<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Saturday Evening Post &#187; Politics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/topics/politics/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com</link>
	<description>Home of The Saturday Evening Post</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 20:09:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>E Pluribus Trivia</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/vice-presidents-trivia.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=vice-presidents-trivia</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/vice-presidents-trivia.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:00:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>William Jeanes</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Trends & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vice presidents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=82001</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Odd and fascinating facts about our vice presidents.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/vice-presidents-trivia.html">E Pluribus Trivia</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?attachment_id=81793" rel="attachment wp-att-81793"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/WorstVPs_TeddyRooseveltrb.jpg" alt="Teddy Roosevelt" width="350" class="alignright size-full wp-image-81793" /></a></p>
<p>Nine of our 47 <a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=79784">vice presidents</a> inherited the presidency—eight from a president’s death and one because <a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/11/06/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/nixon.html">President Richard Nixon</a> quit. Seven vice presidents died in office. Two vice presidents resigned: John C. Calhoun to go to the Senate, and Spiro Agnew to go into hiding. </p>
<p><strong>George Clinton</strong> was the first of seven vice presidents to die in office (1812). The second was Elbridge Gerry (1814), who gave his name to the notorious and ongoing practice of gerrymandering—creating misshapen voting districts to ensure your party’s victory. Both served under James Madison, president from 1809 to 1817. </p>
<p><strong>Richard Mentor Johnson</strong>, V.P. under Martin Van Buren (1837–1841), rose to political prominence partly on his reputation for having personally killed Shawnee Chief Tecumseh in the war of 1812. His reputation came undone in subsequent years when word got out that his common-law wife, with whom he had two daughters, was the light-skinned slave Julia Chinn. She died in the cholera epidemic of 1833, and her existence was conveniently swept under the rug during his period serving as V.P. For the record, Johnson educated and deeded property to his two daughters. </p>
<p><strong>Theodore Roosevelt</strong> found the job of presiding over the Senate so tedious that he often slept at his desk. He famously said of his senatorial charges, &#8220;When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer &#8216;Present&#8217; or &#8216;Guilty.&#8217;&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>Charles G. Dawes</strong> is the sole vice president to write a hit song. His 1912 “Melody in A Major” later had words added and became “It’s All in the Game.” Tommy Edwards took the song to number one in 1958, seven years after Dawes’s death.</p>
<p>Not until <strong>Alben Barkley</strong> in 1949 was the vice president called “The Veep,” a term coined by a young Barkley relative. It was noted by the Oxford English Dictionary in 1949 and has passed into common usage.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/vice-presidents-trivia.html">E Pluribus Trivia</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/vice-presidents-trivia.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Worst 10 1/2* Vice Presidents</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/worst-vice-presidents.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=worst-vice-presidents</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/worst-vice-presidents.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2013 13:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>William Jeanes</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Trends & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vice presidents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=79784</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>A selective view of some who were No. 2 in more ways than one. </p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/worst-vice-presidents.html">The Worst 10 1/2* Vice Presidents</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What do Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt, Hannibal Hamlin, and Millard Fillmore have in common? All are former <a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=82001">vice presidents of the United States</a>. Two are on Mount Rushmore; two are not.</p>
<p>Forty-seven men have occupied the office of vice president, and while they were in there, they did little other than serve as presiding officer of the Senate, their only constitutional mandate. </p>
<p>Vice presidents were chosen more for perceived vote-getting abilities than because of genuine credentials as public servants—which many had. Even so, an aura of veiled weirdness has hovered over the office for more than two centuries. </p>
<p>In 1788, the U.S. held its first presidential election under a flawed system: The man with the most electoral votes got to be president, and the man finishing second became vice president. President John Adams, elected following Washington in 1796, and Vice President Thomas Jefferson detested each other. Imagine George W. Bush with Al Gore as vice president or an Obama-Romney administration, and you’ll understand.</p>
<p>In 1800, Jefferson and Adams faced off—the first time two former vice presidents mutually sought the presidency. But Adams finished third while Jefferson and Aaron Burr tied with 73 votes each. Burr had agreed in advance to serve as Jefferson’s vice president, and that’s how things ultimately worked out. </p>
<p>Jefferson’s near-disaster led to the passage of the 12th Amendment, which required electors to cast separate votes for the two offices. This spared us, up to a point, acrimony between the two top office holders. Since the first vice president was elected in 1788, a motley of murderers, traitors, bribe takers, and outright crooks have paraded through the vice presidency. What’s more, during the 224 years between 1788 and 2012, the office has stood vacant on 18 occasions for a total of almost 38 years.</p>
<p>The nation survived not only those 18 vacancies but also the 10 and one-half vice presidents we examine below. </p>
<div class="product-info-block">
<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?attachment_id=81783" rel="attachment wp-att-81783"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/WorstVPs_AaronBurrrb.jpg" alt="Vice President Aaron Burr" width="150" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-81783" /></a></p>
<h2>Aaron Burr</h2>
<p><strong>(1801-1805)</strong></p>
<p>Our third vice president, Aaron Burr of New York, set the tone of lunacy that so often defines the office. Burr killed Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton in an illegal duel and got himself charged with murder in both New York and New Jersey. After leaving office, shady land deals in the western wilderness got him charged with treason. He was never convicted of either crime.<br />
<div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div>
</div>
<div class="product-info-block">
<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?attachment_id=81788" rel="attachment wp-att-81788"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/WorstVPs_JohnTylerrb.jpg" alt="Vice President John Tyler" width="150" class="alignleft size-full wp-image-81788" /></a></p>
<h2>John Tyler*</h2>
<p><strong>(1841)</strong></p>
<p>How do you get one-half of a vice president? John Tyler of Virginia did it this way. He was the “too” of the 1840 campaign slogan, “Tippecanoe and Tyler Too.” The “Tippecanoe” half of the ticket was William Henry Harrison who spoke for three hours at his rainy inauguration, caught pneumonia, and died 31 days later, making Tyler our shortest-serving vice president. </p>
<p>Incredibly, though the Constitution provided for a vice president, it did not state expressly that the vice president would assume the office of president following a chief executive’s death. A quick-acting Congress rectified this … in 1967.</p>
<p>Before even being elevated to the presidency, Tyler signaled his lack of interest in his elected position. In fact, immediately after Harrison’s inauguration, Tyler left Washington and didn’t return until he was summoned at the president’s death. On his return, Tyler resisted congressional attempts to name him “temporary” or “acting” president and served almost a full term as a no-asterisk president. In that post, however, he was unremarkable and historians have called him weak. He so alienated his party that he was denied its nomination for the election of 1844.<br />
<div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/worst-vice-presidents.html">The Worst 10 1/2* Vice Presidents</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2013/02/19/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/worst-vice-presidents.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America’s Wealth Gap</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/22/archives/post-perspective/americas-wealth-gap.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=americas-wealth-gap</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/22/archives/post-perspective/americas-wealth-gap.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:52:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Frederick E. Allen</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Post Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Trends & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[money]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>What is to be done about the yawning difference between the super rich and the rest of us?</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/22/archives/post-perspective/americas-wealth-gap.html">America’s Wealth Gap</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img class="alignleft size-full wp-image-74454" title="America's Wealth Gap" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/PostPer_mainillioND12.jpg" alt="America's Wealth Gap" width="400" /></p>
<p>Will 2012 go down in history as the year money took over politics? Both parties will have spent more than a billion dollars electing the next president. More and more of that money comes from a handful of the wealthiest Americans and the corporations they run. On the Democratic side, Jeffrey Katzenberg of DreamWorks, telecommunications pioneer Irwin Mark Jacobs, and hedge fund manager James Simons have donated millions to re-elect the president, but the amount of money the Democrats have received from deep-pocketed supporters pales in comparison to what Republicans have received. A single billionaire, business magnate Sheldon Adelson, had by August spent more than $41 million and promised to spend up to $100 million defeating President Obama and other Democrats. All told, the top .07 percent of donors give more money than the bottom 86 percent. And it pays off. Candidates spend ever more time courting the super rich and then, once in office, try to keep them happy. This summer, for example, Mitt Romney held two fundraisers at which he raised almost $10 million from the oil and gas industry and then announced that as president he would end more than 100 years of federal restraint of oil and gas drilling on public lands. Things like that happen on both sides. How did we get into such a situation? What is to be done about it? Is it threatening our democracy? And doesn’t it go against everything the founding fathers stood for?</p>
<p><div style="background:none repeat scroll 0 0 #F5F2E9;border: 1px solid #000000;margin: 16px 16px 16px 0;width:35%;float:left;font-size:.9em;"><h3 style="font-weight:bold;color:#000000;font-size:1.1em;line-height:1.2em;margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:7px">Related Stories From the <em>Post</em>:</h3><h3 style="margin-left:7px;"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html">The Roosevelt Period</a></h3><p class ="related_content" style="margin:0,1.125em,0.625em,0;">In 1919, former U.S. Senator Albert J. Beveridge reported on the economic evolution of the early 20th century.</p><h3 style="margin-left:7px;"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html">One Year of Roosevelt</a></h3><p class ="related_content" style="margin:0,1.125em,0.625em,0;">In 1902, <em>Post</em> reporter William Allen White summarized the first year under the Roosevelt Administration. </p><h3 style="margin-left:7px;"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html">Corporate Corruption</a></h3><p class ="related_content" style="margin:0,1.125em,0.625em,0;">In an 1833 article, Andrew Jackson shared his suspicion that the Bank of the United States intervened in local and national elections.</p><h3 style="margin-left:7px;"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html">Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?</a></h3><p class ="related_content" style="margin:0,1.125em,0.625em,0;">In 1907, <em>Post</em> contributors presented different viewpoints on whether President Roosevelt aided a square deal in business operations.</p></div>Those are big questions. The last one is the easiest to answer. Control of government by the richest wouldn’t have bothered the founders at all. It was just what they believed in. John Jay, the first Chief Justice, put it most directly: “The people who own the country ought to govern it.”</p>
<p>Many of the founders, including George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, were themselves among the wealthiest people in the country. They felt their prosperity made them obliged to serve their nation at the highest level. Yes, they declared independence and fought a Revolution to escape the tyranny of English monarchy and might, but they expected to replace aristocracy of birth with aristocracy of accomplishment, rule by elites who had created their wealth and influence, not inherited it. That was why they wrote a Constitution that stated the president was to be elected not by the people but by an elite Electoral College, and the Senate was to be chosen not by the people but by state legislatures. And that was why in most states only men who had money and property were allowed to vote at all.</p>
<p>It didn’t take long for the 99 percent of the day to rebel against that status quo. The notion of true democracy, rule by ordinary people, grew popular in the early 19th century. It was spearheaded by President Andrew Jackson, who hated bankers and banks, especially the national bank that had been founded by Alexander Hamilton. He destroyed the bank, partly to counter the power of the richest Americans. At the same time, a new generation of wealthiest Americans emerged, and they were a breed that had never existed in Europe—industrious, self-made men of humble origins, such as John Jacob Astor, a German immigrant who began working in a menial job for a fur merchant but came to dominate the trade in furs from the West, and Cornelius Vanderbilt, who rose from ferryboat captain to steamboat owner and then railroad baron. In 19th century America, the wealthiest really did have something in common with the common man.</p>
<p>Or at least that was true in the American North. The elite of the South were a breed apart. They grew fantastically rich and powerful from growing rice and cotton with all the hardest labor done by slaves. Seven of the first 12 presidents were from Virginia, the most prosperous part of the South. When the Civil War came, it was a fight not only over slavery but between the power of new Northern industry and urban wealth and the spoils of the Southern slave economy as well.</p>
