Radical Presidents

An article entitled “5 presidents more ‘radical’ than Obama” found on CNN.com explained the reasoning behind Newt Gingrich’s assumption that Obama has been one of America’s most radical presidents. The article goes on to state that indeed 5 other presidents have been more “radical” than Obama. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was said to be radical due overturning the two-term precedent set by George Washington and winning four terms when most other countries worldwide focused on dictators. John Adams is considered radical for signing the Alien and Sedition acts during the threat of war, outlawing anti-government dissent. Andrew Jackson is considered radical due to removing Native American policies, bringing about the infamous “Trail of Tears” that led to thousands of deaths. Abraham Lincoln was called radical for pledging to only preserve the union and wanting to stop the spread of slavery. Lastly, G.W. Bush has been considered radical because of the extreme choices regarding Iraq and reluctance to pay for his wars directly, contributing to our economic downfall. The article continues on to talk about how none of these “radical” presidents were truly radical in a global sense, just making good or bad decisions regarding American history. People are more worried about who Obama is as a person than as a president. Newt Gingrich argues that we are more worried about using fear and hate to cause a seen and make history, whereas we need to worry about doing better for ourselves and our country as a whole. This reminded me of how we talk about people being more worried about unimportant things when it comes to presidency. Citizens are more concerned with Obama being able to speak well, and whether or not he has an official birth certificate than him being able to lead our country. Although he may have great ideas and hopes for the USA, we are blinded by his color and stereotypes we place on him. Past presidents are referred to as radical after doing something drastically wonderful or horrible, but why? Why is Bush not remembered for his 9/11 speech or actions after 9/11? The inattentive audience needs to worry less about image, eloquent style, plebiscitary, language or speaking abilities (god/devil terms), and media opinions and learn to make their own assumptions and opinions.