The Worst President in History?

[FrankCastle6]

Worst president ever? Sam Walton for sure....


hehe

 

[demento]

And do you blame Bush for not capturing Osama?

He hired Rumsfeld, didn't he?

 

[Admiral_N8]

He hired Rumsfeld, didn't he?

But then shouldnt we credit Bush for getting Saddam??

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Name 4 great things JFK did that make him a great president, getting assassinated doesn't automatically make you great president.

Calling Castro's bluff was pretty good. Starting the Peace Corp. Sending us to the moon. Establishing our supremacy over the Russians.

LBJ ended up passing all the legislation Kennedy was too afraid to pass himself and in my opinion a better President. The only thing that killed him was 'Nam, however the only reason that happened was because Kennedy had already laid the groundwork for it.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Umm without Bush we wouldnt have gone into Iraq at all
...

And do you blame Bush for not capturing Osama?

Had we not gone to Iraq there would have been enough troops so that we wouldn't have had to trust former members of the Afgahn Taliban to catch Osama for us when they had him trapped in the mountains. We outsourced that job to former Taliban members because all of our troops were in Iraq.

So yes I do blame him. We credit the men and women serving in Iraq.

 

[Admiral_N8]

Had we not gone to Iraq there would have been enough troops so that we wouldn't have had to trust former members of the Afgahn Taliban to catch Osama for us when they had him trapped in the mountains. We outsourced that job to former Taliban members because all of our troops were in Iraq.

So yes I do blame him. We credit the men and women serving in Iraq.

So you blame him for not capturing Osama but dont credit him for capturing Saddam?​

 

[Spider-Bite]

So you blame him for not capturing Osama but dont credit him for capturing Saddam?​

yes.

 

[Admiral_N8]

yes.

haha k

 

[demento]

But then shouldnt we credit Bush for getting Saddam??

Suuure, we wouldn't have gotten Saddam if not for W... for all the good it's done us. I'm more than happy to blame him for that too.

 

[KingOfDreams]

For the people that want Bush impeached, a question...

Do you really wany this man as President?

Al Franken writes about this in his new book. He brings up a hypothetical situation of the Democrats taking back the two houses of Congress and impeaching Bush shortly before he leaves office just because they can...and leaving Dick Cheney as president for two days.

 

[Spider-Bite]

I shutter at the thought of Dick Cheney as President. I actually just shuttered reading that quoted post above. However if Bush committed an impeachable offense we need to impeach him for the same reason we punish criminals.
It's a deterrent. If every president thinks they are immune to impeachment they will be even more corrup than they are now.

Plus Cheny wouldn't be much different from Bush anyways, and his approval ratings are lower than Bush's. Bush getting impeached and then having another repulbican Dick Cheney get dragged through the media would be really bad for the republican party.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Al Franken writes about this in his new book. He brings up a hypothetical situation of the Democrats taking back the two houses of Congress and impeaching Bush shortly before he leaves office just because they can...and leaving Dick Cheney as president for two days.

Seriously though if they impeach Bush, Cheney would have a hard time continuing on in any effective capacity. Its hard to take the number 2 of an impeached President seriously.

 

[Spider-Bite]

Seriously though if they impeach Bush, Cheney would have a hard time continuing on in any effective capacity. Its hard to take the number 2 of an impeached President seriously.

especially the number 2 of Bush. You think cheny would have even a remote chance of winning the presidency in 2008?

absolutely not, in fact whoever wins the republican nomination will most certainly try to distance themselves from Bush. They will have to in order to win.

 

[chosen1]

Worst president ever? Sam Walton for sure....


hehe

But he's the richest guy in the world

 

[rjb182]

A couple of points:

1. I am certainly not a Bush fan, but any responsible historian ought to know that you simply can't put a man's presidency in any kind of context while you're in the middle of it. For one thing, we've got two and a half more years. For another, it just doesn't lend itself to impartial analysis... you can say (and I do) "I don't like what Bush has done as president." You cannot (IMO) say with any credibility that he is historically bad for another ten or twenty years at least.

2. The oft-repeated line about how Clinton got impeached for sex, whereas Bush can't seem to get impeached for much worse things: I don't think that's true. To me, Clinton got impeached because he was a Democrat with a Republican congress. If Bush gets impeached, it'll be after the midterms, if he becomes a Republican with a Democratic congress. Sadly, it seems our political parties have become so polarized that it's just that simple... if your political enemies are in power, they'll make whatever trouble for you that they can. Facts are optional.

3. About Lincoln: It's true that he wasn't the demigod our history books make him out to be. In my opinion, he was better.

No, he didn't set out to free slaves. Yes, he walked all over the Constitution (or at least the prevalent interpretation of it at the time) and even jailed his political enemies. The South thought he was the devil, the North thought he was a bumbler. If he'd lost the war, that's all he'd ever be.

But he won the war. He won it because he was, in his way, a political genius who was absolutely committed to his version of America and was willing to die before he would let it be torn apart.

The nation was already fracturing when Lincoln was elected-- the South was so afraid of his "black Republican" policies that they seceded on the spot. He's remembered only for the Civil War because he never had a CHANCE to deal with anything else (although Congress during Lincoln's time did pass some of the most striking legislation in history to open up the West and federalize the nation, largely because their political enemies were no longer in residence and they could do whatever they wanted. I mean, for crying out loud, we got a national *currency* during Lincoln's administration!).

