Dead Presidents

I know that I am not the only big fan of Lyndon Baines Johnson...

Fri, 24 May 2013 20:11:35 -0500

I know that I am not the only big fan of Lyndon Baines Johnson here on Tumblr, so I wanted to pass along a suggestion I received while exchanging e-mails today with Margaret, the wonderful web editor at the LBJ Library.

The LBJ Library, on the campus of the University of Texas in Austin, has been newly-redesigned and is once again re-opened to visitors every day of the year except Christmas. During the year that I lived in Austin, I found myself at the LBJ Library more times than I can even estimate and loved every visit. The only thing I miss about Texas is that wonderful Library and Museum, and I would definitely like to check out the redesigned exhibits. Fortunately, if you’re not in the vicinity of Austin, you can still take the tour with the LBJ Library app from the iTunes store, which will act as your tour guide and take you on an updated journey through President Johnson’s life and career.

For Presidential history nerds such as us, each of the locations in our nation’s growing Presidential Library system give us an opportunity to celebrate and learn about our country’s leaders. To me, visiting a Presidential Library is like winning a Golden Ticket to Willy Wonka’s Presidential History Factory. But way cooler and with only a few Oompa Loompas (at the Hoover Library, oddly enough…I think he brought them back from Belgium). Now, for just 99 cents, you can tour the updated version of LBJ’s Library by downloading the LBJ Library app from the iTunes store!

Anonymous asked: Would you take a bullet for Obama? I really had to stop and think about this one....

Fri, 24 May 2013 17:40:51 -0500

Anonymous asked: Would you take a bullet for Obama?

I really had to stop and think about this one. At first, I was going to either skip this question or give a smart-ass answer, but once I started thinking about it, I decided that I could give you a serious answer because I really have deep-seated feelings about the Presidency.

Yes, I would take a bullet for President Obama. What’s might be more surprising — especially for those who know my political background and beliefs — is that I would have taken a bullet for George W. Bush.

This isn’t because I’m a hero or think I am a Superman. I wouldn’t take a bullet for a Presidential candidate, but for the President of the United States, I would risk my life to protect the office. The office is bigger than any man (or woman), especially this man. The stability of the nation, our place in the world, the importance of the Presidency — all of these things are worth sacrificing my well-being for. If soldiers can risk their lives in the service of their country, I would risk mine for the safety of my President. I wouldn’t do it gladly. I wouldn’t want to do it. But I would do it because I have that much respect for the office.

So, in reality, I don’t think it’s so much that I would take a bullet for Barack Obama. I would take a bullet for the President of the United States of America. Whether I voted for him or not, once he raises his right hand and takes the oath of office, the President is my President. I may not support all of his policies, but I damn well support his well-being and I sure as hell root for him, no matter what party he belongs to. The life of the man who holds the office is no more important than yours or mine. But, in my opinion and in my heart, the office itself is worth whatever risks it might require to protect and support it.

I just noticed that a few people asked me to post a rebloggable version of my answer about if I...

Fri, 24 May 2013 17:30:06 -0500

I just noticed that a few people asked me to post a rebloggable version of my answer about if I would take a bullet for the President, so, yes, I can do that. I apologize for not seeing your requests earlier in the day!

Would you take a bullet for Obama?

Fri, 24 May 2013 12:23:00 -0500

How would still being governor of California have prevented Nixon from running for President in '68? It didn't stop Reagan from making a run at it.

Fri, 24 May 2013 09:38:02 -0500

I don’t mean to say that if Nixon had won his bid for Governor of California in 1962 (and, presumably, won a second term in 1966) it would have prevented him from running for President in 1968. However, it would have been a very different situation than what actually did happen. Instead of coming out of exile to seemingly salvage a GOP that had been battered throughout the 1960s and uniting a party that had been so divided, especially after the disastrous 1964 Presidential campaign, Nixon would have remained a visible part of the establishment throughout the 1960s and I think that would have hurt him in 1968.

