Washington Resigns His Commission OTD in 1783 - and EVERY AMERICAN Should be Forever Grateful

If you're a citizen of the United States of America who values things like freedom, democracy, the rule of law, civilian oversight of the military, and so forth.... then today's date is quite significant and should forever inspire your gratitude and appreciation.

It was on this date -- December 23, 1783 -- that George Washington tendered his resignation as Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army and headed home for Mount Vernon.

Read "George Washington's Greatest Act" at Medium

Yes, Washington was human and had his sins and shortcomings. Yes, not everything was great in the founding era.  Yes, we've made progress on many things since. And thank God for it!  But...

Making progress doesn't give us the right to hate the people of the past or forget our obligations of gratitude. 

Every American -- regardless of race, creed, color, gender, sex, orientation, perspective, etc -- should be grateful to George Washington (especially this act in 1783). Every single American. 

Let's remember the good and be grateful for it.  

An Open Letter to George Washington University Students

March 30, 2019

Dear George Washington University Student,

Is it okay if I address you as a George Washington University student?  I ask because I've just read the news that you've voted to remove and replace your mascot -- "George the Colonial." Apparently, being the 'woke' university students that you are, you find "George the Colonial," a mascot clearly inspired by your namesake, to be inappropriate and offensive in today's world. Clearly, you find George Washington to be offensive, and I certainly don't want to cause any of you any emotional distress by mentioning his name in association with your identity as a student. That would be a micro-aggression that I would absolutely feel terrible about.

I can only surmise that it's a matter of time when you will seek to rename your university. The road to social justice, however, is traveled at different speeds. So I understand why you haven't yet succeeded in making that change. I'm sure you won't let me down.

I commend you on your "wokeness." George Washington, along with "George the Colonial" is so yesterday - I mean, so 1700s. In our enlightened age, no "woke" university should have a namesake associated in any way with the sins of our past. We are, after all, above sin today. We've progressed beyond sin. Or at least "woke" university students like yourselves have. Some of us middle-aged, middle-class, everyday Americans haven't yet caught up to your progress yet. But with students like you signaling your virtues to the rest of us, we will have the needed light to follow.

Some backward-thinking, retrograde Americans will of course say things like "George the Colonial" does not represent colonialism or imperialism. They'll say things like the citizens of colonial America rebelled against imperialism - revolting against the British Empire. Don't you, for a moment, let such facts dissuade you. We know that words matter. And the word "colonial" is offensive. That is all that matters today.

Some will argue we owe a debt of gratitude to George Washington. They'll say that, in spite of Washington's sins, he nevertheless did many great things for the country -- things that we should honor him for. Don't you believe it. Don't you listen to it. Those voices can be ignored or silenced. They represent nothing more than verbal violence from a racist, sexist, homophobic patriarchy. You know better.

Others will say that George Washington grew as a person, that he ultimately came to realize slavery was wrong. This is of course true. Even many African Americans of Washington's day recognized this and hailed him as a hero for all the good he did for America. But none of that matters. George Washington didn't progress far enough or fast enough. His conscience just wasn't up to the standards of today's social justice activists -- people like you. And thank God - oh, sorry, thank Heaven - oh, I mean, thank whatever Higher Power or Entity or Belief System which doesn't offend you - that you are here today to make sure we don't make the mistake of honoring any historical figure that we shouldn't. We have you and your generation to let us know which men and women are worthy of grace, forgiveness, honor and/or gratitude - and George Washington clearly doesn't merit any of those considerations.

I look forward to your continued leadership as we march - can I use that word? It's kind of martial, maybe a little hierarchical - forward on the road to Social Justice.

Sincerely,

Brian Tubbs

p.s. Actually.... I'm not that "woke." If you voted against George Washington, do the rest of us a favor. Leave the United States of America. We're better off without you. Thanks be to God for truly courageous American heroes like George Washington - a man none of you are worthy to even mention! God bless America!

Move Presidents Day to January 20: Let George Washington Have His Own Holiday (Again)

Here we are at the most worthless, meaningless holiday of the year: Presidents Day.  That's the official name of the holiday in some states, but still not with the federal government. Nevertheless, the general public has fully embraced "Presidents Day." And, in so doing, we undermine the man who made all our other Presidents, indeed our very country, possible.

