U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [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 08-07-2013, 08:52 AM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,082 posts, read 25,241,044 times
Reputation: 18069

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
This thread was originally posted to the P&OC forum, but a forum moderator moved to the History forum.

Please note that the OP makes a contention that is not only not supported by the provided link, but part of the premise of the OP is based upon a rumor started by the opposition in the 1920 presidential campaign.
OPs theory threw you off. Thread title correlates with link.

The key word is 'Mystery'.

Last edited by virgode; 08-07-2013 at 09:06 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-07-2013, 10:32 AM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
17,737 posts, read 10,447,240 times
Reputation: 24704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
............ Deal with it.
Well, I guess, that's that then.

Game over.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 11:06 AM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
17,737 posts, read 10,447,240 times
Reputation: 24704
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
.......I noticed you "blew off" the charges that Harding did nothing to stop the depression in the agricultural sector of the economy. At the time, farmers represented slightly over 20% of the population. So, by doing that Harding was essentially "writing off" 20% of the population as being unworthy of any assistance.........
I did indeed blow it off. Mostly because of its context in this thread but also because he was only President, as we know, for about 2 years, and one industry or another is always going to be left behind. Or at least claim they had been.

In the case of agriculture:
In the first place I would hammer a President who presided over a nation who could not produce enough to eat, but I am reluctant to pile on to one whose farmers produce enough but complain about the profit. It's supply and demand, to me.

In the second place Harding signed a number of bills dealing with agriculture. Wikipedia (OK, that's sometimes pretty lame) has a paragraph, but there are many other sources. So I don't feel that serious criticism can be leveled at someone who was going in the right direction when he died unexpectedly.

And you must see that so much of the criticism leveled at Harding has nothing to do with the direction of the country. Seeing so much of that around, I can only assume that some people are trying to appear knowledgeable by "naming the worst President".
He did, after all, decrease taxes all around and the income to the treasury did increase. And he did make an attempt at limiting immigration. And racial relations did, in fact, improve. That is far, far more important to me than a lot of the tripe that is tossed around and is more worthy of discussion than someone's guess at what may have transpired in a Harding future that never occurred.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 02:03 PM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,841 posts, read 7,851,880 times
Reputation: 13779
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
I did indeed blow it off. Mostly because of its context in this thread but also because he was only President, as we know, for about 2 years, and one industry or another is always going to be left behind. Or at least claim they had been.

In the case of agriculture:
In the first place I would hammer a President who presided over a nation who could not produce enough to eat, but I am reluctant to pile on to one whose farmers produce enough but complain about the profit. It's supply and demand, to me.

In the second place Harding signed a number of bills dealing with agriculture. Wikipedia (OK, that's sometimes pretty lame) has a paragraph, but there are many other sources. So I don't feel that serious criticism can be leveled at someone who was going in the right direction when he died unexpectedly.

And you must see that so much of the criticism leveled at Harding has nothing to do with the direction of the country. Seeing so much of that around, I can only assume that some people are trying to appear knowledgeable by "naming the worst President".
He did, after all, decrease taxes all around and the income to the treasury did increase. And he did make an attempt at limiting immigration. And racial relations did, in fact, improve. That is far, far more important to me than a lot of the tripe that is tossed around and is more worthy of discussion than someone's guess at what may have transpired in a Harding future that never occurred.
Let me guess, you're some relative trying to resurrect his reputation. Did you also write/edit the Wiki article on Harding? It sounds remarkably like your original defense of Harding.

If the guy wasn't a crook himself, he hung with a lot of people who were crooks. If he'd been in office longer, they probably would have stolen even more.

And, yeah, you need to deal with the fact that Harding was a bottom-of-the barrel POTUS.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 02:12 PM
 
10,726 posts, read 10,366,510 times
Reputation: 34429
Quote:
No.


We are discussing a mediocre president after all, so what is wrong with
mentioning similar mediocre presidents for comparison?


Is there a rule that states that the Warren Harding Syndrome can only apply
to President Harding?
Have trouble admitting when you're wrong? Read the subject title again. The subject title doesn't say anything about the Warren Harding Syndrome. I brought that up in my discussion of Harding. The subject line is "death of united states first black president still a mystery". When I first read this I was a bit confused. It immediately became apparent, the OP was talking about Warren Harding. Everyone, but you, has primarily written about Warren Harding.

If I seem brusque, its because I am sick and tired of people trying to use the history forum to bash the current president. We have the Politics Forum for that purpose. It should be sufficient.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 02:32 PM
 
5,115 posts, read 4,948,039 times
Reputation: 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
OPs theory threw you off. Thread title correlates with link.

The key word is 'Mystery'.
This thread's title: "death of united states first black president still a mystery".

The article's original title is 'After 90 years, President Warren Harding's Death Still Unsettling'.

Not 'unsettled' or 'a mystery'.

From the article:
Quote:
Today, most historians accept that Harding, 57, died from a heart attack brought on by ample evidence of cardiac problems.
What the article does state is that the public at the time was outraged that Harding had died and had blamed his attending physicians for his death. The article goes on to say that in choosing to have the body embalmed and buried without an autopsy Harding's wife prevented anyone from knowing for certain the exact cause of death. Still, as indicated above, the cause of death was probably a heart attack - not so mysterious.

And to sum it all up, the linked article makes no mention as to whether Warren G Harding had an African American ancestor. That was a little bit of decoration added by one Lionsgator as a presumed side-ways dig against the current President.

Again, this bit of flotsam was dragged over here from the P&OC forum. I believe that the original intent of the thread was not historical inquiry but rather political propaganda.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,097 posts, read 23,240,851 times
Reputation: 6128
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
If I seem brusque, its because I am sick and tired of people trying to use the history forum to bash the current president. We have the Politics Forum for that purpose. It should be sufficient.
President Obama is not a historical figure?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 05:37 PM
 
Location: NE Mississippi
17,737 posts, read 10,447,240 times
Reputation: 24704
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda_d View Post
Let me guess, you're some relative trying to resurrect his reputation. Did you also write/edit the Wiki article on Harding? It sounds remarkably like your original defense of Harding.

If the guy wasn't a crook himself, he hung with a lot of people who were crooks. If he'd been in office longer, they probably would have stolen even more.

And, yeah, you need to deal with the fact that Harding was a bottom-of-the barrel POTUS.
Go away.

I already conceded to you.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-07-2013, 09:47 PM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,082 posts, read 25,241,044 times
Reputation: 18069
Quote:
Originally Posted by djmilf View Post
That was a little bit of decoration added by one Lionsgator as a presumed side-ways dig against the current President.
Of course, and you made OP's day giving the response he was looking for....
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2013, 04:54 AM
 
5,115 posts, read 4,948,039 times
Reputation: 4385
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
Of course, and you made OP's day giving the response he was looking for....
Nope, I just posted a warning about the origination of the original post and an observation about the veracity of the content of said post. Nothing more.
Rate this post positively 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 > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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