Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [prezveepsenator] "Robin Hood," Congress and the Court (Re: John Tyler)

Expand Messages
  • THOMAS JOHNSON
    Thanks to all for the responses.. my question was certainly answered well. I m not sure if anyone ever brought in someone for veep outside their own party
    Message 1 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
      Thanks to all for the responses.. my question was
      certainly answered well. I'm not sure if anyone ever
      brought in someone for veep outside their own party
      since, but I'm reasonably sure that if someone did,
      they didn't deliver a 2 hour inaugural address in
      freezing temperatures without a coat, as Harrison did.
      I don't think anyone got off to a worse start than
      basically freezing himself to death on his first day.

      Tom



      --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


      ---------------------------------
      http://www.supremecourthistory.org/myweb/77journal/swindler77.htm
      "Robin Hood," Congress and the Court
      WILLIAM F. SWINDLER

      Copyright 1976, Supreme Court Historical Society
      from the Yearbook 1977 Supreme Court Historical
      Society

      Presidents nominate persons for positions on the
      Supreme Court for a
      variety of reasons--and in about one case in four, the
      Senate rejects
      the nomination for a variety of reasons, mostly
      political. Altogether,
      thirty-four persons have been proposed for the Court
      who did not sit.
      Seven were confirmed but declined the appointment; one
      died after
      confirmation but before he could take his seat; twelve
      were rejected
      by recorded vote; the rest were killed off by various
      types of
      delaying action, or simply no action.

      Eight Presidents have had one of their nominations
      defeated by one
      senatorial tactic or another; Grover Cleveland and
      Richard Nixon had
      two rejections apiece; Millard Fillmore and Ulysses S.
      Grant, three
      each. But the record is held, in rather dubious honor,
      by John Tyler,
      the unhappy President without a party, who had the
      distinction of
      experiencing five rejections of four of his nominees
      in thirteen months.

      Tyler's selections for the Court were all of high
      professional
      quality. It was Tyler, not the individual nominees,
      who was the target
      of the Senate vendetta. Only once in six attempts did
      the President
      succeed in getting his man confirmed--Chief Justice
      Samuel Nelson of
      New York. Nelson was so conspicuously competent that,
      in the interval
      of an uneasy truce between White House and Capitol,
      his name was
      approved and he went onto the bench.

      Tyler, a Democrat, had come to the presidency by
      accident. William
      Henry Harrison had been chosen by the Whigs as their
      candidate for the
      White House in 1840 and Tyler had been his running
      mate. The fact that
      the vice-presidential candidate came from the opposite
      party and had
      almost completely opposite political views seemed to
      the strategists
      of the day to be a masterstroke. In the Number Two
      position, Tyler's
      views would be neutralized while the combination of a
      Whig and a
      Democrat would offer a bipartisan appearance
      calculated to split the
      opposition. To the familiar campaign song of
      "Tippecanoe and Tyler
      Too," the Whigs contented themselves with vilifying
      their opponent,
      Martin Van Buren of New York, and evading a discussion
      of issues which
      would bring their own candidates into conflict with
      each other.

      The whole thing blew up when the elderly Harrison was
      struck by
      pneumonia on the day of his inauguration and died a
      month later. Tyler
      became the first vice president thus to succeed to the
      White House
      because of the death of the incumbent President. He
      immediately served
      notice that his administration would follow a strong
      states' rights
      line; with the Whigs in control of the Senate, this
      overshadowed a
      solid opposition to Tyler nominees, e.g., for the
      Supreme Court, as
      events were to prove. The Whigs, chagrined at having
      lost the fruits
      of the election, turned for leadership to Henry Clay
      of Kentucky, an
      old Tyler foe; as for the Democrats, they not only
      resented Tyler's
      trafficking with the Whigs in the 1840 campaign, but
      they were for the
      most part followers of Van Buren, whose defeat in 1840
      was ascribed in
      large part to the vitriolic attacks of the
      Harrison-Tyler partisans.

      The confrontation began in January 1844, when the
      President sent up a
      nomination of a successor to Justice Smith Thompson,
      who had died the
      previous month. Tyler's first impulse was to play the
      same political
      game that had proved effective--at least up to a
      point--in 1840: he
      would propose Van Buren himself, thus appealing to the
      Democrats for
      restored party harmony while putting his strongest
      rival for the 1844
      Presidential nomination out of contention. Van Buren's
      friends saw
      through the maneuver and persuaded Tyler that Van
      Buren would reject
      the nomination and make Tyler himself a laughing
      stock. The President
      thereupon substituted another New Yorker, John C.
      Spencer--and leapt
      from the frying pan into the fire.

      Spencer was a Whig, but this did nothing to further
      his nomination.
      First, was the fact that he was an anti-Clay Whig;
      second, he had
      accepted appointment to Tyler's Cabinet as Secretary
      of War and
      subsequently Secretary of the Treasury. Finally, his
      narrow, technical
      views on the national banking laws had added to the
      current enmities,
      since it had been a bitter debate over a banking bill
      that had caused
      mass resignations from the Cabinet in 1842. Despite
      acknowledged legal
      competence, "I have no confidence in the political
      integrity of Mr.
      Spencer," wrote a New York political leader to Clay's
      henchman,
      Senator John J. Crittenden of Kentucky, while another
      New York Whig
      stalwart, Francis Granger, declared in the New York
      Herald that ninety
      Whigs out of every hundred would oppose the
      nomination.

      Within three weeks, the Spencer nomination had been
      rejected by the
      Senate, 21-26. For the next six weeks, Tyler sounded
      out a number of
      prospects including--or so it was rumored--the leading
      Philadelphia
      lawyer Horace Binney and the longtime reporter to the
      Supreme Court,
      Henry Wheaton. Finally, on March 13, 1844, the
      President made his
      second formal selection, the chancellor of New York,
      Reuben H.
      Walworth. The Senate showed no disposition to act on
      the nomination,
      and while matters thus drifted along a second Court
      vacancy occurred
      with the death of Justice Henry Baldwin. On June 5
      Tyler sent up a
      second name for the second opening--Judge Edward King
      of Philadelphia.

