Press release:
November is New York State History Month and to honor the occasion, the Genesee County Federation of Historical Agencies and the Genesee Community College History Club are sponsoring a Genesee County Heritage Fair in the William W. Stuart Forum at GCC from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday, Nov. 5th.
With the 2016 presidential election just days later on Nov. 8th, the theme of the heritage fair will be "Presidential Elections." Museums and historical agencies from all over Genesee County will set up booths for visitors to explore. Many will feature presidential memorabilia. In addition, there will be local history books on sale, craft demonstrations, historical impressionists and much more.
In keeping with the presidential theme, local schools will participate through two special contests. Elementary school students will be asked to draw portraits of their favorite president. Junior and senior high students will be asked to write short essays. Winners of both contests will be announced at the event. Additionally, event organizers are asking the community at-large to vote on their top ten favorite presidents by completing the online survey available at this link: https://surveyplanet.com/57fe980f5820315e61af75c7. The results will be tallied up and shared at the end of the Heritage Fair.
“During the most contentious election process of modern times, the organizers of the Genesee County Heritage Fair are excited to fuse some of our nation’s presidential election history with the current and lately, contentious topic,” said Derek Maxfield, associate professor of History at GCC, advisor to the College’s History Club and a member of the planning committee. “Through the various displays and history initiatives, we hope to remind everyone how important voting is to preserving our democracy.”
New York State History Month was created by the New York State legislature in 1997 and represents an opportunity for historians to assert the vital importance of preserving and learning about our state’s history. It is also a time to engage with the public through programs and learning opportunities about the history of New York State and the ways in which we can help preserve our history.
Further information on New York State History Month can be found at http://files.ctctcdn.com/9499bee6001/9e234d9f-c057-4176-a9da-d7e98c2cc00c.pdf
For more information on the GCC History Club, visit https://gcchistoricalhorizons.wordpress.com/.
Speaking of "Presidential
Speaking of "Presidential Elections", maybe it's about time we amended the United States Constitution.
According to Article Two, Section 1, Clause 5, of the United States Constitution, the eligibility requirements to become president are limited to: He/she must be a natural born citizen, be at least 35 years old, and, been an inhabitant of the United States for at least fourteen years.
That's it! That's the ONLY requirements. There's nothing in the constitution addressing who "shouldn't" be eligible.
In other words, someone, let's say, could be born here in the U.S. At the age of 15, they move to wherever in the world - Russia, China, Ecuador, wherever), and live there for 20 years. When they move back, they are immediately eligible to become president. (NOTE: Even the "14-year inhabitant" requirement is written subjectively - the Constitution doesn't say that the 14 years must be the 14 years "immediately prior" to being elected. It only states that, "... neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have ... been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.)
EVEN IF they were someone tried, convicted, and, ACTUALLY GUILTY of being a mass-murderer, they are, by the U.S. Constitution, eligible of being the president.
Jim Jones, of the Jonestown massacre, would've been eligible to be our president (had he lived through the massacre). Nothing in the constitution prohibits it.
Rapists, pedophiles, killers, psychopaths, multiple-felons, or, just plain liars. They're all eligible - if they fulfill the 3 requirements. I have a problem with that.
Let's see... 4,000 dead
Let's see... 4,000 dead Cherokee would qualify Andrew Jackson as a mass murderer. Grover Cleveland raped a Buffalo department store clerk and committed her to an asylum to hide the evidence. Calvin Coolidge was clinically depressive- most notably after the death of his son.
C.M., you left out Teddy
C.M., you left out Teddy Roosevelt, responsible for the death of 500,000 Filipinos.
C.M.
C.M.
Funny you should mention Andrew Jackson. When he (first) married his wife (nee Rachel Donelson), she was already a married woman (and not divorced yet - only separated from her husband, Lewis Robards).
To Jackson's credit, he did not know that she was still married - he was led to believe that her divorce from her first husband had been finalized. Jackson re-married her, after she finally divorced Robards.
My-my!
My-my!
So many thumbs-down. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out why? For my pointing out flaws in our Constitution, or, for your ignorance in not knowing of them?
Lets add Franklin Roosevelt
Lets add Franklin Roosevelt who put Japanese Americans into "interment camps" during WW II.
Some of those down votes you
Some of those down votes you received might simply be from folks that just don't like you Ed, and nothing more than that. One member here has told me she logs in regularly just to down vote members that she doesn't like... regardless of the topic or what they said. I don't know if you're on her *hit-list or not, but the next time I run into her I'll be sure to inquire. I'd imagine she's not the only member that down votes just for "spite" either, and quite frankly Ed, calling out down voters is most likely just going to compound the butt-pain you're already suffering from.
Maybe Howard could create another membership group (nominal fee required, of course) called the "Elite" members or something? These Elite members could have the option to find out who voted, and which way they voted on each of their comments. On top of the membership fee, these Elite members would also pay Howard like a nickel or a dime each for every vote revealed. With the frequency of members here whining about votes this idea might rake in some major bucks!
Thanks, Ed.
Thanks, Ed.
Trust me, I don't get a "butt pain" whenever someone down-votes my opinions. Personally, I very, very, very rarely use the up OR down "thumbs-thingy". On the occasions when I do, I'd guess, maybe 95% of the time, it's because something is so outrageous that (I feel) it not only deserves it, but, I also address why. But, that's me.
And, your notice that someone might just vote (either way), "regardless of the topic or what they said", likewise doesn't surprise me, either. I believe I already addressed that (phenomenon?) in comment #5.
When I do come across something that I suspect falls within that category, I invariably harken back to my early high school days. I remember participating in several "opinion polls?", given to us by teachers. And, I also remember the little get-togethers with my classmates, afterwards. We'd compare how we "answered" certain questions. Sure enough, there were a "bunch" of us that had chosen the most ridiculous "choice" offered, just to "skew the numbers" (Hey! Maybe that's (part of) the reason I don't believe in polls, today - Uh-oh. There I go again, self-diagnosing myself).
Anyways, Ed, thanks for the chance to engage in one of my favorite things - derailment. If nothing else, it helps keep my "hunt-n-peck" skills honed.
Let's not forget the denial
Let's not forget the denial of Warren Harding's daughter, Elizabeth Ann Britton. She was the only child during an affair.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-warren-hardings-love-child-con…
It kinda looks like it is up
It kinda looks like it is up to the voters,as it should be, to decide what morals and ethics they vote for.
Frank, you're right. The idea
Frank, you're right. The idea that Ed Hartgrove would like to impose his qualifications for office on us is a bit repugnant. It's not likely a mass murderer would ever be elected, but like you said, it should be up to the voters, not Ed.
Well, you're correct on one
Well, you're correct on one thing, John.
It IS up to the voters, not me.
But, if you read my comment closely, I believe the word "propose" would've been a much better choice than "impose".
I not only wouldn't LIKE to impose anything on anyone, but, I wouldn't impose anything on anyone.
After all, I did mention amending the Constitution, not imposing something.
One thing about pointing out
One thing about pointing out all of these presidential failings ... It makes me a little more optimistic about the upcoming election, regardless of the outcome ... look at what we've survived in our past presidents ... we survived. Maybe we can again.