Nixon, of course, was not anti-establishment. Far from it. But he had actually freshened himself up to voters after losing the 1962 gubernatorial race to Pat Brown by stepping away, moving to New York, writing/practicing law, and only campaigning for others rather than himself. By 1968, there were people who missed Dick Nixon! And that’s a big reason why he was able to step into that race, in one of the craziest years in American history, push himself as a new man, the voice of the Silent Majority, and put over his focus on law and order. Had he been Governor of California throughout the decade, none of that could have happened. Sure, nothing would have stopped Nixon from running for President in 1968 if he were Governor of California. Like you said, Reagan (who actually was Governor of California in 1968) was maneuvering to take a shot at the GOP nomination that year. But Governor Reagan wasn’t successful at it in 1968 and I don’t think a Governor Nixon would have been either.

Do you respect any republican presidents? are there any republican politicians today that you respect?

Fri, 24 May 2013 08:57:23 -0500

I respect everybody unless or until they give me a reason not to respect them. I especially have great respect for all of our Presidents, regardless of party affiliation — Republican, Democrat, Whig, Federalist, it doesn’t matter. I don’t agree with everything every President ever did, but I respect their service and their sacrifices on behalf of our country. As I’ve said many times, no American President ever ran for office because he wanted to destroy the nation.

neutralangel: I have never wanted to do anything less than I want to reblog as link. Co-Signed:...

Fri, 24 May 2013 00:33:08 -0500

neutralangel:

I have never wanted to do anything less than I want to reblog as link.

Co-Signed: Anthony Bergen

Brotherhood — our documentary on local war veterans from...

Wed, 22 May 2013 20:09:24 -0500

Brotherhood — our documentary on local war veterans from the American Legion in Union, Missouri — is ready to be premiered for those vets tomorrow night. Keith and I are pretty proud of the film we made and happy with the cover art we designed for the DVD packaging, as well. Hopefully, these will all be sold over the Memorial Day weekend!

Photo

Wed, 22 May 2013 15:18:44 -0500

Sure, no problem.

Wed, 22 May 2013 15:18:05 -0500

Sure, no problem.

The usual Santorum-esque response against gay marriage is that if two men or women can marry, polygamy would be a natural progression for marriage. Do you think that would be a likely next step or something that would be supported with the passion seen for gay marriage?

Wed, 22 May 2013 14:57:30 -0500

No, I think that’s a ridiculous argument. Gay marriage and polygamy are two completely different things. Gay marriage isn’t the progression or evolution of the institution of marriage — it’s equality, plain and simple. It’s equal rights.

Linking gay marriage with polygamy is like linking voting rights for African-Americans in the 1960s with giving driver’s licenses to dolphins. They don’t belong in the same conversation.

At the heart of the matter, it is a civil rights issue. That’s how it should be framed, that’s how the battle should be fought, and that’s what people will look back on it as in a few years.

Nixon ran for Governor of California following his Vice Presidency and lost handily. Would his political career be remarkably different had he won, or would it have just been another notch on his belt?

Wed, 22 May 2013 14:49:58 -0500

I think Nixon needed to lose that race. Deep down, he didn’t want to be Governor of California and went back-and-forth about jumping into the race in 1962. But Nixon needed to get his ass kicked by Pat Brown in that race so that he could step away, focus himself, and wait for the opportune time to jump back into politics. During that first exile from politics — after his gubernatorial defeat — Nixon did some writing, made quite a bit of money by practicing law, and built a remarkable political machine by campaigning for GOP candidates across the country that he was able to turn to in 1968 to call in favors of his own.

Had Nixon been elected Governor of California in 1962, it would have changed not only Nixon’s political career, but the entire political landscape for the rest of the 20th century. Ronald Reagan was elected Governor of California in 1966, so if Nixon had won in 1962, that wouldn’t have happened. Two terms as Governor for Nixon would have taken him to 1970, and he wouldn’t have a chance to seek the Presidency again until 1972. The timing would have been difficult for both Nixon and Reagan. The balance of power in the Republican Party in the last three decades of the 20th Century would have been far different than what actually happened.

