Category Archives: Federalist

On this episode of The Federalist Radio Hour, Jaron Pensinger, a 21-year-old student at Georgetown University, joins Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to discuss his time at President Donald Trumps D.C. rally on Jan. 6 and how his role as a peaceful protester concerned about election integrity was misconstrued by his peers and the press.

I just wanted to, as protests are meant to do, send a peaceful message to our government to show that, you know, we want some sort of change and we want our government back for the people, Pensinger said.

The thought of attacking the Capitol, Pensinger said, never crossed his mind.

I was going down to hearDonald Trump speak and then peacefully marchand then go home, Pensinger said.I was not there because Im a white supremacist. I was not there because I support violence. I felt that there were some concerns about election integrity in this past election, you know, with Donald Trump and Joe Biden, and I feel as though a lot of the election concerns were, in a sense, swept under the rug by Democrats.

Despite the threats and calls for his university to take disciplinary action against him, Pensinger hopes the chaotic events on Jan. 6 will spur journalists and others to hear out the concerns of the peaceful protesters who attended the rally.

All it takes is a conversation, Pensinger said. So many of these people wouldnt even have a conversation with me and were rushing to judgment about me, and all it takes is a conversation.

Read more here about why Pensinger and thousands of others traveled to Washington, D.C., last week to protest the presidential election.

More:

One Student's First-Person Account Of The Rally That Turned Into A Riot - The Federalist

Democratic members of Congress are peddling theories that their GOP colleagues gave reconnaissance tours of the Capitol to insurrectionists just one day before a mob rioted at the historic building, but so far, no evidence has surfaced.

Im going to see they are held accountable, and if necessary, ensure that they dont serve in Congress, said New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill, referring to those members of Congress who had groups coming through the Capitol that I saw on Jan. 5 a reconnaissance for the next day; those members of Congress that incited this violent crowd; those members of Congress that attempted to help our president undermine our democracy.

While the Capitol was technically closed to the public on Jan. 5 due to COVID-19 restrictions, accepting only tours with members families and staff, more than 30 Democratic legislators, led by Sherrill, signed a letter asking for acting House Sergeant-at-Arms Timothy Blodgett, acting Senate Sergeant-at-Arms Jennifer Hemingway, and acting Capitol Police Chief Yogananda Pittman to investigate suspicious behavior and access given to visitors to the Capitol Complex on Tuesday, January 5, 2021 the day before the attacks on the Capitol.

Many of the Members who signed this letter, including those of us who have served in the military and are trained to recognize suspicious activity, as well as various members of our staff, witnessed an extremely high number of outside groups in the complex on Tuesday, January 5, the letter reads. This is unusual for several reasons, including the fact that access to the Capitol Complex has been restricted since public tours ended in March due to the pandemic. We found these tours so concerning that senior staff questioned the SAA on January 5 about what was taking place.

As Politico noted, neither the letter nor Sherrill named any specific members, explained how giving tours was reconnaissance, nor said how tours might have fueled or enabled the riot. Sherrill also did not respond to The Federalists questions about who might have allowed these reportedly suspicious tours to occur.

Sherrill is one of the many lawmakers on the left alleging that their colleagues played a role in orchestrating the Jan. 6 chaos that left five people dead. During a live video session on Instagram just last week, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York told her viewers that she didnt even feel safe around other members of Congress during the attack because she feared they would oust her to the rioters.

There were QAnon and white supremacist sympathizers and, frankly, white supremacist members of Congress who I know and who I have felt would disclose my location and would create opportunities to allow me to be hurt, kidnapped, etc., she said.

Similarly, Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio also alleged that a couple members of Congress might have given tours to people outside their family and staff.

Im going to wait to make sure we get verification, the congressman said, noting that the tours he knew of were not one-on-one tours or that of a small family.

Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, a member of the progressive House Squad, also suggested that GOP members could not be trusted after every panic button in her office was removed without warning, knowledge, or approval.

