Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
At a campaign stop in Largo, Maryland yesterday, President Obama delivered a set of remarks in which he attempted to exculpate himself from skyrocketing fuel prices. And embedded within his speech was a typically partisan attack on Republicans (bolded below), which received special attention on the Drudge Report.
Lately, we’ve heard a lot of professional politicians, a lot of the folks who are running for a certain office -- (laughter) -- who shall go unnamed -- (laughter) -- they've been talking down new sources of energy. They dismiss wind power. They dismiss solar power. They make jokes about biofuels. They were against raising fuel standards. I guess they like gas-guzzlers. They think that's good for our future. We’re trying to move towards the future; they want to be stuck in the past.
We’ve heard this kind of thinking before. Let me tell you something. If some of these folks were around when Columbus set sail -- (laughter) -- they must have been founding members of the Flat Earth Society. (Laughter.) They would not have believed that the world was round....
There have always been folks like that. There always have been folks who are the naysayers and don't believe in the future, and don't believe in trying to do things differently. One of my predecessors, Rutherford B. Hayes, reportedly said about the telephone, "It’s a great invention, but who would ever want to use one?" (Laughter.) That's why he's not on Mt. Rushmore -- (laughter and applause) -- because he’s looking backwards. He’s not looking forwards. (Applause.) He’s explaining why we can't do something, instead of why we can do something.
No Obama speech is complete without a derisive partisan attack, but neither is it complete without a hallmark inaccuracy or two. In this case, the President got his facts about our nineteenth President all wrong, and has earned himself a four Pinocchios rating at the WaPo's Fact Checker blog. Glenn Kessler explains:
According to Ari Hoogenboom, who wrote the definite biography, “Rutherford B. Hayes: Warrior and President,” Hayes entertained Thomas A. Edison at the White House. Edison demonstrated the phonograph for the president. “He was hardly hostile to new inventions,” Higgenboom said.
Moreover, documentation from the Rutherford B. Hayes Presidential Center shows that President Hayes first tried out the telephone in June of 1877, when Alexander Graham Bell arranged for a demonstration. Hayes was so astounded by the telephone that he installed the very first White House telephone just four months later. Kessler writes that "a list of telephone subscribers published in the article 'The Telephones Comes to Washington,' by Richard T. Loomis, shows that the White House was given the number '1,'" indicating that the White House telephone was probably the first in the nation's capital.
Kessler concludes:
Obama mocked Hayes for “looking backwards...not looking forwards.” In reality, Hayes embraced the new technology. He should be an Obama hero, not a skunk.
Hayes is dead and buried, but he deserves an apology.
- Comment (38)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
An apology? No problem, Diane. That's his best thing.
Apr '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
The not so little secret is that Biden is not the only gaffe machine in this administration it just isn't highlighted very much because Obama is a protected class member.
Inflate your tires to its proper psi and wait for energy from green algae are not forward looking they are the ideas of Madhatters.
Feb '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
"they've been talking down new sources of energy. They dismiss wind power."
Wind power is a new source of energy?
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
1. Of course, if Hayes had put a windmill on top of the White House, he'd be hailed as a foresighted genius.
2. The Obama formulation re: electric cars seems to be the reverse: No one would ever want to use one. It's a great invention!
Apr '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
This has been going around the interwebs.
More here.
Dec '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Okay. So Obama has no knowledge of American history. Stipulated.
But let's not get distracted by his ongoing gaffes. His energy policies are causing great harm to consumers. That's what we must keep at the forefront of the public discussion.
Apr '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Last Outpost on the Right: Okay. So Obama has no knowledge of American history. Stipulated.
But let's not get distracted by his ongoing gaffes. His energy policies are causing great harmto consumers. That's what we must keep at the forefront of the public discussion. · 0 minutes ago
But to keep our spirits up, let's not miss an opportunity to ridicule him.
Mar '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
That's why he's not on Mt. Rushmore
And you, Mr President?
Jul '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
He doesn't mention nuclear power?
How odd.
Apr '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
James Lileks: 1. Of course, if Hayes had put a windmill on top of the White House, he'd be hailed as a foresighted genius.
2. The Obama formulation re: electric cars seems to be the reverse: No one would ever want to use one. It's a great invention! · 30 minutes ago
And electric cars are green because they are powered by energy produced by coal many miles from the end user and there fore out of sight. Huh, what!?!
May '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
?
May '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Of course, the proper response to Obama would be: "Then Mr. President aren't you glad that Hayes did not have the power you have assumed or your willingness to use it to mandate that the people do what the President deems best for them?"
Aug '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
And a fellow Harvard Law School alumnus as well. For shame.
Feb '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Thomas Edison, who had invested heavily in DC electrical technologies, favored the use of DC exclusively for electrical distribution, which would have required electricity users to be within a few miles of power stations. In attempting to get DC adapted as the sole standard, he engaged in an extremely sleazy fear-based campaign (including such things as supporting the use of the electric chair for executions and helpfully suggesting that the process could be called "Westinghouseing" in honor of his AC-oriented competitor.)
Had Obama then been president in place of Hayes, he would probably have thrown the full force of the government behind the Edison approach and made AC power illegal.....
Dec '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
That's a lot of mistakes in one speech. The people who argued with Columbus weren't arguing about the shape of the Earth (a myth created by 19th-century writer Washington Irving) but about its size. And guess what? The critics were right!
Mar '11
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
History (and Science) don't seem to be our Dear Leader's strong points.
If he knew more Science he would realize that the energy density of oil is orders of magnitude greater than wind or solar. Nuclear is many orders of magnitude more dense than oil.
It's tough to get round this fundamental problem, which is why the future will be nuclear (which, strangely, he forgot to mention).
It also explains why we can now cross the Atlantic in hours, rather than the weeks taken by the wind-powered Columbus.
Remind me again who is the Luddite, here?
Edited on March 16, 2012 at 10:40pmJun '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
For Obama, politics is a form of theater (and not a lot more). The new estimate of the cost of Obamacare shows that it is twice as expensive as we were told. These are merely irrelevant facts to our Performance Artist in Chief.
May '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Facts are just right-wing constructs, and have always eluded Mr. Obama.
He's also wrong about the flat-Earthers. Few people thought the Earth was flat in the time of Columbus. His detractors just thought he had underestimated the length of his westward journey around the Earth. And they were right, by a factor of 4. He thought it was about 3000 miles West from the Canary Islands across the Atlantic Ocean, where he would find Japan. In reality it's more like 12,000 miles--across the Atlantic Ocean, overland across the Americas, and then across the must vaster Pacific. That's why Columbus thought North America was India.
Aug '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
Can you even begin to imagine how difficult it would be to carve that magnificent beard into Mount Rushmore?!
May '10
Re: Obama Owes Rutherford B. Hayes an Apology
(continued)
So the comparison to flat-Earthers is utterly wrong, and he should be embarrassed. The objections to Columbus were based on skepticism from a scientific point of view--they didn't believe his overly optimistic math. Many of the popular forms of "green energy" are vulnerable to exactly the same criticism.
Columbus wasn't right, he was unbelievably lucky. The only thing that kept Columbus from perishing on his journey "west to the Orient" was that the Americas happened to be in the way, about where he thought east Asia was. So what can we say about the green movement based on the President's lame analogy?
Edited on March 16, 2012 at 11:27pm