<p>As extreme as the power of the wealthiest is today, it pales before that of the rich in the pre-Civil War South, for they could own human beings who had no rights whatsoever. Slave owners had such full support of the law that the Constitution originally counted each slave as three-fifths of a man for voting purposes, not so that slaves themselves could vote, but to add to the headcounts on which Congressional districts were based, giving their owners even more political and electoral power than anyone who didn’t keep slaves. Slavery was by far the highest point of the tyranny of the wealthiest in the United States.</p>
<p>But the kind of abuse of power that’s more familiar to us today took off after the Civil War, when four years of bloodshed costing more than a million lives left the South crippled and the North as a new industrial world power. That power corrupted, as it always does. The Gilded Age—which lasted from the end of the Civil War to 1900—was a festival of power grabs among the wealthiest. For instance, to build the Transcontinental Railroad, the owners of the Union Pacific Railroad set up a construction firm called Credit Mobilier to wildly overcharge for the work it did, just so they could bleed their own company and bondholders. Then, to make sure Congress didn’t complain, they gave assorted Congressmen both cash bribes and stock that paid huge dividends. The scam got exposed in 1872. It was estimated to have stolen $42 million in government and bondholder money, and it led to the disgrace of public figures as high up as the vice president, Schuyler Colfax.</p>
<p>By the 1880s the Senate was dominated by millionaires. And by 1892, wealth-fed scandal had become so commonplace that opposition to it gave rise to a new political party, the Populists, whose platform announced, “We meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge of moral, political, and material ruin. Corruption dominates the ballot-box, the Legislatures, the Congress, and touches even the ermine of the bench. … The fruits of the toil of millions are boldly stolen to build up colossal fortunes for a few. … From the same prolific womb of governmental injustice we breed the two great classes—tramps and millionaires.”</p>
<p>When Theodore Roosevelt became president in 1901, he ushered in the Progressive Era­­, one of two major periods in U.S. history when the political tide turned strongly away from the wealthiest—the other was during the presidency of his distant cousin Franklin Roosevelt. Roosevelt railed against what he called “malefactors of great wealth” and the “criminal rich,” and he pushed through reforms like strengthened railroad regulations and the creation of the Department of Labor. A decade later, President Woodrow Wilson cemented Roosevelt’s accomplishments by establishing the federal income tax and the direct election of senators.</p>
<div class="alignright grid_5">
<blockquote>
<h2>We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob.</h2>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p>Though none of that prevented the wild financial bubble fed by coziness between the wealthy and the government in the 1920s. So in the wake of the Great Crash that followed, Franklin Roosevelt took office in 1933 as a rich New Yorker determined to look out for the common man. He wrote to a friend, “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government since the days of Andrew Jackson. … The country is going through a repetition of Jackson’s fight with the Bank of the United States—only on a far bigger and broader basis.” He raised taxes on the rich and used much of the money that came in to put the unemployed poor back to work. In 1936 he wrote: “We know now that Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob. … I should like to have it said of my first Administration that in it, the forces of selfishness and lust for power met their match. I should like to have it said of my second Administration that in it these forces met their master.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/22/archives/post-perspective/americas-wealth-gap.html">America’s Wealth Gap</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/22/archives/post-perspective/americas-wealth-gap.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America&#8217;s Wealth Gap Through the Years</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/wealth-gap.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=wealth-gap</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/wealth-gap.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:00:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Post Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>According to the <em>Post</em> archives,  America has been wrestling with the wealth gap for the last two centuries.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/wealth-gap.html">America&#8217;s Wealth Gap Through the Years</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In &#8220;America&#8217;s Wealth Gap&#8221; (Nov/Dec 2012), writer Frederick Allen asks: &#8220;What is to be done about the yawning difference between the super rich and the rest of us?&#8221;</p>
<p>The <em>Post</em> was wrestling with similar questions in these 19th and 20th century articles from our archives.</p>
<hr />
<div id="attachment_73453" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73361"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/congress-1833-thumbnail.jpg" alt="Address to Congress" title="Address to Congress" width="150" height="150" class="size-full wp-image-73453" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">December 3, 1833</p></div></p>
<h2><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73361">Corporate Corruption, 19th Century Style</a></h2>
<p>President Andrew Jackson harbored a deep-seated distrust of banking and corporate influence. In this 1833 address to Congress, he shared his suspicion that the Bank of the United States intervened in local and national elections.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<hr />
<div id="attachment_74147" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74063"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/roosevelt-thumbnail.jpg" alt="One Year of Roosevelt" title="One Year of Roosevelt" width="150" height="150" class="size-full wp-image-74147" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">October 4, 1902</p></div></p>
<h2><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74063">One Year of Roosevelt</a></h2>
<p>In 1902, reporter William Allen White summarized the first year under the Roosevelt Administration and predicted that Roosevelt&#8217;s politics would not be swayed by the rich.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<hr />
<div id="attachment_73033" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73020"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/swollen-fortune-LP.jpg" alt="Swollen Fortunes" title="Swollen Fortunes" width="150" height="150" class="size-full wp-image-73033" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">December 22, 1906</p></div></p>
<h2><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73020">&#8220;Swollen Fortunes&#8221; in the Early 20th Century</a></h2>
<p>In this 1906 article, author David Graham Phillips defended President Teddy Roosevelt’s attack on the corrupting power of the super rich.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<hr />
<div id="attachment_74177" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74150"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/menace-thumbnail.jpg" alt="Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?" title="Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?" width="150" height="150" class="size-full wp-image-74177" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">November 23, 1907</p></div></p>
<h2><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74150">Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?</a></h2>
<p>In 1907, <em>Post</em> contributors presented different viewpoints on whether President Roosevelt aided a square deal in business operations.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<hr />
<div id="attachment_74207" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 160px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74180"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/roosevelt-period-thumbnail.jpg" alt="The Roosevelt Period" title="The Roosevelt Period" width="150" height="150" class="size-full wp-image-74207" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">April 5, 1919</p></div></p>
<h2><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74180">The Roosevelt Period</a></h2>
<p>In 1919, former U.S. Senator Albert J. Beveridge reported on the economic evolution of the early 20th century.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/wealth-gap.html">America&#8217;s Wealth Gap Through the Years</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/wealth-gap.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Roosevelt Period</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=roosevelt-period</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Albert J. Beveridge</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roosevelt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In 1919, former U.S. Senator Albert J. Beveridge reported on the economic evolution of the early 20th century.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html">The Roosevelt Period</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In 1919, former U.S. Senator Albert J. Beveridge reported on the economic evolution of the early 20th century under the administration of President Roosevelt.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1919-04-05.pdf" target="_blank">Click here</a> to download the full article &#8220;The Roosevelt Period&#8221; (April 5, 1919) by Albert J. Beveridge, or read below. <em>(See also “America’s Wealth Gap” in the Nov/Dec 2012 issue.)</em></p>
<p><center><iframe src="http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1919-04-05-embed.pdf&embedded=true" style="width:400px; height:514px;" frameborder="0" id="embedpdfviewer" name="embedpdfviewer">Your browser should support iFrame to view this PDF document</iframe></center></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html">The Roosevelt Period</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-period.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Swollen Fortunes</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/swollen-fortunes.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=swollen-fortunes</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/swollen-fortunes.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Post Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roosevelt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73020</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In a 1906 article, author David Graham Phillips defended President Teddy Roosevelt’s attack on the corrupting power of the super rich.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/swollen-fortunes.html">Swollen Fortunes</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a 1906 article for the <em>Post</em>, author David Graham Phillips defended President Teddy Roosevelt&#8217;s attack on the corrupting power of the super rich. Note the author&#8217;s reference to the wealthy &#8220;1 percent,&#8221; a phrase that still resonates a century later.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/swollen-fortune.pdf" target="_blank">Click here</a> to download &#8220;Swollen Fortunes&#8221; (December 22, 1906), or read below. <em>(See also &#8220;America&#8217;s Wealth Gap&#8221; in the Nov/Dec 2012 issue.)</em></p>
<p><center><iframe src="http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/swollen-fortune.pdf&embedded=true" style="width:400px; height:514px;" frameborder="0" id="embedpdfviewer" name="embedpdfviewer">Your browser should support iFrame to view this PDF document</iframe></center></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/swollen-fortunes.html">Swollen Fortunes</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/swollen-fortunes.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>One Year of Roosevelt</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=roosevelt</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:00:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>William Allen White</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[theodore roosevelt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74063</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In 1902, <em>Post</em> reporter William Allen White summarized the first year under the Roosevelt Administration. </p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html">One Year of Roosevelt</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In 1902, reporter William Allen White summarized the first year under the Roosevelt Administration and predicted that Roosevelt&#8217;s politics would not be swayed by the rich: &#8220;When there is a tariff revision, which is inevitable in a few years, if Roosevelt is President, those concerns that contribute to the campaign fund will stand no better show than those who contributed nothing.&#8221;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1902-10-4.pdf" target="_blank">Click here</a> to download the full article &#8220;One Year of Roosevelt&#8221; (October 4, 1902) by William Allen White, or read below. <em>(See also “America’s Wealth Gap” in the Nov/Dec 2012 issue.)</em></p>
<p><center><iframe src="http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1902-10-4-embed.pdf&embedded=true" style="width:400px; height:514px;" frameborder="0" id="embedpdfviewer" name="embedpdfviewer">Your browser should support iFrame to view this PDF document</iframe></center></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html">One Year of Roosevelt</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Corporate Corruption</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=address-congress</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Post Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Jackson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congress]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=73361</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In an 1833 article, Andrew Jackson shared his suspicion that the Bank of the United States intervened in local and national elections.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html">Corporate Corruption</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>President Andrew Jackson harbored a deep-seated distrust of banking and corporate influence. In an address to the Congress published in the <em>Post</em>, he shares his suspicion that the Bank of the United States intervened in local and national elections. <em>(See also &#8220;America&#8217;s Wealth Gap&#8221; in the Nov/Dec 2012 issue.)</em></p>
<p><div class="recipe"></p>
<h2>Fifth Annual Message to Congress</h2>
<p><strong><em>December 3, 1833</em></strong><br />
<em>Fellow Citizens of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/address-to-congress.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1833_12_07.jpg" alt="Fifth Annual Message to Congress, 1833" title="Fifth Annual Message to Congress, 1833" width="350" class="alignright size-full wp-image-73382" /></a></p>
<p>On your assembling to perform the high trusts which the people of the United States have confided to you, of legislating for their common welfare, it gives me pleasure to congratulate you upon the happy condition of our beloved country. By the favor of Divine Providence health is again restored to us, peace reigns within our borders, abundance crowns the labors of our fields, commerce and domestic industry flourish and increase, and individual happiness rewards the private virtue and enterprise of our citizens.</p>
<p>Our condition abroad is no less honorable than it is prosperous at home. Seeking nothing that is not right and determined to submit to nothing that is wrong, but desiring honest friendships and liberal intercourse with all nations, the United States have gained throughout the world the confidence and respect which are due to a policy so just and so congenial to the character of the American people and to the spirit of their institutions.</p>
