Subject: RE: But wait...what's this...???? (nsr)
This always reminds me of my calculus teacher in Nook School using terms in non-standard ways to prove that 1 plus 1 equals 11. Being that the President of the Congress was merely a moderator and had no powers (some resigned so as to have more power in Congress) and that no one in those days equated them in any way with the Presidency as set up when Washington was elected, I have never considered them as being in any way part of a succession. I have a cousin elected to the same office. Nothing in his family history was ever offered that indicated he or his family equated the two titles to be equal or in succession. The United States in Congress is obviously a lot different than what we have that is called the United States. And these people were not always elected. John Hanson was the first president of the Congress assembled to be elected under the terms of the Articles of Conferation. See Wiki for an article that talks about this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_Continental_Congress What is not remembered by all is that when people went to Washington after the war to ask him to lead the country, one of them (Col. Lewis Nicola) asked him to become the King of the United States. He sharply turned this down and hence renounced the idea of a monarchy in the United States. We were very lucky that not only was Washington the first President of the United States, but that along with his leadership abilities he also showed his political wisdom in having both Hamilton and Jefferson on his cabinet. They disagreed about most things, but made the first cabinet a balanced group which helped set the tone for the country they were putting together. Here's an interesting page about this subject, although I have read similar ones in many other places. http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-1-1-a-what-made-george-washington-a-great-leader.html Viejo | 
But wait...what's this...???? (nsr)