Despite these strong allegations, most of the Democrats have failed to provide evidence of or even names of the members who allowed the suspicious tours. One of the closest things to a name that any of the accusers has offered came during Rep. Sean Maloneys rant on MSNBC last week, when the New York lawmaker hinted that some of the newer GOP members could be responsible for giving the tours.

I dont have firsthand knowledge of [the tours], but Ive spoken to a member who saw it personally, he said. And he described it with some alarm that there are some of our new colleagues the same ones, of course, who believe in conspiracy theories and who want to carry guns into the House chamber who, today, today, have been yelling at Capitol Police.

Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee took it a step further, saying Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado was one of the members he saw giving a tour.

We saw congress[woman] Boebert taking a group of people for a tour sometime after the 3rd and before the 6th, he told CNN.

Boebert, however, previously denied ever giving a tour to an outside group.

I have never given a tour of the US Capitol to an outside group, she said in a statement on Jan. 14.

View post:

Dems Say GOP Lawmakers Gave 'Reconnaissance' Capitol Tours. Where's The Evidence? - The Federalist

In a secret recording from Jan. 8, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted that the big tech company is exploring a long-term political censorship campaign to purge and ban users the company deems unacceptable.

The focus is certainly on this account, and how it ties to real-world violence, but also we need to think much longer-term around how these dynamics play out over time, Dorsey said, referring in context to President Donald Trumps account. I dont believe this is going away any time soon.

In the short video, obtained and published by Project Veritas, Dorsey reportedly addressed his employees about the Silicon Valley giants efforts to censor, ban, and de-platform certain users such as President Donald Trump and other conservatives. In the recording, Dorsey pledged to expand Twitters purge in the days following President-elect Joe Bidens inauguration.

We know we are focused on one account right now, but this is going to be much bigger than just one account, and its going to go on for much longer than just this day, this week, the next few weeks, going on beyond inauguration, Dorsey said. We have to expect that. We have to be ready for that.

In addition to banning the sitting president and removing more than 70,000 accounts that Twitter claimed were linked to or amplified QAnon conspiracy theories, Dorsey said the heads of the company are exploring banning more users.

The moves that were making today, around, you know, QAnon, for instance, is one such example of a much broader approach that we should be looking at and going deeper on, Dorsey said. The team has a lot of work and a lot of focus on this particular issue, but we also need to give them the space and the support to focus on the much bigger picture because it is, it is not going away.

The U.S. is extremely divided. Our platform is showing up every single day. And our role is to protect the integrity of that conversation and do what we can to make sure that no one is being harmed based off that, Dorsey concluded.

Jordan Davidson is a staff writer at The Federalist. She graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism.

Visit link:

Twitter CEO Says Censorship Will Be 'Much Bigger' Than The Trump Ban - The Federalist

Former Democratic Party presidential candidate Andrew Yang announced his candidacy for New York mayor on Jan. 14, and its time we set the record straight on him.

Despite a colorful ad featuring New York bodegas, his Asian-American credentials, and his fundraising prowess, Yangs run for mayor is nothing like the barnstorming presidential candidacy in which he presented new ideas and interesting credentials as an entrepreneur and nonprofit founder. Yang has become a standard Democratic candidate who now upholds very standard and uninteresting Democratic positions.

His signature issue, universal basic income cash payments of $1,000 a month, has lost its luster as more Democrat candidates in New York City have co-opted the proposal. We have also seen the limited effects of universal cash payments, as the Trump administration has carried out effectively the same policy to perverse consequences, such as inflation, that would be worse if payments are carried out over the long term, as Yang proposes. Consumer prices for groceries remain up even as the supply chain has righted itself, and the average American will pay roughly $400 more in 2021 for groceries than she did in 2020.

Other than a universal basic income, Yangs policy priorities for New Yorkers are uninspiring. He wants to form a government-run bank to pick and choose winners and losers in business. He wants to add new teachers to a public school system mismanaged by outgoing Mayor Bill de Blasio. Although he has some other interesting ideas, such as fostering a startup incubator with $100 million in private capital, it is unclear where that money comes from or if he has the skill to raise it.

