Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
Root-Boy Slim & The Sex Change Band: This Date in History
- Thread starter donbosco
- Start date
- Replies: 840
- Views: 38K
- Off-Topic
- Messages
- 1,102
In this day and age I am thinking this may be the most important event in the nation's history for this date and top 10 overall. Whether it holds up is too be seen. Worth reading the brief explanation if you do not know the details.
1803 In Marbury v. Madison , the U.S. Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review.
In the weeks before Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration as president in March 1801, the lame-duck Federalist Congress created 16 new circuit judgeships (in the Judiciary Act of 1801) and an unspecified number of new judgeships (in the Organic Act), which Adams proceeded to fill with Federalists in an effort to preserve his party’s control of the judiciary and to frustrate the legislative agenda of Jefferson and his Republican (Democratic-Republican) Party. Because he was among the last of those appointments (the so-called “midnight appointments”), William Marbury, a Federalist Party leader from Maryland, did not receive his commission before Jefferson became president. Once in office, Jefferson directed his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the commission, and Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel Madison to act.
Marbury and his lawyer, former attorney general Charles Lee, argued that signing and sealing the commission completed the transaction and that delivery, in any event, constituted a mere formality. But formality or not, without the actual piece of parchment, Marbury could not enter into the duties of office. Despite Jefferson’s hostility, the court agreed to hear the case, Marbury v. Madison, in its February 1803 term.
Some scholars have questioned whether Marshall should have removed himself from the case because of his prior service as Adams’s secretary of state (1800–01). Certainly, later judicial standards would have called for recusal, but at the time only financial connections to a case led judges to step aside, as Marshall did in suits regarding Virginia lands in which he had an interest. The Republicans, always quick to criticize Marshall, did not even raise the issue of the propriety of his sitting in the case.
The issue directly presented by Marbury v. Madison can only be described as minor. By the time the court heard the case, the wisdom of Jefferson’s desire to reduce the number of justices of the peace had been confirmed (and the Judiciary Act of 1801 had been repealed); Marbury’s original term was almost half over; and most people, Federalists and Republicans alike, considered the case to be moot. But Marshall, despite the political difficulties involved, recognized that he had a perfect case with which to expound a basic principle, judicial review, which would secure the Supreme Court’s primary role in constitutional interpretation.
1803 In Marbury v. Madison , the U.S. Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review.
In the weeks before Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration as president in March 1801, the lame-duck Federalist Congress created 16 new circuit judgeships (in the Judiciary Act of 1801) and an unspecified number of new judgeships (in the Organic Act), which Adams proceeded to fill with Federalists in an effort to preserve his party’s control of the judiciary and to frustrate the legislative agenda of Jefferson and his Republican (Democratic-Republican) Party. Because he was among the last of those appointments (the so-called “midnight appointments”), William Marbury, a Federalist Party leader from Maryland, did not receive his commission before Jefferson became president. Once in office, Jefferson directed his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the commission, and Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel Madison to act.
Marbury and his lawyer, former attorney general Charles Lee, argued that signing and sealing the commission completed the transaction and that delivery, in any event, constituted a mere formality. But formality or not, without the actual piece of parchment, Marbury could not enter into the duties of office. Despite Jefferson’s hostility, the court agreed to hear the case, Marbury v. Madison, in its February 1803 term.
Some scholars have questioned whether Marshall should have removed himself from the case because of his prior service as Adams’s secretary of state (1800–01). Certainly, later judicial standards would have called for recusal, but at the time only financial connections to a case led judges to step aside, as Marshall did in suits regarding Virginia lands in which he had an interest. The Republicans, always quick to criticize Marshall, did not even raise the issue of the propriety of his sitting in the case.