The United States officially and explicitly honors just two people with their own exclusive holiday. (Three if you count Jesus of Nazareth for "Christmas," but that's for another discussion). Those two are Christopher Columbus (Columbus Day) and Martin Luther King, Jr (Martin Luther King Day). Whether we should celebrate Columbus Day is a debate worthy of its own attention, and it's one I've already weighed in on. As for Dr. King, I fully support a holiday in his honor.

Dr. King led America toward fulfilling the promise in its Declaration of Independence, namely that "all men are created equal." As Dr. King himself so eloquently declared at the Lincoln Memorial in his famous "I Have a Dream" speech in 1963, the Founding Fathers issued a "promissory note" to future generations. King's words still resonate today:

"...we’ve come here today to dramatize a shameful condition. In a sense we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was the promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Martin Luther King, Jr. deserves his own holiday, but he is not the only American citizen that should get his own day. There are others. And I would submit that the father of the United States would be such a man.

Some will of course protest that Abraham Lincoln, our sixteenth President, deserves a national holiday. I agree. Let Lincoln have his own holiday. It's questionable whether our politicians will ever go for this, given the proximity that Lincoln and Washington have on the calendar - both their birthdays are in February. But I completely agree with the argument that Abraham Lincoln deserves holiday recognition. But I do not agree that honoring Lincoln means Washington should have to surrender his day.

For those who say we should have a holiday honoring all our Presidents or for those who don't want to have to stop saying "Presidents Day," I have a solution: Make January 20 (which is Inauguration Day every four years) an annual holiday celebrating the office of the presidency. It doesn't have to be an actual day off work, except for when there is an actual inauguration, but January 20 can be known every year as "Presidents Day." And that way, Washington can have back his holiday.

There was a time when most Americans would agree that George Washington is worthy of singular, exclusive celebration. Today, it seems most Americans don't even care. And this is sad, given the fact that we wouldn't even have a country today were it not for George Washington.

Without Washington leading the Continental Army, the American Revolution would've been lost. Without Washington holding his army together and keeping them from revolting during the dangerous interval between the victory at Yorktown (1781) and the Treaty of Paris (1783), the American Revolution would've collapsed into a military coup and major civil unrest. Without Washington presiding over the Constitutional Convention and then supporting the new Constitution, the United States would've sputtered into oblivion and ultimately disintegrated under the ineffectual Articles of Confederation. Without Washington keeping the country together as its first President and putting in place the practical foundation of our civil government, the United States never would've gotten off the ground.

I could go on and on. Washington flatly refused offers to become king or dictator. He resigned his commission at war's end when he could've continued as Commander-in-Chief and exerted monumental leverage (if not outright control) in the affairs of government. After the new Constitution was ratified and he was elected (unanimously) as President, he served two terms and then refused to remain President in perpetuity. He voluntarily relinquished authority not once, but twice. He is alone among leaders in world history in this regard. And Washington renounced, as the Rev. Richard Allen said, "the only stain with which man could reproach him" by freeing his slaves in his will. (See Allen's eulogy here). He was the only slave-holding President to do so, and in essence made his last public statement a denunciation of slavery. Like I said, I could go on and on.

George Washington was, in every respect, the indispensable man of American history. And he more than deserves every monument erected to him and every school or street or building named after him. He deserves Washington State as well as the nation's capital being named in his honor. He deserves to be on our dollar bill and our quarter. And, yes, he deserves a holiday named exclusively in his honor.

Yes, I'm aware that the legal name of the federal holiday designated for the third Monday in February is George Washington's Birthday Observed, but that is no longer the name that is recognized by the general public.

And it's a travesty. We have betrayed the man who made our country possible.

I can't put it any better than the sixteenth President of the United States. In 1842, a young Abraham Lincoln was invited to speak at the Washington Temperance Society on February 22 (the date of Washington's birthday under the Gregorian calendar). Here is what Lincoln said:

"This is the one hundred and tenth anniversary of the birth-day of Washington. We are met to celebrate this day. Washington is the mightiest name of earth — long since mightiest in the cause of civil liberty; still mightiest in moral reformation. On that name, an eulogy is expected. It cannot be. To add brightness to the sun, or glory to the name of Washington, is alike impossible. Let none attempt it. In solemn awe pronounce the name, and in its naked deathless splendor, leave it shining on."