      Tyler was in an impossible situation, not only with
      respect to his
      Supreme Court nominees but with reference to his
      entire administrative
      program. A courtly Virginian of the old Jeffersonian
      tradition, it had
      been his misfortune to come to national office at a
      time when the
      party of Jefferson was torn between the Van Buren
      faction of the North
      and the Clay faction of the West. Indeed, most of the
      political career
      of this gentle and gentlemanly Southerner was to be a
      history of being
      left behind by changing times. Elected to the Senate
      as an
      anti-Jackson Democrat, he had felt obliged to support
      Jackson against
      Clay, in the deadlock of 1828, as "a choice of evils."
      Yet in 1832
      when the Jacksonian Democrats won control of the
      Virginia legislature
      and returned Tyler to the Senate, it was with
      instructions to vote to
      expunge the resolution which had censured Jackson in
      the heated
      struggle over the Bank of the United States. Unable to
      find it in his
      conscience to do so, Tyler had resigned his seat.

      Tragedy and near-tragedy had marked Tyler's
      presidential years. In
      1842 his first wife had died. Two years later, making
      an official
      visit aboard the warship Princeton, he himself
      narrowly escaped death
      when there was an accidental explosion which killed
      several members of
      the presidential party, including a prominent New
      Yorker, David
      Gardiner. This event did prove to have a happy ending;
      Gardiner's
      daughter, Julia, married the widowed President in June
      1844, providing
      the White House with a gracious First Lady in the
      closing months of
      the administration.

      The couple then retired to the Tyler plantation on the
      James River in
      Virginia. which Tyler had named "Sherwood Forest," in
      wry
      acknowledgement of his own political destiny, which he
      described as
      the role of "Robin Hood" confronting the arrogance of
      power in his own
      time. The choice of the terms apparently was an
      admission of political
      predestination; by the spring of 1844, it was apparent
      that Tyler's
      chances of renomination for the presidency were as
      non-existent as his
      likelihood of getting his Supreme Court nominations
      through the
      Senate. In January 1845 the Senate formally tabled the
      Walworth and
      King nominations.

      That November, the election of James K. Polk had
      settled several
      matters--the diehard efforts of Clay to get into the
      White House, and
      the prospects of both Tyler and Van Buren for future
      political office.
      Another matter which the Polk election settled was the
      ambition of
      Senator Crittenden to get onto the Supreme Court. He
      had first been
      nominated in the last days of John Quincy Adams'
      administration, with
      the Jacksonians in the Senate voting to "postpone"
      action until their
      own man took office a few weeks later. Clay, had he
      been successful in
      his final bid for the White House, presumably would
      have sent up the
      name of his fellow Kentuckian one more time.

      Now, in the last days of the Tyler administration, the
      White House
      sought to accommodate the Senate in the wake of the
      presidential
      election; with political issues settled for the time,
      and with one
      Supreme Court position having been unfilled for a
      year, it could be
      hoped that a policy of reasonableness might govern
      relations between
      President and Senate in these last few months. The
      optimists were to
      prove to be only half right.

      "Better the bench shall be vacant for a year," the
      National
      Intelligencer had editorialized the previous spring,
      "than filled for
      half a century by . . . partisans committed in advance
      to particular
      beliefs." The charge was somewhat exaggerated; while
      Walworth was
      condemned in the Senate as "querulous, disagreeable
      [and] unpopular,"
      he was in many professional respects the best
      qualified of Tyler's
      unsuccessful nominations. For the previous twenty
      years as chancellor
      of New York he had virtually written the law of equity
      pleading and
      rules of evidence, and a substantial majority of his
      opinions had been
      upheld on appeal. Both his predecessor, the renowned
      Chancellor James
      Kent, and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story cited his
      cases as
      authoritative.

      Yet there was no denying that he was cantankerous, to
      a point where
      members of the state bar openly declared that they
      supported his
      nomination for the Supreme Court as a means of getting
      him out of
      their own judiciary. The animus was apparently deep
      rooted; in the new
      constitution of 1846, New York would dispose of the
      problem by
      abolishing the office of chancellor. In January 1845,
      Tyler accepted
      the fact of the massive opposition to Walworth and
      withdrew his name.

      There was no clear objection--other than the Senate's
      anti-Tyler
      fixation--for opposing Judge King, a highly reputed
      Pennsylvanian, and
      the President made one final attempt to override the
      opposition by
      resubmitting King's name. The signs in the Senate were
      so forbidding,
      however, that early in February he withdrew that
      nomination as well.

      Time was now running out; obviously, the anti-Tyler
      forces were
      delaying action until a new administration could take
      over in March.
      But the outgoing President made one further effort,
      and for the two
      vacancies on the Court he finally, on the same day
      that he withdrew
      King's name, submitted two last nominations--Chief
      Justice Samuel
      Nelson of New York and former United States Attorney
      John Meredith
      Read of Philadelphia.

      Nelson, one of the best known state judges in the
      land, was confirmed
      within a week, and took his seat on the Court the day
      after Tyler left
      office. It was to be Tyler's only successful
      nomination for the bench.
      Read, although popular with all faction among the
      Whigs, had
      antislavery views which were anathema to the Southern
      members of the
      Senate, and the term ended without action on his case.

      The sound and fury over the Court vacancies actually
      attracted small
      attention in their day. The struggle between Tyler and
      the
      Congressional opposition involved other issues of more
      burning public
      concern, epitomized in the effort to annex the
      Republic of Texas.
      After the Whig-dominated Senate refused to ratify a
      treaty of
      annexation, Tyler proposed a joint resolution of both
      houses, which
      would require only a simple majority. This tactic
      finally worked, but
      only after the fall elections made certain a new
      Democratic majority
      in Congress. In a sense, the judicial nominations of
      the President
      without a party were innocent bystanders to the larger
      contest; in any
      case, several highly qualified candidates were the
      victims.





      ---------------------------------
      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


      Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
      Terms of Service.


      ---------------------------------
    • Ram Lau
      Don t forget Andrew Johnson, the jerk who got us into all these problems (quoting Trent Lott) for at least another century. Lincoln s intention was good, and
      Message 2 of 8 , Aug 30, 2005
        Don't forget Andrew Johnson, the jerk who got us into "all these
        problems" (quoting Trent Lott) for at least another century. Lincoln's
        intention was good, and he probably didn't to be the first President
        to be assassinated.