The issue directly presented by Marbury v. Madison can only be described as minor. By the time the court heard the case, the wisdom of Jefferson’s desire to reduce the number of justices of the peace had been confirmed (and the Judiciary Act of 1801 had been repealed); Marbury’s original term was almost half over; and most people, Federalists and Republicans alike, considered the case to be moot. But Marshall, despite the political difficulties involved, recognized that he had a perfect case with which to expound a basic principle, judicial review, which would secure the Supreme Court’s primary role in constitutional interpretation.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
Never went there in all my years of living in the area. My brother lived out that way for years. I did visit friends at Northhampton West though...how that place got out there I do not know.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
When the character of Sheriff Andy Taylor first appeared in an episode of ‘The Danny Thomas Show,’ aired on February 15, 1960, he was more a bad cop than a good one and in some early episodes of his own show Griffith continued in that role - as an opportunist and slightly mean-spirited trickster. But that’s not the Andy that we love, and we know now that Griffith made a conscious move away from that representation by the second season. That’s a good thing for us all - if any of you have seen ‘Face in the Crowd’ you know the kind of malevolence that Griffith could muster up. Thankfully Sheriff Taylor stepped away from that and toward the honest, wise, and thoughtful lawman that we love.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
#OTD in 1884: BLOOD SHOWER IN CHATHAM: “On February 25, 1884, Mrs. Kit Lasater, “noted for truthfulness,” was walking near her home in the New Hope township of Chatham County when she heard what she thought was a hard rain fall. Glancing up she saw only clear sky but when she glanced down she saw what appeared to be the aftermath of a “shower of pure blood.”
None of the liquid had fallen on her but it had drenched the ground and surrounding trees for some 60 feet (some accounts say yards) in circumference from the spot where she stood. Upon hearing her story, neighbors rushed to see for themselves and, when later interviewed, confirmed the story as related by Mrs. Lasater.
Samples were collected and sent to Dr. F. P. Venable, a professor at UNC, for evaluation. By mid-April he addressed the topic to the Mitchell Scientific Society. In every test performed except one, the conclusion was the same. The samples appeared to be blood. Venable could offer no explanation beyond the results of the tests, suggesting that “the subject is quite a puzzle and offers a tempting field for the theorist blessed with a vivid imagination.”
www.dncr.nc.gov
A month later the reprint from The Pittsboro Record, posted as first the comment, appeared in Orange County Observer. Of course I’m intrigued by the information that is recounted there that I had never before read - most specifically the reference to “the bars near her cabin” in the newspaper account. New Hope Township, where Mrs. Lasater (her first name goes unmentioned) lived is the part of Chatham most inundated by the creation of Jordan Lake in the 1970s and by my judgment one of the wilder parts, rivaled only by the flat woods on the far other end of the county.
The time was just post-Reconstruction, and the governor Thomas Jarvis was a Democrat, as was always the case in those days. An ex-Confederate, he was a Redeemer (Conservative, White Supremacists who worked to thwart post-Civil War Republican and African American power) and closely tied to Zebulon Vance. Indeed, he took over the office of governor when Vance went to the U.S. Senate and later filled his seat when he died in that office. In the interim he served as ambassador to Brazil.
Of course these are just musings about the tenor of the times - a particular time long past - the kind of thing my students and I try and work out as exercises in “doing history.” I’ll add that perusing the News of Chatham during that time reveals a tumultuous and mysterious place. A news report (included) from September 12, 1884 writes of a disinterred body found petrified and another from June 13, 1883 tells of a rain of frogs covering “40 or 59 acres of land” (also posted here).
Petrified Body
Frog Rain
And I thought it was The Devil’s Tramping Ground over in Bear Creek Township and down by Harpers Crossroads that was the only “Weird Chatham.” It seems #DeepChatham just gets deeper and deeper. Maybe the flooding over of New Hope was meant to be.
None of the liquid had fallen on her but it had drenched the ground and surrounding trees for some 60 feet (some accounts say yards) in circumference from the spot where she stood. Upon hearing her story, neighbors rushed to see for themselves and, when later interviewed, confirmed the story as related by Mrs. Lasater.
