just an addendum to the previous post

[winterbadger]

Actually, an example:

"We observe today not a victory of party but a celebration of freedom, symbolizing an end as well as a beginning, signifying renewal as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed [over a century] ago.

The world is very different now. ... And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe -- the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God."

Without Googling, guesses as to whose inaugural address that comes from?

Edit: Here's the end of the same inaugural...

"With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own."

Comments

Re: ok, googled it, I was wrong

[winterbadger]

Arguably one of the most liberal presidents in modern history, but also *deeply* influenced, IMO by his faith. And still the only (non-fictional) Roman Catholic ever to be elected POTUS.

Re: ok, googled it, I was wrong

[robbysmom.livejournal.com]

indeed. and from the now infamous Blue States, even! Hearing lots about how Desm can only run Southerners these days, if they expect to win. . . Johnson, Carter, Clinton, etc. The notion is that this is because Southerners can "speak to black folks." That's just a dfumb comment, to me. I think the reason is that white Southerners don't sound like fools when they talk about their personal beliefs *or* to black folks.

Re: ok, googled it, I was wrong

[winterbadger]

Agreed. I think that the necessity for running Southerners (or, rather, non-Northerners, because I think someone from the West, the Southwest, or California would do fine) is because many white people from the South and West automatically distrust people from the Northeast, while the reverse is not nececessarily true.