John F. Kennedy

“Cool” Vs. “Stiff” Presidential Candidates: The Vote Goes To The “Cool’ Candidate Eighty Percent Of Presidential Elections Since 1932!

One aspect of the battle for the Presidency over time, particularly in the age of modern media and national campaigning, is the personality of the candidates, and whether a person running for the Presidency is “cool” or “stiff” with people.

When one investigates this from the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 onward, in most cases, but not all, the “cool” , more personable, candidate wins.

This happened with FDR against Herbert Hoover in 1932, against Alf Landon in 1936, against Wendell Willkie in 1940, and against Thomas E. Dewey in 1944.

It also occurred with Harry Truman against Dewey in 1948; Dwight D. Eisenhower against Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, and John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon in 1960.

1964 was a rare year, where Barry Goldwater seemed more personable by far than Lyndon B . Johnson, but the Johnson campaign successfully depicted Goldwater as dangerous and extremist.

In 1968, Hubert Humphrey was certainly more gregarious and warm than Richard Nixon or George Wallace, but still lost, due to the Democratic split over the VIetnam War; and in 1972, George McGovern came across as more trustworthy and personable than Richard Nixon, but was depicted as extremist and radical in a way similar to Goldwater eight years earlier.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, a new face on the scene, came across as more personable than Gerald Ford, who seemed stiff and uncomfortable to many.

By 1980, Ronald Reagan easily came across to Americans in a more charming manner than Jimmy Carter, and Walter Mondale never could overcome the Reagan mystique in 1984.

In 1988, neither George H. W. Bush nor Michael Dukakis came across as personable, the only time in modern history that such a situation existed.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton easily came across much better in personality than Bush or Bob Dole.

George W. Bush definitely had the edge in his personality in 2000 and 2004 against Al Gore and John Kerry.

And Barack Obama had a clear advantage over John McCain in 2008, and certainly has that edge as well against Mitt Romney in 2012.

In conclusion, only Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were the less personable candidate when they ran in 1964, 1968, and 1972, and only in 1988 could it be said there was no difference between George H. W. Bush and Michael Dukakis in the level of their “coolness”.

The conclusion is that the more personable or “cool” candidate has a clear edge in the modern era in being elected to the Presidency!

Unpleasant Presidential-Vice Presidential Ties Throughout American History

It has become evident that in many cases, no love is lost between sitting Presidents and Vice Presidents, who often link up for electoral reasons, but often have poor chemistry in working together. And many times, a President has wished to “dump” his Vice President, when running for another term in office, and a few times has done so.

Examples of unpleasant Presidential-Vice Presidential relationships include:

John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, with Jefferson, the opponent in the 1796 Presidential election, becoming Vice President, but leading to the 12th Amendment in 1804, to prevent any future such combination. The two men fought each other bitterly, and opposed each other again in 1800.

Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, “tied” in electoral votes in 1800, forcing the election to the House of Representatives, leading to Alexander Hamilton’s endorsement of Jefferson and trashing of Burr, and causing Hamilton’s death in a gun duel with Burr in 1804. Jefferson had no relationship with Burr, after Burr tried to “steal” the election, and he was “dumped” in 1804.

John Quincy Adams and John C Calhoun, who were rivals in 1824, had totally different views of the protective tariff, with Calhoun switching to support of Andrew Jackson and running with Jackson in 1828.

Andrew Jackson and John C. Calhoun were elected together in 1828, but Calhoun broke with Jackson over the protective tariff, resigning, and creating a potential threat of civil war, with the Nullification Crisis of 1833, resolved by a compromise devised by Henry Clay. Jackson even threatened to kill Calhoun if he promoted secession of South Carolina from the Union.

William Henry Harrison, elected with John Tyler in 1840, had totally divergent views since Tyler was a Democrat running on the Whig Party line, and Tyler succeeded to the Presidency when Harrison died after one month in office in 1841, and the Whigs made Tyler’s life miserable.

Abraham Lincoln and his first Vice President, Hannibal Hamlin, elected in 1860, hardly knew each other, and the indications are that Hamlin had no major role in the administration, and was replaced by Andrew Johnson on the ticket for 1864 for political reasons.

Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson, elected together in 1864, with Lincoln picking Democrat Johnson to help win support in the North, then was assassinated, and succeeded by Johnson after six weeks of the second term in 1865.

James Garfield and Chester Alan Arthur were elected together in 1880, from different factions of the Republican Party, and when Garfield died from assassination wounds six months into office, Arthur finished up the rest of the term from 1881-1885.

