ADVERTISEMENT

OT: President's Day

Source

Heisman Winner
Aug 1, 2001
11,163
6,171
113
Today we salute the paper pushing Presidents of the United States who held down the fort until George Washington could be elected:

Samuel Huntington (Sept 28 1779 – July 10 1781)
John Hanson (Nov 5 1781 – Nov 3 1782)
Elias Boudinot (Nov 4 1782 – Nov 2 1783)
Thomas Mifflin (Nov 3 1783 – Nov 29 1784)
Richard Henry Lee (Nov 30 1784 – Nov 22 1785)
John Hancock (Nov 23 1785 – Jun 5 1786)
Nathaniel Gorham (Jun 6 1786 – Feb 1 1787)
Arthur St. Clair (Feb 2 1787 – Jan 21 1788)
Cyrus Griffin (Jan 22 1788 – Apr 30 1789)

Neilson Field (pronounced nel-son) was College Field’s successor and hosted its first game when Rutgers defeated Stevens 12-10 on October 24, 1891. “One of the finest features of the game was the splended 85 yard spurt of George Ludlow for the first half.” The October 26, 1891 Daily Times put the home attendance at 1,250 (but paid attendance was 316). The field was named in honor of James Neilson, one of the longest serving Trustees of Rutgers College and donor of the land where his field was. His grandfather was Colonel John Neilson who read the newly created Declaration of Independence to the townspeople of New Brunswick on July 9, 1776. Neilson was also one of 40 representatives of the people and counties of New Jersey for “ascent and ratification” of the Constitution of the United States and the last survivor of that group. New Jersey was the first state to ratify the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United States.
 
In truth these men were President of the Continental Congress, which was a wholly different role than President of the United States.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T2Kplus20
Fun fact. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson - political rivals who later became good friends - both died on July 4, 1826. 50 years to the day of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
And James Monroe was the only other U.S. President who died on July 4th. He died in 1831 in New York.
Calvin Coolidge was the only U.S. President born on July 4th.
 
Fun fact. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson - political rivals who later became good friends - both died on July 4, 1826. 50 years to the day of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Actually they were friends at first when they were in the Continental Congress together and went on diplomatic missions to Europe to negotiate treaties with European Nations after the USA became a Nation
Then their political stances separated them and they developed a deep dislike of each other because of it
Once they left the political stage they started to regain the friendship they once had and became good friends again.
 
Last edited:
History channel has a new show on Jefferson that began at 8. They've done a lot of previous presidents in the past like Washington, Lincoln, Grant, Teddy, FDR. It's a lot of surface level info but enjoyable enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MADHAT1 and RUPete
In truth these men were President of the Continental Congress, which was a wholly different role than President of the United States.
Given there was no other president at the time, nor an executive branch to preside over, it does not seem like a meaningful distinction to the nugget of history offered by Source. There is a place for abridged information.
 
Given there was no other president at the time, nor an executive branch to preside over, it does not seem like a meaningful distinction to the nugget of history offered by Source. There is a place for abridged information.

Nor a Constitution. Nor a division from Britain. Nor a Dunkin Donuts/Starbucks.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BossNJ
Well, as the poster who started this thread, I think it's (way) past time to move it to the CE Board.

I just wanted to have a little lightheartedness with the holiday but now I can see why we can't have nice things.
I appreciate your posts. Keep up the good work. Those were important years also, and I'm sure the mechanics of early government activities in war and governance has some interesting nuggets. I started John Adams but didn't watch it all . Time to go back to it.
 
Nor a Constitution. Nor a division from Britain. Nor a Dunkin Donuts/Starbucks.
The Articles of Confederation was a constitution of the United States, just not what we refer to as THE constitution. We divided from Britain as the United States of America as of the declaration of Independence. Can't confirm the first DD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MADHAT1
The Articles of Confederation was a constitution of the United States, just not what we refer to as THE constitution. We divided from Britain as the United States of America as of the declaration of Independence. Can't confirm the first DD.
Agree, The Articles of Confederation was the way the US was bring run before the Constitution came to be. And though the President under it was mainly a ceremonial position without executive power , the holder of the office was President of the Country , just not considered one now that the USA has the Office as a separate branch of government as specified in the US Constitution that replaced The Articles of Confederation as how the Government operated
>The Articles of Confederation served as the written document that established the functions of the national government of the United States after it declared independence from Great Britain. It established a weak central government that mostly, but not entirely, prevented the individual states from conducting their own foreign diplomacy.<
 
Nor a Constitution. Nor a division from Britain. Nor a Dunkin Donuts/Starbucks.
American history could have been very different if there was a Dunkin Donuts open during the Revoution.