Do you think Obama knew of or had any responsibility for the IRS targeting conservative groups?

Wed, 22 May 2013 14:40:18 -0500

I don’t think that he knew of it and certainly don’t think that he would have approved of it. It’s petty politics way below the level of the President. With that said, he’s absolutely responsible for what happens in his Administration. Even if it was far below his level and even if it never got to the White House until the investigations began, Harry Truman’s “the buck stops here” is still the case with every President.

Killah Priest (feat. Ghostface Killah & Inspectah Deck):...

Wed, 22 May 2013 01:52:08 -0500

Killah Priest (feat. Ghostface Killah & Inspectah Deck): Devotion to the Saints

there is that saying that secret service agents are trained to take a bullet for the president. if---god forbid----there was another attempt on a presidents life, do you think an agent would actually pull a super hero move and try to do that?

Sun, 19 May 2013 04:06:11 -0500

That isn’t a myth or a cliché. Not only do I think that a Secret Service agent would take a bullet for the President, but a Secret Service agent already HAS taken a bullet for the President!

This is March 30, 1981, as President Reagan leaves the Washington Hilton. In this first photo, John Hinckley, Jr. has just fired his first shots at Reagan and you can see the reaction. The blonde-haired agent in the blue-gray suit at the center of the photo is Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy:

Behind McCarthy, Secret Service agent Jerry Parr is shoving President Reagan into the limo. Not only is McCarthy reacting to the gunshots, he’s turning the front of his body towards them:

This is no accident or stroke of bad luck. Milliseconds have passed, but Agent McCarthy has shifted his body into a wide stance and is literally shielding President Reagan, who can still somewhat be seen directly behind McCarthy as Agent Parr keeps shoving the President into the limousine:

In that instant, as Hinckley was firing his shots at President Reagan, Agent McCarthy instinctively (yet consciously) recognized the danger, understood the consequences, realized what he had been trained to do, and, yes, in a superhero move, used his body as a shield and took a bullet for the President of the United States:

Of course, we know that President Reagan was still shot and nearly killed during this assassination attempt, but the bullet that struck Reagan had ricocheted off the limo and hit him. The quick-thinking and incredible heroism of Secret Service agent Tim McCarthy probably saved the 70-year-old President from taking another bullet, and he probably saved lead agent Jerry Parr from being shot, as well.

To reiterate, Tim McCarthy didn’t just happen to accidentally get caught in the crossfire — he consciously turned himself towards the gunfire, purposely spread himself into a wide stance, and used his body as a shield so that John Hinckley, Jr. would shoot him instead of President Reagan. So, yes, I think other Secret Service agents would do the same. In fact, one member of President Truman’s protective detail was killed and two were wounded in 1950 when two Puerto Rican nationalists tried to shoot their way into Blair House, the temporary Presidential home while the White House was being renovated, and assassinate President Truman.

By the way, Agent McCarthy fully recovered from his wound.

Hillary?

Sun, 19 May 2013 03:28:05 -0500

No, I’m Anthony. People make that mistake all of the time. It must be my flowing blonde hair and smart pantsuits.

stayand watch the next set of possibilitiesariseand fall awaywhat have you got to losebut...

Sun, 19 May 2013 00:39:58 -0500

stay
and watch the next set of possibilities
arise
and fall away
what have you got to lose
but everything
piece by piece
everything
day by day

Sam Shepard: “Should He Head North”
Day out of Days (BOOK•KINDLE)

i know you already answered that you aren't catholic and are just interested in popes but is there a reason why? just curious why the pope instead of for example, the emperor of japan or the spanish kings and queens?