Samples were collected and sent to Dr. F. P. Venable, a professor at UNC, for evaluation. By mid-April he addressed the topic to the Mitchell Scientific Society. In every test performed except one, the conclusion was the same. The samples appeared to be blood. Venable could offer no explanation beyond the results of the tests, suggesting that “the subject is quite a puzzle and offers a tempting field for the theorist blessed with a vivid imagination.”
Chatham County “Blood Shower”
www.dncr.nc.gov
A month later the reprint from The Pittsboro Record, posted as first the comment, appeared in Orange County Observer. Of course I’m intrigued by the information that is recounted there that I had never before read - most specifically the reference to “the bars near her cabin” in the newspaper account. New Hope Township, where Mrs. Lasater (her first name goes unmentioned) lived is the part of Chatham most inundated by the creation of Jordan Lake in the 1970s and by my judgment one of the wilder parts, rivaled only by the flat woods on the far other end of the county.
The time was just post-Reconstruction, and the governor Thomas Jarvis was a Democrat, as was always the case in those days. An ex-Confederate, he was a Redeemer (Conservative, White Supremacists who worked to thwart post-Civil War Republican and African American power) and closely tied to Zebulon Vance. Indeed, he took over the office of governor when Vance went to the U.S. Senate and later filled his seat when he died in that office. In the interim he served as ambassador to Brazil.
Of course these are just musings about the tenor of the times - a particular time long past - the kind of thing my students and I try and work out as exercises in “doing history.” I’ll add that perusing the News of Chatham during that time reveals a tumultuous and mysterious place. A news report (included) from September 12, 1884 writes of a disinterred body found petrified and another from June 13, 1883 tells of a rain of frogs covering “40 or 59 acres of land” (also posted here).
Petrified Body
Frog Rain
And I thought it was The Devil’s Tramping Ground over in Bear Creek Township and down by Harpers Crossroads that was the only “Weird Chatham.” It seems #DeepChatham just gets deeper and deeper. Maybe the flooding over of New Hope was meant to be.
Last edited:
Two Morehead Scholars and one d00kie from the same family and small town.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
#OTD in 1820 in the US House Of Representatives, NC Congressman Felix Walker ‘spoke for Buncombe,’ #AVL #WNC. His speech was nonsense & rambling but he refused to yield the floor though beseeched. He also interrupted the important, though ultimately futile, work of framing “The Missouri Compromise.” His colleagues came to call this ‘Bunkum’ or ‘Bunk’ & a new term for worthless bloviation was born.
- Messages
- 1,102
Never knew. Pretty cool.
#OTD in 1820 in the US House Of Representatives, NC Congressman Felix Walker ‘spoke for Buncombe,’ #AVL #WNC. His speech was nonsense & rambling but he refused to yield the floor though beseeched. He also interrupted the important, though ultimately futile, work of framing “The Missouri Compromise.” His colleagues came to call this ‘Bunkum’ or ‘Bunk’ & a new term for worthless bloviation was born.
- Messages
- 1,102
Not much to choose from today. Feeling a bit meh this morning so I'll go with this. [I'll leave one for @nashcounty to post in the music thread.]
Note: I have never minded paying taxes. Part of being a contributing member of society. Nitpick all you want. We can see what happens when not enough income comes in to fund necessities such as Infrastructure not just falling apart but dangerous. See bridges.
infrastructurereportcard.org
Sixteenth Amendment, amendment (1913) to the Constitution of the United States permitting a federal income tax.
Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution empowers Congress to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” Article I, Section 9, further states that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
Although income taxes levied in support of the American Civil War (1861–65) were generally tolerated, subsequent attempts by Congress to impose taxes on income were met with significant opposition. In 1895, in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the federal income tax unconstitutional in striking down portions of the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act of 1894 that imposed a direct tax on the incomes of American citizens and corporations. It thusly made any direct tax subject to the rules articulated in Article I, Section 2.
