George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are always the top two presidents when I rate the Presidents of the United States.
But John Adams has always been and will always be my 'favorite' president.
Why? Because I like him. He was so human - with his vanity, impatience with others, not to mention
his high ideals. And he contributed greatly to the foundation of our Great Country. John Adams always
'comes alive' for me more that any other president.
~~~
However, it doesn't hurt that he had a lifelong relationship - and a very deep reciprocal love - for Abigail
Smith Adams, who is thought to be the only First Lady who if she were alive now would be our
first woman president without all the baggage. :-)
Abigail Adams is still alive for me. She lives on through her courage in times that were really tough - maintaining their home while her spouse was overseas, she virtually, singlehandly raised their children (nurturing a future president) and all the time keeping alive a very loving, strong relationship with her husband through letters -who just happens to be my favorite president.
And so while, yes, John Adams is my favorite president, it is really is in honor of Abigail Adams that I post this poem by John Milton.
~~~
On His Blindness
When I consider how my light is spent
Ere half my days in this dark world and wide,
And that one talent which is death to hide
Lodged with me useless, though my soul more bent
To serve therewith my Maker, and present
My true account, lest he returning chide,
'Doth God exact day-labor, light denied?
I fondly ask. But Patience, to prevent
That murmur, soon replies, 'God doth not need
Either man's work or his own gifts. Who best
Bear his mild yoke, they serve him best. His state
Is kingly: thousands at his bidding speed,
And post o'er land and ocean without rest;
They also serve who only stand and wait.'
57 comments:
Sue, I DID get your son in laws message on my blog.
So it must be a problem with your computer.
Thanks Mal
Mal - If it is my problem, then I still don't know what to do.
But I'll be in contact with him - I'm sure he can help me.
When you get a comment from me
on your blog, then you'll know the probelm is solved.
:-) Thanks.
Mal - I cannot access the comment section on your blog
from my computer.
However, if you would like to have discussions with me - you could start with a topic - you can write them on my gmail account.
suefhanes@gmail.com
What do you think?
I set that up for a purpose such as this.
If there are others that are interested in joining in - in a serious way - they would be welcome.
sue
I am a big fan of "Portia", too. Her Brutus succeeded where his predecessor failed.
Please Speedy - I don't have time in the middle of the big move of my life to research your comments.
If you want me to know something - just speak English.
Thanks. :-)
'Portia' was Abigail's pen name in her letters to John Adams, his was 'Brutus'.
They fancied themselves "Romans".
Sorry, I just assumed you had read their letters after your profession of admiration for the both of them.
...and Portia is also a favorite Shakespearean character of mine, not only from his "Julius Caesar", but more specifically from his "Merchant of Venice".
Shakespeare, "Julius Caesar"
PORTIA
If this were true, then should I know this secret.
I grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman that Lord Brutus took to wife:
I grant I am a woman; but withal
A woman well-reputed, Cato's daughter.
Think you I am no stronger than my sex,
Being so father'd and so husbanded?
Tell me your counsels, I will not disclose 'em:
I have made strong proof of my constancy,
Giving myself a voluntary wound
Here, in the thigh: can I bear that with patience.
And not my husband's secrets?
BRUTUS
O ye gods,
Render me worthy of this noble wife!
Knocking within
Hark, hark! one knocks: Portia, go in awhile;
And by and by thy bosom shall partake
The secrets of my heart.
All my engagements I will construe to thee,
All the charactery of my sad brows:
Leave me with haste.
Her Brutus succeeded where his predecessor failed.
Brutus was killed in the play, trying to save the Roman Republic. He failed to achieve his ends.
John Adams successfully established an American Republic. This was the great mission that both John and Abigail shared in their choice of "pen names" during the Revolutionary War.
Thersites - Thanks for clearing that up about the pen names of John and Abigail Adams.
If you read my new post on 'serfs'
you will see that I am not a prolific reader.
I do admire greatly the Adams Family, but although I do have their book of letters, I confess to not having 'poured' over it....
My first love for them came from Irving Stone's Those Who Love, many years back, and after his beautifully written version of their relationship I was hooked on them.
Now I have what you have told me to add to my respect and admiration for them, and I will check out the letters.
thanks, Ther
Thersites - This new insight on John and Abigail Adams just deepens the feeling I have had for both of them for many years.
Irving Stone's book reveals their deep and devout relationship in a way that spoke to me in a lasting way - and his writing allowed me to grasp it fully.
