Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-07-2012, 10:19 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,729,686 times
Reputation: 35920

Advertisements

^^Concur. I think the generally accepted answer to "Who was the first president?" is "George Washington". Unless this was asked as some sort of trick question, I can't imagine 77% of high school students getting it wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-08-2012, 05:02 PM
 
Location: Middle America
37,409 posts, read 53,563,461 times
Reputation: 53073
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertpolyglot View Post
Well, I'm not THAT bad, but I remember getting a not-so-hot mid-term grade in HS Civics. Why? It was boring. As a 15 year old, I had fully absorbed the fact that politicians were and are slime, so I couldn't be interested in a semester worth of that crap.

However, I did well in my history courses, be it in HS or college.
"Civics" does not = "the study of politicians." Civics pertain to the role of the citizenry in the government, and to rights, duties, justice, and ethics. Whether or not one finds that dull is of course specific to the individual. But it doesn't really have much, if anything, to do with politicians.

If all you were doing in HS civics was learning about slimebag politicians, your class was being improperly programmed and taught.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2012, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Nesconset, NY
2,202 posts, read 4,327,433 times
Reputation: 2159
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
None of the presidents before Washington could correctly be called "president of the United States". They were the presiding officers of the Continental Congress, and as such, were closer to being Speaker of the House. While there was a Continental Congress, there was not yet a United States, of which one could be president, nor was there an executive branch, which would have been the office of the president. The Executive Branch , and therefore the office of President of the United States, was created with the Constitution of 1787.
It doesn't matter to me that you're mistaken but to anyone else who may read your comment, "jtur88 is mistaken". Let's assume if I can show one mistake then the rest of the above comment may justifiably be called into question.

"While there was a Continental Congress, there was not yet a United States, of which one could be president..."

The Declaration of Independence was adopted July 4, 1776 (and continued to be signed for a long time).
Above the first words states: "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,"
Therefore, the United States existed in 1776.

The Continental Congress (three of them) existed from 1774 to 1789. The position of President of the Continental Congress was different prior to the ratification of the Articles of Confederation than after. After the Articles of Confederation were ratified by all 13 states (1791) the position was called: President of the United States in Congress Assembled and served a defined term of one year.

Therefore, I have shown that while there was a Continental Congress there indeed was a United States of which one could be President. I have further shown that the title President of the United States (...in Congress Assembled) was an actual title given someone prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States under which George Washington was also elected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2012, 10:05 PM
 
Location: A coal patch in Pennsyltucky
10,379 posts, read 10,658,899 times
Reputation: 12705
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIGuy1202 View Post
It doesn't matter to me that you're mistaken but to anyone else who may read your comment, "jtur88 is mistaken". Let's assume if I can show one mistake then the rest of the above comment may justifiably be called into question.

"While there was a Continental Congress, there was not yet a United States, of which one could be president..."

The Declaration of Independence was adopted July 4, 1776 (and continued to be signed for a long time).
Above the first words states: "The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,"
Therefore, the United States existed in 1776.

The Continental Congress (three of them) existed from 1774 to 1789. The position of President of the Continental Congress was different prior to the ratification of the Articles of Confederation than after. After the Articles of Confederation were ratified by all 13 states (1791) the position was called: President of the United States in Congress Assembled and served a defined term of one year.

Therefore, I have shown that while there was a Continental Congress there indeed was a United States of which one could be President. I have further shown that the title President of the United States (...in Congress Assembled) was an actual title given someone prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States under which George Washington was also elected.
The formal ratification by all 13 states was completed in early 1781. On March 4, 1789, the Articles were replaced with the U.S. Constitution.

The president of the Continental Congress was simply the presiding officer of the Continental Congress. The president of Congress could not set the legislative agenda or make committee appointments. He could not meet privately with foreign leaders, such meetings were held with committees or the entire Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2012, 09:05 AM
 
Location: Arizona
3,763 posts, read 6,709,383 times
Reputation: 2397
The education system needs a means to get the mass amount of kids in n out effective and quick. There is more a lack of budget in most areas then anything. Then we get into college and the mass scam that is tuition, but that's another subject lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:25 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top