Inauguration 2013

[Gamma Xi Phi]

Originally Posted by adpimiz

Haha, I know we will survive.

The sad thing is, as a Republican, I disliked Bush as a president about as much as I dislike Obama as a president.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

If it's any consolation, those of us who had that same feeling in January 1981, 1985, 2001 and 2005 can report that the Republic did indeed survive.

But would the Founding Fathers recognize it?


And that will most probably be all that I have to say about that!

[StealthMode]

Did she just say an "audio enema?" I know the music is good but...

*sigh* Today was a good day.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by honeychile

But would the Founding Fathers recognize it?


And that will most probably be all that I have to say about that!

Perhaps not in details, though in its essentials perhaps.

But then again, there is much about life in this country and in the world in the later half of the 20th Century and the early 21st Century that they wouldn't recognize and couldn't have imagined. As far as that goes, did they foresee the Civil War and its aftermath, which probably did more to shift the nature of the Republic than any other single event in our history?

An answer might also depend in part in exactly what aspect of the Republic one has in mind when answering the question. I think frequently what is implied in the question is "Would they recognize the expanded role of the federal government?" But I would suggest that there's more to it than that -- for example, would they recognize a Republic in which women, blacks and non-land owners can vote and hold office?

I think the relevant, if unanswerable, question is whether they would see the Republic as it exists today as a logical evolution appropriate for the context in which it exists. As to that, each speculator's mileage may differ.

More answer than you wanted to your rhetorical question, I know.

[honeychile]

^And yet, a worthy opinion. I've often selected one or another historical figure, and wondered what he or she would think of today.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Perhaps not in details, though in its essentials perhaps.

But then again, there is much about life in this country and in the world in the later half of the 20th Century and the early 21st Century that they wouldn't recognize and couldn't have imagined. As far as that goes, did they foresee the Civil War and its aftermath, which probably did more to shift the nature of the Republic than any other single event in our history?

An answer might also depend in part in exactly what aspect of the Republic one has in mind when answering the question. I think frequently what is implied in the question is "Would they recognize the expanded role of the federal government?" But I would suggest that there's more to it than that -- for example, would they recognize a Republic in which women, blacks and non-land owners can vote and hold office?

I think the relevant, if unanswerable, question is whether they would see the Republic as it exists today as a logical evolution appropriate for the context in which it exists. As to that, each speculator's mileage may differ.

More answer than you wanted to your rhetorical question, I know.

Abigail Adams is my favorite founding father, so I like to think she'd be pleased.

[PanseyGirl]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Perhaps not in details, though in its essentials perhaps.

But then again, there is much about life in this country and in the world in the later half of the 20th Century and the early 21st Century that they wouldn't recognize and couldn't have imagined. As far as that goes, did they foresee the Civil War and its aftermath, which probably did more to shift the nature of the Republic than any other single event in our history?

An answer might also depend in part in exactly what aspect of the Republic one has in mind when answering the question. I think frequently what is implied in the question is "Would they recognize the expanded role of the federal government?" But I would suggest that there's more to it than that -- for example, would they recognize a Republic in which women, blacks and non-land owners can vote and hold office?

I think the relevant, if unanswerable, question is whether they would see the Republic as it exists today as a logical evolution appropriate for the context in which it exists. As to that, each speculator's mileage may differ.

More answer than you wanted to your rhetorical question, I know.

I think that your comment is incredibly insightful!

[IUHoosiergirl88]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I think the relevant, if unanswerable, question is whether they would see the Republic as it exists today as a logical evolution appropriate for the context in which it exists. As to that, each speculator's mileage may differ.

Well said, MysticCat. Our Founding Fathers could never have imagined the things we deal with today, where government deals heavily with social issues and the world is so diverse and interconnected. I sometimes wonder how Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson would have dealt with the issues of global instability or radicalism; or how Lincoln and Kennedy would have dealt with gay rights and other social issues.

[pbear19]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Perhaps not in details, though in its essentials perhaps.

But then again, there is much about life in this country and in the world in the later half of the 20th Century and the early 21st Century that they wouldn't recognize and couldn't have imagined. As far as that goes, did they foresee the Civil War and its aftermath, which probably did more to shift the nature of the Republic than any other single event in our history?

An answer might also depend in part in exactly what aspect of the Republic one has in mind when answering the question. I think frequently what is implied in the question is "Would they recognize the expanded role of the federal government?" But I would suggest that there's more to it than that -- for example, would they recognize a Republic in which women, blacks and non-land owners can vote and hold office?

I think the relevant, if unanswerable, question is whether they would see the Republic as it exists today as a logical evolution appropriate for the context in which it exists. As to that, each speculator's mileage may differ.

More answer than you wanted to your rhetorical question, I know.

In my last semester of law school I had one of my most enjoyable classes, a seminar called The Founders' Constitution. We read nothing but original writings by the Founders, and I am strongly of the opinion that they would not have recognized much about our post-civil war country. Certainly not since the populist movement. There are things that we do today that everyone takes for granted as being something the Founders would have supported, when in fact, they explicitly came out against it. (And never mind that the term "Founders" in and of itself is somewhat ridiculous to use in these contexts, since they had as many different opinions about how the government should be structured as politicians do today.)

But I like your response, that if they could see the evolution as a whole, I think they would at least understand why we are where we are.

Let's make no mistake though, it's not the past four years that have made a significant difference since the founding era.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by IUHoosiergirl88

I sometimes wonder how Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson would have dealt with the issues of global instability or radicalism; or how Lincoln and Kennedy would have dealt with gay rights and other social issues.

My guess is that they'd be too busy trying to acclimate themselves to the idea that we're not an agrarian society anymore.

Originally Posted by pbear19

There are things that we do today that everyone takes for granted as being something the Founders would have supported, when in fact, they explicitly came out against it. (And never mind that the term "Founders" in and of itself is somewhat ridiculous to use in these contexts, since they had as many different opinions about how the government should be structured as politicians do today.)

. . . Let's make no mistake though, it's not the past four years that have made a significant difference since the founding era.

Yep to both statements.

On another topic, I don't care at all the Beyoncé lip-synced, and her performance didn't annoy me nearly as much as some others I've heard, but I wish that just once at an event like an inauguration, whoever sings the national anthem would be content to sing it the way it was written, without needing to make it "their own." Sometimes, it's really not about the singer.

[AGDee]

When she first started, I said to my son "I think she's lip synching." I don't really care if they lip synch but I like the National Anthem best when it is sung as it was written. I'm a traditionalist though... I think pizza should always have cheese and pepperoni. I like ritual and the expected in many situations.

[Sciencewoman]

My daughter was there. They had a good spot right in the front/middle of the "free" area. She was so cold by the time everything started...they got there at 5 am. It was very inspirational, but she said she's never going again...too many people packed too close together.

She said no one liked the poet.

So, this is one of the things she's been doing instead of finishing her recruitment story.

[AGDee]

I told Hypo that her new aspiration should be inaugural poet since poetry is the genre that wins her awards. She said nobody she was watching with liked that one. And I told her "Exactly! You can do way better than him!"

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by AGDee

I told Hypo that her new aspiration should be inaugural poet since poetry is the genre that wins her awards. She said nobody she was watching with liked that one. And I told her "Exactly! You can do way better than him!"

I love his work. I think his poem was a bit long, but the white house chose from three options presented to them. In general, occasional poetry is kinda mediocre, and a very difficult genre to do well. I don't know that I've ever really liked an inaugural poem.