United States Trump Announces the Formation of the 'National Garden of American Heroes'

[prinCZess]

It's a neat idea, honestly. More memorials and public displays of folks are worthwhile--if something that should be approached with an eye towards reflecting historical context to individuals displayed--no one could or should make the claim any person enshrined in statue was perfect, and all have some failing or another because all were still human (barring any lizard-man infiltration of the American story ).

A few names that arbitrarily appeal to me for consideration would be Henry Ford, John Coltrane, Standing Bear, Samuel Colt--or John Browning in that same vein, or, to go more contemporary Lee Iacocca. Also contemporary would/could be Chuck Yeager, and while it might be a bit gauche to have a statue of someone living, having the man present for such a statue's dedication would be very appropriate (huh, and today I learned this already exists. Hurray for learning!).

Though I suppose the question is how this garden would interact or overlap with statuary hall in the Capitol? It could be an expansion, it could be its own thing. I dunnow...

 

[Abhorsen]

Personally, I'm in favor of private individuals buying land and commissioning statues, or crowdfunding them. This avoids having a city government tear them down if they later dislike them.

 

[Husky_Khan]

It's a neat idea, honestly. More memorials and public displays of folks are worthwhile--if something that should be approached with an eye towards reflecting historical context to individuals displayed--no one could or should make the claim any person enshrined in statue was perfect, and all have some failing or another because all were still human (barring any lizard-man infiltration of the American story ).

A few names that arbitrarily appeal to me for consideration would be Henry Ford, John Coltrane, Standing Bear, Samuel Colt--or John Browning in that same vein, or, to go more contemporary Lee Iacocca. Also contemporary would/could be Chuck Yeager, and while it might be a bit gauche to have a statue of someone living, having the man present for such a statue's dedication would be very appropriate.

Whoa just looked up Standing Bear. Nice choice.

It's always interesting with American Indians. There are a lot of them and they are highly revered and regarded individuals in American heritage and history and culture. But there's always quirky issues that come up. You have individuals like Squanto and Pocahontas who were crucial in the early years of Colonial America, but we were a British dominion at the time. Then you have individuals like Geronimo or Tecumseh who are honored mostly for their ability to fight against American encroachment and the like and are honored and commemorated both civilly and militarily. But Tecumseh especially would never consider himself an "American" in the national sense. A lot of American Indian icons are moreso because of their spirited and laudable resistance to American expansion and really considered themselves apart from America and the country as a whole.

So there is kind of a dearth of American Indian icons beyond those rightly lauded for their resistance. Sacajawea is one well known exception. I'm trying to think of others but all I can think of is Dave Anderson, who founded Famous Dave's BBQ. And he too is still alive... and despite his many glorious achievements, I suspect falls far short of a commemoration such as this.

I'm being sarcastic of course, there's far more... but how many have really become popular American icons or public figures from our history that weren't pre-Revolutionary or despite being American Indians, perhaps never considered themselves proper citizens of the United States.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Personally, I'm in favor of private individuals buying land and commissioning statues, or crowdfunding them. This avoids having a city government tear them down if they later dislike them.

GTFO Commie.

But seriously, there is another opportunity here. We can make a Great Wall of Statuery. Just imagine a beautifully yuge wall built along the Mexican-American border, each mile marker topped by a beautiful statue of some icon of American history or heritage. It will broadcast America's greatness to a people who yearn to come in but won't be allowed to. You can put some hiking trails and bike paths and observation points along the route as well, make it more scenic.

 

[Arlos]

GTFO Commie.

But seriously, there is another opportunity here. We can make a Great Wall of Statuery. Just imagine a beautifully yuge wall built along the Mexican-American border, each mile marker topped by a beautiful statue of some icon of American history or heritage. It will broadcast America's greatness to a people who yearn to come in but won't be allowed to. You can put some hiking trails and bike paths and observation points along the route as well, make it more scenic.

« You can’t come in, but you can visit the Wall museum, that’ll be 20$ per person. »

 

[Bacle]

If the Native Americans want a few more in the mix, they could (and really should) give Capt. Ernest E. Evans a statue.

He was a Cherokee and is more than qualified to be there on his own.

 

[Abhorsen]

Oh, and maybe a Navajo Code Talker as well.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Oh, and maybe a Navajo Code Talker as well.

