Last month during my annual pilgrimage to Priest Lake, Idaho, I read Ulysses S. Grant’s Personal Memoirs. Nothing perks my interest more than presidential history. After the Revolutionary War there’s perhaps no bigger war hero in American history than Ulysses S. Grant. Yet, not much is known about Grant in today’s society. Given the nation’s long history the Civil War is dominated by the events and by President Lincoln. That’s that just the nature of things, but we shouldn’t forget Grant’s contribution to preserving the Union.
Grant’s Personal Memoirs covers his childhood, education, and military service. The book doesn’t cover his presidency, but instead is dedicated to Grant’s military campaign experience. One of the more fascinating aspects of the book is some insight into the Mexican-American War. This conflict is largely forgotten now, but at the time the nation was consumed with the politics behind the conflict. Grant’s own opinion of the war wasn’t favorable:
“I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day, regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation.” Ulysses S. Grant
Later in the book Grant would even go further by suggesting that the nation paid a justifiable price during the Civil War for the injustice of the Mexican-American War. According to Grant the war was a land-grab pushed by the slave states to create more slave states. The politics of the conflict were muddied further by the fact that the generals running the campaign instantly became presidential frontrunners. Zachary Taylor was nominated and eventually elected president based on his success during the war.
Grant’s experiences during the war were mostly as an observer since he served as a quartermaster. He did get close to action on a few occasions. His attention to detail during the conflict was amazing considering he wrote about them thirty years later.
After the Mexican-American War Grant went to Northern California and served for a few year before calling it quits. He moved to Illinois to be with his wife and owned a leather shop. During this period Grant had some financial difficulty before the Civil War broke out. When the war started Grant’s experience in the Mexican-American war and the fact he graduated from West Point helped bring him to prominence in the Civil War.
I’ll leave Grant’s rise through the ranks and successful campaigns for anyone who wants to read the book. However, it’s an amazing American story. Grant went from recruiting and training volunteers in 1861 and by 1863 he was in charge of the entire Union Army. The Vicksburg campaign in particular was an amazing piece of leadership. After the war Grant was only second to Lincoln in terms of popularity so it’s no surprise that he was elected president.
Grant wrote Personal Memoirs at the very end of his life. In fact, he finished Volume II a few days before he passed away. After reading the book I have great deal of respect for Grant. He’s viewed by many unfavorably because of his presidency and the fact that the South never really forgave him for Sherman’s March or defeating General Lee. It’s likely President Lincoln’s legacy is saved by the fact he never had to deal with the reconstruction of the South. That turned out to be a very bitter affair. It is the fate of many great men to be torn down by events outside of their control.
Ulysses S. Grant is remembered as a great general, a poor president, and an alcoholic. He was a great general and perhaps the nation’s greatest general. I’m not sure about his presidency, but rumors of his alcoholism are largely exaggerated. Grant never wanted to be president and ultimately regretted having served. Grant said, “It was my fortune, or misfortune, to be called to the office of Chief Executive without any previous political training.” Grant felt like it was his duty when he was called to do so.
“It is men who wait to be selected, and not those who seek, from whom we may expect the most efficient service.” Ulysses S. Grant
I have an immense fondness for those who rise to the highest levels of leadership without an extreme desire to be on top. That’s not to deride those who are motivated by power. There have been a lot of great leaders who have gotten where they are because of their motivation. In Grant’s case he became the leader of an entire army and eventually an entire nation because of his accomplishments. Grant was selected due to his accomplishments. The nation will always owe Grant an enormous debt for his service in the Civil War. Thanks in large part to his brilliant tactics the Union was preserved and slavery was abolished. The Civil War saw our nation’s greatest president in Abraham Lincoln and our greatest soldier in Ulysses S. Grant.
I highly recommend Ulysses S. Grant’s Personal Memoirs for fans of American and presidential history.
America at 235
One of the most frustrating parts of the political process is dealing with uninformed people. This really isn’t a left/right issue. The list of things Americans are uninformed about is almost endless. Look at what people say about the Separation of Church and State, 9/11, the JFK assassination, or the issue that started the Civil War. I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard someone say that “slavery didn’t start the American Civil War.” This is probably because I live in the South and that talking point has always existed, but it doesn’t change the fact that the argument is delusional. If the war wasn’t about slavery, what was it about?
The Information Age is great for those who are willing to use it, but it’s terrible for people who are lazy. The increasing trend in New Media is to tailor coverage towards the audience. FOX News has perfected it. FOX isn’t in the business of shaping the news. They’re in the business of covering the news that most Americans want to see. The FOX philosophy is simple: if people want to watch it they cover it. It’s all about increasing ratings and advertising dollars. MSNBC has become the liberal news network. While “leaning forward” the talking heads are actually cocooning themselves inside a tunnel of delusion.
What about newspapers? For a long while papers like the New York Times prided themselves for being “above the fray.” It was all nonsense, but the perception existed. It’s over now. The New York Times is just another source for the progressive cocoon. Krugman and Friedman write haughty, faux intelligent articles that aren’t exactly friendly with the facts. Just today William Buffett wrote an article about taxing the super rich. The world is aflutter! Who cares? Taxing the rich won’t put a dent in our debt problem. If people were better informed, they’d realize this and dismiss Buffett’s liberal talking points.