By the way, I always thought it would have made a good school project looking at ways the British could have better handled the events that wound up leading to the Revolution. Or if the Revolution was going to eventually happen no matter what.
 
American history could have been very different if there was a Dunkin Donuts open during the Revoution.

By the way, I always thought it would have made a good school project looking at ways the British could have better handled the events that wound up leading to the Revolution. Or if the Revolution was going to eventually happen no matter what.
I pulled out a book that I had in my home, but never got around to reading until now. It was popular a while ago - First Salute by Barbara Tuchman. Early on, it seems to get into some of those questions, but I got sidetracked with another book so I will let you know later... 😄
 
I pulled out a book that I had in my home, but never got around to reading until now. It was popular a while ago - First Salute by Barbara Tuchman. Early on, it seems to get into some of those questions, but I got sidetracked with another book so I will let you know later... 😄
Another book by Tuchman that addresses the British mishandling of the American colonies situation as well as several other case studies is “The March of Folly From Troy To Vietnam”. An in depth discussion of how empires have pursued policies contrary to their self interest which resulted in defeat and loss of influence in the world. I read that a very long time ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ashokan and RUPete
I hear ya. Always root for a win though, no matter what. I will still be at the last two games, but my expectations will be low.
You should.. everyone should go and cheer.. Harper and Bailey and the other Frosh deserve it just for choosing Rutgers. Who knows when we will see talent like that at Rutgers again. Enjoy it as we should have all season.. with eyes wide open as to how everything has changed in college athletics and it was impossible to predict how the season would go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AntiG and RUPete
American history could have been very different if there was a Dunkin Donuts open during the Revoution.

By the way, I always thought it would have made a good school project looking at ways the British could have better handled the events that wound up leading to the Revolution. Or if the Revolution was going to eventually happen no matter what.
Dunkin' Donuts would have been called Dunkin' Crumpets and featured highly taxed tea and not coffee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MADHAT1
Another book by Tuchman that addresses the British mishandling of the American colonies situation as well as several other case studies is “The March of Folly From Troy To Vietnam”. An in depth discussion of how empires have pursued policies contrary to their self interest which resulted in defeat and loss of influence in the world. I read that a very long time ago.

There are good historians who point out that the colonial populations weren't especially "oppressed" by England for a long time, but then the wars with France made England desperate for income. England put the squeeze on colonials who had grown used to being independent.

Once the wars began the Brits weren't particularly vicious about it because there were shared bonds between colonists and Brits. British soldiers would put a blow on American soldiers or militia and then they would ease-up thinking that was all that was needed but then they would have another encounter.

Early on America's inchoate military forces were a disaster and could have been easier to beat. Washington complained about his first militia (not army) forces being so unprofessional that they kept defecating near camp where food and water were. Poor hygiene was killing more US soldiers than combat. British soldiers were required to have 3 clean shirts are all times but militia considered laundry as women's work and wouldn't wash their clothes - so they got sick a lot just from being dirty and pooping where they ate. McCullough wrote about that and how they drank a lot and got a fairly healthy ration of rum (Washington understood the value of alcohol for troops)

Washington knew he had a mess on his hands, and his writings express his sense of despair. Alas they did also come to feel providence was on their side because something would happen out of the blue to save the situation. But had the Brits pressed early on early they could have cleaned-up.

I would also mention that after the war, soldiers of the Continental Army struggled to get their pensions and such and often felt abandoned.
 
That was a great series. Paul Giamatti was excellent in it. If I’m not mistaken, it was one of the first series where they digitized or created backgrounds such as when he visited France.
Paul is great in everything he does basically. But yeah great series indeed.
 
Paul is great in everything he does basically. But yeah great series indeed.

He was great as Santa Claus:

fred-claus-paul-giamatti-santa-costume-42323037749504.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: AntiG
I'd love to see him play Beast or Magneto in X-Men. Someone with a lot of strong, intellectual dialogue
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT