Reply #213: Yeah, It would have been better if Washington wore his uniform on independence day

[pschoeb]

than what he did. Of course there wasn't any battle, that's why I called it the Whiskey protest, as it didn't amount to a rebellion in any way, certainly it wasn't even remotely close to the failed coup attempt of 2002 in Venezuela. Considering the circumstances, there was no need for Washington to be General, he could have safely let General Lee control the 13,000 troop army he called up just for this task, larger than the army he used during the revolution(talk about militaristic). Of course making every male over 18 in western Pennsylvania sign a loyalty oath or be imprisoned is certainly a cool thing to do while all dressed up as a General, toting along your Secretary of the Treasury as one of your officers as well. But your right, if Washington had instead worn his uniform in some July fourth celebration, while President, that would have been truly horrific for Democracy.

Do you think Eisenhower should have personally been Supreme Commander of all NATO forces and also been personally General in the Korean War while President, since he had been Supreme Commander of NATO forces right before he was President? I'm glad he didn't do that.

James Madison, personally commanded troops when the British attacked near Washington in 1814, but only briefly. As far as Theodore Roosevelt, when the dust-up happened about Bush's flight suit, someone researched the last President to wear their former military uniform while President, and it was Theodore Roosevelt.

Why do you have the problem with the pants, I can find a Clinton photo wearing a military hat and jacket while holding binoculars, he could be wearing military pants as well, though the picture doesn't go that far. now is it bad?