Yangs most disheartening attribute is his quick descent from independent-minded freethinker to Democratic Party shill and coattails-rider. The quirky former presidential candidate came into national politics with concerns about automation taking away American jobs, admirably writing in his 2018 book, The War on Normal People: America is starting 100,000 fewer businesses per year than it was only 12 years ago, and is in the midst of shedding millions of jobs due primarily to technological advances.

Yang broke boundaries (not just racial) in his presidential campaign, appearing on Fox News, Joe Rogans podcast and The View to articulate his ideas, and he attracted young and tech-savvy voters known as the Yang Gang. At times, Yang wrote as an independent-minded and even admirable personality.

During the height of the lockdowns in 2020, Yang asked Asian-Americans to step up and become leaders in their communities, showing a gentle patriotism mixed with understanding about Asian-American fears. He wrote: We Asian Americans need to embrace and show our American-ness in ways we never have before. We need to step up, help our neighbors, donate gear, vote, wear red white, and blue, volunteer, fund aid organizations, and do everything in our power to accelerate the end of this crisis.

But after his presidential campaign ended, Yang ingratiated himself with the Democratic mainstream. He became a stump speaker for Joe Biden, who is hardly a reformer or changemaker by any stretch of the imagination, and capitulated to leftist identity politics by saying that a Biden-Harris win would be Asian-Americans best hope. He directed followers to move to Georgia for Senate candidates Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock before the runoff elections.

Now in his New York City mayoral campaign, he is promising free everything: from free money to free business bucks (at the mercy of the government, of course), to free college and forgiveness of college tuition. He has become a caricature of himself as free stuff Santa.

All the while, Yang has drifted further and further away from the concerns of ordinary Americans. In one interview at the start of his mayoral campaign, Yang said to The New York Times, We live in a two-bedroom apartment in Manhattan. And so, like, can you imagine trying to have two kids on virtual school in a two-bedroom apartment, and then trying to do work yourself?

It was a classically Yang kind of thing to say, but criticism mounted immediately over his out-of-touch words, especially since Yang owns a second home far away from the city in which he camped during the pandemic. Over Twitter, New York critics compared his comments to let them eat cake. Yang responded feistily: Anyone who thinks my New Yorkness is in question, he said, should come and say it to my face.

An early poll shows Yang up among the candidates for NYC mayor. But pitfalls can also follow high initial name-recognition. His recordor lack thereofwill be put through the meat-grinder in the New York political machine. Without a truly independent brand, Yang may prove to be ultimately indistinguishable from either his more liberal or conservative opponents.

Yangs evaporation is surely disappointing. A promising outsider, a family man, and a man with intellectual credibility about the decline of middle-class America has become a shill for the Democratic Party, and New Yorkers shouldnt expect much more.

Go here to see the original:

Andrew Yang Used To Champion Ideas. Now He Is A Boring Democrat - The Federalist

After 46 years, the annual Washington, D.C., March for Life has been cancelled, with leaders citing COVID-19 concerns and the Jan. 6th U.S. capitol riot, which has resulted in heightened pressures for law enforcement officers. Organizers of Americas largest outdoor pro-life demonstration announced Friday that there will be a virtual March for Life on Jan. 29 instead.

Those who were planning to make the D.C. pilgrimage are being asked to stay home and watch the march online. Only a small group of pro-life leaders will attend the event and walk the protest route.

The march takes place every year on the anniversary of the 1973 landmark Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision, which forced states to allow abortion nationwide. It has become a powerful symbol of the right to life movement.

March organizers bring in passionate pro-life advocates to speak, ranging from Live Action founder Lila Rose to saline abortion survivor Melissa Ohden. Recently, President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence became the first president and vice president to speak at the march.

