Yes. Arthur was president when the Pendleton Act was passed.
NOW, how about my question re: Garner?
I've never even heard of him.
OK. FDR and Garner BOTH wanted the Democratic nomination for President in 1932.
When FDR won the Convention, they offered the VP Slot to Garner to 1) get the Southern vote [he was from Texas] and 2) because it was indicated that after FDR served his Presidency, Garner could probably expect to get nominated for the No. 1 slot.
In 1940, Garner expected F.D.R. to step down (after all, who had ever heard of a President who ran for THREE consecutive terms before?)
But F.D.R. did NOT step down--but Garner left--in a BIG huff--because he thought F.D.R. had stolen "his chance" at becoming President.
I'm going to head out to the Library--but I'll be back in a bit and we can review some more if you'd like.
Yes, please.
Yes, I'd have to agree to that - thank you much!
Broadway Legend Joined: 1/3/05
We could quiz each other. Here's one. What was William Jennings Bryan speech called, what was it for, and what was it about? Ready... go!
Not sure of the exact title but it was for the Populist Party and the support of free silver, like the hard currency and gold standard being extended to silver too?
Updated On: 5/2/05 at 08:48 PM
I can't take the anticipation.. am I right? And what was his stupid speech called (I'm getting mad that I can't remember haha)
Wasn't the Cross of Gold speech? He said "you shal not crucify blahblah upon a cross of gold!" and it was in support of the silver standard and getting rid of the gold standard.
Cross of Gold speech! That sounds right to me! Ashley.. what's the verdict
William Jennings Bryan DID proclaim "Thou Shalt Not Crucify Man on a Cross of Gold."
The wealthier Republicans wanted the Dollar to be backed by Gold Reserves--while the more middle-class Democrats wanted a Silver Standard.
Please tell me EXACTLY which slaves were freed by The Emancipation Proclomation, and what were Lincoln's very savvy POLITICAL reasons for enacting it?
Lincoln realized that the emancipation proclamation made the civil war ALL about slavery at the point...thats all I have.
"I think it was the Korean tour or something. They were all frickin' asian!" -Zoran912
No slaves were freed by the EP because the EP only freed slaves in states still in rebellion, and since the states were in rebellion, they did not have to obey Lincoln's orders. Lincoln did it like that because he did not want to alienate the border states, who were not in rebellion, but had slaves. He knew that the country would either have to be all slave or all free, but that it couldn't be both. There's more, but I can't remember exactly...
To "flesh" out a little bit, Jwei...
The Emancipation Procolomation freed "all the slaves currently in rebellion against the United States." In other words, the Confederacy. In other words, the very Area over which Lincoln had no control!!!
So why did he do it? When the war was was about States' Rights, the Confederacy was INCHES AWAY from being recognized as a separate country and receiving support from the U.K.--heck, the U.K. would MUCH RATHER deal with two squabbling Americas than one United one.
But when Lincoln made the war all about SLAVERY, the U.K. immediately backed off ALL NEGIOTATIONS! (As Lincoln well knew, Queen Victoria HATED slavery and would not aid any country that she perceived was fighting to preserve it.)
What was the "magic bullet" theory that Senator Arlen Spector of Pennsylvania presented at the Warren Commission which determined the how and why to which JFK was assassinated?
The "magic bullet" theory was that there was only one assasin (not two, as many suspect) and that the bullet went through JFK's neck, head and arm/hand, which was virtually impossible. It's something like that.
That's about it, Elphie.
Since ballastics could prove that Oswald's gun fired only ONE shot, Spector presented a diagram that theorized how that bullet could have gone inside ONCE, dovetailed OUT, and returned two or three more times--all striking JFK at different parts of his body.
Which President mandated the Louisania Purchase? Why was that so ironic?
Jefferson!!
It was ironic because it was probably not exactly Constitutional because it was not in the President's powers to do so, yet Jefferson was a strict constructionist.
PERFECT, Elphie.
Who was known as "The Great Compromiser"?
Jefferson - ironic because, as an "Anti-Federalist" or Dem.-Repub. he was more for state rights opposed to federal government taking control and power. He was also for a frugal government (this was a huge undertaking, paying 15 million for the LA Territory). He also says this will "marry the U.S. to Britain" when the Anti-Fed's are pro-French.
Was it Henry Clay?
Darn, just a little late. I'm also going with Clay..
YOU BET, Elphie. SEE, you're doing JUST FINE...
What was the Whiskey Rebellion?
There was a tax on whiskey (Hamilton did that, right?) and people were rebelling, so Washington called out the army. It was the first time he had to call out the troops and he called out a massive amount, like 13,000 or something.
4 more days..........
argh
I'm taking it too...but one hand I'm worried, but on the other hand I'm just kind of like......whatever...I'm so worthless.
Videos