Today’s Topic: Even Presidential History isn’t Safe with this Administration
After reading about halfway through Nathaniel Blumberg’s novel "The Afternoon of March 30", I decided today to look up some information about other presidential assassinations and attempts.
While the concept of "lone assassin" permeates the history of America, one has to wonder just how this administration would help to continue the spin. So I took a look at the White House Website and its depiction of history and have come up with just a few things I question, not the least that ALL presidential assassinations have been a coup perpetrated upon the government and people of America.
First, on assassination of William McKinley, a Republican, this paragraph ends the "official" biography.
"His second term, which had begun auspiciously, came to a tragic end in September 1901. He was standing in a receiving line at the Buffalo Pan-American Exposition when a deranged anarchist shot him twice. He died eight days later. "
In terms of an assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan mere months after being inaugurated, only this small segment is presented.
"On January 20, 1981, Reagan took office. Only 69 days later he was shot by a would-be assassin, but quickly recovered and returned to duty. His grace and wit during the dangerous incident caused his popularity to soar. "
Additionally, this little line about his election was strategically inserted.
"Reagan won 489 electoral votes to 49 for President Jimmy Carter."
But here’s where the selective memory, or the revision of history, becomes highly suspicious. Reagan won by a landslide of electoral votes when a democrat, John F. Kennedy, assassinated on November 22, 1963, earned this small insert of the administration’s appraisal.
"Millions watched his television debates with the Republican candidate, Richard M. Nixon. Winning by a narrow margin in the popular vote, Kennedy became the first Roman Catholic President."
The passage about Abraham Lincoln’s assassination is simple and straightforward.
"On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theatre in Washington by John Wilkes Booth, an actor, who somehow thought he was helping the South. The opposite was the result, for with Lincoln's death, the possibility of peace with magnanimity died. "
The problem with Lincoln’s assassination is that it is represented as just another deranged assassin when history tells us that four of Booth’s conspirators were hung, including Mary Surratt, the leaseholder of a tavern used for conspiratorial meetings. Others were given life sentences by military tribunal except for a Ford’s theater stagehand who helped Booth escape and only received a 6 year sentence.
My point is what we have been taught over the 220 years of America’s existence is being modified, and has been modified over the centuries. Perhaps the "who somehow thought he was helping the South" passage is the sum total of a real conspiracy to assassinate a sitting republican president. History has leaked out because of the individuals present during these history-making times have told us about them. But the official version from the White House is that only John Wilkes Booth was the assassin, without concern for the prevailing facts of a real conspiracy.
In fact there is circumstantial evidence of Vice Presidential involvement on the part of Andrew Johnson. At the least Mary Todd Lincoln wrote this paragraph in a letter of March 15, 1866 to her friend Sally Orne.
"...that, that miserable inebriate Johnson, had cognizance of my husband's death - Why, was that card of Booth's, found in his box, some acquaintance certainly existed - I have been deeply impressed, with the harrowing thought, that he, had an understanding with the conspirators & they knew their man... As sure, as you & I live, Johnson, had some hand, in all this..."
Certainly this is not any real "smoking gun" evidence of a "grand" conspiracy to assassinate President Lincoln, but in today’s world guilt by association is given far more credence than perhaps is due.
Surely history is more solid than what is presented on the White House Website?
And, of course, all that I’ve included simply isn’t just about assassinations or attempts, but shows a political bent towards describing history.
For how is it that the electoral votes for Reagan make so much difference when Kennedy’s victory in 1960 is described as a "narrow margin of the popular vote" supposedly equates to Electoral College votes? In truth, Kennedy garnered 303 electoral votes to Nixon’s 219.
These are very slight revisions in just the first five entries I researched of the official presidential biographies. But revisions don’t add up to the omissions. By simply changing a few lines in each of these few presidential biographies I’ve read, history appears to have been altered on a much larger scale. And my gut feeling is that these alterations are politically motivated.
When people visit the White House Website one supposes that they will be getting the truth. When the truth expressed is motivated by political manipulation, then truth no longer exists.
With Karl Rove’s fingerprints all over the politicization of the Executive branch’s institutions, perhaps we should have a document expert research whether the Constitution we view today is the one signed by the likes of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin. Certainly we know that bills up for vote have been substituted in the middle of the night with wording more favorable to this administration, such as the Patriot Act. We also know that, in violation of law, this administration has perpetuated a longstanding ruse upon the American public by utilizing a vast paid propaganda machine, the likes of which has not been seen since the Third Reich. The tendrils seemingly reach into all the aspects of our sacred institutions of government.
And perhaps a true historian should peruse the White House Website to see just how far this politicization has gone. For if just the basic information on the history of the Presidency is suspect, then all the information out of this administration is suspect.
Remember, a person who will lie for his country will lie to his country.
Is there truly any American who doesn’t finally understand all of this?
11:46:45 AM 
|