Woodrow Wilson and Thomas Marshall were elected together in 1912, but Marshall was “kept out of the loop”, and when Wilson suffered a stroke in 1919, was denied access to the President by Mrs. Wilson, never knowing the extent of Wilson’s incapacity for the rest of the term to 1921.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and his first Vice President, John Nance Garner were elected to two terms together in 1932 and 1936, with Garner unhappy with the New Deal programs, and wanting to succeed FDR in 1940, and alienated when FDR ran for a third term in 1940.

Franklin D. Roosevelt and his second Vice President, Henry A. Wallace were elected together in 1940, but Wallace was “dumped” by FDR in 1944, to please Southern Democrats unhappy with Wallace’s advocacy of civil rights for African Americans, and his backing of close relations with the Soviet Union.

Dwight D. Eisenhower and Richard Nixon were elected together in 1952 and 1956, but Ike wished to “dump” Nixon in 1956 although that did not happen, and he was less than supportive of Nixon in 1960 and 1968.

John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, elected together in 1960, were never close, having been rivals for the Presidential nomination, with LBJ feeling slighted by Robert F. Kennedy, the Attorney General and brother of the President, and rumors swirling that he would be “dumped” in 1964, if Kennedy had lived.

Lyndon B. Johnson and Hubert H. Humphrey were elected together in 1964, but with Humphrey feeling mistreated by LBJ, and unhappy as Vice President, seeing himself trapped, and being undermined when he was the Presidential nominee in 1968, and LBJ working against him when Humphrey ran against Richard Nixon.

Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew were elected together in 1968 and 1972, with Agnew feeling “used” by Nixon to do his “dirty work” against the news media, and gaining no support from Nixon when in legal trouble over accepting bribes, leading to his resignation in 1973. Agnew refused to speak ever again to his former boss.

Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush were never close, and the Bushes were never invited to the White House by the Reagans, after their two victories in elections in 1980 and 1984.

George H. W. Bush and Dan Quayle were elected together in 1988, with obvious discomfort by Bush as to Quayle’s performance in his term of office as Vice President, and considered “dumping” him in 1992, but not done in that losing re-election effort.

Bill Clinton and Al Gore, elected together in 1992 and 1996, got along well, but after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, a growing divide occurred between the two men, and Gore decided not to have Clinton help him in the Presidential campaign of 2000, and then the two men had angry words in a confrontation in the Oval Office after the defeat.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, elected together in 2000 and 2004, originally worked well together, but Bush then ignored Cheney’s advice often in the second term, and refused Cheney’s request that Scooter Libby be given a pardon. Cheney, in his memoir, made clear that his relationship with Bush had cooled.

So often, the relationship between President and Vice President has been a very difficult one, an interesting aspect of American history!

Exceptions to this were the close relationship of Gerald Ford and Nelson Rockefeller between 1974 and 1977, although Rockefeller was “dumped” from the ticket in 1976 for Bob Dole, a move that Ford later said he did for political reasons, and greatly regretted; the extremely close ties between Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale between 1977-1981, with Mondale practically a “Co President”; and the present relationship between Barack Obama and Joe Biden since 2009.

The Unusual Nature Of The 2008 Election, In More Ways Than One!

2008, the year of the economic collapse in America, unrivaled since the Great Depression of the 1930s, was a very unusual election year.

This was the first time we had an African American Presidential nominee, and he won the election, despite a majority of white men voting against him.

The country had both candidates for President born off the mainland of America–John McCain in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936, and Barack Obama born in Hawaii in 1961.

The country had the greatest gap in age between the two Presidential candidates in American history–a difference of 25 years between McCain and Obama.

The country had the first college professor (although part time) winning office since Woodrow Wilson 96 years earlier, in 1912.

Barack Obama was the first President from Illinois since Abraham Lincoln 148 years earlier, in 1860.

Barack Obama was the first Northern President elected since John F. Kennedy in 1960, and is the only Democrat to have at least 51 percent of the total vote since World War II, with the exception of Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964.

The year 2008 saw the first Republican woman nominee for Vice President, Sarah Palin.

John McCain became the second Arizona Senator to lose the Presidency, after Barry Goldwater 44 years earlier, in 1964.

So the 2008 election was a path breaking election in more ways than one!

Hatred, Resentment, Indifference Toward The Poor: The Sickness In America

There is a sickness in America, which is growing by leaps and bounds.