Each year, the demonstration inspires tens of thousands of Americans, especially young people, to brave the cold weather and take a stand for the more than 600,000 unborn babies killed every year in America. The lasting tradition couldnt even stop 10,000 people from marching in a blizzard during the 1987 rally! Yet leftist corporate media has routinelyrefused to give the mega-march the coverage it deserves, while playing up much smaller leftist rallies.

This year, the March for Life is a sorry loss for pro-lifers, especially since the incoming administration has been named the mostanti-life ticketin our nations history. Vice President-elect Kamala Harris is an extremist who supports late-term abortion. As a senator, Harris had a 0 percent rating from theNational Right to Life Committeeand a 100 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America.

Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote,said, Like Joe Biden himself, Kamala Harris favors radical abortion policies including late-term abortion paid for by taxpayers, as well as forcing Catholic religious orders like the Little Sisters of the Poor to provide abortion drugs in their healthcare plans.

As the attorney general of California, Harris used her power to target the pro-life journalists who investigated Planned Parenthood and exposeditsleadershipnegotiating the harvesting and sale of aborted fetal body parts. Harris has called for arepeal of the Hyde Amendment,which protects taxpayer from being forced to fund abortion.

Harris supports codifying Roe,which would prompt Congress to establish an affirmative and statutory right to abortion, prohibiting states from passing their own restrictions. She also endorses aplanthat would force states and localities to seek prior approval and clearance through the U.S. Department of Justice before placing any restrictions on abortions.Since both Biden and Harris have dodged answering questions on their opinion ofcourt packing, there is a real probability that the U.S. Supreme Court may be cemented as anti-life for decades under the incoming administration.

While the reasons for cancelling an in-person March for Life may be understandable, it couldnt have come at a more dire time for the pro-life movement.

Evita Duffy is an intern at The Federalist and a junior at the University of Chicago, where she studies American History. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, & her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1

See the article here:

March For Life Cancelled As Abortion Extremist Descends On White House - The Federalist

Peter Weirs 2003 masterpiece, Master and Commander, is a film about manhood, fatherhood, service, and sacrifice. Adapted from three novels in Patrick OBrians epic Aubrey-Maturin series and starring Russell Crowe, the film is set at sea during the Napoleonic Wars and tells the story of British Captain Jack Aubreys mission to find and sink a French privateer thats been harassing the British whaling fleet off the coast of Brazil.

In other words, its not a comic-book film for woke zoomers and millennials trapped in adolescence. Its a film for adults who want to see a nuanced portrayal of masculine virtue set amid breathtaking cinematography and awesome naval battle scenes.

Crowe himself explained as much over the weekend when someone on Twitter snarked that Master and Commander was so boring it might help as a sleep aid during the pandemic. Ive never made it past the ten minute mark, wrote Ian McNabb, to which Crowe replied, Thats the problem with kids these days. No focus.

Peter Weirs film is brilliant. An exacting, detail oriented, epic tale of fidelity to Empire & service, regardless of the cost. Incredible cinematography by Russell Boyd & a majestic soundtrack. Definitely an adults movie.

Crowes critique of the Twitter troll McNabb strikes at the heart of why a film like Master and Commander might seem boring to young people in todays culture, especially young men.

Yes, the film is a slow burn essentially a drawn-out chase scene as Aubreys ship first eludes and then hunts the French privateer. But as the tension slowly mounts, the virtues of a bygone era are made manifest, not just in the friendship between Aubrey and Dr. Stephen Maturin, the ships surgeon, but also in the paternal relationship Aubrey has toward his officers and crew.

In a time when close male friendship and fatherhood are increasingly rare for young men, Master and Commander is an even more important film to watch and contemplate, and then watch again. If you cant get through the first 10 minutes because youre bored, I assure you the problem isnt with the film, its with you. Grow up.

Go here to see the original:

Russell Crowe Is Right, If You Think 'Master And Commander' Is Boring, You Need To Grow Up - The Federalist

The top Democrat contender for the speaker position in the Illinois House of Representatives is facing scrutiny from his colleagues and others for his history of domestic abuse.