        Ram


        --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON <AVRCRDNG@F...>
        wrote:
        > Thanks to all for the responses.. my question was
        > certainly answered well. I'm not sure if anyone ever
        > brought in someone for veep outside their own party
        > since, but I'm reasonably sure that if someone did,
        > they didn't deliver a 2 hour inaugural address in
        > freezing temperatures without a coat, as Harrison did.
        > I don't think anyone got off to a worse start than
        > basically freezing himself to death on his first day.
        >
        > Tom
        >
        >
        >
        > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------
        > http://www.supremecourthistory.org/myweb/77journal/swindler77.htm
        > "Robin Hood," Congress and the Court
        > WILLIAM F. SWINDLER
        >
        > Copyright 1976, Supreme Court Historical Society
        > from the Yearbook 1977 Supreme Court Historical
        > Society
        >
        > Presidents nominate persons for positions on the
        > Supreme Court for a
        > variety of reasons--and in about one case in four, the
        > Senate rejects
        > the nomination for a variety of reasons, mostly
        > political. Altogether,
        > thirty-four persons have been proposed for the Court
        > who did not sit.
        > Seven were confirmed but declined the appointment; one
        > died after
        > confirmation but before he could take his seat; twelve
        > were rejected
        > by recorded vote; the rest were killed off by various
        > types of
        > delaying action, or simply no action.
        >
        > Eight Presidents have had one of their nominations
        > defeated by one
        > senatorial tactic or another; Grover Cleveland and
        > Richard Nixon had
        > two rejections apiece; Millard Fillmore and Ulysses S.
        > Grant, three
        > each. But the record is held, in rather dubious honor,
        > by John Tyler,
        > the unhappy President without a party, who had the
        > distinction of
        > experiencing five rejections of four of his nominees
        > in thirteen months.
        >
        > Tyler's selections for the Court were all of high
        > professional
        > quality. It was Tyler, not the individual nominees,
        > who was the target
        > of the Senate vendetta. Only once in six attempts did
        > the President
        > succeed in getting his man confirmed--Chief Justice
        > Samuel Nelson of
        > New York. Nelson was so conspicuously competent that,
        > in the interval
        > of an uneasy truce between White House and Capitol,
        > his name was
        > approved and he went onto the bench.
        >
        > Tyler, a Democrat, had come to the presidency by
        > accident. William
        > Henry Harrison had been chosen by the Whigs as their
        > candidate for the
        > White House in 1840 and Tyler had been his running
        > mate. The fact that
        > the vice-presidential candidate came from the opposite
        > party and had
        > almost completely opposite political views seemed to
        > the strategists
        > of the day to be a masterstroke. In the Number Two
        > position, Tyler's
        > views would be neutralized while the combination of a
        > Whig and a
        > Democrat would offer a bipartisan appearance
        > calculated to split the
        > opposition. To the familiar campaign song of
        > "Tippecanoe and Tyler
        > Too," the Whigs contented themselves with vilifying
        > their opponent,
        > Martin Van Buren of New York, and evading a discussion
        > of issues which
        > would bring their own candidates into conflict with
        > each other.
        >
        > The whole thing blew up when the elderly Harrison was
        > struck by
        > pneumonia on the day of his inauguration and died a
        > month later. Tyler
        > became the first vice president thus to succeed to the
        > White House
        > because of the death of the incumbent President. He
        > immediately served
        > notice that his administration would follow a strong
        > states' rights
        > line; with the Whigs in control of the Senate, this
        > overshadowed a
        > solid opposition to Tyler nominees, e.g., for the
        > Supreme Court, as
        > events were to prove. The Whigs, chagrined at having
        > lost the fruits
        > of the election, turned for leadership to Henry Clay
        > of Kentucky, an
        > old Tyler foe; as for the Democrats, they not only
        > resented Tyler's
        > trafficking with the Whigs in the 1840 campaign, but
        > they were for the
        > most part followers of Van Buren, whose defeat in 1840
        > was ascribed in
        > large part to the vitriolic attacks of the
        > Harrison-Tyler partisans.
        >
        > The confrontation began in January 1844, when the
        > President sent up a
        > nomination of a successor to Justice Smith Thompson,
        > who had died the
        > previous month. Tyler's first impulse was to play the
        > same political
        > game that had proved effective--at least up to a
        > point--in 1840: he
        > would propose Van Buren himself, thus appealing to the
        > Democrats for
        > restored party harmony while putting his strongest
        > rival for the 1844
        > Presidential nomination out of contention. Van Buren's
        > friends saw
        > through the maneuver and persuaded Tyler that Van
        > Buren would reject
        > the nomination and make Tyler himself a laughing
        > stock. The President
        > thereupon substituted another New Yorker, John C.
        > Spencer--and leapt
        > from the frying pan into the fire.
        >
        > Spencer was a Whig, but this did nothing to further
        > his nomination.
        > First, was the fact that he was an anti-Clay Whig;
        > second, he had
        > accepted appointment to Tyler's Cabinet as Secretary
        > of War and
        > subsequently Secretary of the Treasury. Finally, his
        > narrow, technical
        > views on the national banking laws had added to the
        > current enmities,
        > since it had been a bitter debate over a banking bill
        > that had caused
        > mass resignations from the Cabinet in 1842. Despite
        > acknowledged legal
        > competence, "I have no confidence in the political
        > integrity of Mr.
        > Spencer," wrote a New York political leader to Clay's
        > henchman,
        > Senator John J. Crittenden of Kentucky, while another
        > New York Whig
        > stalwart, Francis Granger, declared in the New York
        > Herald that ninety
        > Whigs out of every hundred would oppose the
        > nomination.
        >
        > Within three weeks, the Spencer nomination had been
        > rejected by the
        > Senate, 21-26. For the next six weeks, Tyler sounded
        > out a number of
        > prospects including--or so it was rumored--the leading
        > Philadelphia
        > lawyer Horace Binney and the longtime reporter to the
        > Supreme Court,
        > Henry Wheaton. Finally, on March 13, 1844, the
        > President made his
        > second formal selection, the chancellor of New York,
        > Reuben H.
        > Walworth. The Senate showed no disposition to act on
        > the nomination,
        > and while matters thus drifted along a second Court
        > vacancy occurred
        > with the death of Justice Henry Baldwin. On June 5
        > Tyler sent up a
        > second name for the second opening--Judge Edward King
        > of Philadelphia.
        >
        > Tyler was in an impossible situation, not only with
        > respect to his
        > Supreme Court nominees but with reference to his
        > entire administrative
        > program. A courtly Virginian of the old Jeffersonian
        > tradition, it had
        > been his misfortune to come to national office at a
        > time when the
        > party of Jefferson was torn between the Van Buren
        > faction of the North
        > and the Clay faction of the West. Indeed, most of the
        > political career
        > of this gentle and gentlemanly Southerner was to be a
        > history of being