Indeed.

Happy George Washington Day!

Robert E. Lee and George Washington Are Not The Same

Robert E Lee's statue in Charlottesville, Va.

In a combative August 15 press conference, President Donald Trump expressed dismay at the removal of the statue to Confederate General Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia (that planned removal being the flashpoint of the violent protests which erupted this past weekend) and in doing so, seemed to compare General Lee to George Washington.

"So, this week it's Robert E. Lee," said the President. "I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder is it George Washington next week and is it Thomas Jefferson the week after?"

Let's agree that there are many in this country who would make little to no distinction between Confederate generals and slave-owning Founding Fathers. These activists would like to see statues and memorials to any and all slave owners (Confederate or loyal American) removed, and they would like to see any schools, towns, cities, or states likewise renamed. This includes Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, George Mason, and so on. President Trump is correct on this point, but...

I believe it's wrong to encourage such linking or association. It's unnecessary to suggest an all-or-nothing approach to statues and memorials.

There are indeed some similarities between George Washington and Robert E. Lee. Both professed to be Christians. Both were Virginians. Both were generals. Both led (depending on one's point of view) revolutionary or insurrectionist armies. And, yes, both owned and managed slaves. But... there are also several very meaningful differences.

Robert E. Lee emphasized loyalty to state over nation. By contrast, George Washington called for national allegiance. In his Farewell Address, President Washington declared: "Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations." Despite post-Civil War "Lost Cause" mythology and propaganda, the southern states in 1860-61 (particularly in the Deep South), clearly centered their grievances around the issue of slavery. This was made clear in their speeches, editorials, proclamations, formal deliberations, and official resolutions. Their desire to protect the institution of slavery (as well as its expansion and the capture of slaves who escaped to the North) was what drove them to secession. (See Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens' Cornerstone Speech). Lee took up his sword to defend this cause.

In contrast, the Second Continental Congress listed out their grievances (17 of them) against the British in the Declaration of Independence. Not one of those grievances was the desire to guard or expand slavery. (In fact, despite popular misconception today, most of the Founders didn't own slaves and even many who did had deep reservations with the institution). Both Lee and Washington expressed moral disapproval of slavery, and yet one of them (Lee) took up arms to effectively defend (and, had he been successful, to advance) slavery. The other capped off his long career by freeing his slaves in his will and (in so doing) publicly adding his name to the cause of manumission.

On the issue of slavery, it should be noted that Lee may not have been the "benevolent" slave master that his defenders would have us believe. Wesley Norris was a slave owned by the family and estate of George Washington Parke Custis, grandson of Martha Washington. It was, as Norris said, the "general impression" of the slaves that when Mr. Custis passed, they would be freed. This understanding was no doubt inspired by the spirit of George Washington's will. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. When Custis died, Norris was informed he would have to remain a slave, under the authority of (at the time) Colonel Lee according to the "conditions of the will." Seventeen months into their 5-year extension, Norris and two or three other slaves escaped to Maryland where they were captured and returned to Lee. Norris' account of what happened next is damning. Though Lee privately denied these allegations, there is some compelling evidence to back up Norris' claims. But even if Lee is technically innocent of some of the specifics of what Norris says, the nature of the controversy speaks to the relations Lee had with the slaves on his and his wife's plantation. It also makes clear that the Custis family and Lee broke with George Washington's trajectory against slavery.

