Statesmen and Political Leaders: “These individuals dedicated their lives to the service of the Republic, upholding the Constitution and the cause of liberty.”
1. Founding Fathers: John Adams, Samuel Adams, Charles Carroll, Benjamin
Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison,
Caesar Rodney, George Washington.
Comment: Arbitrary and incompetent list, and inexcusably so. Where is George Mason, who had almost as much influence on the development of the Constitution as Madison? Major General Joseph Warren was a essential to the Boston patriot movement as either Adams, and is the one who sent Paul Revere and William Dawes on their ride to Lexington and Concord. He died in the Battle of Bunker Hill in 1775: many of those Founders on the list let others do their fighting for them. For that matter, why aren’t Paul Revere and Dawes on the list? They were heroes by definition. The omission of John Dickinson, who authored the Article of Confederation and other crucial documents on our way to revolution, makes me think whoever made out the list had seen “1776” as the extent of his research. Abigail Adams also deserves to be honored. She’s an odd omission, especially since lot of the entries are DEI heroes only.
2. Presidents: Grover Cleveland, Calvin Coolidge, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ulysses
S. Grant, Andrew Jackson, John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, William
McKinley, Ronald Reagan, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, William
Howard Taft, Harry S. Truman.
Comment: Wow! Against all odds, this category is even worse than the “Founders” list! Grant was, on balance, a bad President: he belongs in the military list, but not here. Cleveland was almost certainly a rapist: call me sensitive, but I think that disqualifies someone as a hero. He was also just a so-so POTUS. Calvin Coolidge was probably responsible for the Great Depression: he’s an embarrassing choice, as are Taft and… Kennedy???? Putting JFK on the list is a sop to the historically illiterate. Meanwhile, James Monroe, one of our most effective Presidents, and James K. Polk, by some measures out most successful, are missing.
3. Legislators and Diplomats: Henry Clay, Barry Goldwater, Daniel Inouye,
Barbara Jordan, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Clare Boothe Luce, Jeannette Rankin,
Margaret Chase Smith.
Comment: Worse still: Again, terrible, incompetent list. These are almost all affirmative action honors. None of the women on the list had many legislative accomplishments. Two white men out of nine distinguished legislators in 250 years? This just bad history. Ted Kennedy, whom I would exclude because he was, you know, a murderer, deserves to be on the list more than all of these except Henry Clay. So does Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey, Bob Dole. Sam Rayburn. Tip O’Neil, Mike Mansfield, Everett Dirkson. Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Yes, even John Calhoun. Heck, Joe Biden was a more productive member of Congress than most of them. The “garden” honors JFK, who has received too many honors already, but “Profiles in Courage,” his Pulitzer Prize-winning book (ghost-written by Ted Sorrenson ) provides a genuine list of heroic Senators, not one of whom is included in Trump’s 250! Those are: John Quincy Adams, Daniel Webster,Thomas Hart Benton, Sam Houston, Edmund G. Ross, (who stopped Andrew Johnson from being convicted in his impeachment trial, Lucius Lamar, George W. Norris, and Robert A. Taft. It is emblematic of how incompetent the proposed list is that Sen. Taft, who deserves to be honored, is left out while his father, who was not particularly successful in his category, is included.
This is long enough for a single post. I’ll finish my disgusted evaluation of this unethical project in Part II.
Ethics Alarms 
“Jeannette Rankin”
Seriously, aside from her being a historic first, her only accomplishments of note are casting no votes for the U.S. entry into both WWI and WWII. Both votes cost her her congressional seat.
With all due respect; how could “both” of those votes cost her her seat? It seems to me that the latter one would be the one that cost her her seat.
This will all boil down to what definition they choose to use for the word “hero”.
Personally I think our culture has been bastardizing the definition of hero for quite some time now and conflating it with other terms like role model. Yes a hero could be a role model, often they are; however, a role model isn’t necessarily a hero. This bastardization has thoroughly cheapened the value of the word hero because people now seem to apply it to whatever the hell they want.
Here is a simple definition…
HERO: someone who shows great bravery, often risking their life (or in the 21st century they knowingly risk massive social canceling, active and persistent persecution, that could destroy most or all aspects of their life) for the common good.
In my opinion; anything beyond that is a bastardization.
Here’s a few early 21st century prominent people that could be defined as heroes, as defined above; Charlie Kirk, Alan Dershowitz, Donald Trump, J.K. Rowling, and maybe even Ben Shapiro. Yes I know most of those are conservatives, feel free to specifically list some Liberals or progressives that you think might fit the definition. Remember, you don’t have to agree with their public position or their public action for them to fit the definition.
I definitely don’t trust President Trump to choose 250 heroes for this proposed memorial.
Wait until you see the second part of the list!
Steve makes good points. I would like to add that any list can be criticized by someone with a different set of beliefs regarding persons who added significant value.
Conceptually, the idea that we need a way to publicly acknowledge the accomplishments of our forebears is a good one. Perhaps the best way to make a selection is to put together an all inclusive list with biographies and let the public vote on the first tranche of statues. That number should be limited to say around fifty and should only include those from the early 17th century to the early 19th century. The next 50-100 could be those from the mid 19th to mid 20th followed by a third round of those more modern heroes.
In any event the term hero must be defined before any list could be compiled.
Many on the list are notable but I would hardly call them heroes.
From my experience any new idea will face opposition from those who want to find fault. I have had to put together initial lists for various initiatives and invariably that list will change with the input from others. The question of execution should not be based solely on the initial inclusions on a list. You have to start with something.