PDA

View Full Version : Best president?


politicalforum
12-14-2006, 01:43 AM
Who's the best president in your opinion?

:p

Vlad
12-14-2006, 01:55 AM
president Bush.

just kidding.

I'd say Andrew Jackson just because he's so damn cool.

curefiend
12-16-2006, 01:08 AM
Fidel Castro?

:) :) :) :)

American President? N/A

Vlad
12-16-2006, 02:29 AM
lol nice!!!

politicskid
12-19-2006, 11:43 AM
none other than reagan!

curefiend
12-20-2006, 12:34 AM
Oh dear god, thems is fighting words.

Reagan? Reagan was the worst president, I even say he is worse then our current president (though few agree with me on that statement).

BelligerentCreature
12-20-2006, 12:31 PM
what are your opinions on US presidents?

politicskid
12-20-2006, 01:05 PM
how is reagan the worst president?

he brought up our economy to the max

curefiend
12-20-2006, 01:30 PM
He drove up the deficiet to a max, brought unemployment up to a max, supported illegal behavior in Central America which resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives. And supported other murderous thugs like Noreiga.

Thats why.

TheGuru
12-20-2006, 04:45 PM
That's like most of the presidents.

curefiend
12-22-2006, 04:36 PM
But Reagan would be the poster boy for such corruption.

ipop
01-03-2007, 08:44 PM
i think its Lincoln

samsara15
01-05-2007, 06:32 PM
Grover Cleveland. An honest man.

GrassRootPolitician
01-08-2007, 08:20 AM
I must say Bill Clinton. Bill might have shown Monica how to blow his Sax :D
but at least he admitted the session anyways, and just because he did not admit it at first (who are we to judge)? I am sure that a real man would not have turned down any form of Sex, and by Bill being married it was a shameful mistake. As far as him being President he did his best to clean up Daddy Bush's BS, and if he could ran again he would have my vote.

curefiend
01-12-2007, 03:15 AM
Bill Clinton would probably be one of the best modern day republican presidents, but in the history of American presidency, he is as much responsible for our current state as Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.

EVA001
01-12-2007, 06:35 AM
Bill Clinton? Are you serious?

could you elaborate more on that point please

USMC the Almighty
02-03-2007, 09:42 PM
Oh dear god, thems is fighting words.

Reagan? Reagan was the worst president, I even say he is worse then our current president (though few agree with me on that statement).

WHAT?!?! Reagan was the president who finally got bold with the Soviet Communism ("Evil Empire" as he called them) and expedited their collapse. He also revived the traditional conservative principles of limited government, low taxes, and strong defense, all while stoking a bloody war between Iran and Iraq.

-Real economic growth averaged 3.2 percent during the Reagan years versus 2.8 percent during the Ford-Carter years and 2.1 percent during the post-Reagan years.

-Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.

-Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.

-The average annual growth rate of GDP from 1981 to 1989 was 3.2 percent per year, compared with 2.8 percent from 1974 to 1981 and 2.1 percent from 1989 to 1995. The 3.2 percent growth rate for the Reagan years includes the recession of the early 1980s, which was a side effect of reversing Carter's high-inflation policies, and the seven expansion years, 1983-89. During the economic expansion alone, the economy grew by a robust annual rate of 3.8 percent. By the end of the Reagan years, the American economy was almost one-third larger than it was when they began.

-From 1981 through 1989 the U.S. economy produced 17 million new jobs, or roughly 2 million new jobs each year. Contrary to the Clinton administration's claims of vast job gains in the 1990s, the United States has averaged only 1.3 million new jobs per year in the post-Reagan years. The labor force United States has averaged only 1.3 million new jobs expanded by 1.7 percent per year between 1981 and 1989, but by just 1.2 percent per year between 1990 and 1995.

-When Reagan took office in 1981, the unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. When Reagan left office, the unemployment rate was 5.5 percent.

-Under Reagan, productivity grew at a 1.5 percent annual rate.Under Clinton, productivity has increased at an annual rate of just 0.3 percent per year--the worst presidential performance since that of Herbert Hoover.