Elizabeth Brown Pryor, author of Reading The Man: A Portrait of Robert E. Lee Through His Private Letters, explains how Lee should be seen on the issue of slavery in contrast to George Washington. She writes:

The tragedy for Lee is that he never made the transformational leap that would recognize the fundamental human nature of the slaves. George Washington wrestled with it; Abraham Lincoln did as well. Neither of these men ever considered African-Americans their equal. Ultimately, however, they both grasped the fact that what was wrong with slavery was not an absence of sufficient laws, or a need for more humane treatment within an exploitative system. What was wrong with slavery was that it failed to recognize the brotherhood of the human condition. The entangled lives of the slaves and their masters, the emotional, historical, sexual, and communal connections, could mean only one thing: that these beings were equal as part of mankind; equal in their human instincts, passions, desires, and inclinations, including the desire for self-determination. Equal, as Lincoln said, in the "right to eat the bread without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns. . . ." Capable, as George Washington finally realized, "of a destiny different from that in which they were born." Robert E. Lee would never cross this threshold. He could embrace the need for justice, but it was a justice defined by unjust principles. His racism and his limited imagination meant that he never admitted the humanity of the slaves with whom he lived. In avoiding that truth, he bound himself to slavery's inhumanity.

Finally, though Lee verbally objected to secession (calling it "anarchy"), he ultimately took up arms against the national government when his home state seceded. Washington, on the other hand, responded to rebellion against the national government with a swift and overwhelming display of military force (even leading troops in the field himself while President). See the Whiskey Rebellion. He also reportedly told an English friend, after the American Revolution, that if the southern states (including Virginia) were to secede over the issue of slavery, he would move north and side with the Union.

Bottom line: George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same.

There are similarities, but there are also some very important differences -- differences that we should not miss today.

The President is right that some will seek to remove Washington's hero status (by tearing down statues in his honor and removing his name from schools and parks). Some are already doing this (and have been for a few years). Tearing down or removing Confederate statues is undoubtedly fueling momentum for downgrading the hero status of anyone associated with slavery - and that certainly includes men like Washington. But...

It's fallacious to say that we should keep up statues to undeserving historical figures so that we don't lose our statues to deserving ones.

We should not honor the Confederacy as a noble cause. Anyone who reads Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens' infamous "Cornerstone Speech" should agree. For this reason, I understand - and will not oppose - the removal of statues to Confederate leaders from public grounds. Confederate flags and statues belong on cemeteries and museums - not in public squares. Not in 2017.

But we should honor our nation's Founding Fathers. And I will oppose (vigorously so) any attempt to dishonor our nation's Founders.

This is how, I hope, most Americans today feel.

A Reminder from Mount Vernon on Star Wars Day

The fine folks at Mount Vernon have posted this brilliant meme inspired by Star Wars Day. If you don't "get it," you need to watch the original Star Wars trilogy and pay close attention to the end of The Empire Strikes Back. :-)

How Benedict Arnold Became a Traitor

Bestselling author Nathaniel Philbrick tackles the most notorious act of treason in American history. Philbrick, author of Mayflower and In the Heart of the Sea, turns his focus to the tumultuous period that is also the focus of this blog: the American Revolution. 

In his book Valiant Ambition: George Washington, Benedict Arnold, and the Fate of the American Revolution, Philbrick explains that Arnold's treason can only be understood when one studies its context. Other than perhaps Arnold's choice in wives, the same temptations more or less faced other notables in the American Revolution, including the great George Washington. Fortunately for America, Washington withstood such temptations proving himself to be the man of exceptional integrity the nation desperately needed. 

Writing a review of Philbrick's book, John Daniel Davidson explains: 

It’s a wonder that Washington endured such terrible treatment from civilian overseers and managed to keep his army together; a lesser man would have either resigned in disgust or declared himself emperor and taken what his army needed by force. Or he would have done what Arnold did: conclude that the country’s experiment in freedom had failed and that the only way to restore peace and order was to help the British win the war. 

To read the rest of Davidson's review, check out... 

"The Seduction of Benedict Arnold" at National Review

Newt Gingrich and William R. Forstchen Bring George Washington's Revolution to Life

Whatever you think of Newt Gingrich as a politician, you must give him props as a brilliant thinker and accomplished author. An example of Gingrich's impressive talent with a pen (or personal computer keyboard) is his foray into historical fiction. Gingrich has co-written several marvelous historical novels (some of them in the alternate history category) with William R. Forstchen. Among those terrific novels is an inspiring trilogy set in the Revolutionary War - a trilogy that begins with To Try Men's Souls: A Novel of George Washington and the Fight for American Freedom. 