Yeah. The main thing is, with MoH winners and Navajo Code Talkers, I would hope that there'd be a reason to choose one singularly out of the whole bunch. Like if you allow one, what justifies them more then everyone else in the same category? Else it just seems so arbitrary.

The only other American Indian I can think of without actually googling into it would be Ely Parker, who served on General Ulysses S. Grant's staff during the American Civil War. There was a notable exchange at Appomattox where General Lee recognized General Parker as an American Indian and after shaking his hand or whatever stated "I am glad to see one real American here."

And Ely Parker responded, "We are all Americans."

Then he served in various government posts postwar including a Commissioner of Indian Affairs and such.

The only other person I can think of, but he'd be more problematic would be a Choctaw Chieftain named Matthaw who actually rejected the alliance with Tecumseh way back in the 1810's and fought on the side of the United States during the War of 1812 and even held a US military general rank and buried with full military honors. Of course IIRC the Choctwa got boned anyways by America but that doesn't diminish the 'Indian General's legacy.

 

[LordsFire]

I read you posts, I read the way you are trying to white-wash traitors to our nation for 'reconciliation' purposes.

Just because the ACW ended does not mean the Confederate leaders suddenly stopped being traitors.

And I'm not the one twisting and contorting the meaning behind the document to try to salvage your decision to say Confederates are qualified to be in the National Garden. So I'd say this more a sensitive topic for you, given all that.

Also, Confederates weren't 'partisans'; they were traitors and slavers serving a traitorous leadership who was fighting to preserve slavery and their own power.

Alright, the way you mono-focus on this thread is getting pretty annoying, so I'm going to start engaging you on this thread, the same way you've been engaging.

As a leftist/former leftist, how dare you groom children for pedophiles. I cannot believe that you continue to support this practice.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Jim Thorpe might be a good Native American option.

Jim Thorpe - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Zachowon]

There are not going to be Confederates in this park; they are disqualified based on the stated requirements.

"those who fought for the abolition of slavery or participated in the underground railroad" is the wording used, and no other wording allows for Confederates to qualify.

There most likely will be no Confederates in the National Garden, ever, and nor should there be based on who is qualified in the document posted at the beginning of this thread.

No one in DC is going to advance putting Confederates in their either, because they know that is a quick way to become a political pariah.

So we cant talk about Lee before he joined to protect his state? When he faught side by side grant (Not literally from what I know) during the Mexican-Amerian war? We cant recognize what a great General he was during his time before during and after the war? Same with other Generals? What about Confederate soldiers who joined the Army after?

They fall under American armed forces members. Did you not see the comma next to and before that phrase? It talks about founding fathers, what you said, armed forces members, MOH, PMOF so on so forth. I can tell you right now, everyone they put on that list, not all of them fought for or were apart of the abolition of slavery, some wernt even born yet...

You are nitpicking words.

Am I saying we should praise the confederates for what they did? No. I am saying we should still respect them for fighting for what they beilive in and dying to thier own brothers for it. The Civil war was a war where Brother killed Brother. Father killed son. Unlike the WWs, this was a war between people who years prior were friends, family.

 

[Bacle]

So we cant talk about Lee before he joined to protect his state? When he faught side by side grant (Not literally from what I know) during the Mexican-Amerian war? We cant recognize what a great General he was during his time before during and after the war? Same with other Generals? What about Confederate soldiers who joined the Army after?

They fall under American armed forces members. Did you not see the comma next to and before that phrase? It talks about founding fathers, what you said, armed forces members, MOH, PMOF so on so forth. I can tell you right now, everyone they put on that list, not all of them fought for or were apart of the abolition of slavery, some wernt even born yet...

You are nitpicking words.

Am I saying we should praise the confederates for what they did? No. I am saying we should still respect them for fighting for what they beilive in and dying to thier own brothers for it. The Civil war was a war where Brother killed Brother. Father killed son. Unlike the WWs, this was a war between people who years prior were friends, family.

How would you feel if Snowden or Bergdahl were nominated?

After all, they fit the criteria too, of you want to play that game.

Edit: I say this because opening the door to ACW traitors opens the door to others as well. I doubt you want to see Benedict Arnold up there, but you are opening the door to that, by pushing that line of logic.

 

[Zachowon]

How would you feel if Snowden or Bergdahl were nominated?

