Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

John Hanson,First President of USA
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084 		  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: John Hanson,First President of USA
    Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 09:53
George Washington was definitely not the first President of the United States. He was the first President of the United States under the Constitution we follow today. And the first seven Presidents are forgotten in history.
http://www.marshallhall.org/hanson.html
Ok USA people tell me more about it!Big smile
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226 		  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:00
I think I've run this topic before.  Washington was the first first "Elected Pres".  John Hansen, a Swede, was the first under the Articles of Confederation.
 
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392 		  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:03
Red is correct. At various points, during the formation of the government and it's Executive...Legislative and Judicial development of officers and members-duties and responsibilities, authorities etc....prior to the ratification of the USC. Others were given the title President.

Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 07-Mar-2013 at 10:05
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084 		  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:16
"Confederation" was agreement among colonial states with administration had ruled by their foreign state
dominions(Spain&Sweden&Portugal&France...)?
Back to Top
red clay View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar
Tomato Master Emeritus

Joined: 14-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 10226 		  Quote red clay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:19
A side note< Old Swede's Church, Gloria Dei, is where Hansen took the oath of office.  It still exists off the RT 95 corridor, next to "Penn's Landing" in Philadelphia.  If your ever in town, that's a "don't missit".
 
 
"Arguing with someone who hates you or your ideas, is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter what move you make, your opponent will walk all over the board and scramble the pieces".
Unknown.
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392 		  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:26
Not by foreign states...but through an attempt at consensus, by the former colonies, now in theory, equally independent of a central government as separate political states-entities with a national identification as a confederation.
 
See the following:
 
 
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084 		  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 10:35
Was the French revolution reason for American federalization movement?Were dominions of colonies-states
feared about further spreed of revolution on American soil?Or it was vise versa?"Imported" revolution in
France,create "revolution" in colonies?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
Back to Top
Centrix Vigilis View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2006
Location: The Llano
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7392 		  Quote Centrix Vigilis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 11:58
Claims have been made for both theorems Meden. Strong federal control to avoid the destructive nature of the FR vice the concerns for individual state sovereignty and that of the peoples. Especially as it concerned property and individual liberties which was thought, and still is, as being best defended at the local-state level. Through direct selection and balloting etc... As it was at the level, that the people believe their interests are best served thru 'direct' representation.
 
It's a fascinating story that constitution...and not perfect according to many; and always in debate as to it's status as fixed, semi fixed or dynamic (and in reality it's all of those, imo)....but it's close.
 
It was never the provisions inherently or the intent that was or is in error....but the interpretations and laws that developed as the nation did; that might have and have been. But the beauty of it is when the time does come..discerning peoples call for those laws change.
 
 
 
Recognising that it's basic premise while originally written by landed and property classes for self protection in part and; the development of capitalism and a free market..... and equal representation and self determination, even tho miles from their mother nation....And even because they believed that the educated were better qualified to determine a society's development rather then the masses
 
 
......ntl ended up protecting all.
 
 
 
 
And I still believe that given that caveat of intellectual ego and class status-wealth aside; the majority believing in the tenets both legal and spiritual of their forefathers, intended that all along. 
 
And the rest, right and often wrong, is ntl the better for it. And that's America.
 


Edited by Centrix Vigilis - 07-Mar-2013 at 12:03
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"

S. T. Friedman


Pilger's law: 'If it's been officially denied, then it's probably true'

Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084 		  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 14:41
Let me be clear first:God bless America!If it is clear let us talk about real history and your search as "natives
on this land.19th century history was full with revolutions.Almost every country in western Europe got it one.Situation on Europe soil have been copied&pasted in colonies.Did Great Britain loose or win after civil war in America?Federal option had wined and France&Spain&...lost their colonial estates in USA.Britain win or lost really?SmileQueen is out of Dollar face&back but what about banks&owners.There was option: George Washington for a King!
Back to Top
Mountain Man View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16-Aug-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 873 		  Quote Mountain Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Mar-2013 at 15:35
Washington was offered the position of King of America.  Not surprisingly, this left a very bad taste in the mouths of many Americans and he wisely turned it down.  Had he accepted, America would mostl iely have gone immemdiately into a second Revolutionary war, this time against him.

Did Great Britain win or lose as a result of the losing the Revolutionary War?  She lost.  One only has to take a single look at the enormous resources America has yielded since then to understand just how badly GB lost, but losing huge countries with enormous resources is nothing to England.  She lost Canada, Australia, the Far East and India besides America, so at least she has maintained a perfect record.

Anybody can conquer someone else.  The trick to colonialism is to understand how to keep it once you get it. 
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.