Thersites - Your blog wouldn't let me comment so I'll do it here.
Liked the video but Theognis of Megara must not have had a very creative mind.
He leaves no room for dreaming, jousting with windmills - or saving the world.
I differ in opinion of Theognis' creativity. But as you noted, he was largely a man who favoured activity over contemplation, of doing over dreaming.
JC - Yes, as a writer he would have had a Creative Ability - of sorts.
But let me refresh your memory:
'Never give thou thy mind to the impractible,(I'm totally that)
(nor) desire things where of there cometh no accomplishment.'
~~~
Everything I do has the possiblity of accomplishing nothing - especially my dreams - and Theo of Megara doesn't seem to believe in dreams.
~~~
to quote J. Lennon:
'You may say that I'm a dreamer...'
Well, I am. And always will be.
But admidst my dreams is the reality of their not coming through for me so I'm always prepared for any contingency - thus disallowing too much disappointment.
...but isn't it better to achieve the dream rather than merely dream it? Or is the dreaming of it, enough?
I think Theognis' point is that dreaming is not enough. Realizing the dream, THAT is what you should be trying to do.
...there is a time for dreaming, and a time for doing. Dream of doing. Then do it. Now "refine" the dream, and do IT again. And again. Until its' "perfect".
It's not a question of NOT dreaming. It's an alternating of dreaming and doing.
And NOT dreaming of things that CANNOT be done... but things that CAN be done. Practical things. from the root word, praxis.
And as for Don Quixote, tilting at a windmill was something that one DID, not something to merely "dreamt" of doing.
Shakespeare, "Hamlet"
How all occasions do inform against me,
And spur my dull revenge! What is a man,
If his chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep and feed? a beast, no more.
Sure, he that made us with such large discourse,
Looking before and after, gave us not
That capability and god-like reason
To fust in us unused. Now, whether it be
Bestial oblivion, or some craven scruple
Of thinking too precisely on the event,
A thought which, quarter'd, hath but one part wisdom
And ever three parts coward, I do not know
Why yet I live to say 'This thing's to do;'
Sith I have cause and will and strength and means
To do't. Examples gross as earth exhort me:
Witness this army of such mass and charge
Led by a delicate and tender prince,
Whose spirit with divine ambition puff'd
Makes mouths at the invisible event,
Exposing what is mortal and unsure
To all that fortune, death and danger dare,
Even for an egg-shell. Rightly to be great
Is not to stir without great argument,
But greatly to find quarrel in a straw
When honour's at the stake. How stand I then,
That have a father kill'd, a mother stain'd,
Excitements of my reason and my blood,
And let all sleep? while, to my shame, I see
The imminent death of twenty thousand men,
That, for a fantasy and trick of fame,
Go to their graves like beds, fight for a plot
Whereon the numbers cannot try the cause,
Which is not tomb enough and continent
To hide the slain? O, from this time forth,
My thoughts be bloody, or be nothing worth!
...bloody (something that can be put into flesh and realized), or be nothing worth!
As for unrealizable dreams... the Lady of Shalott/Ophelia becomes the model for those.
One cannot gather the experience necessary to achieve dreams simply by dreaming... a day for doing, always follows a night for dreams. And then another. And then another.
Theognis was "creative" in a realistic sense, and not purely a romantic sense.
He's also NOT saying that you should only dream today of what you can physically achieve tomorrow. What you dream of may take years, decades to realize. But the key is to move towards the achievement of that dreams step by step, day by day, broken down in a "realizable" way. One that gains the dreamer the experiences necessary to achieve the dream.
An impossible dream today, perhaps... but NOT tomorrow.
Thersites - Thanks for you comments.
I have to leave now and will not be back until maybe late. But you can be sure I will be commenting on what you have to say about
this subject.
Thersites - I will say this now, that because I am a dreamer - I have more than one dream, so I have to decide which dream to go after, and see if they are intertwined, etc.
More later.
Thersites - Ok. I get it.
And I will press on.
~~~
Thanks for your most poetic and meaningful comments.
(and soon to sleep and perchance to dream)
Adams is rarely mentioned by the right leaners as one of our Founding Fathers as he was for a strong government. This caused many arguments between he and Thomas Jefferson.
Truth - Presidents Adams and Jefferson had a falling out I believe later on - like near the end of Jefferson's presidency.