Sat, 18 May 2013 22:50:00 -0500

Honestly, I have no idea. It’s certainly not any type of theological interest or connection. Unlike the Presidents, the Popes should be as foreign or distant to me as the examples you used — the Japanese emperors or Spanish monarchs — and, really, they are. Yet, those who have reigned as Pope and the Papacy itself definitely piques my interest in a way second only to the American Presidents and American Presidency.

The best explanation that I can give you for my interest in the Popes and Papacy despite the fact that I am a committed non-believer actually comes from a Catholic priest. In The Making of the Popes 1978, Father Andrew Greeley differentiates between “papal mystique” and “papal policies”. It’s that mystique that draws me in — an interest in the people who put on the robes and the funny hats and become this incredible powerful, absolute monarch who is not only a supposedly infallible religious leader to over a billion human beings worldwide but also the temporal leader of a sovereign state with borderline dictatorial powers. And, most amazingly of all, there is no Biblical or secular basis for this hugely powerful position.

As Father Greeley writes about the “papal mystique”: “You can come and shout ‘Viva il Papa’ at St. Peter’s because of the symbolic power of the office and still not really take seriously the kind of stuff the Pope tries to teach you.” When I’m studying the Popes and I read their encyclicals or their motu proprios, it’s not a religious thing to me — it’s filling in the biographical blanks. The Pope’s power is supposedly derived from God. I don’t believe in God. But the Pope indeed has power. So the mystique for me becomes a search for where that power actually comes from, who truly wields it, what kind of person does it take to become and reign as Pope, and so on. That’s where my interests in the subject lie, I guess.

Imagine my shock when my friend Josh (aka Sir Samurai) mentioned...

Sat, 18 May 2013 16:46:25 -0500

Imagine my shock when my friend Josh (aka Sir Samurai) mentioned that he was reading the recent book by UFC fighter (and fellow Sacramento native) Urijah Faber and was surprised to find my name on the back of it. I reviewed Urijah’s book when it was first released, but had no idea that they used a quote from my review as a blurb. My shock turned into pure excitement when Josh sent me this picture of the back cover and I realized that not only is my name on Urijah’s book, but it is prominently placed (to say the least) and plugs Dead Presidents, too! How cool is that?!

Next time you’re at a bookstore, grab yourself a copy the newly-released paperback edition of Urijah Faber’s The Laws of the Ring, find my name on the back, and get excited!

“One day Shaq dropped by the house unannounced. He’d ventured to Montana in order to...

Thu, 16 May 2013 20:46:48 -0500

“One day Shaq dropped by the house unannounced. He’d ventured to Montana in order to perform at a rap concert in nearby Kalispell. I wasn’t home when he arrived, so June invited him in. When I drove up, Shaq was bouncing on a trampoline down by the lake and creating quite a sensation in the neighborhood. All of the sudden, dozens of boats filled with curious onlookers crowded into the bay near our house to gawk at this giant leaping through the air. Shaq did not disappoint. After the trampoline exhibition, he started doing comical backflips off the dock, then took off on a madcap Jet Ski tour of the bay.

Since he was already wet, I asked Shaq to help me move a large tree that had toppled in our yard during a recent storm. It was impressive watching him work. ’We’re going to have a lot of fun, Coach,’ he said when we were finished. That’s what Shaq was all about: fun.”

— Hall of Fame coach Phil Jackson on a surprise visit that Shaquille O’Neal made to Jackson’s home in remote Montana, just a few weeks after Jackson was hired to coach the Los Angeles Lakers in 1999.

This is just one of many candid stories and anecdotes about Jackson’s experiences and leadership lessons he learned during his career as a player and coach in the NBA recounted in Jackson’s new book, Eleven Rings: The Soul of Success (BOOK•KINDLE). My copy of Eleven Rings arrived just a few hours ago and I’m already 200 pages deep and will finish it tonight. If you’re a fan of basketball — or leaders — I highly suggest checking out this book when it is released next Tuesday.