That illness is hatred, resentment, and indifference towards the poor!

The ability of most Americans to have compassion and concern for those less fortunate is lacking.

We are a religious nation, with so many claiming to be believers in God, but yet we look down upon the poor, and blame them for their own plight.

It is as if people love to be poor, and are unwilling to do anything to get out of poverty, when it is clear that those born in poverty have an inability to pull themselves out of poverty without assistance from others, as the majority of people in poverty are children.

We have politicians who make a career condemning the poor, and we have radio and cable talk show hosts who live to denounce the poor, and we have religious leaders who claim to be following Jesus Christ, but are not doing so.

We have seen the Social Darwinist theory about poverty arise again in the 21st century, when it was supposed to have died a natural death at the end of the 19th century.

Until we are willing to accept that it is our responsibility as human beings to help lift the poor, we are nothing but religious hypocrites.

Until we stop denouncing the poor for their plight, we are not the shining nation on the hill, offering America as a model for the world.

Our heads should be held in shame until we accept our role to care about and help the poor!

We had wealthy Presidents before who showed concern about the poor, including Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy. Now we have Mitt Romney, who does not give a damn about the poor! This crisis for America cries out for a change of attitude society wide!

51st Anniversary Of Bay Of Pigs Fiasco: Time To Open Up To Cuba

Today marks the 51st anniversary of the Bay of Pigs fiasco under President John F. Kennedy, the failure to overthrow Fidel Castro and Communism in Cuba.

Often thought to be possibly the worst action of the Kennedy Presidency, it simply emboldened Fidel Castro, and it led to the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962, leading to the most dangerous moment in the Cold War between America and the Soviet Union.

Had it not been for cooler heads on both sides, including President Kennedy’s brother, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, the world as we knew it might have come to an end in a disastrous nuclear war.

In the years since, negotiations went on with the Soviet Union until its downfall in December 1991, and relations with China, the largest Communist power, ensued, and despite many problems and issues between China and the US, we are now marking 40 years of contact with that nation.

But our involvement with Fidel Castro, and now his brother Raul Castro, has been very minimal, and an embargo on trade has failed to overwhelm Cuba, even after the Soviet Union collapsed.

Instead, for political reasons, the influence of Cuban Americans in the Republican Party, and particularly in Florida, has led to the refusal to deal with Castro, which all other nations do, and has made us look ridiculous.

Dealing with an evil government which denies human rights to its citizens is not a good thing, but yet we deal with many governments diplomatically, who do just that, deny basic human rights to its people.

If we were to deal only with governments that guarantee equality and human rights, we would be isolated from contact with much of the world, as sadly, much of the membership of the United Nations is governed by abhorrent leadership.

The point is that Cuba will sometime soon see a change of government, as with Fidel Castro reaching 86 this summer, and Raul Castro in his early 80s, we could have a dramatic effect on the future of that island nation if we began diplomatic ties and stopped the ridiculous, ineffective embargo that has gone on now for more than half a century.

It is time that we decided that we are not going to allow the Cuban American community of South Florida, which is indeed becoming more diverse, in any case, simply by the changing attitudes of the younger generation, to dominate the issue of the future of Cuban relations.

And as part of that, we need to have people willing to stand up to the dominant, older, right wing forces in the Cuban community, who are not interested in democracy in Cuba’s future, but only in establishing a right wing government that favors the wealthy who were forced out of Cuba in 1959-1960, and want to influence the future of that nation through their family connections, but have poisoned politics in Florida and the nation by their intransigence on the Cuba issue all these years.

And therefore, it is time for the Miami Marlins to stop pandering to those in the community who have called for the firing of manager Oscar Guillen because he had the “nerve” to speak his mind about Fidel Castro. IF we do not promote freedom of speech, how are we any different than what has gone on in Cuba for the past half century? And although the author thinks Fidel Castro is reprehensible, that does not mean that Oscar Guillen’s job should be based on denial of his right to his personal views, whether you and I agree with such views!

Hopefully, in a second term, Barack Obama will be able to move forward on the issue of opening up to Cuba, as a plan for the future of our relations with that island nation, soon to change simply on the basis of time passing and leadership leaving the scene!

Modesty And Humility: Not Traits Of Mitt Romney, As Compared To Wealthy Presidents!

Mitt Romney was born with a “silver spoon” in his mouth to a father who was a success story in the auto industry.

Mitt Romney had the opportunity to attend Harvard for a law degree and a business degree.