After all, they fit the criteria too, of you want to play that game.

Edit: I say this because opening the door to ACW traitors opens the door to others as well. I doubt you want to see Benedict Arnold up there, but you are opening the door to that, by pushing that line of logic.

Arnold had some good things he did before he was a traitor.

I am just saying putting Lee up there would be honoring someone for thier military mind rather then thier political views.

 

[Bacle]

Arnold had some good things he did before he was a traitor.

I am just saying putting Lee up there would be honoring someone for thier military mind rather then thier political views.

This Garden is about national heroes, of all types, not just military figures, and the politics of those recommended to fill the vacant slots very much comes into play.

Lee was a great military mind, but not a hero to the nation.

 

[Zachowon]

This Garden is about national heroes, of all types, not just military figures, and the politics of those recommended to fill the vacant slots very much comes into play.

Lee was a great military mind, but not a hero to the nation.

He was a hero tot he Nation. He stood up for his state, back when states were more independent. That is like saying the Alamo wernt Heros because they were fighting for thier own State Independence

 

[CarlManvers2019]

Personally, I'm in favor of private individuals buying land and commissioning statues, or crowdfunding them. This avoids having a city government tear them down if they later dislike them.

Somehow, I can see the fact that it's private property being ignored and SOMEHOW the local government making an excuse or justification to be able to take it down anyway

Like making it so that you can't have the American Flag in your own backyard or right outside the window of your apartment or something

 

[Zachowon]

Somehow, I can see the fact that it's private property being ignored and SOMEHOW the local government making an excuse or justification to be able to take it down anyway

Like making it so that you can't have the American Flag in your own backyard or right outside the window of your apartment or something

That is more of a property owner if you are renting an apartment. Not the government

If you own the land you can legally do what ever as long as it follows the law

 

[CarlManvers2019]

That is more of a property owner if you are renting an apartment. Not the government

If you own the land you can legally do what ever as long as it follows the law

The law is whatever the local government says it is alongside whatever those “protestors” decide it is

 

[Zachowon]

The law is whatever the local government says it is alongside whatever those “protestors” decide it is

Not that simple. County laws are generally by a commitee, city is also generally done by a comittee. State is done by the state reps, which are voted for.

 

[Husky_Khan]

How would you feel if Snowden or Bergdahl were nominated?

After all, they fit the criteria too, of you want to play that game.

Edit: I say this because opening the door to ACW traitors opens the door to others as well. I doubt you want to see Benedict Arnold up there, but you are opening the door to that, by pushing that line of logic.

Bowe Bergdahl was a deserter. As far as I know he didnt provide aidnor comfort to the enemy beyond existing in captivity.

Edward Snowden is still hiding in Russia refusing to face justice. Maybe he'd be exonerated if he came back but until then he's hiding out in an authoritarian foreign country and working with our enemies.

Neither of them participated in a Civil War either but fled to foreign nations... Much like your next example.

Benedict Arnold remained in Britain after his betrayal and unlike literally every ex-Confederate mentioned here never surrendered to the United States and became a citizen and advocate for reconciliation and served the United States honorably after the Civil War.

Your Traitor metric is so laughably shallow and thin with a country that was founded on it and that by the era of the American Civil War there was no clear distinction over whether States had the right to secede or not.

Its also important to know that after the ACW the Union tried to try Jefferson Davis for treason and betraying his Oath to the Constitution. Unfortunately... Up til that point and until the 14th Amendment was passed IIRC there was no clear distinction if State citizenship or national citizenship held primacy when you made an oath to the Constitution or were a citizen. Therefore Essentially he was only an American/US citizen via being a citizen of Virginia. And when Virginia seceded... he was no longer a citizen of the United States and therefore any obligations or privileges he previously held as a US military officer were over when Virginia seceded. If you are a citizen of the United States via being a citizen of Virginia... Then if Virginia secedes you and all othrt Virginian state citizens are no longer American and the Constitution wasnt clear on the issue either way.

Thus... Why after the ACW the common reply to secessionist ideas isnt some case law but instead citing North v. South. Might made right in this case...but theres still the 14th Amendment and stuff since then.

Your argument is doubly hollow for another hypothetical.

Lets assume some southern firebrand became President in 1860 and it was the Northern states that seceded... Oh I guess they're the traitors then. Permaban.