Consequently, unless the U.S. Congress expected all income taxes to be apportioned among the states according to their populations, the power to levy income taxes was rendered impotent. The Sixteenth Amendment was introduced in 1909 to remedy this problem. By specifically affixing the language, “from whatever source derived,” it removes the “direct tax dilemma” related to Article I, Section 8, and authorizes Congress to lay and collect income tax without regard to the rules of Article I, Section 9, regarding census and enumeration. It was ratified in 1913.
The full text of the Amendment is:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Note: I have never minded paying taxes. Part of being a contributing member of society. Nitpick all you want. We can see what happens when not enough income comes in to fund necessities such as Infrastructure not just falling apart but dangerous. See bridges.
Bridges
Every day, millions of trips are taken across structurally deficient bridges causing the need for updates to our bridge infrastructure maintenance program.
infrastructurereportcard.org
Sixteenth Amendment, amendment (1913) to the Constitution of the United States permitting a federal income tax.
Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution empowers Congress to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.” Article I, Section 9, further states that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.”
Although income taxes levied in support of the American Civil War (1861–65) were generally tolerated, subsequent attempts by Congress to impose taxes on income were met with significant opposition. In 1895, in Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan and Trust Company, the U.S. Supreme Court declared the federal income tax unconstitutional in striking down portions of the Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act of 1894 that imposed a direct tax on the incomes of American citizens and corporations. It thusly made any direct tax subject to the rules articulated in Article I, Section 2.
Consequently, unless the U.S. Congress expected all income taxes to be apportioned among the states according to their populations, the power to levy income taxes was rendered impotent. The Sixteenth Amendment was introduced in 1909 to remedy this problem. By specifically affixing the language, “from whatever source derived,” it removes the “direct tax dilemma” related to Article I, Section 8, and authorizes Congress to lay and collect income tax without regard to the rules of Article I, Section 9, regarding census and enumeration. It was ratified in 1913.
The full text of the Amendment is:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
IN GRAHAM
www.dncr.nc.gov
Lynching of Wyatt Outlaw and the Kirk-Holden War
On February 26, 1870, Graham town commissioner Wyatt Outlaw, an African American, was lynched by a band of Ku Klux Klansmen.Outlaw served in the 2nd Regiment United States Colored Cavalry during the Civil War. In 1866, he attended the second freedmen’s convention in Raleigh and soon after...
www.dncr.nc.gov
There was a play written about this. I live in Alamance County and saw it performed at the Paramount Theater in Burlington. While I’m not a theater critic, I would have to say it was a very touching play that brought home to the audience a feeling of what it was like to be a black person in NC just after the War. I don’t remember the play’s name.IN GRAHAM
Lynching of Wyatt Outlaw and the Kirk-Holden War
On February 26, 1870, Graham town commissioner Wyatt Outlaw, an African American, was lynched by a band of Ku Klux Klansmen.Outlaw served in the 2nd Regiment United States Colored Cavalry during the Civil War. In 1866, he attended the second freedmen’s convention in Raleigh and soon after...
- Messages
- 1,102
My favprite place of isolation during my backpacling years.
On one trip I wasi sitting about where this picture was taken near Horn creek. That spot called to me from below and when I got there there was a nicely shaped 'seat' to sit on. Taking off my shoes (converse high tops - no need for heavy boots in the canyon) I noticed something circular and plasitc buried with about 1/4" above ground. Digging it out it was a vial with 5 joints in it. Damn! And it was golden; and sweet, and after a couple hits I was buzzed. Not your Hopi or Havasu blend lol.
Just a beautiful day. Then I heard the sound of a helicopter approaching. Landed on the sandbar below me. Ranger folk got out as I hustled down shoes untied. They were taking water samples and were very apoligetic for interupting my peaceful existence. Buzz killed a bit. Oh, well. PS I still have that vial 45 years later.