        > left behind by changing times. Elected to the Senate
        > as an
        > anti-Jackson Democrat, he had felt obliged to support
        > Jackson against
        > Clay, in the deadlock of 1828, as "a choice of evils."
        > Yet in 1832
        > when the Jacksonian Democrats won control of the
        > Virginia legislature
        > and returned Tyler to the Senate, it was with
        > instructions to vote to
        > expunge the resolution which had censured Jackson in
        > the heated
        > struggle over the Bank of the United States. Unable to
        > find it in his
        > conscience to do so, Tyler had resigned his seat.
        >
        > Tragedy and near-tragedy had marked Tyler's
        > presidential years. In
        > 1842 his first wife had died. Two years later, making
        > an official
        > visit aboard the warship Princeton, he himself
        > narrowly escaped death
        > when there was an accidental explosion which killed
        > several members of
        > the presidential party, including a prominent New
        > Yorker, David
        > Gardiner. This event did prove to have a happy ending;
        > Gardiner's
        > daughter, Julia, married the widowed President in June
        > 1844, providing
        > the White House with a gracious First Lady in the
        > closing months of
        > the administration.
        >
        > The couple then retired to the Tyler plantation on the
        > James River in
        > Virginia. which Tyler had named "Sherwood Forest," in
        > wry
        > acknowledgement of his own political destiny, which he
        > described as
        > the role of "Robin Hood" confronting the arrogance of
        > power in his own
        > time. The choice of the terms apparently was an
        > admission of political
        > predestination; by the spring of 1844, it was apparent
        > that Tyler's
        > chances of renomination for the presidency were as
        > non-existent as his
        > likelihood of getting his Supreme Court nominations
        > through the
        > Senate. In January 1845 the Senate formally tabled the
        > Walworth and
        > King nominations.
        >
        > That November, the election of James K. Polk had
        > settled several
        > matters--the diehard efforts of Clay to get into the
        > White House, and
        > the prospects of both Tyler and Van Buren for future
        > political office.
        > Another matter which the Polk election settled was the
        > ambition of
        > Senator Crittenden to get onto the Supreme Court. He
        > had first been
        > nominated in the last days of John Quincy Adams'
        > administration, with
        > the Jacksonians in the Senate voting to "postpone"
        > action until their
        > own man took office a few weeks later. Clay, had he
        > been successful in
        > his final bid for the White House, presumably would
        > have sent up the
        > name of his fellow Kentuckian one more time.
        >
        > Now, in the last days of the Tyler administration, the
        > White House
        > sought to accommodate the Senate in the wake of the
        > presidential
        > election; with political issues settled for the time,
        > and with one
        > Supreme Court position having been unfilled for a
        > year, it could be
        > hoped that a policy of reasonableness might govern
        > relations between
        > President and Senate in these last few months. The
        > optimists were to
        > prove to be only half right.
        >
        > "Better the bench shall be vacant for a year," the
        > National
        > Intelligencer had editorialized the previous spring,
        > "than filled for
        > half a century by . . . partisans committed in advance
        > to particular
        > beliefs." The charge was somewhat exaggerated; while
        > Walworth was
        > condemned in the Senate as "querulous, disagreeable
        > [and] unpopular,"
        > he was in many professional respects the best
        > qualified of Tyler's
        > unsuccessful nominations. For the previous twenty
        > years as chancellor
        > of New York he had virtually written the law of equity
        > pleading and
        > rules of evidence, and a substantial majority of his
        > opinions had been
        > upheld on appeal. Both his predecessor, the renowned
        > Chancellor James
        > Kent, and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story cited his
        > cases as
        > authoritative.
        >
        > Yet there was no denying that he was cantankerous, to
        > a point where
        > members of the state bar openly declared that they
        > supported his
        > nomination for the Supreme Court as a means of getting
        > him out of
        > their own judiciary. The animus was apparently deep
        > rooted; in the new
        > constitution of 1846, New York would dispose of the
        > problem by
        > abolishing the office of chancellor. In January 1845,
        > Tyler accepted
        > the fact of the massive opposition to Walworth and
        > withdrew his name.
        >
        > There was no clear objection--other than the Senate's
        > anti-Tyler
        > fixation--for opposing Judge King, a highly reputed
        > Pennsylvanian, and
        > the President made one final attempt to override the
        > opposition by
        > resubmitting King's name. The signs in the Senate were
        > so forbidding,
        > however, that early in February he withdrew that
        > nomination as well.
        >
        > Time was now running out; obviously, the anti-Tyler
        > forces were
        > delaying action until a new administration could take
        > over in March.
        > But the outgoing President made one further effort,
        > and for the two
        > vacancies on the Court he finally, on the same day
        > that he withdrew
        > King's name, submitted two last nominations--Chief
        > Justice Samuel
        > Nelson of New York and former United States Attorney
        > John Meredith
        > Read of Philadelphia.
        >
        > Nelson, one of the best known state judges in the
        > land, was confirmed
        > within a week, and took his seat on the Court the day
        > after Tyler left
        > office. It was to be Tyler's only successful
        > nomination for the bench.
        > Read, although popular with all faction among the
        > Whigs, had
        > antislavery views which were anathema to the Southern
        > members of the
        > Senate, and the term ended without action on his case.
        >
        > The sound and fury over the Court vacancies actually
        > attracted small
        > attention in their day. The struggle between Tyler and
        > the
        > Congressional opposition involved other issues of more
        > burning public
        > concern, epitomized in the effort to annex the
        > Republic of Texas.
        > After the Whig-dominated Senate refused to ratify a
        > treaty of
        > annexation, Tyler proposed a joint resolution of both
        > houses, which
        > would require only a simple majority. This tactic
        > finally worked, but
        > only after the fall elections made certain a new
        > Democratic majority
        > in Congress. In a sense, the judicial nominations of
        > the President
        > without a party were innocent bystanders to the larger
        > contest; in any
        > case, several highly qualified candidates were the
        > victims.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------
        > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        >
        >
        > Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
        > Terms of Service.
        >
        >
        > ---------------------------------
      • THOMAS JOHNSON
        Ram s last post got me curious about Andrew Johnson. What was a white supremacist Democrat doing on the ticket anyway? From an article
        Message 3 of 8 , Aug 31, 2005
          Ram's last post got me curious about Andrew Johnson.
          What was a white supremacist Democrat doing on the
          ticket anyway? From an article
          (http://www.americanpresident.org/history/andrewjohnson/biography/resources/Articles/KunhardtAJohnsonBio.article.shtml
          ) by Philip Kuhhardt:

          During the Civil War, Johnson became the only senator
          from a seceding state to remain in Washington and back
          the Union. "Damn the negroes," he explained to a
          Northern general; "I am fighting those traitorous
          aristocrats, their masters." The following year, even
          though he was a Democrat and Lincoln a Republican, the
          President rewarded his loyalty by naming him wartime
          governor of Tennessee. And in 1864, after Johnson
          publicly supported Lincoln's policy of emancipation,
          he was chosen to run on the Union ticket for vice
          president. On November 8, they won the election.

          But the President soon had reason to regret his
          choice, for Johnson's behavior at the inauguration was
          a severe embarrassment. Having taken considerable
          whiskey to fortify himself from a recent illness, the
          swaying, stammering, beet-red vice president called on
          each cabinet member by name, telling them in turn that
          they were plebeians-creatures of the people.

          "I'm a-goin' for to tell you here today," he sang out.
          "Yes, I'm a-goin' for to tell you all, that I'm a
          plebeian. I glory in it. The people, yes, the people
          have made me what I am. And I am a-goin' for to tell
          you here today, yes, today, in this place, that the
          people are everything!"

          "To think," said an editorial in the New York World,
          "that one frail life stands between this insolent,
          clownish creature and the Presidency."

          Little more than a month later, Lincoln was killed,
          and the fifty-six-year-old Democrat from Tennessee was
          sworn in as the seventeenth President. "I have been
          almost overwhelmed by the sad event," Johnson uttered
          in a brief statement from his hotel room after taking
          the oath of office. "I feel incompetent to perform . .
          . duties so unexpectedly thrown upon me."

          From the beginning, everything in Johnson's presidency
          went wrong. Although he retained Lincoln's entire
          cabinet, he resisted calling upon their experience and
          wisdom. And instead of cultivating Republican leaders
          in Congress, he allowed his differences with them
          regarding the difficult problem of Reconstruction to
          set them off on a collision course.

          Unlike the majority of Congress who wanted to
          safeguard black rights and hold the South accountable,
          Johnson was determined to remain faithful to what he
          saw as Lincoln's policy of leniency. On May 29, he
          announced a general amnesty to former Confederates, to
          be supplemented by presidential pardons for the top
          leaders of secession.

          Bolstered by the President's strong support and
          sympathy, Southern states began reinstating many of
          their old leaders, acting as if the Civil War had
          never been fought. Four Confederate generals, five
          colonels, and even the former vice president of the
          Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, were elected to
          Congress.

          Outraged, Congress refused to seat them. Instead,
          acting on what it called the true spirit of Lincoln,
          it passed a bill to provide federal aid to liberated
          slaves, which Johnson quickly vetoed, and then a
          sweeping civil rights bill declaring blacks to be full
          citizens of the United States. Johnson vetoed again.
          "I am right. I know I am right, and I am damned if I
          do not adhere to it," he insisted. When Congress, by a
          two-thirds vote, overrode this second veto, it became
          open war.

          To seek support from the American people, Johnson set
          out on a cross-country speaking tour. But his
          undignified harangues only increased his unpopularity.
          "Congress has undertaken to poison the minds of the
          American people," Johnson blasted. "This common gang
          of cormorants and bloodsuckers have been fattening
          upon the country for the past four or five years. . .
          . [They think] everybody is a traitor that is against
          them."

          With Congress taking full control of Reconstruction,
          Johnson was now virtually ignored, referred to by one
          observer as "the dead dog of the White House." Former
          Congressman Isaac N. Arnold, in a letter to the
          President, wrote, "You have betrayed the great . . .
          party which elected Abraham Lincoln."

          In March 1867, to further constrain him, Congress
          passed the Tenure of Office Act, forbidding the
          President to dismiss his top officials without the
          Senate's concurrence. In defiance, Johnson ignored the
          law and fired Edwin Stanton, the secretary of war,
          claiming he was disloyal. Republicans became convinced
          that Johnson had committed a convictable crime, and in
          the following year, Congress voted to impeach.
          "Impeachment of me for violating the Constitution!"
          Johnson exclaimed. "Damn them! Have I not been
          struggling ever since I have been in this chair to
          uphold the Constitution which they trample under
          foot[?]"

          In the embattled White House, Johnson wondered and
          waited, kept informed of the proceedings in the Senate
          chamber through eyewitness reports. And then, after
          more than a month, the day of decision arrived. In the
          end it all came down to one man's vote, that of Edmund
          G. Ross, a Republican senator from Kansas, to whom
          Johnson had promised that he would soften his
          opposition to congressional Reconstruction. "Not
          guilty!" Ross intoned. The news was run by foot to the
          White House, where on hearing it, the President wept.

          "I intend to devote the remainder of my life," he
          said, "to the vindication of my own character."

          Never before had two branches of the government been
          at such odds, or the office of the presidency been so
          diminished. And much of it-though not all-had been
          Andrew Johnson's fault. Stubborn and independent, at
          his best moments heroically so, he was also crude and
          uncompromising and lacking in any sympathy for black
          Americans. And he was unable to lead the country
          through the massive challenges of Reconstruction.

          In November 1868, General Ulysses S. Grant was elected
          President, and after four months Johnson returned to
          Tennessee. "I have performed my duty to my God, my
          country, and my family," he would insist. "I have
          nothing to fear." In an attempt to restore his
          reputation, Johnson ran for a seat in Congress, losing
          a Senate race in 1869 and a House race in 1972 before
          finally winning a spot in the U.S. Senate in 1874.
          When news of his victory in Tennessee reached
          him-making him the only former President ever to be
          elected to the Senate-the old fighter grew emotional.
          "I'd rather have this information than to learn that I
          had been elected president of the United States. Thank
          God for the vindication."