<p>In bringing to your notice the particular state of our foreign affairs, it affords me high gratification to inform you that they are in a condition which promises the continuance of friendship with all nations.</p>
<p>With Great Britain the interesting question of our North East boundary remains still undecided. A negotiation, however, upon that subject has been renewed since the close of the last Congress, and a proposition has been submitted to the British Government with the view of establishing, in conformity with the resolution of the Senate, the line designated by the treaty of 1783. Though no definitive answer has been received, it may be daily looked for, and I entertain a hope that the overture may ultimately lead to a satisfactory adjustment of this important matter.</p>
<p>I have the satisfaction to inform you that a negotiation which, by desire of the House of Representatives, was opened some years ago with the British Government, for the erection of light houses on the Bahamas, has been successful. Those works, when completed, together with those which the United States have constructed on the western side of the Gulf of Florida, will contribute essentially to the safety of navigation in that sea. This joint participation in establishments interesting to humanity and beneficial to commerce is worthy of two enlightened nations, and indicates feelings which can not fail to have a happy influence upon their political relations. It is gratifying to the friends of both to perceive that the intercourse between the two people is becoming daily more extensive, and that sentiments of mutual good will have grown up befitting their common origin and justifying the hope that by wise counsels on each side not only unsettled questions may be satisfactorily terminated, but new causes of misunderstanding prevented.</p>
<p>Not withstanding that I continue to receive the most amicable assurances from the Government of France, and that in all other respects the most friendly relations exist between the United States and that Government, it is to be regretted that the stipulations of the convention concluded on 1831-07-04 remain in some important parts unfulfilled.</p>
<p>By the second article of that convention it was stipulated that the sum payable to the United States should be paid at Paris, in 6 annual installments, into the hands of such person or persons as should be authorized by the Government of the United States to receive it, and by the same article the first installment was payable on 1833-02-02. By the act of Congress of 1832-07-13 it was made the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury to cause the several installments, with the interest thereon, to be received from the French Government and transferred to the United States in such manner as he may deem best; and by the same act of Congress the stipulations on the part of the United States in the convention were in all respects fulfilled. Not doubting that a treaty thus made and ratified by the two Governments, and faithfully executed by the United States, would be promptly complied with by the other party, and desiring to avoid the risk and expense of intermediate agencies, the Secretary of the Treasury deemed it advisable to receive and transfer the first installment by means of a draft upon the French minister of finance.</p>
<p>A draft for this purpose was accordingly drawn in favor of the cashier of the Bank of the United States for the amount accruing to the United States out of the first installment, and the interest payable with it. This bill was not drawn at Washington until 5 days after the installment was payable at Paris, and was accompanied by a special authority from the President authorizing the cashier or his assigns to receive the amount. The mode thus adopted of receiving the installment was officially made known to the French Government by the American chargé d&#8217;affaires at Paris, pursuant to instructions from the Department of State. The bill, however, though not presented for payment until 1833-03-23, was not paid, and for the reason assigned by the French minister of finance that no appropriation had been made by the French Chambers. It is not known to me that up to that period any appropriation had been required of the Chambers, and although a communication was subsequently made to the Chambers by direction of the King, recommending that the necessary provision should be made for carrying the convention into effect, it was at an advanced period of the session, and the subject was finally postponed until the next meeting of the Chambers.</p>
<p>Not withstanding it has been supposed by the French ministry that the financial stipulations of the treaty can not be carried into effect without an appropriation by the Chambers, it appears to me to be not only consistent with the character of France, but due to the character of both Governments, as well as to the rights of our citizens, to treat the convention, made and ratified in proper form, as pledging the good faith of the French Government for its execution, and as imposing upon each department an obligation to fulfill it; and I have received assurances through our chargé d&#8217;affaires at Paris and the French minister plenipotentiary at Washington, and more recently through the minister of the United States at Paris, that the delay has not proceeded from any indisposition on the part of the King and his ministers to fulfill their treaty, and that measures will be presented at the next meeting of the Chambers, and with a reasonable hope of success, to obtain the necessary appropriation.</p>
<p>It is necessary to state, however, that the documents, except certain lists of vessels captured, condemned, or burnt at sea, proper to facilitate the examination and liquidation of the reclamations comprised in the stipulations of the convention, and which by the 6th article France engaged to communicate to the United States by the intermediary of the legation, though repeatedly applied for by the American chargé d&#8217;affaires under instructions from this Government, have not yet been communicated; and this delay, it is apprehended, will necessarily prevent the completion of the duties assigned to the commissioners within the time at present prescribed by law.</p>
<p>The reasons for delaying to communicate these documents have not been explicitly stated, and this is the more to be regretted as it is not understood that the interposition of the Chambers is in any manner required for the delivery of those papers.</p>
<p>Under these circumstances, in a case so important to the interests of our citizens and to the character of our country, and under disappointments so unexpected, I deemed it my duty, however I might respect the general assurances to which I have adverted, no longer to delay the appointment of a minister plenipotentiary to Paris, but to dispatch him in season to communicate the result of his application to the French Government at an early period of your session. I accordingly appointed a distinguished citizen for this purpose, who proceeded on his mission in August last and was presented to the King early in the month of October. He is particularly instructed as to all matters connected with the present posture of affairs, and I indulge the hope that with the representations he is instructed to make, and from the disposition manifested by the King and his ministers in their recent assurances to our minister at Paris, the subject will be early considered, and satisfactorily disposed of at the next meeting of the Chambers.</p>
<p>As this subject involves important interests and has attracted a considerable share of the public attention, I have deemed it proper to make this explicit statement of its actual condition, and should I be disappointed in the hope now entertained the subject will be again brought to the notice of Congress in such manner as the occasion may require.</p>
<p>The friendly relations which have always been maintained between the United States and Russia have been further extended and strengthened by the treaty of navigation and commerce concluded on 1832-12-06, and sanctioned by the Senate before the close of its last session. The ratifications having been since exchanged, the liberal provisions of the treaty are now in full force, and under the encouragement which they have secured a flourishing and increasing commerce, yielding its benefits to the enterprise of both nations, affords to each the just recompense of wise measures, and adds new motives for that mutual friendship which the two countries have hitherto cherished toward each other.</p>
<p>It affords me peculiar satisfaction to state that the Government of Spain has at length yielded to the justice of the claims which have been so long urged in behalf of our citizens, and has expressed a willingness to provide an indemnification as soon as the proper amount can be agreed upon. Upon this latter point it is probable an understanding had taken place between the minister of the United States and the Spanish Government before the decease of the late King of Spain; and, unless that event may have delayed its completion, there is reason to hope that it may be in my power to announce to you early in your present session the conclusion of a convention upon terms not less favorable than those entered into for similar objects with other nations. That act of justice would well accord with the character of Spain, and is due to the United States from their ancient friend. It could not fail to strengthen the sentiments of amity and good will between the two nations which it is so much the wish of the United States to cherish and so truly the interest of both to maintain.</p>
<p>By the first section of an act of Congress passed on 1832-07-13 the tonnage duty on Spanish ships arriving from the ports of Spain previous to 1817-10-20, being 5 cents per ton. That act was intended to give effect on our side to an arrangement made with the Spanish Government by which discriminating duties of tonnage were to be abolished in the ports of the United States and Spain on he vessels of the two nations. Pursuant to that arrangement, which was carried into effect on the part of Spain on 1832-05-20, by a royal order dated 1832-04-29, American vessels in the ports of Spain have paid 5 cents per ton, which rate of duty is also paid in those ports by Spanish ships; but as American vessels pay no tonnage duty in the ports of the United States, the duty of 5 cents payable in our ports by Spanish vessels under the act above mentioned is really a discriminating duty, operating to the disadvantage of Spain.</p>
<p>Though no complaint has yet been made on the part of Spain, we are not the less bound by the obligations of good faith to remove the discrimination, and I recommend that the act be amended accordingly. As the royal order above alluded to includes the ports of the Balearic and Canary islands as well as those of Spain, it would seem that the provisions of the act of Congress should be equally extensive, and that for the repayments of such duties as may have been improperly received an addition should be made to the sum appropriated at the last session of Congress for refunding discriminating duties.</p>
<p>As the arrangement referred to, however, did not embrace the islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico, discriminating duties to the prejudice of American shipping continue to be levied there. From the extent of the commerce carried on between the United States and those islands, particularly the former, this discrimination causes serious injury to one of those great national interests which it has been considered an essential part of our policy to cherish, and has given rise to complaints on the part of our merchants. Under instructions given to our minister at Madrid, earnest representations have been made by him to the Spanish Government upon this subject, and there is reason to expect, from the friendly disposition which is entertained toward this country, that a beneficial change will be produced.</p>
<p>The disadvantage, however, to which our shipping is subjected by the operation of these discriminating duties requires that they be met by suitable countervailing duties during your present session, power being at the same time vested in the President to modify or discontinue them as the discriminating duties on American vessels or their cargoes may be modified or discontinued at those islands. Intimations have been given to the Spanish Government that the United States may be obliged to resort to such measures as are of necessary self-defense, and there is no reason to apprehend that it would be unfavorably received. The proposed proceeding if adopted would not be permitted, however, in any degree to induce a relaxation in the efforts of our minister to effect a repeal of this irregularity by friendly negotiation, and it might serve to give force to his representations by showing the dangers to which that valuable trade is exposed by the obstructions and burdens which a system of discriminating and countervailing duties necessarily produces.</p>
<p>The selection and preparation of the Florida archives for the purpose of being delivered over to the United States, in conformity with the royal order as mentioned in my last annual message, though in progress, has not yet been completed. This delay has been produced partly by causes which were unavoidable, particularly the prevalence of the cholera at Havana; but measures have been taken which it is believed will expedite the delivery of those important records.</p>
<p>Congress were informed at the opening of the last session that &#8220;owing, as was alleged, to embarrassments in the finances of Portugal, consequent upon the civil war in which that nation was engaged&#8221;, payment had been made of only one installment of the amount which the Portuguese Government had stipulated to pay for indemnifying our citizens for property illegally captured in the blockade of Terceira. Since that time a postponement for two years, with interest, of the 2 remaining installments was requested by the Portuguese Government, and as a consideration it offered to stipulate that rice of the United States should be admitted into Portugal at the same duties as Brazilian rice. Being satisfied that no better arrangement could be made, my consent was given, and a royal order of the King of Portugal was accordingly issued on 1833-02-04 for the reduction of the duty on rice of the United States. It would give me great pleasure if in speaking of that country, in whose prosperity the United States are so much interested, and with whom a long- subsisting, extensive, and mutually advantageous commercial intercourse has strengthened the relation of friendship, I could announce to you the restoration of its internal tranquillity.</p>
<p>Subsequently to the commencement of the last session of Congress the final installment payable by Denmark under the convention of 1830-03-28 was received. The commissioners for examining the claims have since terminated their labors, and their awards have been paid at the Treasury as they have been called for. The justice rendered to our citizens by that Government is thus completed, and a pledge is thereby afforded for the maintenance of that friendly intercourse becoming the relations that the two nations mutually bear to each other.</p>
<p>It is satisfactory to inform you that the Danish Government have recently issued an ordinance by which the commerce with the island of St. Croix is placed on a more liberal footing than heretofore. This change can not fail to prove beneficial to the trade between the United States and that colony, and the advantages likely to flow from it may lead to greater relaxations in the colonial systems of other nations.</p>
<p>The ratifications of the convention with the King of the two Sicilies have been duly exchanged, and the commissioners appointed for examining the claims under it have entered upon the duties assigned to them by law. The friendship that the interests of the two nations require of them being now established, it may be hoped that each will enjoy the benefits which a liberal commerce should yield to both.</p>
