Thinking Right. Now with New Thinking

I pulled my kids out of government school 15 years ago. I saw this, even then. It is a long battle, and we, as conservatives are way behind. I have done what I can to convince others to get their children out, with some success, but, very hard fought. Get your kids out of government schools. Period.

Posted by Leslie at October 26, 2013 9:31 AM

Great picture... one star too many, though.

Posted by ROger.45 at October 26, 2013 9:41 AM

The Washington illustration is deficient. Not only is the five-star rank of General of the Army a circle of five stars, not a line, Washinton never held that rank anyway. In his lifetime Washinton rose to the rank of Lt. Gen., three stars.

In 1976, by act of Congress, Washington was designated as America's only-ever General of the Armies of the United States, putatively a six-star rank for which a design was drafted (earlier, in fact, than 1976) but never adopted, nor had any officer been promoted to six-star rank anyway. That design added a star to the center of the five-star circle.

The 1976 law also states that no officer shall ever be promoted to superior rank than Washington.

In 1919, Gen. Pershing was promoted by Congress to the rank of General of the Armies, but still to hold four stars. (Note the subtle distinction of wording of the rank with that of Washington's 1976 designation.) This was not a popular move in the Army at the time because of the risk it would be seen as a superior rank to Washington, even though Pershing himself was held in highest esteem.

In 1944, FDR wanted to create the rank of field marshal because that was the highest rank used in allied armies and FDR reasonably wanted US officers to deal with them as equals. GEN George C. Marshall, Army chief of staff, talked him out of it. His personal reason was that it would unavoidably be seen as a superior rank to Washington's, but he also knew that FDR didn't much care about that. So he told FDR that he could not accept a rank that would result in him being called, "Field Marshal Marshall," to which FDR surprisingly agreed. Hence was born the five-star rank of General of the Army.

Posted by Donald Sensing at October 26, 2013 9:49 AM

It is nonsense like this with which the Congress occupies itself.

Posted by Lorne at October 26, 2013 10:52 AM

The precedent for General of the Army goes back to the period right after the American Civil War when Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan held the rank. This piece from the Center of Military History covers the entire history of the rank:

http://www.history.army.mil/html/faq/5star.html

According the the CMH, the precedence would be Washington, then Pershing, then the three Civil War generals together with the WWII generals.

Interestingly -- and not in the CMH article -- Congress granted Admiral Dewey the rank of Admiral of the Fleets. He would therefore rank with Pershing.

But Geo. Washington in a USMC uniform???

Posted by el baboso at October 26, 2013 11:26 AM

And why does the pic show Washington in a Marine uniform? Geeze, that really pisses me off.

Posted by Donald Sensing at October 26, 2013 11:42 AM

Email to Bill Whittle suggested.

Posted by vanderleun at October 26, 2013 11:58 AM

I remember reading that the rank of General of the American Armies was actually proposed while Washington still lived but it never went anywhere. That is probably where the 1976 Congress got the idea.

Posted by Donald Sensing at October 26, 2013 2:14 PM

Leslie is the only one who got it right: comment on the content of the article and the efforts of Whittle.

The rest failed miserably. Oh so clever comments on how the uniform is wrong. Pundits like this are in the crowd I am avoiding.

Hey guys, look ... a squirrel!

Posted by chasmatic at October 26, 2013 2:58 PM

Was this an exam? Can I get college credits?

You know chasmatic, someone once pointed out that there is no way to tell whether the person you are conversing with on the web isn't a dog. He could also be someone whose shoulders are burdened with a heavy load and who is merely trying to have a nice talk about something he enjoys.

Posted by el baboso at October 26, 2013 4:36 PM

Thanks, Chasmatic, I was beginning to think I missed the point...

Posted by Leslie at October 26, 2013 8:50 PM

baboso: sometimes I talk faster than I think. Sorry if I spoiled your fun. Sometimes a thread gets side-tracked, shrug.

It all sounds simple, uh? But there's a mile of wire in a screen door.

Posted by chasmatic at October 26, 2013 10:21 PM

I forget that Bill Whittle lives in a completely different world than the rest of us, out in L.A. I was frankly surprised to see his "Aha!" moment being such a recent event.

Whittle was a favorite essayist until he took to the video market. His voice is fey and soft, even when his words are strong. He does not carry well across my computer screen. If wants to dominate the air, he needs to become an AWAC for other fighter pilots. That Whittle wants to use "smart" tells me all I need to know about his political insecurities about "less than smart" perceptions about Conservatives.

I wonder that while many on the right eschew Glenn Beck, that Beck quietly continues amassing great influence and media dominance. And does it with lots of humor, downright silliness, overwrought anguish, and plodding determination. Love him or loathe him, Beck has a plan and is working it. He's not against us. He's already been doing what Whittle just discovered. Maybe he's not smart enough for Whittle, but he's laughing all the way to the bank.

Posted by Joan of Argghh! at October 28, 2013 3:16 AM

Beck is a good Conservatism 101 guy, but he'd be better off without his darkly veiled mutterings of doom. Overall he's quite effective and entertaining.

Posted by Christopher Taylor at October 28, 2013 3:09 PM