Fighting a cabinet made up of people who wanted his job and a nation that didn't particularly feel like fighting to free blacks *or* prevent secession-- not to mention a succession of generals so incompetent that Lincoln once said to General McClellan, "If you are not using the Army for anything, I would like to borrow it..."-- Lincoln kept the North focused and on target and kept them in the fight long enough for their superior resources to do the job.

Slavery... true, Lincoln was no radical on that score. He said that if he could preserve the Union by freeing no slaves, he'd do it, and if he could preserve it by freeing every slave he'd do it, or if he could preserve it by freeing some and not others, he'd do that too. But he did have a strong personal dislike of slavery, and once the anti-slavery die was cast, he was absolutely committed to it. He said, let's see if I can find it...

Originally posted by Abraham Lincoln:
There have been men who have proposed to me to return to slavery the black warriors (of our army). I should be damned in Hell for all eternity for so doing. The world shall know that I keep my faith to friends and enemies, come what will."

This was at a time, by the way, when it would have been politically expedient to abandon emancipation for the sake of being re-elected, as until Sherman took Atlanta it looked very much like he would go down to defeat and lose everything. I don't know about you, but I'd give a lot for a President with that kind of integrity today.

And, by the way, the Emancipation Proclamation wasn't the failure you hear it called, either. True, it didn't free a single slave... BUT it got the ball rolling toward that end, and its primary purpose-- keeping antislavery Britain and France from joining the war on the Southern side, which economically would have benefitted those nations-- it acheived brilliantly. The South could only win, really, with the help of the Royal Navy. Thanks to Lincoln and the Proclamation, the British would have had to publically betray their every principle in order to provide that help.

I'm rambling now, but the Lincoln thing's important to me. It's because of him that America as we think of it today exists. He turned a loose collection of dissimilar states into a nation, and while his motives were occasionally impure, he did it largely by doing the right thing.

He accomplished one thing as President, and then he died. Maybe that doesn't sound like a great Administration. But what a thing it was...

 

[Mr Sparkle]

But then shouldnt we credit Bush for getting Saddam??

how exactly was taking out a dictator relevant?
if it was because he felt bad for the people of Iraq how come he never mentioned them prior to his presidency and ran on a "no foreign intervention" platform?
he has yet to get Osama, which is weird.
Osama is just a means to an end anyway.

 

[TheSumOfGod]

The worst president ever is Jimmy Carter. Hands down.

Jimmy Carter sucked at being President because he was a big Jesus freak, in the sense that he tried to act all peace and love like Jesus did, so he didn't have the balls to make big presidential decisions that involved a lot of people getting killed. Ironically, Bush sucks at being President also because he's a big Jesus freak, but in a "crusade and holy war, the non-believers shall drown in their own blood and then burn in hell for all of eternity" kinda way.

 

[SuperDude]

Jimmy Carter sucked at being President because he was a big Jesus freak, in the sense that he tried to act all peace and love like Jesus did, so he didn't have the balls to make big presidential decisions that involved a lot of people getting killed. Ironically, Bush sucks at being President also because he's a big Jesus freak, but in a "crusade and holy war, the non-believers shall drown in their own blood and then burn in hell for all of eternity" kinda way.

So, your saying Jimmy Carter is the New Testament Jesus and Bush is Old Testament Jesus?

 

[SuperDude]

rjb182: I totally agree with you. And it seems to me that people say what they say about Lincoln in an effort to sound smart.

"You know, Lincoln wasn't as good as the history books say. Ah ha ha ha, look at me I'm intelligent."

But most of the time they say this based on only a few facts taken out of context. The most prevalent one seems to be people saying Lincoln didn't really care about slavery which is just ridiculous. He'd been against slavery his entire political career (more so at some times than others but always against it). Man, I get pretty fired up when I hear people say that kind of stuff. Hehe.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

rjb182: I totally agree with you. And it seems to me that people say what they say about Lincoln in an effort to sound smart.

"You know, Lincoln wasn't as good as the history books say. Ah ha ha ha, look at me I'm intelligent."

But most of the time they say this based on only a few facts taken out of context. The most prevalent one seems to be people saying Lincoln didn't really care about slavery which is just ridiculous. He'd been against slavery his entire political career (more so at some times than others but always against it). Man, I get pretty fired up when I hear people say that kind of stuff. Hehe.

They say he had been against it since his childhood, his Baptist Church I found split from their denomination because they took a hard line against slavery when he was very young. Since that point he had felt that slavery was both unconstitutional and un Christian.

 

[SuperDude]

They say he had been against it since his childhood, his Baptist Church I found split from their denomination because they took a hard line against slavery when he was very young. Since that point he had felt that slavery was both unconstitutional and un Christian.

True. Also, his father was strongly opposed to slavery. This was one of the reasons that his family left Kentucky for Indiana.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

True. Also, his father was strongly opposed to slavery. This was one of the reasons that his family left Kentucky for Indiana.

Yep...indeed true again...you'd think people would research this kind of stuff before posting.

 

[SuperDude]

Yep...indeed true again...you'd think people would research this kind of stuff before posting.

Yeah, but whatchyagonnado?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Yeah, but whatchyagonnado?

Nuthin'

 

[ScottyBBadd]

especially the number 2 of Bush. You think cheny would have even a remote chance of winning the presidency in 2008?

absolutely not, in fact whoever wins the republican nomination will most certainly try to distance themselves from Bush. They will have to in order to win.

I have a better chance of bieng nominated than Dick Cheney. (I am neither a Republician nor 35.)