<p>A treaty of amity and commerce between the United States and Belgium was concluded during the last winter and received the sanction of the Senate, but the exchange of the ratifications has been hitherto delayed, in consequence, in the first instance, of some delay in the reception of the treaty at Brussels, and, subsequently, of the absence of the Belgian minister of foreign affairs at the important conferences in which his Government is engaged at London. That treaty does but embody those enlarged principles of friendly policy which it is sincerely hoped will always regulate the conduct of the two nations having such strong motives to maintain amicable relations toward each other and so sincerely desirous to cherish them.</p>
<p>With all the other European powers with whom the United States have formed diplomatic relations and with the Sublime Porte the best understanding prevails. From all I continue to receive assurances of good will toward the United States &#8212; assurances which it gives me no less pleasure to reciprocate than to receive. With all, the engagements which have been entered into are fulfilled with good faith on both sides. Measures have also been taken to enlarge our friendly relations and extend our commercial intercourse with other States. The system we have pursued of aiming at no exclusive advantages, of dealing with all on terms of fair and equal reciprocity, and of adhering scrupulously to all our engagements is well calculated to give success to efforts intended to be mutually beneficial.</p>
<p>The wars of which the southern part of this continent was so long the theater, and which were carried on either by the mother country against the States which had formerly been her colonies or by the States against each other, having terminated, and their civil dissensions having so far subsided as with few exceptions no longer to disturb the public tranquillity, it is earnestly hoped those States will be able to employ themselves without interruption in perfecting their institutions, cultivating the arts of peace, and promoting by wise councils and able exertions the public and private prosperity which their patriotic struggles so well entitle them to enjoy.</p>
<p>With those States our relations have under-gone but little change during the present year. No reunion having yet taken place between the States which composed the Republic of Colombia, our chargé d&#8217;affaires at Bogota has been accredited to the Government of New Grenada, and we have, therefore, no diplomatic relations with Venezuela and Equator, except as they may be included in those heretofore formed with the Colombian Republic.</p>
<p>It is understood that representatives from the three stattes were about to assemble at Bogota to confer on the subject of their mutual interests, particularly that of their union, and if the result should render it necessary, measures will be taken on our part to preserve with each that friendship and those liberal commercial connections which it has been the constant desire of the United States to cultivate with their sister Republics of this hemisphere. Until the important question of reunion shall be settled, however, the different matters which have been under discussion between the United States and the Republic of Colombia, or either of the States which composed it, are not likely to be brought to a satisfactory issue.</p>
<p>In consequence of the illness of the chargé d&#8217;affaires appointed to Central America at the last session of Congress, he was prevented from proceeding on his mission until the month of October. It is hoped, however, that he is by this time at his post, and that the official intercourse, unfortunately so long interrupted, has been thus renewed on the part of the two nations so amicably and advantageously connected by engagements founded on the most enlarged principles of commercial reciprocity.</p>
<p>It is gratifying to state that since my last annual message some of the most important claims of our fellow citizens upon the Government of Brazil have been satisfactorily adjusted, and a reliance is placed on the friendly dispositions manifested by it that justice will also be done in others. No new causes of complaint have arisen, and the trade between the two countries flourishes under the encouragement secured to it by the liberal provisions of the treaty.</p>
<p>It is cause of regret that, owing, probably, to the civil dissensions which have occupied the attention of the Mexican Government, the time fixed by the treaty of limits with the United States for the meeting of the commissioners to define the boundaries between the two nations has been suffered to expire without the appointment of any commissioners on the part of that Government. While the true boundary remains in doubt by either party it is difficult to give effect to those measures which are necessary to the protection and quiet of our numerous citizens residing near that frontier. The subject is one of great solicitude to the United States, and will not fail to receive my earnest attention.</p>
<p>The treaty concluded with Chili and approved by the Senate at its last session was also ratified by the Chilian Government, but with certain additional and explanatory articles of a nature to have required it to be again submitted to the Senate. The time limited for the exchange of the ratification, however, having since expired, the action of both Governments on the treaty will again become necessary.</p>
<p>The negotiations commenced with the Argentine Republic relative to the outrages committed on our vessels engaged in the fisheries at the Falkland Islands by persons acting under the color of its authority, as well as the other matters in controversy between the two Governments, have been suspended by the departure of the chargé d&#8217;affaires of the United States from Buenos Ayres. It is understood, however, that a minister was subsequently appointed by that Government to renew the negotiation in the United States, but though daily expected he has not yet arrived in this country.</p>
<p>With Peru no treaty has yet been formed, and with Bolivia no diplomatic intercourse has yet been established. It will be my endeavor to encourage those sentiments of amity and that liberal commerce which belong to the relations in which all the independent States of this continent stand toward each other.</p>
<p>I deem it proper to recommend to your notice the revision of our consular system. This has become an important branch of the public service, in as much as it is intimately connected with the preservation of our national character abroad, with the interest of our citizens in foreign countries, with the regulation and care of our commerce, and with the protection of our sea men. At the close of the last session of Congress I communicated a report from the Secretary of State upon the subject, to which I now refer, as containing information which may be useful in any inquiries that Congress may see fit to institute with a view to a salutary reform of the system.</p>
<p>It gives me great pleasure to congratulate you upon the prosperous condition of the finances of the country, as will appear from the report which the Secretary of the Treasury will in due time lay before you. The receipts into the Treasury during the present year will amount to more than $32,000,000. The revenue derived from customs will, it is believed, be more than $28,000,000, and the public lands will yield about $3,0900,000. The expenditures within the year for all objects, including $2,572,240.99 on account of the public debt, will not amount to $25,000,000, and a large balance will remain in the Treasury after satisfying all the appropriations chargeable on the revenue for the present year.</p>
<p>The measures taken by the Secretary of the Treasury will probably enable to pay off in the course of the present year the residue of the exchanged 4.5% stock, redeemable on 1834-01-01. It has therefore been included in the estimated expenditures of this year, and forms a part of the sum above stated to have been paid on account of the public debt. The payment of this stock will reduce the whole debt of the United States, funded and unfunded, to the sum of $4,760,082.08, and as provision has already been made for the 4.5% stocks above mentioned, and charged in the expenses of the present year, the sum last stated is all that now remains of the national debt; and the revenue of the coming year, together with the balance now in the Treasury, will be sufficient to discharge it, after meeting the current expenses of the Government. Under the power given to the commissioners of the sinking fund, it will, I have no doubt, be purchased on favorable terms within the year.</p>
<p>From this view of the state of the finances and the public engagements yet to be fulfilled you will perceive that if Providence permits me to meet you at another session I shall have the high gratification of announcing to you that the national debt is extinguished. I can not refrain from expressing the pleasure I feel at the near approach of that desirable event. The short period of time within which the public debt will have been discharged is strong evidence of the abundant resources of the country and of the prudence and economy with which the Government has heretofore been administered. We have waged two wars since we became a nation, with one of the most powerful kingdoms in the world, both of them undertaken in defense of our dearest rights, been successfully prosecuted and honorably terminated; and many of those who partook in the first struggle as well as in the second will have lived to see the last item of the debt incurred in these necessary but expensive conflicts faithfully and honestly discharged. And we shall have the proud satisfaction of bequeathing to the public servants who follow us in the administration of the Government the rare blessing of a revenue sufficiently abundant, raised without injustice or oppression to our citizens, and unencumbered with any burdens but what they themselves shall think proper to impose upon it.</p>
<p>The flourishing state of the finances ought not, however, to encourage us to indulge in a lavish expenditure of the public treasure. The receipts of the present year do not furnish the test by which we are to estimate the income of the next. The changes made in our revenue system by the acts of Congress of 1832 and 1833, and more especially by the former, have swelled the receipts of the present year far beyond the amount to be expected in future years upon the reduced tariff of duties. The shortened credits on revenue bonds and the cash duties on woolens which were introduced by the act of 1832, and took effect on 1832-03-04, have brought large sums into the Treasury in 1833, which, according to the credits formerly given, would not have been payable until 1834, and would have formed a part of the income of that year. These causes would of themselves produce a great diminution of the receipts in the year 1834 as compared with the present one, and they will be still more diminished by the reduced rates of duties which take place on 1834-01-01 on some of the most important and productive articles.</p>
<p>Upon the best estimates that can be made the receipts of the next year, with the aid of the unappropriated amount now in the Treasury, will not be much more than sufficient to meet the expenses of the year and pay the small remnant of the national debt which yet remains unsatisfied. I can not, therefore, recommend to you any alteration in the present tariff of duties. The rate as now fixed by law on the various articles was adopted at the last session of Congress, as a matter of compromise, with unusual unanimity, and unless it is found to produce more than the necessities of the Government call for there would seem to be no reason at this time to justify a change.</p>
<p>But while I forbear to recommend any further reduction of the duties beyond that already provided for by the existing laws, I must earnestly and respectfully press upon Congress the importance of abstaining from all appropriations which are not absolutely required for the public interest and authorized by the powers clearly delegated to the United States. We are beginning a new era in our Government. The national debt, which has so long been a burden on the Treasury, will be finally discharged in the course of the ensuing year. No more memory will afterwards be needed than what may be necessary to meet the ordinary expenses of the Government. Now, then, is the proper moment to fix our system of expenditure on firm and durable principles, and I can not too strongly urge the necessity of a rigid economy and an inflexible determination not to enlarge the income beyond the real necessities of the Government and not to increase the wants of the Government by unnecessary and profuse expenditures.</p>
<p>If a contrary course should be pursued, it may happen that the revenue of 1834 will fall short of the demands upon it, and after reducing the tariff in order to lighten the burdens of the people, and providing for a still further reduction to take effect hereafter, it would be much to be deplored if at the end of another year we should find ourselves obliged to retrace our steps and impose additional taxes to meet unnecessary expenditures.</p>
<p>It is my duty on this occasion to call your attention to the destruction of the public building occupied by the Treasury Department, which happened since the last adjournment of Congress. A thorough inquiry into the causes of this loss was directed and made at the time, the result of which will be duly communicated to you. I take pleasure, however, in stating here that by the laudable exertions of the officers of the Department and many of the citizens of the District but few papers were lost, and none that will materially affect the public interest.</p>
<p>The public convenience requires that another building should be erected as soon as practicable, and in providing for it it will be advisable to enlarge in some manner the accommodations for the public officers of the several Departments, and to authorize the erection of suitable depositories for the safe-keeping of the public documents and records.</p>
<p>Since the last adjournment of Congress the Secretary of the Treasury has directed the money of the United States to be deposited in certain State banks designated by him, and he will immediately lay before you his reasons for this direction. I concur with him entirely in the view he has taken on the subject, and some months before the removal I urged upon the Department the propriety of taking that step. The near approach of the day on which the charger will expire, as well as the conduct of the bank, appeared to me to call for this measure upon the high considerations of public interest and public duty. The extent of its misconduct, however, although known to be great, was not at that time fully developed by proof. It was not until late in the month of August that I received from the Government directors an official report establishing beyond question that this great and powerful institution had been actively engaged in attempting to influence the elections of the public officers by means of its money, and that, in violation of the express provisions of its charter, it had by a formal resolution placed its funds at the disposition of its president to be employed in sustaining the political power of the bank. A copy of this resolution is contained in the report of the Government directors before referred to, and how ever the object may be disguised by cautious language, no one can doubt that this money was in truth intended for electioneering purposes, and the particular uses to which it was proved to have been applied abundantly show that it was so understood. Not only was the evidence complete as to the past application of the money and power of the bank to electioneering purposes, but that the resolution of the board of directors authorized the same course to be pursued in future.</p>
