint in that nothingburger job.
In Barkley’s case, he’d been a powerful Senate leader (both Majority & Minority Leader), Garner had been Speaker of the House & Minority Leader. Tom Marshall (Wilson’s VP) had been Governor of Indiana.
Curiously, with the exception of Van Buren & GHW Bush (not including Adams & Jefferson, as the “runner-up” rule was in place), every VP ascending to President all only had a less than a term (or in some cases, less than a year) to jump to the job. Tom Marshall (had he properly acceded to the office with Wilson’s debilitating stroke), would’ve been the first person (since Adams) to have served 2 terms.
I know, and I don’t even like beer.
Me, neither.
We’re in lonely company in that regard.
My father hates beer, too. I figure more for everyone else and I’ll never be accused of stealing it.
I think FDR promised Garner that he would be his "heir apparent" in 1940, if the pair were successful in 1932. Garner took the bait, and FDR had no intent of keeping his pledge. Garner was aghast that Franklin would break with tradition and seek a third term, he figured it was now "his turn" but went nowhere. In hindsight, he was fairly decent for a Dem and would have probably made a good President, and he lived a good 20 years after that, dying in his 90s. But that didn't matter in 1940, a 70+ year old, tough as nails, whiskey-drinking, right-of-center Dem trying to succeed the entrenched liberal icon FDR was a non-starter in the Dem contest.
A good "what if?" scenario would be if Garner HADN'T tried to run in 1940, and remained on the ticket in '40 and '44 as a "caretaker" veep, then became President at the age of 77 when FDR kicked the bucket in 1945. It's a long shot scenario, since it's doubtful FDR would have kept him around for a fourth term, but it's interesting to speculate how he would have differed from Truman. And would he have run again in 1948?
Barkley was certainly much closer to Biden ideologically, and suffered the same "I'm gonna finally be elected President at age 74" delusion when he ran in 1952. I don't think Truman had any intent of ever having this guy succeed him, but he took the job the same reason Biden did -- he always wanted the Presidency and being Truman's #2 was the only way he could get in line for it. Of course, when he finally had a chance to run in his own right in 1952, he went nowhere in the RAT primaries that year (although you could make a good case the primaries back were nothing like the primaries now)
I guess we can be thankful Dick Cheney did what an "elder statesman" veep SHOULD do, and was an instrumental part of the Bush administration but never sought the glory or the Presidency for himself. Of course, now we have his daughter to deal with. Is it fair to deduct points for her actions? ;-)
Oh, and off topic, but I'm not a fan of beer, either. Flavored beer is okay. Regular beer is tasteless and I'll only drink it if nothing else is available.
I’m telling you, you missed your calling; you should have been a brewmaster.
I wonder what a conservative southern rat President in the 20th century would have been like and what effect it would have had politically. Even as the incumbent could Garner have been nominated as late as 1948? Would he have even have been that conservative?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.