1919 The U.S. Congress established Grand Canyon National Park in northwestern Arizona.
www.nps.gov
On one trip I wasi sitting about where this picture was taken near Horn creek. That spot called to me from below and when I got there there was a nicely shaped 'seat' to sit on. Taking off my shoes (converse high tops - no need for heavy boots in the canyon) I noticed something circular and plasitc buried with about 1/4" above ground. Digging it out it was a vial with 5 joints in it. Damn! And it was golden; and sweet, and after a couple hits I was buzzed. Not your Hopi or Havasu blend lol.
Just a beautiful day. Then I heard the sound of a helicopter approaching. Landed on the sandbar below me. Ranger folk got out as I hustled down shoes untied. They were taking water samples and were very apoligetic for interupting my peaceful existence. Buzz killed a bit. Oh, well. PS I still have that vial 45 years later.
1919 The U.S. Congress established Grand Canyon National Park in northwestern Arizona.
Grand Canyon National Park (U.S. National Park Service)
Entirely within the state of Arizona, the park encompasses 278 miles (447 km) of the Colorado River and adjacent uplands. Located on the ancestral homelands of 11 present day Tribal Communities, Grand Canyon is one of the most spectacular examples of erosion anywhere in the world—a mile deep...
Last edited:
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
Indulge me friends..,
#OTD (Feb. 27) in 1776 North Carolina militia met Scottish Highlanders in battle at Moores Creek Bridge (Pender County). The militia were under the overall command of Colonel James Moore out of Wilmington. Captains Richard Caswell led troops from New Bern (approx. 850) and Alexander Lillington (~150) from Brunswick County. Moore, who was at the head of around 650 troops arrived at Moores Creek after the battle was fought.
The Highlanders , Loyalists, were from Crosscreek (Fayetteville today). All told, those against the Crown that day totaled 1000 and those in favor, the Scots, counted 700. Lillington had arrived to the site a day early and had prepared fortifications which were crucial in the engagement. Allegiance on this day is an intriguing thing, after all, in the moment, Caswell and Lillington and their men were essentially traitors to their country. Of course, as we tell the story, they become Patriots. Such is the language of the winners in retrospect.
The Scottish Highlanders and their constancy to George the Third is also at first a curious thing. Certainly there was no love for a Crown that had so recently (1746) vanquished them at The Battle of Culloden, so why stand and fight as Loyalists? That allegiance can be mainly explained by the fact that as a condition of the receipt of land grants in colonial North Carolina, the otherwise defeated and dispossessed Highlanders had sworn an Oath of Fealty to the English monarch. Thus, no matter their own rebellious inclinations, the Scots were bound by their word.
That’s a shame since they were routed on this day in 1776. Caswell and Lillington’s men set up across the bridge that the Highlanders were obliged to cross. The wily eventual-patriots also removed the cross boards and greased the beams on the bridge, slowing any crossing to a deadly pace. The Scots charged ahead anyway, brandishing broadswords and dirks in the hope of finding in the far side the kind of hand-to-hand combat in which they excelled. Caswell and Lillington’s troops mowed them down. Casualties were likely 50, some drowning in the cold water of deep Moores Creek.
This win set back English plans for subduing The South and then turning full force on The North and was, in the long run, key to outlasting English resources and patience, and bring independence.
This battle is quite personally dear to me. Once upon a time, around 2003, Leah and I had set out heading east - beach bound out of Chapel Hill. We were newly dating and this was our first weekend getaway. I’m a fan if Blue Highways, as I learned to my eternal delight, is Leah. Indeed, we had talked about making that sort of route a general characteristic of this excursion. Secretly, but wary of being nerdy around her, I hoped that history might play some role in our romantic escape from The Triangle. So we took Highway 421 South, the literal lifeline that splits my homeland of #ChathamCounty and is Main Street, such as there can be in a mini-hamlet like #Bonlee.