<p>It being thus established by unquestionable proof that the Bank of the United States was converted into a permanent electioneering engine, it appeared to me that the path of duty which the executive department of the Government ought to pursue was not doubtful. As by the terms of the bank charter no officer but the Secretary of the Treasury could remove the deposits, it seemed to me that this authority ought to be at once exerted to deprive that great corporation of the support and countenance of the Government in such an use of its and such an exertion of its power. In this point of the case the question is distinctly presented whether the people of the United States are to govern through representatives chosen by their unbiased suffrages or whether the money and power of a great corporation are to be secretly exerted to influence their judgment and control their decisions. It must now be determined whether the bank is to have its candidates for all offices in the country, from the highest to the lowest, or whether candidates on both sides of political questions shall be brought forward as heretofore and supported by the usual means.</p>
<p>At this time the efforts of the bank to control public opinion, through the distresses of some and the fears of others, are equally apparent, and, if possible, more objectionable. By a curtailment of its accommodations more rapid than any emergency requires, and even while it retains specie to an almost unprecedented amount in its vaults, it is attempting to produce great embarrassment in one portion of the community, while through presses known to have been sustained by its money it attempts by unfounded alarms to create a panic in all.</p>
<p>These are the means by which it seems to expect that it can force a restoration of the deposits, and as a necessary consequence extort from Congress a renewal of its charter. I am happy to know that through the good sense of our people the effort to get up a panic has hitherto failed, and that through the increased accommodations which the State banks have been enabled to afford, no public distress has followed the exertions of the bank, and it can not be doubted that the exercise of its power and the expenditure of its money, as well as its efforts to spread groundless alarm, will be met and rebuked as they deserve. In my own sphere of duty I should feel myself called on by the facts disclosed to order a scire facias against the bank, with a view to put an end to the chartered rights it has so palpably violated, were it not that the charter itself will expire as soon as a decision would probably be obtained from the court of last resort.</p>
<p>I called the attention of Congress to this subject in my last annual message, and informed them that such measures as were within the reach of the Secretary of the Treasury had been taken to enable him to judge whether the public deposits in the Bank of the United States were entirely safe; but that as his single powers might be inadequate to the object, I recommended the subject to Congress as worthy of their serious investigation, declaring it as my opinion that an inquiry into the transactions of that institution, embracing the branches as well as the principal bank, was called for by the credit which was given throughout the country to many serious charges impeaching their character, and which, if true, might justly excite the apprehension that they were no longer a safe depository for the public money. The extent to which the examination thus recommended was gone into is spread upon your journals, and is too well known to require to be stated. Such as was made resulted in a report from a majority of the Committee of Ways and Means touching certain specified points only, concluding with a resolution that the Government deposits might safely be continued in the Bank of the United States. This resolution was adopted at the close of the session by the vote of a majority of the House of Representatives.</p>
<p>Although I may not always be able to concur in the views of the public interest or the duties of its agents which may be taken by the other departments of the Government or either of its branches, I am, not withstanding, wholly incapable of receiving otherwise than with the most sincere respect all opinions or suggestions proceeding from such a source, and in respect to none am I more inclined to do so than to the House of Representatives. But it will be seen from the brief views at this time taken of the subject by myself, as well as the more ample ones presented by the Secretary of the Treasury, that the change in the deposits which has been ordered has been deemed to be called for by considerations which are not affected by the proceedings referred to, and which, if correctly viewed by that Department, rendered its act a matter of imperious duty.</p>
<p>Coming as you do, for the most part, immediately from the people and the States by election, and possessing the fullest opportunity to know their sentiments, the present Congress will be sincerely solicitous to carry into full and fair effect the will of their constituents in regard to this institution. It will be for those in whose behalf we all act to decide whether the executive department of the Government, in the steps which it has taken on this subject, has been found in the line of its duty.</p>
<p>The accompanying report of the Secretary of War, with the documents annexed to it, exhibits the operations of the War Department for the past year and the condition of the various subjects intrusted to its administration.</p>
<p>It will be seen from them that the Army maintains the character it has heretofore acquired for efficiency and military knowledge. Nothing has occurred since your last session to require its services beyond the ordinary routine duties which upon the sea-board and the in-land frontier devolve upon it in a time of peace. The system so wisely adopted and so long pursued of constructing fortifications at exposed points and of preparing and collecting the supplies necessary for the military defense of the country, and thus providently furnishing in peace the means of defense in war, has been continued with the usual results. I recommend to your consideration the various subjects suggested in the report of the Secretary of War. Their adoption would promote the public service and meliorate the condition of the Army.</p>
<p>Our relations with the various Indian tribes have been undisturbed since the termination of the difficulties growing out of the hostile aggressions of the Sac and Fox Indians. Several treaties have been formed for the relinquishment of territory to the United States and for the migration of the occupants of the region assigned for their residence West of the Mississippi. Should these treaties be ratified by the Senate, provision will have been made for the removal of almost all the tribes remaining E of that river and for the termination of many difficult and embarrassing questions arising out of their anomalous political condition.</p>
<p>It is to be hoped that those portions of two of the Southern tribes, which in that event will present the only remaining difficulties, will realize the necessity of emigration, and will speedily resort to it. My original convictions upon this subject have been confirmed by the course of events for several years, and experience is every day adding to their strength. That those tribes can not exist surrounded by our settlements and in continual contact with our citizens is certain. They have neither the intelligence, the industry, the moral habits, nor the desire of improvement which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of another and a superior race, and without appreciating the causes of their inferiority or seeking to control them, they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and ere long disappear.</p>
<p>Such has been their fate heretofore, and if it is to be averted &#8212; and it is &#8212; it can only be done by a general removal beyond our boundary and by the reorganization of their political system upon principles adapted to the new relations in which they will be placed. The experiment which has been recently made has so far proved successful. The emigrants generally are represented to be prosperous and contented, the country suitable to their wants and habits, and the essential articles of subsistence easily procured. When the report of the commissioners now engaged in investigating the condition and prospects of these Indians and in devising a plan for their intercourse and government is received, I trust ample means of information will be in possession of the Government for adjusting all the unsettled questions connected with this interesting subject.</p>
<p>The operations of the Navy during the year and its present condition are fully exhibited in the annual report from the Navy Department.</p>
<p>Suggestions are made by the Secretary of various improvements, which deserve careful consideration, and most of which, if adopted, bid fair to promote the efficiency of this important branch of the public service. Among these are the new organization of the Navy Board, the revision of the pay to officers, and a change in the period of time or in the manner of making the annual appropriations, to which I beg leave to call your particular attention.</p>
<p>The views which are presented on almost every portion of our naval concerns, and especially on the amount of force and the number of officers, and the general course of policy appropriate in the present state of our country for securing the great and useful purposes of naval protection in peace and due preparation for the contingencies of war, meet with my entire approbation.</p>
<p>It will be perceived from the report referred to that the fiscal concerns of the establishment are in an excellent condition, and it is hoped that Congress may feel disposed to make promptly every suitable provision desired either for preserving or improving the system.</p>
<p>The general Post Office Department has continued, upon the strength of its own resources, to facilitate the means of communication between the various portions of the Union with increased activity. The method, however, in which the accounts of the transportation of the mail have always been kept appears to have presented an imperfect view of its expenses. It has recently been discovered that from the earliest records of the Department the annual statements have been calculated to exhibit an amount considerably short of the actual expense incurred for that service. These illusory statements, together with the expense of carrying into effect the law of the last session of Congress establishing new mail routes, and a disposition on the part of the head of the Department to gratify the wishes of the public in the extension of mail facilities, have induced him to incur responsibilities for their improvement beyond what the current resources of the Department would sustain. As soon as he had discovered the imperfection of the method he caused an investigation to be made of its results and applied the proper remedy to correct the evil. It became necessary for him to withdraw some of the improvements which he had made to bring the expenses of the Department within its own resources. These expenses were incurred for the public good, and the public have enjoyed their benefit. They are now but partially suspended, and that where they may be discontinued with the least inconvenience to the country.</p>
<p>The progressive increase in the income from postages has equaled the highest expectations, and it affords demonstrative evidence of the growing importance and great utility of this Department. The details are exhibited in the accompanying report of the PostMaster General.</p>
<p>The many distressing accidents which have of late occurred in that portion of our navigation carried on by the use of steam power deserve the immediate and unremitting attention of the constituted authorities of the country. The fact that the number of those fatal disasters is constantly increasing, not withstanding the great improvements which are every where made in the machinery employed and in the rapid advances which have made in that branch of science, shows very clearly that they are in a great degree the result of criminal negligence on the part of those by whom the vessels are navigated and to whose care and attention the lives and property of our citizens are so extensively intrusted.</p>
<p>That these evils may be greatly lessened, if not substantially removed, by means of precautionary and penal legislation seems to be highly probably. So far, therefore, as the subject can be regarded as within the constitutional purview of Congress I earnestly recommend it to your prompt and serious consideration.</p>
<p>I would also call your attention to the views I have heretofore expressed of the propriety of amending the Constitution in relation to the mode of electing the President and the Vice-President of the United States. Regarding it as all important to the future quiet and harmony of the people that every intermediate agency in the election of these officers should be removed and that their eligibility should be limited to one term of either 4 or 6 years, I can not too earnestly invite your consideration of the subject.</p>
<p>Trusting that your deliberations on all the topics of general interest to which I have adverted, and such others as your more extensive knowledge of the wants of our beloved country may suggest, may be crowned with success, I tender you in conclusion the cooperation which it may be in my power to afford them. <em>—Andrew Jackson</em></p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html">Corporate Corruption</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/address-congress.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=roosevelt-menace-business</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2012 11:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Post Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[roosevelt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=74150</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>In 1907, <em>Post</em> contributors presented different viewpoints on whether President Roosevelt aided a square deal in business operations.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html">Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In 1907, American financiers and businessmen offer yes and no arguments to the question, &#8220;Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?&#8221; in the pages of <em>The Saturday Evening Post</em>.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1907-11023.pdf" target="_blank">Click here</a> to download the entire article &#8220;Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?&#8221; (November 23, 1907), or read below.</p>
<p><center><iframe src="http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/1907-11-23-embed.pdf&embedded=true" style="width:400px; height:514px;" frameborder="0" id="embedpdfviewer" name="embedpdfviewer">Your browser should support iFrame to view this PDF document</iframe></center></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html">Is Roosevelt a Menace to Business?</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/10/17/archives/roosevelt-menace-business.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Classic Covers: Election</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=election-covers</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2012 12:00:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diana Denny</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Art & Artists]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Art & Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[john falter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Norman Rockwell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political campaigns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[post covers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[presidential elections]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=70821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>It is said that politics makes strange bedfellows. Perhaps it does, but over the years, it has also made for great <em>Post</em> covers!