To Try Men's Souls tells the true-life story of George Washington saving the American Revolution by pulling off an audacious and brilliant defeat of the dreaded Hessian mercenaries at Trenton, New Jersey. It's a captivating read -- made all the more special by the fact that the events described are real (even though much of the dialogue and the details of the story are fleshed out by the authors' imaginations). If you haven't read To Try Men's Souls, I encourage you to pick up a copy today at the link below.

***

Order your copy of To Try Men's Souls now at Amazon.com. And don't forget the sequels Valley Forge and Victory at Yorktown. 

Edward Larson Talks About George Washington's Return to Civic Duty

Pulitzer Prize winning author Edward Larson recently spoke at the Richard M. Nixon Library about his book The Return of George Washington. As Larson makes clear, Washington's retirement in 1783 established a government of the people, and his return from retirement in 1787 preserved it. You can watch Larson's speech below...



...and pick up a copy of The Return of George Washington courtesy of Amazon.com.

Happy Birthday, Mr. Washington: 10 Things to Know About George Washington

On this birthday of our nation's first President, George Washington, we should remember how blessed our nation was to have such a remarkable man at the center of its founding. In that spirit, the folks at Mount Vernon have offered 10 things every American should know about the father of our country....

"10 Things You Really Ought to Know About George Washington"

George Washington Resigns His Commission on December 23, 1783

On this day in 1783, General George Washington strode into the State Capitol Building in Annapolis, Maryland and did one of the most remarkable things anyone has ever done in the history of the world. The phrase may be trite, but Washington was "on top of the world" or at least his world. Many Americans already regarded him as the father of his country, and more than a few expected him (and were even calling upon him) to become dictator of the new nation just as Oliver Cromwell had done in England over a century prior. It was the natural order of things, but Washington flatly refused such a suggestion and instead did something virtually unheard of.

Other than Vietnam and the 21st century's "War on Terror," the American Revolution (aka the Revolutionary War) was the longest war in U.S. history. Next to the American Civil War, it was also the war that hurt Americans at home more than any other. And at the end of the war in 1783, the new nation was in disarray and desperate for strong leadership. They weren't getting such leadership from Congress, which was impotent under the Articles of Confederation. They needed a strong national leader to bring the various states and factions together, heal the nation's economy, shore up the nation's security, project strength abroad, and forge a path toward progress. The temptation for Washington to be that guy must have been enormous, but Washington knew the cost of giving into such pressure. This new nation, in Washington's mind, should not be characterized by dictators, kings, martial law, violent insurrections, or the bloody transfer of power. As difficult and frustrating as the path might be, Washington believed the only sure path to national success was one that honored the Rule of Law and popular consent.

With this in mind, Washington kept his army in the field after the victory in Yorktown to keep pressure on the British, while at the same time doing his best to keep peace in the Continental Army itself - an army torn with strife over inadequate supplies and unpaid wages. In early 1783, he talked down his officers from leading an open revolt against Congress (even resorting to a display of theatrics with his spectacles) and turned away any and all suggestions that he become king or dictator. Though such an offer was never formally made, the prospect was dangled in front of him continually throughout 1783. Finally, in December of that year, just weeks after the British formally recognized American independence (bringing the American Revolution to an official end), Washington made his decision. He would leave the army and go home as a private citizen. And he would leave the success of America in the hands of civilian authority.

On December 23, 1783, Washington made good on his promise. Appearing before the Congress in Annapolis, the Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army (and, as such, the most powerful man in America) resigned his military commission and (in his words) took "leave of all the employments of public life." In his brief remarks Washington offered: "I consider it an indispensable duty to close this last solemn act of my Official life, by commending the Interests of our dearest Country to the protection of Almighty God, and those who have the superintendence of them, to his holy keeping." According to one observer, there was in the Congress that day a "shedding of copious tears."

We now know, of course, that Washington's retirement was not permanent. But he (in 1783) didn't know that, and neither did the nation. It was only with great reluctance that Washington answered the call to public life again in 1787 with the Constitutional Convention and then in 1789 to take the oath as the first President of the United States under the U.S. Constitution.