Mitt Romney was able to use personal contacts, through his wealthy family, to multiply the wealth of the Romney family.

Mitt Romney grew up with an attitude of entitlement, that he was ordained to lead because of his family connections and business contacts.

Mitt Romney is not the first modern President to have similar advantages.

Theodore Roosevelt had these advantages. So did Franklin D. Roosevelt,. John F. Kennedy, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

But none of the above wore their wealth quite like Mitt Romney!

All of them engaged in politics more than Mitt Romney, who took the route of the least government service and experience, a minimum four years as Massachusetts Governor.

All of the other wealthy Presidents at birth had their own character flaws and shortcomings as we all do.

But none of them were cocky and arrogant, at least in public, quite like Mitt Romney is!

And none of their wives quite acted as Ann Romney is displaying, also an attitude of entitlement and arrogance!

It is one thing to be wealthy. It is another thing to boast about it, to emphasize it, to be cocky and arrogant, and act as if one is entitled!

What Mitt Romney and Anne Romney lack is a sense of modesty and humility!

The other Presidents tried very hard to make the American people forget their personal wealth and status, although, of course, it was there for all to see!

But Mitt and Anne Romney exude wealth, and make it out to be a virtue they wish to publicize.

And no one really likes a wealthy person who acts this way. It is not a nice character trait to brag or to boast.

Rather, it is nice when one goes out of his or her way to divert attention to one’s wealth, and to show concern for average Americans who are not so fortunate.

So Theodore Roosevelt showed concern with labor rights.

So Franklin D. Roosevelt showed concern about the poor during the Great Depression.

So John F. Kennedy planned a War on Poverty, and concern about racial discrimination.

So George H. W. Bush showed concern about the problems of the disabled and handicapped.

So George W. Bush showed concern about health care prescription costs for senior citizens.

How has Mitt Romney displayed concern for those less fortunate than himself?

The answer is that he has NOT displayed concern for anyone less fortunate, wanting to see the auto industry collapse, as just the tip of the iceberg as to his lack of care about how ordinary people are affected in their daily lives. He has displayed lack of concern about labor rights, the plight of the poor, discrimination against Hispanics and Latinos, and the cutting of Medicaid for the disabled and elderly.

This man has no “heart”, and while one who is cynical might argue that the other wealthy Presidents were just putting on a facade of concern, the old saying goes: Action speaks louder than words!

Losing Vice Presidential Candidates And Their Careers

In the past fifty years, since the Kennedy-Nixon election of 1960, we have had a total of 12 losing Vice Presidential nominees of major parties, not including Vice President Walter Mondale under President Jimmy Carter in 1980, and Vice President Dan Quayle under President George H. W. Bush in 1992.

What ever became of these 12 losing Vice Presidential nominees?

Henry Cabot Lodge, who ran with Richard Nixon in 1960, went on to be Ambassador to South Vietnam for President Kennedy in 1963-1964, a sign of bipartisan cooperation, even though Lodge had lost his US Senate seat to President Kennedy in 1952. He then was a candidate for the Republican nomination for President in 1964, but did not get very far in the race. Lodge had had a distinguished career as Senator from Massachusetts from 1937-1953, played an influential role in drafting Dwight D. Eisenhower for President in 1952, and served as Ike’s United Nations Ambassador for eight years, before becoming Nixon’s running mate in 1960. Overall, a very distinguished career, to say the least!

William E. Miller, who ran with Barry Goldwater in 1964, served as a member of the US House of Representatives from upstate New York from 1951-1965, and was Republican National Chairman from 1961-1964. His public career ended with the Goldwater defeat, but his daughter, Stephanie Miller, is a comedian and radio talk show host, and also on Current TV five mornings a week. Interestingly, she is very liberal, while her father was a solid conservative.

Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine ran with Hubert H. Humphrey in 1968, after having served in the US Senate for ten years, and continued to serve in the Senate until 1980, when he agreed to be President Jimmy Carter’s Secretary of State for one year. He also sought the Presidency himself in 1972, was considered a front runner, but his candidacy floundered.

Senator Thomas Eagleton of Missouri was George McGovern’s first running mate in 1972, but was forced out over revelations that he had undergone shock treatments and taken psychiatric medication. Despite that, he served in the US Senate for 18 years from 1969-1987, and served with distinction, with whatever mental problems he had not interfering with his performance.