          Copyright 2003 The Rector and Visitors of the
          University of Virginia
          last updated on 01/19/2005 - 02:13



          Here are a few more details of his impeachment
          borrowed from the Wikipedia:


          Congress and Johnson argued in an increasingly public
          way about Reconstruction: the manner in which the
          Southern secessionist states would be readmitted to
          the Union. Johnson favored a very quick restoration of
          all rights and privileges of other states. However,
          "Congressional Reconstruction", enforced by repeated
          acts passed over Johnson's veto, provided for
          provisional state governments run by the military and
          ensuring the local passage of civil rights laws and
          otherwise imposing the will of the United States
          Congress — which, of course, was run by the North.
          Johnson's public criticisms of Congress provoked much
          talk of impeachment over the months.
          On February 21, 1868, Johnson notified Congress that
          he had removed Edwin Stanton as Secretary of War, and
          was replacing him in the interim with Adjutant-General
          Lorenzo Thomas. This was an apparent violation of the
          Tenure-of-Office Act, made law in March of 1867, which
          was a law that Congress had specifically designed to
          protect Stanton. The Act said, "...every person
          holding any civil office, to which he has been
          appointed by and with the advice and consent of the
          Senate ... shall be entitled to hold such office until
          a successor shall have been in like manner appointed
          and duly qualified," thus removing the President's
          previous unlimited power to fire any of his Cabinet
          members at will. Johnson had previously vetoed the
          Act, claiming it was unconstitutional, and
          subsequently Congress had passed the Act again by the
          required two-thirds majority to make it law, over the
          objection of the President. (Years later in Myers v.
          United States (1926), the Supreme Court ruled that
          such laws were indeed unconstitutional.)


          President Andrew Johnson
          The Senate and House entered into hot debate. Thomas
          attempted to move into the War office, for which
          Stanton had Thomas arrested. Three days after
          Stanton's removal, the House passed a resolution to
          impeach Johnson for "high crimes and misdemeanors",
          specifically, for intentionally violating the
          Tenure-of-Office Act and thus violating the law of the
          land, which he had sworn an oath to enforce.
          On March 5, 1868 a court of impeachment was organized
          in the Senate to hear charges against the President.
          William M. Evarts served as his counsel. Eleven
          articles were set out in the resolution and the trial
          before the Senate lasted three months. Johnson's
          defense was based on a clause in the Tenure-of-Office
          Act stating that the then-current Secretaries would
          hold their posts throughout the term of the President
          who appointed them. Since Lincoln had appointed
          Stanton, it was claimed, the applicability of the Act
          had already run its course.
          Johnson was acquitted by a vote of thirty-five for
          conviction to nineteen for acquittal. He had avoided
          removal from office by a single vote. There were two
          votes in the Senate: one on May 16, 1868 for the 11th
          article, and another on May 26 for the other 10.
          Johnson was the first President to be impeached, and
          the only one until the impeachment of Bill Clinton on
          December 19, 1998.
          [edit]


          --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


          ---------------------------------
          Don't forget Andrew Johnson, the jerk who got us into
          "all these
          problems" (quoting Trent Lott) for at least another
          century. Lincoln's
          intention was good, and he probably didn't to be the
          first President
          to be assassinated.