</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html">Classic Covers: Election</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div class="recipe"><h2><em>Republican Convention</em> </h2><br />
 <div id="attachment_70868" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 385px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/attachment/republican-convention-06-19-1948-john-falter" rel="attachment wp-att-70868"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Republican-Convention-06-19-1948-John-Falter-400x514.jpg" alt="Republican Convention by John Falter from June 19, 1948" title="Republican-Convention-06-19-1948-John-Falter" width="375" height="482" class="size-medium wp-image-70868" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5><em>Republican Convention</em><br /> by John Falter<br /> from June 19, 1948</h5>
<p></p></div></p>
<p>The delegates are ready in this 1948 cover by artist John Falter. If you’re tying to make out the candidate’s face on those signs, save yourself the eyestrain; the image is purposely vague because &#8230; it wasn’t decided yet! And if you’re an aficionado of <em>Post</em> literature from this era, note the distinguished white-haired gentleman in the lower right-hand corner. Writer Clarence Budington Kelland was a long-time party leader.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><div class="recipe"><h2><em>The Great Debate</em></h2><br />
<div id="attachment_70880" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 385px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/attachment/the-great-debate-10-30-48-norman-rockwell" rel="attachment wp-att-70880"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/The-Great-Debate-10-30-48-Norman-Rockwell-400x528.jpg" alt="The Great Debate by Norman Rockwell from October 30, 1948" title="The-Great-Debate-10-30-48-Norman-Rockwell" width="375" height="496" class="size-medium wp-image-70880" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5><em>The Great Debate</em><br /> by Norman Rockwell<br /> from October 30, 1948</h5>
<p></p></div></p>
<p>He’s for Dewey; she’s for Truman. The poor kid, the dog and the cat (on the back of her chair) are for peace. The Rockwell classic “was always one of my husband’s favorites,” said Bess Truman who spoke of the original painting that found its home, appropriately, in the Truman Library. “He enjoyed showing it to visitors when toured the library’s museum.”</p>
<p>1948 was not the first time Norman Rockwell showed a couple on either side of the great political divide&mdash;see below.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><div class="recipe"><h2><em>Election Debate</em>  </h2><br />
<div id="attachment_70866" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 385px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/attachment/election-debate-october-9-1920-norman-rockwell" rel="attachment wp-att-70866"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Election-Debate-October-9-1920-Norman-Rockwell-400x547.jpg" alt="Election Debate by Norman Rockwell from October 9, 1920" title="Election-Debate-October-9-1920--Norman-Rockwell" width="375" height="513" class="size-medium wp-image-70866" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5><em>Election Debate</em><br /> by Norman Rockwell<br /> from October 9, 1920</h5>
<p></p></div></p>
<p>The election of 1920, in the aftermath of World War I, brought Warren G. Harding vs. James M. Cox. This time the wife is for the Republican (Harding) and hubby is sure he is right about Cox. </p>
<p>The newspaper she holds shows Rockwell’s talent for portraiture&mdash;that’s his depiction of Harding, not a photograph, as with his depictions of Dewey and Truman above. In later years his political portraits would include Humphrey, Goldwater, and on subsequent <em>Saturday Evening Post</em> covers, candidates Eisenhower and Stevenson in 1956, and Nixon and Kennedy in 1960 <a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2011/02/19/art-entertainment/presidential-post-covers.html" target="_blank"">(see &#8220;Post Presidential Covers&#8221;)</a>.</p>
<p>As for these two Rockwell covers, it would be, well, impolitic, to point out that the woman was right both times. So we won&#8217;t.</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><div class="recipe"><h2><em>Politics by a Potbelly Stove</em>  </h2></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70867" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 385px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/attachment/politics-by-a-potbelly-stove-11-26-1910-rober-robinson" rel="attachment wp-att-70867"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Politics-by-a-Potbelly-Stove-11-26-1910-Rober-Robinson-400x559.jpg" alt="Politics by a Potbelly Stove by Robert Robinson from November 26, 1910" title="Politics-by-a-Potbelly-Stove-11-26-1910-Robert-Robinson" width="375" height="524" class="size-medium wp-image-70867" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5><em>Politics by a Potbelly Stove</em><br /> by Robert Robinson<br /> from November 26, 1910</h5>
<p></p></div></p>
<p>It was politics by a potbellied stove in 1910. Dang that dad-burned Teddy Roosevelt, anyhow. This cover is by Robert Robinson, whom we know little about today, except that he was great at painting old geezers. It shows us one thing: folks will argue about politics even when no one is listening (much as politicians will keep speaking).</p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><div class="recipe"><h2><em>Post-Convention Clean-up</em> </h2><br />
<div id="attachment_70858" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 385px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/attachment/post-convention-clean-up-8-18-56-constantin-alajalov" rel="attachment wp-att-70858"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Post-Convention-Clean-up-8-18-56-Constantin-Alajalov-400x514.jpg" alt="Post Convention Clean-up by Constantin Alajalov. from August 18, 1956" title="Post-Convention-Clean-up-8-18-56-Constantin-Alajalov" width="375" height="482" class="size-medium wp-image-70858" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5><em>Post-Convention Clean-up</em><br /> by Constantin Alajalov<br />from August 18, 1956</h5>
<p></p></div> </p>
<p>&#8220;Ladies and gentlemen of this great nation, if elected I promise to clean up&mdash;and I’ve got the broom to do it!&#8221; </p>
<p>This 1956 view of the “after-party” was by Constantin Alajalov. It is a cover that inspires and gives hope: soon this will all be over!<br />
<div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div><br />
</div></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html">Classic Covers: Election</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/07/art-entertainment/election-covers.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cartoons: Campaign Comedy</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=cartoons-campaign-comedy</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Sep 2012 12:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Diana Denny</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cartoons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Humor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[classic cartoons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political campaigns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=70790</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>First it was the Republican Convention. Then the Democratic Convention. My fellow Americans, it is time for a Cartoon Convention!</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html">Cartoons: Campaign Comedy</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Whether it was 1964, 1972, or 2012, the <em>Post</em> was fair and balanced. We make fun of both parties!</strong></p>
<div style="width:450px; margin:0 auto ">
<p><div id="attachment_70797" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/bum-fall-72" rel="attachment wp-att-70797"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/bum-fall-72-400x452.jpg" alt="&quot;My father thinks you’re a bum.&quot; from Fall 1972" title="bum-fall-72" width="400" height="452" class="size-medium wp-image-70797" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&quot;My father thinks you’re a bum.&quot;</h5>
<div class='date'>Fall 1972</div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70800" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/rebuttal-nov-84" rel="attachment wp-att-70800"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Rebuttal-Nov-84-400x284.jpg" alt="&quot;The Senator now has three minutes for his rebuttal.&quot; from November 1984 " title="Rebuttal-Nov-84" width="400" height="284" class="size-medium wp-image-70800" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&quot;The Senator now has three minutes for his rebuttal.&quot;</h5>
<div class='date'>November 1984 </div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70802" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/bra-sept-oct-2012" rel="attachment wp-att-70802"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/bra-sept-oct-2012-400x494.jpg" alt="&quot;I&#039;m running my campaign like bra—not too revealing, but I still want your support.&quot; from Sept/Oct 2012" title="bra-sept-oct-2012" width="400" height="494" class="size-medium wp-image-70802" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&quot;I&#039;m running my campaign like a bra—not too revealing, but I still want your support.&quot;</h5>
<div class='date'>Sep/Oct 2012</div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70803" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/dem-v-rep-10-31-1964" rel="attachment wp-att-70803"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/dem-v-rep-10-31-1964-400x287.jpg" alt="&quot;I think I prefer the Republicans for clichés, but the Democrats for platitudes.&quot; from October 31, 1964" title="dem-v-rep-10-31-1964" width="400" height="287" class="size-medium wp-image-70803" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&quot;I think I prefer the Republicans for clichés,<br /> but the Democrats for platitudes.&quot;</h5>
<div class='date'>October 31, 1964</div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70806" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/spending-jan-feb-2012" rel="attachment wp-att-70806"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Spending-Jan-Feb-2012-400x328.jpg" alt="&quot;I promise to stimulate the economy with another unlimited –spending election!&quot; from Jan/Feb 2012 " title="Spending-Jan-Feb-2012" width="400" height="328" class="size-medium wp-image-70806" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&nbsp;</h5>
<div class='date'>Jan/Feb 2012 </div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div id="attachment_70807" class="wp-caption alignnone" style="width: 410px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/attachment/concession-10-76" rel="attachment wp-att-70807"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/concession-10-76-400x472.jpg" alt="&quot;He&#039;s reading his concession speech instead of his victory speech!&quot; Oct. 1976 " title="concession-10-76" width="400" height="472" class="size-medium wp-image-70807" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text"><br />
<h5>&quot;He&#039;s reading his concession speech<br /> instead of his victory speech!&quot;</h5>
<div class='date'>October 1976 </div>
<p></p></div></p>
<p><div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div>
</div>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html">Cartoons: Campaign Comedy</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/09/05/humor/cartoons-campaign-comedy.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What True Grassroots Campaigns Looked Like</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=grassroots-campaigns</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:36:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Nilsson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Archives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political campaigns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[presidency]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=70401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The way we choose our president has changed over the years. A 1903 <em>Post</em> article spells out dramatic shifts in voting laws from a different era. </p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html">What True Grassroots Campaigns Looked Like</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Like the presidency, itself, the way we choose our president has changed over the years. In the past decade, the price tag on presidential campaigns has risen sharply. Before the year 2000, total spending for each election never cost more than $450 million. But in 2004, it suddenly shot up to $850 million. It reached $1.3 billion in 2008, and this year, it&#8217;s expected to exceed $5 billion.</p>
<p>If it seems that the presidential campaign has changed dramatically in our lifetime, consider how it looked to Rebecca Harding Davis. In 1903, she wrote “Nothing… [shows] the change in this country during the last 50 years as the difference in our conduct of the presidential campaigns.&#8221;</p>
<p>She was 72 years old when she wrote &#8220;Presidential Campaigns of Today and Yesterday&#8221; for the <em>Post</em>, and she could look back over 19 presidential campaigns that she’d witnessed from her home in western Virginia. The biggest change was that elections no longer centered on a great moral issue, which divided the country before the Civil War. &#8220;The crucial question usually is, in fact; some difference in financial policy—a matter but vaguely comprehended by the masses. It is likely to affect the pocket of the country rather than its conscience. Hence, no voter now, unless he is looking forward to office, is likely to lose a night&#8217;s sleep in anxiety about the issue.”</p>
<p>The other difference was that the campaigns were no longer conducted at the local level. Now they were directed by distant “commanders” who spent the money and made the decisions in some distant city. How different, she wrote, from the elections she remembered from the 1830s, when “the campaign was a part of the personal life of each American.”</p>
<blockquote>
<p><div id="attachment_70446" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 260px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-70446" title="Henry Clay" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/a-campaign-Clay.jpg" alt="Henry Clay" width="250" height="298" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Henry Clay, though all the country knew his family and breeding, was always represented in his campaigns as a dirty, ragged boy coming home from the mill astride of a mule. For every vote Clay won for being a gentleman and statesman, he won a 100 for that bare-footed image.</p></div></p>