Somewhere along that way, a few hours into the music and the lovey talk, we saw the sign. I definitely saw it first and immediately began plotting how? Aware of the double down nerdiness of wanting to stop at a revolutionary war battle ground in the absolute middle of nowhere on the way to a romantic weekend trip - our very first even - I squelched myself. So what should happen but Leah, upon spying the brown historic marker, not only says, “Hey look!” but pulls out a folder from her bag with a print out about the place!
I was already a hard lean but at that moment I fell deeply and Happily in Love. There really is no better pairing than Historian and Librarian.
#OTD (Feb. 27) in 1776 North Carolina militia met Scottish Highlanders in battle at Moores Creek Bridge (Pender County). The militia were under the overall command of Colonel James Moore out of Wilmington. Captains Richard Caswell led troops from New Bern (approx. 850) and Alexander Lillington (~150) from Brunswick County. Moore, who was at the head of around 650 troops arrived at Moores Creek after the battle was fought.
The Highlanders , Loyalists, were from Crosscreek (Fayetteville today). All told, those against the Crown that day totaled 1000 and those in favor, the Scots, counted 700. Lillington had arrived to the site a day early and had prepared fortifications which were crucial in the engagement. Allegiance on this day is an intriguing thing, after all, in the moment, Caswell and Lillington and their men were essentially traitors to their country. Of course, as we tell the story, they become Patriots. Such is the language of the winners in retrospect.
The Scottish Highlanders and their constancy to George the Third is also at first a curious thing. Certainly there was no love for a Crown that had so recently (1746) vanquished them at The Battle of Culloden, so why stand and fight as Loyalists? That allegiance can be mainly explained by the fact that as a condition of the receipt of land grants in colonial North Carolina, the otherwise defeated and dispossessed Highlanders had sworn an Oath of Fealty to the English monarch. Thus, no matter their own rebellious inclinations, the Scots were bound by their word.
That’s a shame since they were routed on this day in 1776. Caswell and Lillington’s men set up across the bridge that the Highlanders were obliged to cross. The wily eventual-patriots also removed the cross boards and greased the beams on the bridge, slowing any crossing to a deadly pace. The Scots charged ahead anyway, brandishing broadswords and dirks in the hope of finding in the far side the kind of hand-to-hand combat in which they excelled. Caswell and Lillington’s troops mowed them down. Casualties were likely 50, some drowning in the cold water of deep Moores Creek.
This win set back English plans for subduing The South and then turning full force on The North and was, in the long run, key to outlasting English resources and patience, and bring independence.
This battle is quite personally dear to me. Once upon a time, around 2003, Leah and I had set out heading east - beach bound out of Chapel Hill. We were newly dating and this was our first weekend getaway. I’m a fan if Blue Highways, as I learned to my eternal delight, is Leah. Indeed, we had talked about making that sort of route a general characteristic of this excursion. Secretly, but wary of being nerdy around her, I hoped that history might play some role in our romantic escape from The Triangle. So we took Highway 421 South, the literal lifeline that splits my homeland of #ChathamCounty and is Main Street, such as there can be in a mini-hamlet like #Bonlee.
Somewhere along that way, a few hours into the music and the lovey talk, we saw the sign. I definitely saw it first and immediately began plotting how? Aware of the double down nerdiness of wanting to stop at a revolutionary war battle ground in the absolute middle of nowhere on the way to a romantic weekend trip - our very first even - I squelched myself. So what should happen but Leah, upon spying the brown historic marker, not only says, “Hey look!” but pulls out a folder from her bag with a print out about the place!
I was already a hard lean but at that moment I fell deeply and Happily in Love. There really is no better pairing than Historian and Librarian.
- Messages
- 1,102
Pretty big deal for us up and coming draft age folk. It exemplifies what a true free and independent media can accomplish. Unfortunatelt, we are now seeing a near total collapse of that independence.