          Ram


          --- In prezveepsenator@yahoogroups.com, THOMAS JOHNSON
          <AVRCRDNG@F...>
          wrote:
          > Thanks to all for the responses.. my question was
          > certainly answered well. I'm not sure if anyone ever
          > brought in someone for veep outside their own party
          > since, but I'm reasonably sure that if someone did,
          > they didn't deliver a 2 hour inaugural address in
          > freezing temperatures without a coat, as Harrison
          did.
          > I don't think anyone got off to a worse start than
          > basically freezing himself to death on his first
          day.
          >
          > Tom
          >
          >
          >
          > --- Ram Lau <ramlau@y...> wrote:
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          >
          http://www.supremecourthistory.org/myweb/77journal/swindler77.htm
          > "Robin Hood," Congress and the Court
          > WILLIAM F. SWINDLER
          >
          > Copyright 1976, Supreme Court Historical Society
          > from the Yearbook 1977 Supreme Court Historical
          > Society
          >
          > Presidents nominate persons for positions on the
          > Supreme Court for a
          > variety of reasons--and in about one case in four,
          the
          > Senate rejects
          > the nomination for a variety of reasons, mostly
          > political. Altogether,
          > thirty-four persons have been proposed for the Court
          > who did not sit.
          > Seven were confirmed but declined the appointment;
          one
          > died after
          > confirmation but before he could take his seat;
          twelve
          > were rejected
          > by recorded vote; the rest were killed off by
          various
          > types of
          > delaying action, or simply no action.
          >
          > Eight Presidents have had one of their nominations
          > defeated by one
          > senatorial tactic or another; Grover Cleveland and
          > Richard Nixon had
          > two rejections apiece; Millard Fillmore and Ulysses
          S.
          > Grant, three
          > each. But the record is held, in rather dubious
          honor,
          > by John Tyler,
          > the unhappy President without a party, who had the
          > distinction of
          > experiencing five rejections of four of his nominees
          > in thirteen months.
          >
          > Tyler's selections for the Court were all of high
          > professional
          > quality. It was Tyler, not the individual nominees,
          > who was the target
          > of the Senate vendetta. Only once in six attempts
          did
          > the President
          > succeed in getting his man confirmed--Chief Justice
          > Samuel Nelson of
          > New York. Nelson was so conspicuously competent
          that,
          > in the interval
          > of an uneasy truce between White House and Capitol,
          > his name was
          > approved and he went onto the bench.
          >
          > Tyler, a Democrat, had come to the presidency by
          > accident. William
          > Henry Harrison had been chosen by the Whigs as their
          > candidate for the
          > White House in 1840 and Tyler had been his running
          > mate. The fact that
          > the vice-presidential candidate came from the
          opposite
          > party and had
          > almost completely opposite political views seemed to
          > the strategists
          > of the day to be a masterstroke. In the Number Two
          > position, Tyler's
          > views would be neutralized while the combination of
          a
          > Whig and a
          > Democrat would offer a bipartisan appearance
          > calculated to split the
          > opposition. To the familiar campaign song of
          > "Tippecanoe and Tyler
          > Too," the Whigs contented themselves with vilifying
          > their opponent,
          > Martin Van Buren of New York, and evading a
          discussion
          > of issues which
          > would bring their own candidates into conflict with
          > each other.
          >
          > The whole thing blew up when the elderly Harrison
          was
          > struck by
          > pneumonia on the day of his inauguration and died a
          > month later. Tyler
          > became the first vice president thus to succeed to
          the
          > White House
          > because of the death of the incumbent President. He
          > immediately served
          > notice that his administration would follow a strong
          > states' rights
          > line; with the Whigs in control of the Senate, this
          > overshadowed a
          > solid opposition to Tyler nominees, e.g., for the
          > Supreme Court, as
          > events were to prove. The Whigs, chagrined at having
          > lost the fruits
          > of the election, turned for leadership to Henry Clay
          > of Kentucky, an
          > old Tyler foe; as for the Democrats, they not only
          > resented Tyler's
          > trafficking with the Whigs in the 1840 campaign, but
          > they were for the
          > most part followers of Van Buren, whose defeat in
          1840
          > was ascribed in
          > large part to the vitriolic attacks of the
          > Harrison-Tyler partisans.
          >
          > The confrontation began in January 1844, when the
          > President sent up a
          > nomination of a successor to Justice Smith Thompson,
          > who had died the
          > previous month. Tyler's first impulse was to play
          the
          > same political
          > game that had proved effective--at least up to a
          > point--in 1840: he
          > would propose Van Buren himself, thus appealing to
          the
          > Democrats for
          > restored party harmony while putting his strongest
          > rival for the 1844
          > Presidential nomination out of contention. Van
          Buren's
          > friends saw
          > through the maneuver and persuaded Tyler that Van
          > Buren would reject
          > the nomination and make Tyler himself a laughing
          > stock. The President
          > thereupon substituted another New Yorker, John C.
          > Spencer--and leapt
          > from the frying pan into the fire.
          >
          > Spencer was a Whig, but this did nothing to further
          > his nomination.
          > First, was the fact that he was an anti-Clay Whig;
          > second, he had
          > accepted appointment to Tyler's Cabinet as Secretary
          > of War and
          > subsequently Secretary of the Treasury. Finally, his
          > narrow, technical
          > views on the national banking laws had added to the
          > current enmities,
          > since it had been a bitter debate over a banking
          bill
          > that had caused
          > mass resignations from the Cabinet in 1842. Despite
          > acknowledged legal
          > competence, "I have no confidence in the political
          > integrity of Mr.
          > Spencer," wrote a New York political leader to
          Clay's
          > henchman,
          > Senator John J. Crittenden of Kentucky, while
          another
          > New York Whig
          > stalwart, Francis Granger, declared in the New York
          > Herald that ninety
          > Whigs out of every hundred would oppose the
          > nomination.
          >
          > Within three weeks, the Spencer nomination had been
          > rejected by the
          > Senate, 21-26. For the next six weeks, Tyler sounded
          > out a number of
          > prospects including--or so it was rumored--the
          leading
          > Philadelphia
          > lawyer Horace Binney and the longtime reporter to
          the
          > Supreme Court,
          > Henry Wheaton. Finally, on March 13, 1844, the
          > President made his
          > second formal selection, the chancellor of New York,
          > Reuben H.
          > Walworth. The Senate showed no disposition to act on
          > the nomination,
          > and while matters thus drifted along a second Court
          > vacancy occurred
          > with the death of Justice Henry Baldwin. On June 5
          > Tyler sent up a
          > second name for the second opening--Judge Edward
          King
          > of Philadelphia.
          >
          > Tyler was in an impossible situation, not only with
          > respect to his
          > Supreme Court nominees but with reference to his
          > entire administrative
          > program. A courtly Virginian of the old Jeffersonian
          > tradition, it had
          > been his misfortune to come to national office at a
          > time when the
          > party of Jefferson was torn between the Van Buren
          > faction of the North
          > and the Clay faction of the West. Indeed, most of
          the
          > political career
          > of this gentle and gentlemanly Southerner was to be
          a
          > history of being
          > left behind by changing times. Elected to the Senate
          > as an
          > anti-Jackson Democrat, he had felt obliged to
          support
          > Jackson against
          > Clay, in the deadlock of 1828, as "a choice of
          evils."
          > Yet in 1832
          > when the Jacksonian Democrats won control of the
          > Virginia legislature
          > and returned Tyler to the Senate, it was with
          > instructions to vote to
          > expunge the resolution which had censured Jackson in
          > the heated
          > struggle over the Bank of the United States. Unable
          to
          > find it in his
          > conscience to do so, Tyler had resigned his seat.
          >
          > Tragedy and near-tragedy had marked Tyler's
          > presidential years. In
          > 1842 his first wife had died. Two years later,
          making
          > an official
          > visit aboard the warship Princeton, he himself
          > narrowly escaped death
          > when there was an accidental explosion which killed
          > several members of
          > the presidential party, including a prominent New
          > Yorker, David
          > Gardiner. This event did prove to have a happy
          ending;
          > Gardiner's
          > daughter, Julia, married the widowed President in
          June
          > 1844, providing
          > the White House with a gracious First Lady in the
          > closing months of
          > the administration.
          >
          > The couple then retired to the Tyler plantation on
          the
          > James River in
          > Virginia. which Tyler had named "Sherwood Forest,"
          in
          > wry
          > acknowledgement of his own political destiny, which
          he
          > described as
          > the role of "Robin Hood" confronting the arrogance
          of
          > power in his own
          > time. The choice of the terms apparently was an
          > admission of political
          > predestination; by the spring of 1844, it was
          apparent
          > that Tyler's
          > chances of renomination for the presidency were as
          > non-existent as his
          > likelihood of getting his Supreme Court nominations
          > through the
          > Senate. In January 1845 the Senate formally tabled
          the
          > Walworth and
          > King nominations.
          >
          > That November, the election of James K. Polk had
          > settled several
          > matters--the diehard efforts of Clay to get into the
          > White House, and
          > the prospects of both Tyler and Van Buren for future
          > political office.
          > Another matter which the Polk election settled was
          the
          > ambition of
          > Senator Crittenden to get onto the Supreme Court. He
          > had first been
          > nominated in the last days of John Quincy Adams'
          > administration, with
          > the Jacksonians in the Senate voting to "postpone"
          > action until their
          > own man took office a few weeks later. Clay, had he
          > been successful in
          > his final bid for the White House, presumably would
          > have sent up the
          > name of his fellow Kentuckian one more time.
          >
          > Now, in the last days of the Tyler administration,
          the
          > White House
          > sought to accommodate the Senate in the wake of the
          > presidential
          > election; with political issues settled for the
          time,
          > and with one
          > Supreme Court position having been unfilled for a
          > year, it could be
          > hoped that a policy of reasonableness might govern
          > relations between
          > President and Senate in these last few months. The
          > optimists were to
          > prove to be only half right.
          >
          > "Better the bench shall be vacant for a year," the
          > National
          > Intelligencer had editorialized the previous spring,
          > "than filled for
          > half a century by . . . partisans committed in
          advance
          > to particular
          > beliefs." The charge was somewhat exaggerated; while
          > Walworth was
          > condemned in the Senate as "querulous, disagreeable
          > [and] unpopular,"
          > he was in many professional respects the best
          > qualified of Tyler's
          > unsuccessful nominations. For the previous twenty
          > years as chancellor
          > of New York he had virtually written the law of
          equity
          > pleading and
          > rules of evidence, and a substantial majority of his
          > opinions had been
          > upheld on appeal. Both his predecessor, the renowned
          > Chancellor James
          > Kent, and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story cited
          his
          > cases as
          > authoritative.
          >
          > Yet there was no denying that he was cantankerous,
          to
          > a point where
          > members of the state bar openly declared that they
          > supported his
          > nomination for the Supreme Court as a means of
          getting
          > him out of
          > their own judiciary. The animus was apparently deep
          > rooted; in the new
          > constitution of 1846, New York would dispose of the
          > problem by
          > abolishing the office of chancellor. In January
          1845,
          > Tyler accepted
          > the fact of the massive opposition to Walworth and
          > withdrew his name.
          >
          > There was no clear objection--other than the
          Senate's
          > anti-Tyler
          > fixation--for opposing Judge King, a highly reputed
          > Pennsylvanian, and
          > the President made one final attempt to override the
          > opposition by
          > resubmitting King's name. The signs in the Senate
          were
          > so forbidding,
          > however, that early in February he withdrew that
          > nomination as well.
          >
          > Time was now running out; obviously, the anti-Tyler
          > forces were
          > delaying action until a new administration could
          take
          > over in March.
          > But the outgoing President made one further effort,
          > and for the two
          > vacancies on the Court he finally, on the same day
          > that he withdrew
          > King's name, submitted two last nominations--Chief
          > Justice Samuel
          > Nelson of New York and former United States Attorney
          > John Meredith
          > Read of Philadelphia.
          >
          > Nelson, one of the best known state judges in the
          > land, was confirmed
          > within a week, and took his seat on the Court the
          day
          > after Tyler left
          > office. It was to be Tyler's only successful
          > nomination for the bench.
          > Read, although popular with all faction among the
          > Whigs, had
          > antislavery views which were anathema to the
          Southern
          > members of the
          > Senate, and the term ended without action on his
          case.
          >
          > The sound and fury over the Court vacancies actually
          > attracted small
          > attention in their day. The struggle between Tyler
          and
          > the
          > Congressional opposition involved other issues of
          more
          > burning public
          > concern, epitomized in the effort to annex the
          > Republic of Texas.
          > After the Whig-dominated Senate refused to ratify a
          > treaty of
          > annexation, Tyler proposed a joint resolution of
          both
          > houses, which
          > would require only a simple majority. This tactic
          > finally worked, but
          > only after the fall elections made certain a new
          > Democratic majority
          > in Congress. In a sense, the judicial nominations of
          > the President
          > without a party were innocent bystanders to the
          larger
          > contest; in any
          > case, several highly qualified candidates were the
          > victims.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------
          > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
          >
          >
          > Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
          to:
          > prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
          Yahoo!
          > Terms of Service.
          >
          >
          > ---------------------------------