<p>In the old days a presidential campaign was a family feud. The candidates were known to every farmer, butcher and schoolboy from the Penobscot to the Missouri. They were called &#8220;Bill &#8221; or &#8220;Jim&#8221; in every store and smithy, and were hated or loved with the passion of clansmen against or for their chiefs.</p>
<p>Men stabbed each other to the death in the fury of dispute as to whether Mrs. Andrew Jackson smoked a pipe after dinner or not, or whether Hamilton had maligned Burr, or Burr had murdered Hamilton.</p>
<p>Each village had its mass meeting, to which the farms and little towns of half a dozen counties sent deputations; there were party mottoes, party songs, party flags.”</p>
<p>The first of these campaigns which I remember was that of Harrison and Van Buren.</p>
<p>Every household was at work for weeks preparing for it. Hams were boiled, turkeys and chickens roasted by the scores. &#8230; An open table was set on the lawn or the porch of each dwelling, and every house was made gay with bunting and appropriate mottoes, such as &#8220;The latch-string is out.&#8221; &#8220;All welcome!&#8221;</p>
<p>Deputations came from towns and hamlets within a circuit of fifty miles. &#8230; Each division had its band of native talent and its homemade flag of original device.</p>
<p>The only duty of the convention, apparently, was to march and counter-march all day, up and down the long streets with flying flags, to the sound of fifes, drums, and clashing cymbals. Lawyers, farmers, butchers, and bakers marched under the queer banners with a stern exultation. &#8230; There were bands of men from the other side of the [Ohio] river, their horses and themselves covered with strings of horse chestnuts, or buckeyes, Ohio being the &#8220;Buckeye State,&#8221; and Harrison the &#8220;Ohio Pioneer.&#8221;</p>
<p>The town was in a frenzy of delight at these shows; the church bells rang, the people crowded the sidewalks, cheering as each band went by.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_70444" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 260px"><img class="size-medium wp-image-70444" title="Campaign Float" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/a-campaign-float.jpg" alt="Campaign Float" width="250" height="278" /><p class="wp-caption-text">&quot;There was a real forge, the sparks flying, the blacksmiths banging the iron and shouting out Whig songs.&quot; Illustration of a campaign float.</p></div></p>
<p>Undoubtedly the most popular of the devices were the floats on which were log cabins supposed to represent the birthplace and home of “Old Tip” [the nickname given to Harrison for his victory over Tecumseh’s tribe at the Battle of Tippecanoe.]</p>
<p>In some of them the boy Harrison, exceedingly ragged and unwashed, was seen squatted by the fire; sometimes he was engaged in cutting up a bear which he had just killed.</p>
<p>One cabin, however, drove the lookers-on into a fervor of loyalty to the candidate. In it the boy, a pistol in each hand, was holding at bay two gigantic Indians who were attacking the windows. Of course the people shouted. Nobody then doubted that the squatter always was a just, wronged man, and a favored child of God, and the Indian always a fiend, made up of all vices, the offspring of the devil. We never then looked on the other side. That is a modern uncomfortable habit.</p></blockquote>
<p>In 1903, Ms. Davis watched the campaign between Teddy Roosevelt and Alton Parker, and wondered, “What quiet doctor or minister in any country town would now parade the streets bestrung with buckeyes and shouting campaign songs?” Those campaigners were part of a country that was still young in the 1840s and ‘50s. They hated and loved with unreasoning fury, she believed, and were led by personal likes and dislikes in a way that would seem childish “to this more adult generation, which is governed by high moral reasons, or by greed, or by expediency.”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html">What True Grassroots Campaigns Looked Like</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Long Tradition of the Smear Campaign</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=tradition-dirty-politics</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2012 12:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeff Nilsson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Post Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[political campaigns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[presidents]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=69988</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>We had a respectable election once, and the winner was George Washington. In a 1976 article, Jack Anderson pointed out that when the next election came around, the gloves were off and tar buckets filled.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html">The Long Tradition of the Smear Campaign</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_70077" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 378px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html/attachment/daddy-cleveland" rel="attachment wp-att-70077"><img class="size-full wp-image-70077" title="Daddy Cleveland" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/daddy-cleveland.jpg" alt="Daddy Cleveland" width="368" height="342" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">&quot;Another Voice for Cleveland&quot;</p></div></p>
<p>There’s always the hope, with the start of every presidential campaign, that this time it will be different. This year, maybe the candidates will offer intelligent, practical solutions to the country’s problems. They emphasize what they’ll do, not dwell on the many shortcomings of their opponent.</p>
<p>And usually we’re disappointed. No matter how earnest and well-intentioned a presidential campaign begins, by the time it approaches the finish line, it usually assumes an atmosphere somewhere between a carnival midway and a bar fight.</p>
<p>We had an intelligent, respectable election once, and the winner was George Washington. By the time the next election came around, the gloves were off and the tar buckets filled, as Jack Anderson pointed out. [The Pulitzer-prize winning author's article—"The Dirtiest Campaign Tricks in History"—appeared in the Post on November, 1976]</p>
<blockquote><p>In the 1796 election, John Adams suffered a blow when the Boston <em>Independent Chronicle</em> alleged that during the Revolution he had publicly supported Washington while surreptitiously attempting to have the General cashiered. In truth, it was Adams&#8217;s second cousin, Sam, who had sought Washington&#8217;s scalp.</p>
<p>Adams&#8217;s opponent, Thomas Jefferson &#8230; was accused of being the son of a half-breed Indian and a mulatto father. Voters were warned that Jefferson&#8217;s election would result in a civil war and a national orgy of rape, incest, and adultery.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_70071" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 250px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html/attachment/721px-aj" rel="attachment wp-att-70071"><img class=" wp-image-70071 " title="721px-~aj" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/721px-aj-400x568.gif" alt="" width="240" height="341" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Andrew Jackson&#39;s ultimate goal, according to opponents.</p></div></p>
<p>Andrew Jackson [was portrayed by his opponents] as a bloodthirsty wild man; a trigger-happy brawler; the son of a prostitute and a black man… his older brother had been sold as a slave [and] Jackson &#8230; had put to death soldiers who had offended him. Worst of all, Jackson and his wife were depicted as adulterers. Through a technical mixup, Rachael Jackson had married Andrew before her first husband divorced her. &#8220;Ought a convicted adulteress and her paramour husband be placed in the highest offices of this free and Christian land?&#8221; screamed the <em>Cincinnati Gazette</em>. Rachael succumbed to a heart attack before the couple could move into the White House, and many of Jackson&#8217;s advocates attributed her death to the calumnious campaign of 1828.</p>
<p>In 1839, Martin Van Buren was accused of being too close to the Pope, when, in fact, he had done little more than correspond with the Vatican in his job as Secretary of State under Andrew Jackson. His opponents, nevertheless, spread the canard that a &#8220;popish plot&#8221; was afoot to ensure Van Buren&#8217;s election.</p>
<p>During the Polk-Clay race of 1844 the Ithaca, New York, <em>Chronicle</em> [quoted] &#8230; one Baron Roorback &#8230; [who] had witnessed the purchase of 43 slaves by James K. Polk. The entire story was a hoax. Polk had purchased no slaves; in fact, there was no Baron Roorback. But that didn&#8217;t keep the story from gaining wide attention.</p>
<p>During the campaign of 1864, Lincoln was tagged with every filthy name in the political lexicon, from ape to ghoul to traitor. Midway through his first term, his detractors accused his wife of collaborating with Confederates, a charge which compelled the President to appear, uninvited, before a Senate committee which was secretly considering the allegations [and swear to his wife’s innocence.]</p>
<p><div id="attachment_70068" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 250px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/3a13798r.gif" rel="lightbox"><img class=" wp-image-70068 " title="Cartoon" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/3a13798r-400x266.gif" alt="" width="240" height="160" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">In a rather complicated cartoon, Satan lures James Polk toward war with Britain over the Oregon territory.Click image to enlarge. </p></div></p>
<p>The campaign of 1884 held the dubious honor of being the dirtiest in American history. &#8230; In July, the Buffalo <em>Evening Telegraph</em> &#8230; accused Cleveland of fathering an illegitimate son a decade earlier in Buffalo. It turned out that Cleveland, a bachelor, had dated the child&#8217;s mother, as had several other men. The boy, therefore, was of questionable parentage. Yet the inherently decent Cleveland had provided for him. A chant soon arose in Republican ranks: &#8220;Ma! Ma! Where&#8217;s my pa? Gone to the White House, ha! ha! ha!&#8221;</p>
<p>Cleveland&#8217;s opponent, James G. Blaine &#8230; involved in a business scandal. A railroad line had permitted him to sell bonds for a generous commission in return for a land grant. &#8220;Burn this letter!&#8221; Blaine instructed one cohort in a cover-up attempt. Thus evolved the Democratic comeback to Cleveland&#8217;s critics: &#8220;Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, the continental liar from the State of Maine.&#8221;</p>
<p>Warren Harding… became the subject of a whispering campaign about his ancestry. A great-grandmother, it was alleged, had been a Negro, and a great-grandfather had Negro blood.</p></blockquote>
<p>The dirty tricks don’t end once the ballots had been cast, either.</p>
<blockquote>
<p><div id="attachment_70125" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 260px"><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html/attachment/3a05729u_cleaned_small" rel="attachment wp-att-70125"><img class="size-full wp-image-70125" title="Candidate Lincoln" src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/3a05729u_cleaned_small.gif" alt="" width="250" height="288" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">Candidate Lincoln, according to Pro-South Democrats, would lead the country straight into insanity.</p></div></p>
<p>In the election of 1876, Democrat Samuel Tilden won the popular election but fell one electoral vote shy of a majority. The electoral tallies in several states were counted and recounted, juggled and changed, until finally the election was thrown into the Congress. A Republican Senate and a Democratic House set up an Electoral Commission to decide the winner. Through some political maneuvering that fairly reeked of scandal, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes was declared the victor.</p>
<p>Lyndon Johnson first won his Senate seat in 1948 by an 87-vote margin when 203 previously unnoticed ballots were miraculously discovered several days after the election. The &#8220;voters,&#8221; curiously, had approached the polls in alphabetical order, and 202 of them had cast their marks beside the Johnson name. This election gave LBJ his nickname of &#8220;Landslide Lyndon.&#8221;</p>
<p>Dead men not only vote in American elections; occasionally they are candidates. Philadelphia&#8217;s Democratic party bosses, for example, ran a dead man in last April&#8217;s primary. The cadaverous candidate was Congressman William Barrett, who departed the scene fifteen days before the election. The party hacks kept Barrett&#8217;s name on the ballot in the hope that uninformed voters would select him anyway. Thus the bosses could handpick his replacement.Barrett won.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p></blockquote>
<p>Next: <a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/29/archives/post-perspective/grassroots-campaigns.html">The Big Change in Presidential Campaigns</a></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html">The Long Tradition of the Smear Campaign</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/25/archives/post-perspective/tradition-dirty-politics.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>America’s Painful Divide</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/21/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/americas-painful-divide.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=americas-painful-divide</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/21/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/americas-painful-divide.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Aug 2012 20:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Haidt</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Trends & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[America]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jonathan Haidt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=67696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The country is polarized and embattled to the point of dysfunction. What will it take to bring us back together?</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/21/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/americas-painful-divide.html">America’s Painful Divide</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_67704" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 410px"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/SO2012Cover-400x320.jpg" alt="Illustration by SHOUT" title="American Divide, illustration by SHOUT" width="400" height="320" class="size-medium wp-image-67704" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Illustration by SHOUT.</p></div></p>
<p><strong>“Politics ain’t beanbag,” said a Chicago humorist in 1895; it’s not a game for children.</strong> Ever since then the saying has been used to justify the rough-and-tumble nastiness of American politics. The competition always involves trickery and demagoguery, as politicians play fast and loose with the truth, using their inner press secretaries to portray themselves in the best possible light and their opponents as fools who would lead the country to ruin.</p>