Sargent Shriver, the brother in law of President Kennedy, replaced Eagleton, and was well known as the head of the Peace Corps under Kennedy, and as head of the War on Poverty under President Lyndon B. Johnson. Then he served as Ambassador to France under Johnson and Richard Nixon, before running for Vice President. He also ran for President unsuccessfully in 1976, and became the head of the Special Olympics. His daughter, Maria Shriver, became an NBC reporter and the wife of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California. His decline due to Alzheimer’s Disease had an impact on publicity about that disease. He died a much beloved public servant.

Gerald Ford had Senator Bob Dole of Kansas as his running mate in 1976. Dole had been a member of the House of Representatives from 1961-1969, and served in the Senate from 1969 until his resignation in 1996, when he became the Republican nominee for President. He remains active today, and is highly honored for his public career, and his wife Elizabeth also served as a United States Senator from North Carolina. Additionally, Dole had served as Republican National Chairman from 1971-1973 under Richard Nixon. He also was, at different times, Senate Majority Leader and Senate Minority Leader.

Geraldine Ferraro was Walter Mondale’s running mate in 1984, becoming the first woman to run for Vice President. She had been a Congresswoman from Queens County, New York City from 1978-1984, and was later US Ambassador to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights under President Bill Clinton from 1993-1996. She ran unsuccessfully for the US Senate in 1992 and 1998, and later was involved in the Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign of 2008.

Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas was the running mate of Michael Dukakis in1988. He served in the House of Representatives from 1949-1955, and as US Senator from 1971-1993, winning his seat the first time over future President George H. W. Bush, He was also Senate Finance Committee Chairman, and Treasury Secretary under BIll Clinton in 1993–1994.

New York Congressman Jack Kemp, a former football player for the San Diego Chargers and the Buffalo Bills of the American Football League, served in the House of Representatives from upstate Buffalo, New York, from 1971-1989. He ran for President unsuccessfully in 1988, before agreeing to be Bob Dole’s running mate in 1996. He also served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under the first President Bush from 1989-1993. He was a major supporter of economic conservatism, and a follower of President Ronald Reagan. He continued to advocate his views after losing the Vice Presidency.

Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000, and was the first Jewish nominee for Vice President. He had served in the Senate since first being elected in 1988, and will retire from the Senate in 2012, after four complete terms, as a controversial independent Democrat, progressive on social issues, but hard line conservative on foreign policy. He was called conservative intellectual William F. Buckley, Jr’s “favorite Democrat”.

In 2004, North Carolina Senator John Edwards was John Kerry’s Vice Presidential running mate. He served in the Senate for one term from 1999-2005, and sought the Presidency in 2008, and when his campaign failed, he was revealed to have a consensual affair with a woman while his wife was sick with cancer, and the liaison produced a daughter, and now has led to a trial that might lead to his imprisonment on charges of illegal use of campaign funds to cover the affair and the needs of the child and mother. This is truly a sad situation, still to be played out.

And finally, who could forget Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who came out of obscurity as the second woman to run for Vice President, with John McCain in 2008. She became a lightning rod, and many blamed the debacle of the McCain campaign on her, and her obvious ignorance of the issues and the facts of American politics and history. She has remained a controversial figure, who has made millions writing some books and giving speeches,and is seen by many as a major factor in the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Her future is still ahead of her, and we will not be able to ignore her, as she will be part of political news for a long time.

So who stood out among these losing VP candidates?

Clearly, Lodge, Muskie, Eagleton, Shriver, Dole, Bentsen, Kemp, and Lieberman had a positive effect on American history.

The same cannot be said for Miller, Ferraro, Edwards, and Palin.

However, all of them contributed to our history, and should be remembered!

Mitt Romney And Harvard: A Phony Issue!

Barack Obama went to Harvard.

George W. Bush went to Harvard.

John F. Kennedy went to Harvard.

Franklin D. Roosevelt went to Harvard.

Theodore Roosevelt went to Harvard.

Rutherford B. Hayes went to Harvard.

John Quincy Adams went to Harvard.

John Adams went to Harvard.

A total of EIGHT Presidents went to Harvard!

Mitt Romney, if he won the White House,. would be the NINTH to have gone to Harvard.

But Romney tried to use this fact, of Obama’s Harvard Law School degree, against him last week, which is awfully lame, when Romney received not only a law degree, but also a business degree from Harvard, and spent four years in Cambridge, as compared to Obama’s three years at the law school.

What is Romney trying to do?

is he trying to say that one should not elect people who went to Harvard, and that no Harvard educated people should be in the cabinets or in advisory positions of any President?