The day after resigning his commission before Congress in 1783, George Washington rode his horse back to his beloved Mount Vernon as a private citizen to spend Christmas with his loving wife, Martha. This was the greatest Christmas present Washington could give to the United States. We still benefit from this gift today, though we take it for granted. So remarkable was it for a victorious leader of a revolution and a new nation to walk away from power that King George III called Washington "the greatest man in the world." Indeed he was, and in my opinion, he remains one of the greatest men in human history.

**For more on George Washington's character, check out The Religion of George Washington: The Faith and Moral Philosophy of our Greatest Founding Father

WatchMojo.com Ranks George Washington #3 in List of Top 10 Presidents

Despite the fact that a successful George Washington presidency was indispensable to the United States of America getting off the ground as a stable, self-sufficient country, WatchMojo.com ranked him behind Franklin D. Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln. Here's the video....



Personally, I'd rank Lincoln as #2. Yes, his accomplishments were immense, and the United States would've surely divided into two or more countries, were it not for his leadership. But there would have been no United States to divide - no country to fight a civil war - had Washington failed. And to rank Franklin D. Roosevelt above Washington is intellectually unforgivable. Does FDR belong in the Top 10? Absolutely. Probably even in the Top 5. But ahead of the father of our country? Puleeeeeze.

What are your thoughts on the WatchMojo.com ranking?

Historic Sites in Northern Virginia for Student Travel Tours to Washington DC

Often when student travel groups decide upon Washington D.C. as their destination, the tour leaders have specific sites in mind for a visit. Many of the sites that student travel groups request the most are just outside Washington D.C., in Northern Virginia. In order to include these historic sites in a student travel tour, advanced planning is required. Usually, I advise educational travel groups to plan one year ahead for trips to the Washington D.C. area. Depending upon the site visited, special advance procedures to clear student visitors may be required.

An educational travel company needs to be retained to plan and execute an effective itinerary for Washington D.C. If popular historic or governmental sites in Northern Virginia are requested, the itinerary will accommodate these sites on one special day, or combine them effectively with other destinations on the student tour.

Here is an overview of some of the popular Northern Virginia sites for educational travel groups:

Pentagon Tour
The Pentagon is located just across the Potomac River from Washington D.C. in Arlington, Virginia. Many student travel groups are eager to see the headquarters for high-ranking officers of the U.S. Military and their aides. Because the Pentagon was attacked on September 11th, and it houses critical military personnel, it is a sensitive site. Despite the challenges to security, the U.S. government still provides student travel tours led by a uniformed and trained member of the U.S. Military. This tour has been provided to the public since 1976, when it was first initiated in celebration of our nation’s 200th anniversary. With proper advance notification, an educational travel group may schedule a one-hour tour of the Pentagon that includes about one and one half miles of walking through Pentagon corridors and grounds and a view of the highlights.

Arlington National Cemetery
Arlington National Cemetery is another historic site that fascinates and intrigues educational tour groups. Arlington National Cemetery was dedicated as a military cemetery on June 15th 1854. Veterans from all of the wars, both foreign and domestic, are buried here and the gravesites number around 300,000. The National Park Service administers Arlington House and its immediate grounds. The U.S. Army oversees Arlington National Cemetery and Soldier’s Home National Cemetery. Educational travel groups touring Arlington National Cemetery may have the opportunity to attend a Wreath Laying Ceremony or take a Tram tour, with advance planning.

Mount Vernon Estate and Gardens
Mount Vernon, the historic estate of George Washington lies just across the Potomac River from Washington D.C. a mere 16 miles distance from the nation’s capital. Mount Vernon is exquisitely preserved. Educational travel groups will be greeted at a brand new building, the Ford Orientation Center, and will tour The Donald W. Reynolds Museum and Education Center which houses 25 new theaters and galleries that narrate the entire story of George Washington's life. The Reynolds museum displays 500 original artifacts, and offers 11 videos and Immersion Theater as a way of learning about our founding father.

Student travel groups can experience living history by observing a working 18th Century farm and gristmill, as well as other educational programs. Student travel groups may tour the mansion, gardens, working farm, and more.