<p>Why does it have to be this nasty? The country now seems polarized and embattled to the point of dysfunction. Up until a few years ago, there were some political scientists who claimed that the so-called culture war was limited to Washington, and that Americans had not in fact become more polarized in their attitudes toward most policy issues. But in the last twelve years Americans have begun to move further apart. There’s been a decline in the number of people calling themselves centrists or moderates (from 40 percent in 2000 down to 36 percent in 2011), a rise in the number of conservatives (from 38 percent to 41 percent), and a rise in the number of liberals (from 19 percent to 21 percent).</p>
<p>This shift to a more tribal mentality owes a lot to the stories we tell about ourselves. Everyone loves a good story, and these narratives are not necessarily true stories—they are simplified and selective reconstructions of the past, often connected to an idealized vision of the future. But even though life narratives are to some degree post hoc fabrications, they still influence people’s behavior, relationships, and mental health.</p>
<p>One such narrative, which the sociologist Christian Smith calls the “liberal progress narrative,” organizes much of the moral matrix of the American academic left. It goes like this:</p>
<p><em>Once upon a time, the vast majority of human persons suffered in societies that were unjust, unhealthy, repressive, and oppressive. These traditional societies were reprehensible because of their deep-rooted inequality, exploitation, and irrational traditionalism. … But the noble human aspiration for autonomy, equality, and prosperity struggled mightily against the forces of misery and oppression, and eventually succeeded in establishing modern, liberal, democratic, capitalist, welfare societies. While modern social conditions hold the potential to maximize the individual freedom and pleasure of all, there is much work to be done to dismantle the powerful vestiges of inequality, exploitation, and repression. This struggle for the good society in which individuals are equal and free to pursue their self-defined happiness is the one mission truly worth dedicating one’s life to achieving.</em></p>
<p>This narrative may not mesh perfectly with the moral matrices of the left in European countries (where, for example, there is more distrust of capitalism). Nonetheless, its general plotline should be recognizable to leftists everywhere. It’s a heroic liberation narrative. Authority, hierarchy, power, and tradition are the chains that must be broken to free the “noble aspirations” of the victims.</p>
<p>Contrast that narrative to one for modern conservatism. The clinical psychologist Drew Westen in his book <em>The Political Brain</em> extracts the master narrative that was implicit, and sometimes explicit, in the major speeches of Ronald Reagan:</p>
<p><em>Once upon a time, America was a shining beacon. Then liberals came along and erected an enormous federal bureaucracy that handcuffed the invisible hand of the free market. They subverted our traditional American values and opposed God and faith at every step of the way. … Instead of requiring that people work for a living, they siphoned money from hardworking Americans and gave it to Cadillac-driving drug addicts and welfare queens. … Instead of adhering to traditional American values of family, fidelity, and personal responsibility, they encouraged a feminist agenda that undermined traditional family roles. … Instead of projecting strength to those who would do evil around the world, they cut military budgets, disrespected our soldiers in uniform, burned our flag, and chose negotiation and multilateralism. … Then Americans decided to take their country back from those who sought to undermine it.</em></p>
<p>The two narratives are as opposed as could be. But research shows that the obstacles to empathy are not symmetrical. Even though conservatives score slightly lower on measures of empathy and may therefore be less moved by a story about suffering and oppression, they can still recognize that it is awful to be kept in chains. And even though many conservatives opposed some of the great liberations of the twentieth century—of women, sweatshop workers, African Americans, and gay people—they have applauded others, such as the liberation of Eastern Europe from communist oppression.</p>
<p>But when liberals try to understand the Reagan narrative, they have a harder time. Many in the audience actively reject these concerns as immoral. Loyalty to a group is the basis of racism and exclusion, they say. Authority is oppression. Religion is used to suppress female sexuality and justify homophobia.</p>
<p>John Lennon captured a common liberal dream in his haunting song “Imagine.” Imagine if there were no countries, and no religion too. If we could just erase the borders and boundaries that divide us, then the world would “be as one.” It’s a vision of heaven for liberals, but conservatives believe it would quickly descend into hell.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_67700" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 378px"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Politics_fullpage-368x482.jpg" alt="Illustration by SHOUT" title="American Divide 2, illustration by SHOUT" width="368" height="482" class="size-title image 368 max width wp-image-67700" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Illustration by SHOUT.</p></div></p>
<p>As a one-time liberal atheist, I’ve come to believe, based on my own research, that conservatives are onto something. They understand the importance of what I’ll call “moral capital.” (Please note that I am praising conservative intellectuals, not the Republican Party.) Capital, in economics, refers to the resources that allow a person or firm to produce goods or services. There’s financial capital (money in the bank), physical capital (such as a wrench or a factory), and human capital (such as a well-trained sales force). When everything else is equal, a firm with more of any kind of capital will outcompete a firm with less. We can define moral capital as the resources that sustain a moral community. More specifically, moral capital refers to the degree to which a community possesses interlocking sets of values and practices that mesh well with evolved psychological mechanisms and thereby enable the community to regulate selfishness and make cooperation possible.</p>
<p>What does it take to sustain moral capital? Is it enough to just link people together in healthy and trusting relationships? Will that lead to good behavior for years to come?</p>
<p>If you believe that people are inherently good, and that they flourish when constraints and divisions are removed, then yes, that may be sufficient. But conservatives generally take a very different view of human nature. They believe that people need external structures or constraints in order to behave well, cooperate, and thrive. These external constraints include laws, institutions, customs, traditions, nations, and religions.</p>
<p>Large-scale human societies are nearly miraculous achievements. Our complicated moral psychology co-evolved with our religions and our other cultural inventions (such as tribes and agriculture) to get us where we are today. We need groups, we love groups, and we develop our virtues in groups, even though those groups necessarily exclude nonmembers. Conservatives fear that if you destroy all groups and dissolve all internal structure, you destroy your moral capital.</p>
<p>This, I believe, is the fundamental blind spot of the left. It explains why liberal reforms so often backfire, and why communist revolutions usually end up in despotism. Left-wing reformers often overreach, change too many things too quickly, and reduce the stock of moral capital inadvertently. Conversely, while conservatives do a better job of preserving moral capital, they often fail to notice certain classes of victims, fail to limit the predations of certain powerful interests, and fail to see the need to change or update institutions as times change.</p>
<p>The third-century Persian prophet Mani preached that the world is the battleground between the forces of absolute goodness and the forces of absolute evil. His preaching developed into Manichaeism, a religion that spread throughout the Middle East and influenced Western thinking. Unfortunately, the rising rancor and polarization between liberals and conservatives has turned our politicians into Manichaean priests. Compromise is a sin. God and the devil don’t issue many bipartisan proclamations, and neither do our politicians.</p>
<p>America’s political class has become far more Manichaean since the early 1990s. Before 1995, congressmen from both parties attended many of the same social events on weekends; their spouses became friends; their children played on the same sports teams. But nowadays most congressmen fly to Washington on Monday night, huddle with their teammates and do battle for three days, and then fly home on Thursday night. Cross-party friendships are disappearing; Manichaeism and scorched Earth politics are increasing.</p>
<p><div id="attachment_67701" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 378px"><img src="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/wp-content/uploads/satevepost/Politics_spot-368x482.jpg" alt="Illustration by SHOUT" title="American Divide 3, illustration by SHOUT" width="368" height="482" class="size-title image 368 max width wp-image-67701" /><p class="wp-caption-text">Illustration by SHOUT.</p></div></p>
<p>I don’t know how Americans can convince their legislators to move their families to Washington, and I don’t know if even that change would revive cross-party friendships in today’s poisoned atmosphere, but anything we can do to cultivate more positive social connections might also alter behavior. Other structural changes that might reduce Manichaeism include changing the ways that primary elections are run, the ways that electoral districts are drawn, and the ways that candidates raise money for their campaigns.</p>
<p>The problem is not just limited to politicians. Technology and changing residential patterns have allowed each of us to isolate ourselves within cocoons of like-minded individuals. In 1976, only 27 percent of Americans lived in “landslide counties”—counties that voted either Democratic or Republican by a margin of 20 percent or more. But the number has risen steadily; in 2008, 48 percent of Americans lived in a landslide county. Our counties and towns are becoming increasingly segregated into “lifestyle enclaves,” in which ways of voting, eating, working, and worshipping are increasingly aligned. If you find yourself in a Whole Foods store, there’s an 89 percent chance that the county surrounding you voted for Barack Obama. If you want to find Republicans, go to a county that contains a Cracker Barrel restaurant (62 percent of these counties went for McCain).</p>
<p>Morality binds and blinds. This is not just something that happens to people on the other side. We all get sucked into tribal moral communities. We think the other side is blind to truth, reason, science, and common sense, but in fact everyone goes blind when talking about what they hold sacred. So if you really want to open your mind, open your heart first. If you can have at least one friendly interaction with a member of the “other” group, you’ll find it far easier to listen to what they’re saying, and maybe even see a controversial issue in a new light.</p>
<p>The next time you find yourself seated beside someone from “another” group, give it a try. Don’t just jump right in. Don’t bring up morality until you’ve found a few points of commonality or in some other way established a bit of trust. And when you do bring up issues of morality, try to start with some praise or a sincere expression of interest.</p>
<p>We’re all stuck here for a while, so let’s try to work it out.</p>
<p>To view a video of Jonathan Haidt with journalist Bill Moyers, visit <a href="http://saturdayeveningpost.com/haidt">saturdayeveningpost.com/haidt</a>.</p>
<p>An excerpt from <em>The Righteous Mind</em> by Jonathan Haidt. © 2012 by Jonathan Haidt. Published by arrangement with Pantheon Books, an imprint of The Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, a division of Random House, Inc. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/21/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/americas-painful-divide.html">America’s Painful Divide</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/21/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/americas-painful-divide.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jonathan Haidt</title>
		<link>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/17/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/haidt.html?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=haidt</link>
		<comments>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/17/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/haidt.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2012 19:47:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Post Editors</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Trends & Opinions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jonathan Haidt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[religion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[videos]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=66958</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Haidt, author of The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. Haidt&#8217;s article &#8220;America&#8217;s Painful Divide&#8221; was published in the Sep/Oct 2012 issue of The Saturday Evening Post.</p><p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/17/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/haidt.html">Jonathan Haidt</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bill Moyers interviews Jonathan Haidt, author of <em>The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion</em>. Haidt&#8217;s article <!--a href=http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/?p=67696-->&#8220;America&#8217;s Painful Divide&#8221; was published in the Sep/Oct 2012 issue of <em>The Saturday Evening Post</em>.</p>
<p><div class="recipe"><center><iframe src="http://player.vimeo.com/video/36128360?title=0&amp;byline=0&amp;portrait=0" width="500" height="375" frameborder="0" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe></center></div><br />
<div style="clear:both;"><!--this is a clear div--></div></p>
<p><a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/17/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/haidt.html">Jonathan Haidt</a>

<a href="http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com">The Saturday Evening Post</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/17/in-the-magazine/trends-and-opinions/haidt.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
