Miserliness is considered a fault. Yet, a miserly prince "will come to be considered more generous when it is realized that his revenues are sufficient to defend himself against enemies that attack him, and to undertake campaigns without imposing special taxes on the people" (p.56). Likewise, starting a war is considered an immoral act by many. Yet, a prince should not allow troubles "to develop in order to avoid fighting a war for wars can not really be avoided, but are merely postponed to the advantage of others" (p.11). Avoiding war may ... ... middle of paper ... ... the ugly political process preceding the results has overshadowed positive results like a lower deficit and improved economy.
Hobbes is also not appropriate because his cynical attitude towards men is not appealing to society and the sovereign aspect is not suitable in a democratic nation. Locke proves to be the most effective in today’s government and nations across the world because we have our separation of powers to ensure that the accumulation of power in the government never occurs, and our voting system to ensure equality.
Tompkins is incorrect about Johnson because he was a bad president, no matter the time, or congressman in charge. Johnson let his personal vendetta against aristocrats and view of African Americans cloud his judgment. Also he did not work with moderates even though they desired to work with him, which would have given him more support in Congress. Plus he knowingly got himself impeached and did not care. A President should put the country before himself and the presidency also requires him to provide stability of the Government.
John Quincy Adams was a prodigious politician, but the area in which he had the most effect and accomplishments is gray. Although he attained one of the highest public office positions in the US, he did little to benefit as the president of the United States. As a diplomat of Foreign Affairs, he helped established many treaties with foreign nations that helped make sure the fledging country didn’t suffer from any more setbacks. On the other hand, Adam’s attempt as president is riddled with holes of opposition that denied him any chance of actually contributing to the US because of lack of support for Adam’s legislative, division in his own party, his own ideology, tariffs, and his liberal approach towards Native Americans. Adams role as a diplomatic for the US made him, one of the strongest foreign affairs sectaries for his time and dwarfs his time as President.
He did not really have a view on the world. His obsession for power had blinded him; he believed he was on top of the law because he was president. He was also not very loyal to the people. Nixon lied about ending America’s involvement in the Vietnam War. However, he increased the involvement.
In the “Emperor’s New Clothes,” by Hans Anderson there is an emperor who is portrayed as obsessed with new clothes; nothing else mattered to him. “He did not trouble himself in the least about his soldiers; nor did he care to go either to the theatre or the chase, except for the opportunities then afforded him for displaying his new clothes.” (Anderson) This addiction to self interests is similar of our current president, Barrack Obama. However, the president’s interest is healthcare. Even though healthcare seems to be a selfless idea, his persistence makes it appear as if his true desire is a legacy. The emperor uses his belief in his new clothes to instill fear in his people, which leads to their pluralistic ignorance.
Henry V from Shakespeare’s play of the same name was a disappointment as a monarch. Although he was an intelligent man, he failed his people and himself by choosing to be unsuccessful as a true head of state. As the guardian of the people, the promotion of righteousness should be have been the first priority of Henry V. But what is righteousness, and how does it apply to a king? The main priority of a king, throughout his entire rule, should be to promote virtue to the people through way of his own example, especially in considering laws and other affairs of the state. Henry V, however, did not promote virtue during his reign, and was, in fact, very prideful and self-centered, as shown by his message to the French prince, in which he boasted that he would “shine so brightly that even the Dauphin will be struck blind.”1 At the Siege of Harfleur, Henry V struck fear into the hearts of the French people by threatening violence if they did not surrender immediately.2 Henry V could have walked away from the battle and prevented the ensuing crimes, but because he valued what he perceived as honor and valor more than he valued the lives of the people, he chose to scare the governor of Harfleur into surrendering.
Many former successful leaders expected political rewards, however Washington did the opposite and did not embrace power. I agree with this view because it helped to shape the government that we have today. Washington was offered a crown and had ample opportunity to become king, however he refused unlike anyone at the time, helping to create a democratic form of government. 2. Why was Madison convinced that the Articles of Confederation could not be fixed?
This is why Dole's complaints are ineffective in convincing voters. In my opinion, I think that Stengel is correct in saying that the reason why Dole's attacks are not working is voters are not concerned with the President's personal shortcomings, but rather his capability of running the country, and the two are not always closely related. I think that Bob Dole is going about the whole issue all wrong, and his tactics are not practical and may even backfire. He is trying to make Clinton look bad by insulting his character, but in doing so, Dole is revealing a lot about his own. Take for instance the issue of Clinton and his playful attitude
The measures made to ensure the king does not have absolute power are not enough to prevent him from ultimately getting his way no matter what that may be. On page 27 Paine tells how the king made the declaration that there will be no law unless put in place by himself. This effort to make the colonists powerless as to how they are governed is tyranny. Paine’s also argues that this event shows how Britain believes America has become too powerful and is trying to slow its growth and development (27). Those who are in parliament so far away from the tragic events that take place in America who live in such a vastly different world are too ignorant to make judgements for America (23).