Educational travel to Washington D.C. is greatly enhanced by trips to Northern Virginia historical points of interest. Places like the Pentagon, Arlington National Cemetery, and Mount Vernon should not be ignored on a student travel tour of the Washington D.C. area. For more information on specific points of interest in the Washington D.C. area for student travel groups, visit educationaltravelconsultants.com

*****

Howard Clemens founded Educational Travel Consultants in 1984. Over the last 24 years, Mr. Clemens has organized student travel tours for thousands of high schools, middle schools, and elementary schools. His company also specializes in performance tours to Washington D.C., New York City, and Orlando, Florida. Email him at info@educationaltravelconsultants.com or visit http://www.educationaltravelconsultants.com

Say NO to Presidents' Day

February is upon us - and that means "Presidents' Day" is coming. Let me make something abundantly clear for everyone. I hate and despise "Presidents' Day." That's right. I hate it. Why, you ask?

Well, don't get me wrong. I love holidays. And I don't hate the American presidency. In fact, having a day each year in which we encourage people to learn more about our Presidents is a good thing.

***To test your knowledge on U.S. Presidents, try this quiz.

What I hate about "Presidents' Day" is the way in which this worthless holiday has evolved - and, most importantly, I hate how the original purpose of the day has been diminished and forgotten.

Officially, there is no "Presidents' Day." The holiday does not exist -- officially. According to US federal law, the day we commonly refer to as "Presidents' Day" is "George Washington's Birthday Observed."

You see, the U.S. Congress voted to make George Washington's birthday a federal holiday. With the Monday Holidays Act, we no longer celebrate on Washington's birthday itself, but rather on what is usually the nearest Monday to it.

Well, over time, people stopped calling the holiday "George Washington Day" or "George Washington's Birthday" - and instead began calling it "Presidents' Day." There are several reasons for this - not the least of which is that some believe we should honor Abraham Lincoln as well.

While I agree that Lincoln deserves a holiday, let's not give him one at the expense of the father of our country. Either create a separate holiday for Lincoln, or leave the February holiday for George Washington. Don't diminish Washington in order to honor Lincoln. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Besides, we don't call the holiday "Washington-Lincoln Day," so Lincoln isn't being honored anyway.

There is only one solution to this problem. Remove George Washington's birthday from the Monday Holidays Act. Congress already did this with Veteran's Day. Let's do it with George Washington's birthday as well.

If Washington's birthday falls on a Saturday or Sunday, THEN you can observe the holiday on a Monday. Otherwise, observe the holiday on the actual day of his birth (according to the modern calendar, of course).

If you want to keep a "Presidents' Day" (because it sounds nice), then Congress can designate January 20 (Inauguration Day) as "Presidents' Day" - and make it a day to honor ALL our nation's Presidents.

But let's restore Washington's birthday now. By putting the February holiday actually on Washington's birthday, it will force people to recognize that it's a day to honor George Washington specifically. The father of our country deserves that.

***Interested in visiting Mount Vernon, check out this article.

For Liberty and Glory - New Book by James R Gaines

I'm currently reading For Liberty and Glory: Washington, Lafayette and their Revolutions. It's a very interesting and well-researched analysis of the two most important revolutions in western history - told with a focus on two men whose lives were deeply affected by BOTH events.

George Washington, of course, headed the American Revolution as the Continental Army Commander-in-Chief. But he was also impacted by the French Revolution while serving as President of the United States. Lafayette was an invaluable aide to Washington during the American Revolution, and became something like a son to the childless Washington. Lafayette would return to France as a hero and then himself be swept up in the revolution which gripped his own nation.

So far, I'm enjoying the book and can give it a solid recommendation. I will provide a more detailed review once I've completed it.

Alan Axelrod Studies Washington's Trial by Fire

There's a book on the market (which I just bought) that takes a look at George Washington's "trial by fire" learning experience in the French and Indian War. Interestingly, the book focuses on Washington's life up until his humiliating defeat at Fort Necessity. It then only briefly mentions his redemptive heroism at Braddock's defeat.

While I've only skimmed the book, I can say that I'm looking forward to delving into it more deeply. This really was a pivotal time for George Washington. A great leader learns more from failure than success. And Washington's "blooding" at the "Great Meadows" certainly was a learning experience for him.