Reporting by the Chicago Tribune indicates that in 2002, officers responded to Rep. Emanuel Chris Welchs house after his ex-girlfriend claimed he slammed her head into a kitchen countertop numerous times after she called him a loser when she was at his house to pick up some of her belongings. Police reports also suggest Welch blocked her from leaving the home, which is when she called the police. Welch denied the allegations.

While the woman originally sought to press charges against Welch for domestic battery and unlawful restraint, she eventually declined to do so.

A few days later, the woman reported a bruise on her arm, police said, as reported by the Tribune.

Eight years later, another woman filed a federal lawsuit for sexual harassment and retaliation against Welch, saying she lost her job at a school after she broke up with him while he was still president of the school board. The case was eventually dismissed following the beginning of settlement talks.

Welch said the incidents, especially the domestic abuse, are no longer relevant and only resurfaced because Republicans are threatened by the potential growth of my profile.

This verbal argument occurred nearly two decades ago, Welch said in a statement. I will be honest that I have reconciled with the individual since that night.

These charges, however, are concerning to some representatives who note that, if chosen as the speaker, Welch would be replacing his political ally, current Speaker Michael Madigan, who received backlash after a Me Too scandal in 2018 in his office, resulting in the firing of one of his longtime aides.

Despite Welchs quick support and endorsement from the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus, Alaina Hampton, the female campaign worker who came forward in 2018 after her supervisor in Madigans office sent her inappropriate texts, condemned Welchs bid for speaker.

How does our state go through a #MeToo scandal that lasted two years and the solution to replacing Michael Madigan is with a person who appeared in a police report write-up over domestic violence allegations? she asked.

Current speaker Madigan was also under investigation by the House Executive Committee, chaired by Welch, for a Commonwealth Edison bribery scandal, but the committee adjourned with no action.

According to House Republican leader Jim Durkin, Welch is merely an extension of Mike Madigan.

Weve gotta break from the past, said Durkin. And trust me, Mike Madigan is going to do everything he can to make sure he passes that baton off to somebody thats going to continue the business model of Madigan Inc.

Jordan Davidson is a staff writer at The Federalist. She graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism.

Read more here:

Illinois Dem With #MeToo History Could Be The Next State House Speaker - The Federalist

Federalist Senior Editor Mollie Hemingway warned leaders ought to be wary of new dangers presented to American civil liberties in the aftermath of the attack on Capitol Hill just as new restrictions were passed following the September terrorist attacks in 2001.

People were terrified, Hemingway said after Al-Qaeda terrorists brought down the World Trade Centers and flew a plane into the Pentagon, and that resulted in a very big constriction of civil liberties that was not always in the countrys best interest and not always constitutional.

Now, Hemingway argued, following another attack on the nations capital this time coming from domestic political extremists, the same reaction repeating itself coming primarily from big tech implementing a widespread purge of non-leftist voices in the 21st-century public square.

Youre having very powerful people, tech oligarchs, and other people working with Democrats and people in the media to suppress all political opposition, Hemingway said. Thats a very real danger that needs to be taken seriously by our leaders.

Continued here:

Hemingway: Leaders Should Be Wary Of Post-9/11 Style Crackdown - The Federalist

National Review

Joe Biden has not yet been sworn in, but already, he is at war with American energy which is to say, at war with American prosperity. Biden has promised to sabotage the Keystone XL pipeline, a privately financed, multi-billion-dollar project already under way, and cancel it on his first day, according to a briefing document cited by the BBC. The Keystone pipeline would, if it were allowed to, carry crude from the oil sands of Alberta to Nebraska, where the pipeline would link up with the existing distribution network to send that oil on to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico. This would benefit Canadian producers and their investors, American refineries and their large, excellently paid work forces those good, high-paying, blue-collar jobs Biden talks about and, most important, American consumers, who would have access to yet another source of fuel at attractive prices from a nearby friendly country. This sort of thing is the point of international economic cooperation. The notional case against Keystone is environmental in the main part, and in the lesser part an issue of Indian lands and rights. The environmental case is unsound: Canada has ratified the Paris agreement and takes environmental issues relatively seriously. Innovation and technological improvements have substantially reduced the greenhouse-gas emissions associated with Canadian tar-sands productions by 30 percent since the 1990s, as the Canadian government calculates. Of course, it matters relatively little whether a gallon of gasoline in the tank of a Cadillac Escalade in Houston is refined from Canadian tar-sands oil or from West Texas oil the relevant emissions come overwhelmingly from the point of combustion. Of course there are environmental challenges associated with the oil sands, as there are with any usable source of energy, including wind and solar. These are regulatory and practical challenges that are perfectly manageable. (Which is not the same thing as a guarantee that U.S. or Canadian authorities, or businesses, will manage them perfectly that kind of oversight is hard work and a serious business.) The same is true of fracking and other petroleum-extraction practices. There are many reasonable ways to manage tradeoffs between economic development and environmental priorities if environmentalists were interested in reasonable tradeoffs, which they arent. Biden, already looking over his shoulder at a restive progressive caucus, apparently intends to buy environmentalists off with other peoples money. Why? Fossil fuels, far from being the great villain of the climate story, have been the main source of greenhouse-gas reductions in the United States over the past several decades, as relatively clean-burning natural gas displaces relatively dirty coal in electricity generation. But that is not the kind of intelligent tradeoff that interests American environmentalists, who are moralists and romantics and committed to the notion that hydrocarbon fuels are, simply, evil and that they must be fought on every front. Hence, the American Lefts comprehensive and total war on any and all infrastructure associated with our most abundant energy sources not only oil pipelines but natural-gas pipelines, too, along with rail-shipping facilities, refineries and other plants, and West Coast export depots intended to help U.S. producers in Asian markets. If it produces, consumes, moves, or processes oil or gas, the American Left opposes it. If Joe Biden is interested in improving the employment and wage outlook for middle-class Americans, he ought not make our industrial, chemical, manufacturing, transportation, and electricity sectors hostage to the narrow-minded concerns of a small group of fanatics. There is a worrying Hayekian lesson in this, too: It is impossible for American businesses to make big, long-term investments in a political environment in which every project is up for renegotiation or summary economic execution every time the White House changes hands. Why invest in building and moving physical goods, and taking on the political risk that goes along with such investments, when you could join the booming financial sector and put your money into the money business? This is not to sniff at finance or other work in the service economy, but, surely, in a continental nation as vast as ours, with an economy as complex as ours, it shouldnt be possible for one man serving a short term in a temporary elected office to undo years of work and billions of dollars in investment. This is pure foolishness, and it will cost us. Joe Biden is getting ready to get off to a poor start. And if he thinks that he can buy off the green lobby by sacrificing Keystone, he is mistaken. Their ambitions are bigger and broader than that, and they will not be easily satisfied: Lapptit vient en mangeant. If you were wondering who actually has Joe Bidens ear, now you know.

Go here to read the rest:

Attorney and Federalist Society member sounds alarm about 'progressive tide' in small towns - Yahoo News

By HILLEL ITALIE AP National Writer

January 15, 2021, 5:06 PM

5 min read

NEW YORK -- When Joe Biden addresses the country for the first time as president, his inaugural speech is likely to echo calls for unity that predecessors have invoked since the first time George Washington was sworn in.

Unity has since been a theme, and an anxiety, for many incoming presidents, who have faced economic and social crises and moments when the very future of the U.S. was in doubt. Historians mention the first inaugural speeches of Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln as possible parallels for Biden, who has said his goal is to restore the soul of the country.

Biden, who assumes office just two weeks after an armed seige of the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump, will preside over a nation in which millions believe Trump's baseless claims that the election was stolen. Few presidents have faced such questions about their own legitimacy.