          ---------------------------------
          YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


          Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
          Terms of Service.


          ---------------------------------
        • Ram Lau
          ... Tom, The reason why Lincoln picked a Democrat as his running mate was because of his unpopularity in 1864 and the fact that the country was deeply
          Message 4 of 8 , Aug 31, 2005
            > Ram's last post got me curious about Andrew Johnson.
            > What was a white supremacist Democrat doing on the
            > ticket anyway? From an article

            Tom,

            The reason why Lincoln picked a Democrat as his "running mate" was
            because of his unpopularity in 1864 and the fact that the country was
            deeply divided. He thought that move would secure his re-election bid,
            and more importantly, appease the South.

            If McCain had the decency to be Kerry's Andrew Johnson in 2004, that
            would have been a winning cross-party ticket since Linoln-Johnson.

            Ram
          • THOMAS JOHNSON
            Let s see.. two cross-party tickets; in both cases, the president dies within a month or so, and both VPs go on to have miserable presidencies. It s not hard
            Message 5 of 8 , Sep 1, 2005
              Let's see.. two cross-party tickets; in both cases,
              the president dies within a month or so, and both VPs
              go on to have miserable presidencies. It's not hard to
              see why it's not more common.

              --- Ram Lau <ramlau@...> wrote:


              ---------------------------------
              > Ram's last post got me curious about Andrew Johnson.
              > What was a white supremacist Democrat doing on the
              > ticket anyway? From an article

              Tom,

              The reason why Lincoln picked a Democrat as his
              "running mate" was
              because of his unpopularity in 1864 and the fact that
              the country was
              deeply divided. He thought that move would secure his
              re-election bid,
              and more importantly, appease the South.

              If McCain had the decency to be Kerry's Andrew Johnson
              in 2004, that
              would have been a winning cross-party ticket since
              Linoln-Johnson.

              Ram






              ---------------------------------
              YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


              Visit your group "prezveepsenator" on the web.

              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              prezveepsenator-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
              Terms of Service.


              ---------------------------------
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.