<p><span class="deck"> Martin Van Buren, Andrew Jackson’s right-hand man, was a master of political intrigue who let nothing block his one unwavering ambition—the Presidency. But sometimes he was too smart for his own good</span> </p>
<p><span class="deck"> <span class="typestyle"> In San Francisco Warren G. Harding lay dead, and the nation was without a Chief Executive. In the early morning hours, by the light of a flickering oil lamp, an elderly Vermonter swore in his son as the thirtieth President of the United States</span> </span></p>
<p><span class="deck"> <span class="typestyle"> One summer brought excitement and glory to the young secretary of a political leader. How could he know that the next one would brim with tragedy?</span> </span></p>
<p><span class="deck"> <span class="typestyle"> For TR, the nation s highest office was never a burden; he loved the job, and Americans loved him for loving it</span> </span></p>
<p><span class="deck"> Was the murdered President one of our best, a man of “vigor, rationality, and noble vision” or was he “an optical illusion,” “an expensively programmed waxwork”? A noted historian examines the mottled evolution of his reputation.</span> </p>
<p><span class="deck"> <span class="typestyle"> The early years of our republic produced dozens of great leaders. A historian explains how men like Adams and Jefferson were selected for public office, and tells why the machinery that raised them became obsolete.</span> </span></p>
<p><span class="deck">It’s not surprising that Democrats seek to wrap themselves in the Roosevelt cloak; what’s harder to understand is why so many Republicans do, too. A distinguished historian explains.</span></p>
<p><span class="deck">The elder statesman sets the record straight on JFK, LBJ, Stalin, the bomb, Charles de Gaulle, Douglas MacArthur, and, most of all, the American presidency.</span></p>
<p><span class="deck">Smarter than stupid, of course, but does the intellectual tradition that began with the century suggest that there's such a thing as being too smart for the country’s good?</span></p>
<p><span class="deck">When John Adams was elected president, and Thomas Jefferson as vice president, each came to see the other as a traitor. Out of their enmity grew our modern political system.</span></p>
<p><span class="deck">As America goes into its 55th presidential election, we should remember that there might have been only one if we hadn’t had the only original candidate on Earth who could do the job.</span></p>
<p>Most associate Ronald Reagan with California, but he spent his formative years in the midwest. On the centennial of his birth, a handful of small Illinois towns want a share of the limelight.</p>
<p>In 1962, the president wrote for <em>American Heritage</em> that the study of history is no mere pastime, but the means by which a nation establishes its sense of identity and purpose.</p>
<p>We republish an essay President Hoover wrote for <em>American Heritage</em> in 1958 in which he recounted his experiences as an aide to Woodrow Wilson at the peace talks after World War I. This important first-person narrative candidly details the difficulties that Wilson faced in what Hoover called “the greatest drama of intellectual leadership in all history.”</p>
<p>The struggles and triumphs of our presidents have been central to shaping our nation, even though they operated under a Constitution that didn’t grant them unilateral power.</p>
<p>The censure of Andrew Jackson for replacing his Secretary of Treasury raised the question of a president's authority to control the actions of his cabinet members.</p>
<p>Partisan politics, plus the media’s focus on Clinton’s personal life, created a presidency under siege and consumed by scandals—some serious, others trivial.</p>
<p>Though Bush's connections to industry sometimes led to charges of corruption, his presidency is most associated with the Iraq War and efforts to combat terrorism in the wake of 9/11.</p>
<p>Have Biden and other recent Presidents demeaned the award meant for “especially meritorious contributions to the security and national interests of the United States”?</p>
<p>Was he the era’s greatest Democrat or its elected autocrat? A hero or a scoundrel? Balancing Andrew Jackson’s legacy is a problematic exercise, complicated by his many contradictions.</p>