In February 1968 CBS Evening News anchor Walter Cronkite undertook a two-week fact-finding trip to Vietnam to assess the impact of the Tet Offensive—the massive coordinated North Vietnamese and Vietcong surprise attack on hundreds of targets across South Vietnam. At 10:00 p.m. on February 27, at the CBS News headquarters in New York City, Cronkite delivered his controversial 30-minute “Report from Vietnam.” Tens of millions of Americans tuned in as “the most trusted man in America” presented facts from the ground in Vietnam, making the case that the situation was more dire than the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson alleged. Towards the end of his report he delivered his only on-air personal commentary, in what historian David Schmitz has called the “single most important news event” of the Vietnam War. The “only realistic if unsatisfactory conclusion,” as Cronkite saw it, was that the US was not on the verge of victory and should find an “honorable” way out of Vietnam.
In February 1968 CBS Evening News anchor Walter Cronkite undertook a two-week fact-finding trip to Vietnam to assess the impact of the Tet Offensive—the massive coordinated North Vietnamese and Vietcong surprise attack on hundreds of targets across South Vietnam. At 10:00 p.m. on February 27, at the CBS News headquarters in New York City, Cronkite delivered his controversial 30-minute “Report from Vietnam.” Tens of millions of Americans tuned in as “the most trusted man in America” presented facts from the ground in Vietnam, making the case that the situation was more dire than the administration of President Lyndon B. Johnson alleged. Towards the end of his report he delivered his only on-air personal commentary, in what historian David Schmitz has called the “single most important news event” of the Vietnam War. The “only realistic if unsatisfactory conclusion,” as Cronkite saw it, was that the US was not on the verge of victory and should find an “honorable” way out of Vietnam.
donbosco
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,634
As a 9-10 year old I watched the news religiously with my Deddy. My brother was 19 and his lottery number was 17. There was derp concern in our house.
Ironically, caught up in Combat and Rat Patrol, I was gung-ho and trying to talk my parents into sending me away to Fork Union Military Academy. Thankfully they waved me off.
Watching the Tote Board of killed and casualties every evening I was pretty sure we were bound for victory, so very many more of THEM were killed compared to US.
I grew up some and by the early 1970s the mendacity of Nixon was so crystal clear - eyes open wide.
Ironically, caught up in Combat and Rat Patrol, I was gung-ho and trying to talk my parents into sending me away to Fork Union Military Academy. Thankfully they waved me off.
Watching the Tote Board of killed and casualties every evening I was pretty sure we were bound for victory, so very many more of THEM were killed compared to US.
I grew up some and by the early 1970s the mendacity of Nixon was so crystal clear - eyes open wide.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,288
During the Vietnam War, both my older brothers were in the Navy. One of them was in Vietnam--as a weather man assigned to the Marines up on the DMZ--when our church was visited by the choir from some Methodist college in the Southeast. As was the custom, the members of the choir were divided up among the congregation for Sunday dinner. My family was lucky enough to get two very attractive young women.
In the after dinner conversation, the topic of Vietnam arose. My father was very progressive on just about everything but Vietnam. These two young women just couldn't believe their ears. They pointed one son was in Vietnam, another could go at anytime, and--pointing at me--said a third could go if Vietnam lasted long enough. The only argument my Dad had was that as bad as the Vietnam War was, it was better than any other alternative. That argument fell as flat then as it sounds today.
This discussion, in 1968 or 1969, was the turning point for my father, a WW2 Marine combat vet, on Vietnam. By 1972, he was so against Vietnam, he was the county chairman for George McGovern, a cause almost as futile as Vietnam. I really admired my father for having a mind open enough that it could be changed by a strong, polite, and logical argument, even if that argument was voiced by two college girls.
ETA: Had my father not lived long enough to actually see it, I don't think he would have believed that despite the fact that the US lost the Vietnam War, with-in a generation, Vietnamese teenagers would be working in factories making tennis shoes for Americans. It's like the joke on Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In, "If you really want to win the Vietnam War, just send a delegation of Japanese and German bankers to Hanoi and have them explain exactly what happens if you lose a war to the United States."
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,102