Mickey Kaus who considers himself a “neoliberal” wrote about the MSNBC effect on the New York Times today for the The Daily Caller.
In June the paper deployed its powerful “Draws Attention To” template, the formula for which is
X event in the news (go find one if necessary)
“draws attention to”
Y argument the Times wants to push
If Obama loses his bid for reelection in 2012 the left will blame it on racism. If Obama wins in a close contest the left will blame racism. That’s how shallow some people on left are when it comes to racism. The left is obsessed with racism. Obama’s problems have nothing to do with his race and everything to do with his amateur leadership. Tavis Smiley has even gone a step further, predicting that 2012 will be “the the ugliest, the nastiest, the most divisive, and the most racist in the history of this Republic.” Only an idiot could make such a statement.
I guess Smiley has forgotten about George Wallace and has no historic knowledge of the election of 1860. Does Smiley really believe this upcoming election is going to be uglier and more divisive than the election that led to a civil war? Is race really that big of a problem today? The nation just elected a president named Barack Hussein Obama who wasn’t even qualified for the office. Race isn’t a major problem when that happens. It’s odd that the same people who drool over Martin Luther King’s famous words that we should not” judge by the color of skin, but by the content of character” are obsessed by the color of skin. Obama’s problem is the content of his agenda, not the color of his skin.
Tavis Smiley and his hate logic are perfectly acceptable for PBS, but Juan Williams is a problem? Give me a break!
The most depressing part of the whole budget battle in Washington is the left. Even if the Democrats cave to the Republican position on the budget the severe fiscal problems facing the nation aren’t addressed. The Democratic party and most of the people who vote for them are simply in denial. Or maybe they’re simply ignorant. I really don’t have an answer for it.
The main talking points from the left are raise taxes on the rich, cut the defense budget, and that Republicans want people to die. Here is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s take on the situation:
“Republicans want to shut down the government because they think there’s nothing more important than keeping women from getting cancer screenings. This is indefensible and everyone should be outraged,” Reid said on the Senate floor.
How can liberals complain about Rush Limbaugh, FOX news, or Glenn Beck when the Democrat’s leader in the Senate makes such idiotic statements? Reid’s statement is outrageous and detached from reality. Oh, but there’s more. MSNBC professional race baiter Jesse Jackson compares the current debate to the American Civil War.
“[T]his really is a Civil War fight,” Jackson said. “This is making the federal government dysfunctional on the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. These guys will support three wars. They’ll support tax dodgers. They’ll support the wealthiest Americans getting tax breaks. They want to cut into education and health care. This is an ideological battle.”
Jackson said those trying to shut down the federal government are doing so to make an “ideological-religious point.”
“This is a Civil War fight,” he said. “I think Time magazine has it right. This is the 150th anniversary of the 1861 Civil War. Now those are determined to shut the federal government down to make their point — their ideological-religious point.”
It’s it a little odd that a man who calls himself a reverend is talking about an “ideological-religious point?” I wish I could say that I’m picking some random nutjobs on the left, but these are respected liberals who are willing to say whatever it takes to cash in some political points. I don’t think Americans are listening to this garbage any more, but the same cannot be said of the left. The liberal echo chamber is creating a group of willfully ignorant condescending people. They don’t want to debate. They don’t want to be informed. They just want their Utopian worldview justified.
The anti-war left has their talking points: “Bush lied people died,” “Neo-con,” and “Haliburton.” The big government left has their economic talking points: “Reaganomics,” “Voodoo Economics,” “Tax the Rich,” and “The Shrinking Middle-class.” Ask a liberal to explain any of these nonsesnical terms and they’ll change the subject.
If we only taxed the rich more and got rid of our defense department the world would love us, we would have free health care, and every child would be a super genius because they would have free high speed internet. It’s all so dumb, but that’s the reality on the left.
Jonah Goldberg at The National Review mentioned something on Tuesday over at The Corner that I wanted to address. Goldberg was discussing the President role at the Memorial Day service at Arlington National Cemetery.
I think Obama played things pretty much perfectly at Arlington yesterday, continuing the tradition of laying a wreath at the memorial to the Confederate dead and starting a new one of leaving a presidential wreath at the monument to African-American soldiers who fought against the confederacy.
From a political standpoint the president did the right thing, but I think he should have stopped the practice that President Wilson started. Wilson was the first Democrat from the South to be elected after the Civil War and despite the adulation from “progressives” he was pretty dispicable.
Many Southern Democrats hoped — and had good reason to expect — an all-out Dixiecrat revival with Wilson in the Oval Office. But they had to settle for Wilson’s re-segregation of Washington D.C. and the federal bureaucracy and screenings of Birth of a Nation in the White House.
If the president took my suggestion he would face the backlash of many southerners who still have a great deal of pride in their “confederate past;” however, it’s been 140 years and it’s time to get over it. We shouldn’t be honoring a succession movement; especially when the main issue of slavery was so evil. Hopefully a president in the future goes back to the single wreath to honor all Americans who have given their lives to the United States.
Recent Comments