That's my unflattering name for Presidents' Day and I'm standing by it, based on my disdain of 22 odd years toward that American institution that attracts the most psychopathic, pathological, sociopathic personalities out there fully hungry for something that almost approaches absolute power over millions of souls here and overseas.
I have no respect left to give toward an elected office whose best holders, in my opinion, did the least damage by doing little or nothing of note while they held it. Most court historians (meaning most of the state-loving and government-worshiping practitioners in that profession) always rank the best Presidents by what expansion of federal power or bloody useless war they presided over or somehow shaped and encouraged. All the greats at that often end up at the top, or for their perceived charisma and style while making the government bigger - Washington, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, LBJ, Reagan (someone I once admired but no longer and never again), Wilson, Kennedy, Jefferson and Eisenhower. I prefer the ones that seemed to do little and never let government grow too much on their watch: Filmore, Pierce, Buchannan, Andrew Johnson (Congress did more to expand federal power in his time), Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland, Harding and Coolidge. I'll say nothing good about our 20-21st Century elected Caesars who caused nothing but economic burdens and needless deaths during their tenures in office.
I don't even get the day off from my current job for this phony federal holiday (economizing the birthdays of Washington and Lincoln as separate holidays, and allow the new celebration of the likes of Slick Willie, W and BO - our three most recent horrid examples of overweaning executive power and each worse than his predecessor). A few more changes to the officeholder and we'll have a real emperor who considers his personal property to cherish or destroy as if some mad false god atop the religion of Americanism (our own brand of fascism probably carrying a cross and wrapped up in the flag).
I have no respect left to give toward an elected office whose best holders, in my opinion, did the least damage by doing little or nothing of note while they held it. Most court historians (meaning most of the state-loving and government-worshiping practitioners in that profession) always rank the best Presidents by what expansion of federal power or bloody useless war they presided over or somehow shaped and encouraged. All the greats at that often end up at the top, or for their perceived charisma and style while making the government bigger - Washington, Lincoln, both Roosevelts, LBJ, Reagan (someone I once admired but no longer and never again), Wilson, Kennedy, Jefferson and Eisenhower. I prefer the ones that seemed to do little and never let government grow too much on their watch: Filmore, Pierce, Buchannan, Andrew Johnson (Congress did more to expand federal power in his time), Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland, Harding and Coolidge. I'll say nothing good about our 20-21st Century elected Caesars who caused nothing but economic burdens and needless deaths during their tenures in office.
I don't even get the day off from my current job for this phony federal holiday (economizing the birthdays of Washington and Lincoln as separate holidays, and allow the new celebration of the likes of Slick Willie, W and BO - our three most recent horrid examples of overweaning executive power and each worse than his predecessor). A few more changes to the officeholder and we'll have a real emperor who considers his personal property to cherish or destroy as if some mad false god atop the religion of Americanism (our own brand of fascism probably carrying a cross and wrapped up in the flag).