But in time they made up and corresponded as friends once more.
~~~
On July 4th, 1826, they both died -within hours of each other.
It is said that John Adams' last words were: Jefferson lives.
James Monroe also died on July 4th.
There's a difference between a strong government and a limited one. Righties LOVE a strong government for "Defense". We just don't want a strong government in "Education."
Limited.
Speedy - A strong defense can only come through a strong government.
The problem is if our defense is strong won't we want to try it out? Use it. The difficult part is how to maintain a strong defense without feeling the need to exercise our muscles.
Discernment.
~~~
Education needs the support of a strong government to give it a jump start. Now is the time for that jump start and an overhaul.
Without a badly needed overhaul in education our strong defense will have an mindless population to defend.
Defense for Dummies.
Is there anything that the government shouldn't do?
Evidently your "strong government" answer is, "no".
And you wonder how we end up in a totalitarian dictatorship...
*shakes head*
Thersites - Yes, I do talk about stong government. But I can assure you I would never want an oppressive government.
It's just that we could use the government to our advantage - whlie keeping them at bay.
It's really just a matter of figuring out how to do that.
I believe that anything is possible but not when a country as great as ours is divided by its own people - by choice.
Infighting and bickering has become a chosen way of life here - and it's getting worse all the time.
Well since the people are divided, you have no means whatsoever of "keeping the government at bay".
We used to have a Constitution for that, but apparently, it's no longer effective.
And so it's "no wonder" why the people are divided. the Left insists the government do "more". And the Right insists that it go back to doing ONLY those LIMITED things it was mandated to do in the Constitution.
And believe this or NOT, educating the people (to accept the government's pogrom due jour) was NOT one of them.
But Speedy - I keep hearing negativity from all sides.
We can keep our government at bay.
But the only way we can do this is if WE The People are the government.
Right now we are seeing:
the government
one political faction
another political faction
The two political factions are working against each other - allowing the government machinery to grind them into the ground - all the while saying heh heh we got 'em just where we want them.
We have to come to terms with this - join together in civility and unity - and make our country strong and whole again.
It can be done - but first we have to be willing to try.
But one half of the people want MORE government to take what the other half has and give it to THEM. They're NEVER going to join together again. One half of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Of COURSE they want taxes to go up. ALL THAT MONEY GOES TO THEM.
See the problem?
...and the government is perfectly willing to do what the one half wants, because they get a "commission" on every tax dollar taken.
T-sites - What if the FF had operated solely from behind the anonymity of a blog wringing their hands and repeating over and over:
We will never get out from under the thumb of the Brits...
We will never get out from under the thumb of the Brits...
But we did, didn't we. And now we are in a tight spot. The Civil War was horrendous, but picking up guns and killing your brother is easier than winning a war of words, so we can't seem to find our way out of this one.
The very people that are talking about this divisive problem are the very people that can sovle it if they would just come out from behind their computers, step forward and not only say:
'I'd mad as h*ll and I'm not going to take it any more - and then take action.
But not with guns.
What if the FF had operated solely from behind the anonymity of a blog wringing their hands and repeating over and over...
lol! You need to read more about Ben Franklin. He had a LOT of "pen names". Silence Dogood, Harry Meanwell, Alice Addertongue, Richard Saunders, and Timothy Turnstone being but some.
And THEN he stopped "wringing his hands" and making arguments, and started killing Brit Loyalists. That day may still come for me. ;)
After you've taken all I have with your "pen"... all I have left is my gun. THAT is why we have a 2nd Amemdment. To protect MY rights on THAT day.
James Madison, "Memorial and Remonstrance"
3. Because it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of Citizens, and one of the noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. The free men of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided the consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lesson too much soon to forget it. Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other Religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other Sects? that the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?
speedy - Your comments often are over my head.
But this was not:
'all that I have left is my gun'
That makes me wonder what you had in the first place - and if the only way I could get your gun away from you is to pry it out of your cold dead hands.
Or will you shoot me first and then smile as I fall dead on the ground still clutching my pen?
Or will you shoot me first and then smile as I fall dead on the ground still clutching my pen?
After you've stolen everything I own from me? You bet.
You promised me with your pen (the Constitution) that you wouldn't steal from me, that you would leave me alone to pursue my happiness. If you break that promise, you deserve whatever you get.
Thersites - I am willing to take a bullet for you if I have wronged you.
