<span>Congress approved $50 million that McKinley requested to prepare for war after C. the Maine exploded and sank in Havana Harbor.
Although it was unclear at the time what caused the explosion, the American immediately blamed Span after the Spanish minister to the US called President McKinley a weak leader. As a result, the President set aside a large sum of money in order to prepare for war with Spain.
</span>
Answer:
It is a livestock market, and one of the chief centres in the United States for the manufacture of saddlery and leather goods, and of cotton-gin machinery.
Explanation:
Hope this help you!!
Answer:
false
Explanation:
The tradition of “pardoning” White House turkeys has been traced to President Abraham Lincoln's 1863 clemency to a turkey recorded in an 1865 dispatch by White House reporter Noah Brooks, who noted, “a live turkey had been brought home for the Christmas dinner, but [Lincoln’s son Tad] interceded in behalf of its life. . . . [Tad’s] plea was admitted and the turkey’s life spared.”
Recently White House mythmakers have claimed that President Harry S. Truman began this amusing holiday tradition. However, Truman, when he received the turkeys, and subsequent presidents did not “pardon” their birds. The formalities of pardoning a turkey gelled by 1989, when President George H.W. Bush remarked, “Reprieve,” “keep him going,” or “pardon”: it’s all the same for the turkey, as long as he doesn’t end up on the president’s holiday table.
plz mark brainliest
Answer:
I don't know...call me crazy, but I don't think this would be such a bad idea (at least sometime in the future.) With the advent of the internet, there really is no reason why people can't have more input on legislation. Remember, congressmen act as representatives of the people for logistical reasons. Were voting allowed via internet, mail, or permanent polling places, the logistical roadblocks are reduced.
This country has an annoying quality where senators and representatives are elected and then inject their own personality into their voting. They are supposed to represent the people of their district. If 60% of the people in their district feel a certain way about an issue, why is the congressman/woman allowed to vote a different way? Why do their personal beliefs really matter at all? They are supposed to be voting the way their district wants regardless of what they personally believe.
I know, I know, things can be horribly complicated and the average person can't possibly understand all the issues they are voting on, but last I checked their is no intelligence requirement to be in the government...many people in governement now are dumb as a box of rocks. They don't have to be smart to be elected, they have to be personable and have good advisors working in the background.
Imagine being able to directly vote on education issues, warfare issues, and being able to prioritize budget items. Instead of blaming the morons in congress we would only be able to blame ourselves when things went horribly wrong. Of course, some form of standing governement would still be needed for a lot of reasons.
Again, I know the technology is not hot enough right now to provide the secruity that would be needed, etc, but it won't be long...
The founding fathers included checks and balances so that one body of government does not gain too much power and become tyrannical.