Unity has always been an aspiration," says presidential historian Douglas Brinkley. It seems like whenever we have foreign policy flare-ups, we use the word freedom. But when we have domestic turmoil we use the word unity.

The United States was forged through compromise among factions that disagreed profoundly on slavery, regional influence and the relative powers of state and federal government. When Washington assumed office in 1789 he cited the blessings of providence in noting that the tranquil deliberations and voluntary consent of so many distinct communities, from which the event has resulted, cannot be compared with the means by which most governments have been established.

Jefferson was the third U.S. president, and the first whose rise was regarded by opponents as a kind of emergency. The 1800 election won by Jefferson marked the beginning of competing political parties Jefferson was a leader of the Democratic-Republican Party, losing incumbent John Adams a Federalist and critics regarded the new president as a dangerous atheist. "JEFFERSON AND NO GOD!!! was how one Federalist paper described Jefferson's candidacy. Adams did not attend the inauguration, a breach rarely repeated although Trump has vowed to do the same.

Let us then, fellow citizens, unite with one heart and one mind," Jefferson urged in his address. "We are all republicans: we are all federalists. If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this union, or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated, where reason is left free to combat it."

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall, a Federalist who administered the oath of office to Jefferson, wrote later that the speech was in the general well judged and conciliatory.

Lincoln's pleas were more dire, and tragically unmet, despite what historian Ted Widmer calls his genius to combine urgency with literary grace. Seven out of 11 future Confederate states had seceded from the U.S. before he spoke, in March 1861, over fears he would end slavery. The Civil War would begin a month later. We are not enemies, but friends, Lincoln had insisted, reminding fellow Americans of their mystic chords of memory while also warning that resistance to the will of voters would destroy democracy.

"A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations, and always changing easily with deliberate changes of popular opinions and sentiments, is the only true sovereign of a free people. Whoever rejects it does of necessity fly to anarchy or to despotism, he said.

Historian David Greenberg, whose books include Nixon's Shadow" and Republic of Spin, cites Richard Nixon's inaugural in 1969 as another speech given at a time of social turmoil. The U.S. was violently divided over the Vietnam War and civil rights, and Nixon himself had long been seen as an unprincipled politician exploiting fears and resentments appealing to what he would call the silent majority. His speech at times was openly and awkwardly modeled on the 1961 inaugural of John F. Kennedy, who had defeated Nixon in 1960.

We are caught in war, wanting peace. We are torn by division, wanting unity, Nixon stated. We cannot learn from one another until we stop shouting at one another until we speak quietly enough so that our words can be heard as well as our voices.

Some presidents asked for unity, others asserted it.

Franklin Roosevelt, elected in a landslide in 1932 during the Great Depression, said in his first inaugural speech: If I read the temper of our people correctly, we now realize as we have never realized before our interdependence on each other. Four years later, having won by an even greater landslide, he declared the country had recognized a need beyond financial help, a deeper need, to find through government the instrument of our united purpose.

Unity can prove more imagined than real. When James Buchanan spoke in 1857, three years before the Civil War, he claimed that all agree that under the Constitution slavery in the states is beyond the reach of any human power except that of the respective states themselves wherein it exists. Rutherford B. Hayes, whose presidency was marked by the retrenchment of federal troops from the post-Civil War South and ongoing resistance from Southern whites to equal rights for Blacks, declared during his 1877 inaugural that true peace could be achieved through the united and harmonious efforts of both races and the honest work of local self-government.

A president often claims the country is united behind a belief when its more wishful thinking than reality, Widmer says. Im not sure how many Americans wanted to do something for their country after JFK asked them to although there were impressive new kinds of volunteers, like the Peace Corps. And I think that many Americans still appreciated help from the government, even after Ronald Reagan declared that government is the problem. Thats the problem with soundbites: They often oversimplify.

More here:

Unity has long been a theme, and anxiety, for new presidents - ABC News