But if you are the one that is
wrong then it will be murder.
'you promised... that you would leave me alone to pursue my happiness'
If you only want to be left alone to Pursue your Happiness - then you don't belong here. This is a Country of Individual Rights, yes, but it can only work Collectively.
~~~
'We must all hang together, or
assuredly we shall all hang
separately.'
~Benjamin Franklin
(1706-1790)
~printer by trade
~scientist by fame
~a man of action by all accounts
~a man who continues to shape
American thinking and action
'We must
but it can only work Collectively.
Indeed. But the the "collective necessity" lies in leaving us all ALONE to pursue our OWN INDIVIDUAL crazy dreams as to what "happiness" consists of. THAT is our "collective duty." Not to pursue some "collective dream" that NOT ALL OF US BUY INTO as to what "happiness" consists of.
As Madison said when he spoke of INALIENABLE RIGHTS...
Because we hold it for a fundamental and undeniable truth, "that religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence." The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate. This right is in its nature an unalienable right. It is unalienable, because the opinions of men, depending only on the evidence contemplated by their own minds cannot follow the dictates of other men: It is unalienable also, because what is here a right towards men, is a duty towards the Creator. It is the duty of every man to render to the Creator such homage and such only as he believes to be acceptable to him. This duty is precedent, both in order of time and in degree of obligation, to the claims of Civil Society.
....
Because Religion be exempt from the authority of the Society at large, still less can it be subject to that of the Legislative Body. The latter are but the creatures and vicegerents of the former. Their jurisdiction is both derivative and limited: it is limited with regard to the co-ordinate departments, more necessarily is it limited with regard to the constituents. The preservation of a free Government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power be invariably maintained; but more especially that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves.
Madison "Memorial and Remonstrance Against Religious Assessments" (read "unjust taxes").
Keep your hands out of my pockets. I don't HAVE to CONTRIBUTE to your "charities". You want to help poor people get better medical care? Send them a VOLUNTARY contribution. Don't rob me so that YOU can feel good about YOURSELF.
Are you familiar with Maslow's "Need Hierarchy"? Human needs are UNLIMITED. The amount of money I have is LIMITED. Deal with it.
Speed - 'deal with it'
Later this afternoon or tonight.
I'm going to a farwell(not goodbye)
lunch with a friend, and then I have a few errands to run.
Take a number, please.
Six. I'll take the number '6'.
-FJ - Add two more sixes and you'll have the devil reading my blog.
And I am not anxious to have the big guy anywhere near here.
Speedy - The 'contributing to charities - or not' comment makes a lot of sense to me.
Let's do it that way, then.
To each his own, and the h*ll with everyone else.
Are you a f****** Libertarian?
Cause you sure sound like one. :-)
~~~
As for your other two comments - I've packed so many boxes and have so many to go, I really couldn't latch on to it.
Thanks, Speedy. I always hope for something from you.
No, I'm not a Libertarian. I'm a "classical liberal". Isaiah Berlin is my favorite near-contemporary philosopher. I believe in a concept of justice that encompasses something called "Negative Liberty" (as opposed to an externally imposed "Positive Liberty"). It is the antithesis of the modern concept of Rawlsian "Social Justice".
And I believe in a limited federal government that free's the States up to experiment with whatever cultures they care to create... just so long as I can choose which one I want to live in. So if I don't want "universal healthcare", I can move someplace outside of Massachusetts or Oregon, where they don't have it.
If YOU want to live on Brook Farm, then GO, DO IT! Just don't make me come with you because I don't WANT to live there. ;)
-FJ - Brook Farm Community?
communal
George Ripley
utopian
idealism
transcentdentalism
FJ - I'm not a hippie
-FJ - Wasn't John Rawls the guy who wrote sci-fi novels and founded a religion for celebrities
also known as religion for dummies
-FJ - I googled Isaiah Berlin.
He's an ancestor to the great composer that gave us
White Christmas(I'm dreaming of a)
also known as religion for dummies
Scientology? That was L. Ron Hubbard?
And I didn't know that Isaiah and Irving Berlin were related. Thanks for sharing that.
AM - You are welcome.
No charge.
Believe it or not there may be other things you actually don't know.
(Look for a passage from Conrad - as I know you won't read it on your own. Coming very soon in one of my posts.)
I look forward to it... and there are LOTS and LOTS of things I don't know... ALMOST everything! ;)
Post a Comment