The Case for Martin Van Buren?

Jeffrey Rogers Hummel makes one, though I remain skeptical about his proposed greatness. As Hummel points out, his lapses aren't inconsiderable.

Advertisements

One thought on “The Case for Martin Van Buren?

  1. Kenneth R. Gregg June 25, 2006 / 5:26 am

    I think every president from at least Jefferson (who wanted to annex Florida) to Polk (who annexed just about everything else) and beyond had problems with the Seminoles. The battles of the Seminoles were legendary.

    Van Buren did less harm than most, which is to his credit. But harm was there, nevertheless.

    America was on the move, which the Jeffersonians were more than happy to encourage it, and kept as an element of their sense of national agenda, such as it was. Whether it was the failed goal of turning the Carribean into an American lake, or the success in conquering (both through bribes and violence) much of the land claimed by Mexico and desired by Britain.

    While not inevitable, the journey flowed onward, like the rivers oft used for travel. None could stop the flow for very long.

    Just a thought,
    Just Ken
    kgregglv@cox.net
    http://classicalliberalism.blogspot.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s