I’m not complaining. I’m just pointing out that his bigotry toward Vulcans at one point in his life was a part of Archer’s character, regardless of if he was a product of his time or not.A bit harsh, but I agree Kirk was the most likeable.
Archer's "bigotry" towards Vulcans added some depth to the story. The relationship between Vulcans and Humans not always being so rosey was more interesting than a "kumbaya" type atmosphere.
Also, Picard and Riker demonstrated some prejudgments against Ferengi and Vulcans at times. Rivalries happen.
And Starfleet officers in general do not like the Ferengi, as they remind them of 21st century Earth too much, an era they have noted disdain for.
well, recent real-life events show that everyone can be president material.
Saving Earth from the Xindi and helping to found the Federation > torture, hypocrisy (if Paxton could be called out as one, so should Archer), and helping to overthrow an ally’s government I suppose. Even though I sure Vulcan helped Earth to recover from WW3, and are the reason why the Klingons did not behave like mirror Cochrane and blast him and Sato once he stepped foot in the Klingon High Council Chamber and then his crew from orbit
Honestly, I can't imagine that most of those missions would be known by the general public in the Star Trek Universe. At the very least, aspects of them would be highly classified.
But Kirk obviously did something to become famous during the TOS era. Captain Harriman says in GEN that he read about Kirk's missions in grade school. And Kirk was a handsome, charismatic guy, younger than most of the other captains we saw on TOS, so it makes sense that the media would latch onto him. He's like JFK in that regard.
But it's an interesting question: Which of the missions we saw on TOS would be publicly reported on?
Well, if Harriman was 37 in GEN, then he would be 11 in TOS S1 and 16 by the end of Kirk’s 5-year mission. Maybe its something in TAS as opposed to TOS that Harriman read that he was referring to.