If that is so, then Romney would have very few advisers for his campaign, and would have trouble filling top positions if he became President!

Is this the best that Mitt Romney can do, to be petty, to be ridiculous, to be glorifying mediocrity, rather than advertise the fact that Harvard educated people, and that of other Ivy League universities, are among the best educated people in this nation?

And if a reader wants to imagine that the author has a Harvard degree, forget it, as he is the product of public university education, but has no grudge, jealousy, or anger in understanding and accepting the reality that Harvard and other Ivy League universities have contributed a massive amount to the governing of our nation, as well as in all the professions and the business world!

One should be proud of his or her Ivy League education, and have a sense of purpose and commitment to use that education,. not only to advance oneself, but also to advance the nation that gave him or her that opportunity for a world class education!

Mitt Romney: Total Opportunist, Totally Unprincipled!

So now Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts Governor, has what he has wanted all of his life: to be the nominee of the Republican Party for the Presidency of the United States!

Now the problem is to WIN the Presidency from a man who is one of the great orators and political “animals” of the modern Presidency, right up there with Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, and Bill Clinton.

Each of the above had his shortcomings and weaknesses, but each knew how to inspire and motivate people, and have people believe in them and their principles.

Mitt Romney has no such problem, no such oratorical gift, no such ability to inspire and motivate people, and no principles he will not abandon in his mad dash to be President!

Mitt Romney offers himself as a chameleon who will change his views on a moment’s notice if he believes it will help promote his desire to be President!

But by being so inconsistent, so changeable, so lacking in embarrassment that he has totally changed his views and repudiated his record as Governor of Massachusetts, he makes it difficult for anyone to feel a commitment to go out there and vote for Mitt as a principled political leader who one can know how he would conduct himself as President.

Mitt Romney is phony even when he laughs, even when he tells a joke, even when he attempts to sing. One finds himself embarrassed for him, that he cannot look at tapes of himself and wince at how he appears to the American people.

This is a man of unknown quality, an intelligent man for sure, a good family man for sure, probably a lot of fun to be around in private according to his wife’s testimony, a man of strong religious principle for sure, and a man who if he was not running for President might come across as genuine if he was not seeking your vote.

But he is asking us to vote for him without having any clue as to whether he will go back to being a moderate, or remain on the right wing of the Republican Party. We do not know if he would be willing to gut the social safety network that even George W. Bush expanded. We do not know if he would be able to get along with right wing Republicans in Congress, or would be his own man and break with the extremism that they represent.

We do not know how he would shape the Supreme Court, whether he would pick moderates or make the Court so right wing that it would set us back for two generations of time.

We do not know how he would communicate with the media, and through them, with the American people on a daily basis. He certainly would have a tough act to follow, lacking the charisma and personality of Barack Obama.

Would Mitt Romney be willing to preside over the dissolution of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security as we know it? Would he be unwilling to work with our European allies, and be ready to commit troops to ever continuous war in the Middle East? Would he be someone who would resist religious influence to promote an intrusion in government beyond the wishes of the Founding Fathers? Would the Mormon Church gain a special foothold in government, and be able to promote its backward, resistance to change, mentality with a Mormon in the White House, or would Romney, like John F. Kennedy, make clear that he happens to be a Mormon, but is not the Mormon President, not dedicated to the church’s advancement in a nation that is a country of all religions and also, no religious beliefs?

What it comes down to is that Mitt Romney as President would be a total “blank slate”, an unknown, who we would have no idea of what kind of President he would turn out to be.

The question is whether the American people want to gamble on a man who is so much an unknown quantity, due primarily to his chameleon nature!

The betting is clearly that the answer will be NO!

The Month Of April In Presidential And American History

The month of April is particularly rich in Presidential History.

The following Presidents were born in the month of April:

Thomas Jefferson April 13
James Monroe April 28
James Buchanan April 23
Ulysses Grant April 27

The following Presidents died in the month of April:

William Henry Harrison April 4
Abraham Lincoln April 15
Franklin D. Roosevelt April 12
Richard Nixon April 22

Additionally,

John Tyler became President in April.
The Civil War began in April. (Lincoln)
The Civil War ended in April.(Lincoln)
Andrew Johnson became President in April.
The Spanish American War began in April.(McKinley)
American entrance into World War I was in April. (Wilson)
Harry Truman became President in April.
The Bay of Pigs Invasion of Cuba occurred in April.(Kennedy)
The unsuccessful attempt to rescue American hostages in Iran occurred in April. (Carter)