-The central economic evil that Ronald Reagan inherited in 1981 from Jimmy Carter was three years of double-digit inflation. In 1980 the consumer price index (CPI) rose to 13.5 percent. By Reagan's second year in office, the inflation rate fell by more than half to 6.2 percent. In 1988, Reagan's last year in office, the CPI had fallen to 4.1 percent.

USMC the Almighty
02-03-2007, 09:45 PM
He drove up the deficiet to a max, brought unemployment up to a max

I addressed these two above.

... supported illegal behavior in Central America which resulted in the loss of thousands of innocent lives

You clearly don't understand history. At the time, the Soviet Union was our biggest threat. He helped the rebels fight against the Soviet Union and it ultimately was one of the factors that led to its collapse.

And supported other murderous thugs like Noreiga.

Thats why.

Do you forget the fact that Navy SEALs captured and U.S. courts tried Manuel Noreiga for drug trafficking in 1988 (I think that's the right year)? Doesn't seem like "supporting" him.

USMC the Almighty
02-03-2007, 09:48 PM
Bill Clinton? Are you serious?

could you elaborate more on that point please

It's just typical partisan hackery.

Clinton was merely an adequate peace time president who was too weak to confront terrorism, even after 5-6 attacks on this country and our greatest Americans (military personell).

He's also one of the luckiest American presidents. He was right smack in the middle of the computer/technology era where the economy skyrocketed and he was feeling the positive affects of the Reagan tax cuts from a decade before (a president's affect on the economy typically takes an average of 8-10 years).

vyo476
04-10-2007, 09:35 PM
-The central economic evil that Ronald Reagan inherited in 1981 from Jimmy Carter was three years of double-digit inflation. In 1980 the consumer price index (CPI) rose to 13.5 percent. By Reagan's second year in office, the inflation rate fell by more than half to 6.2 percent. In 1988, Reagan's last year in office, the CPI had fallen to 4.1 percent.

(a president's affect on the economy typically takes an average of 8-10 years).

So in other words, Reagan was just dealing with the mess left behind from the beginning of Dick Nixon's reign as President. By your logic that inflation was not Jimmy's fault - the economic recession of the late nineteen eighties that drove George HW Bush out of office was.

EDIT: Sorry if the "by your logic" thing came across as sarcastic. I've read the same thing about economic impact.

Lindsay
05-16-2007, 02:44 PM
Nixon has my vote.

Cheshire Cat
05-16-2007, 03:20 PM
We feel that our cause is just and holy; we protest solemnly in the face of mankind that we desire peace at any sacrifice save that of honour and independence; we ask no conquest, no aggrandizement, no concession of any kind from the States with which we were lately confederated; all we ask is to be let alone; that those who never held power over us shall not now attempt our subjugation by arms.

'President Jefferson Davis - 29 April 1861'

Fred
05-16-2007, 03:42 PM
Jimmy Carter

Cheshire Cat
05-16-2007, 03:43 PM
Jimmy Carter

Yeah, he impressed the hell out me when he fought off that rabbit that attacked his boat.

Fred
05-16-2007, 03:46 PM
He WAS the best ever

Dave
05-16-2007, 08:25 PM
Jimmy Carter

I'm sure the 66 American hostages held in Iran for 444 days would disagree.

Abraxis Axis
05-16-2007, 08:36 PM
Im not

He was a GREAT president,Your just looking at it wrong.
He paved the way for the entire right wing corporate agenda.
I believe he was handpicked by the NWO to be put in the scapegoats seat so that the neo-cons could take power ...

It was a brilliant Coup on the part of the right wing extremists. By using the absolute WORST lame duck
President EVER IN HISTORY the American people were BEGGING for the neocon Ronnie Big Boy reagan agenda

It was all orchestrated brilliantly by the NWO/PNAC
TRI-LATS, and the C.F.R and FEMA and of course the corporate Might of american capitalism. Carter is the reason we are where we are today he so soured America on the democratic agenda that they wouldnt touch the left for many years afterwards


Clinton was used in the Same exact manner. what you need to realize is that there is NO speration of party any longer.all the same underlying agenda. thats what makes the peanut farmer great. That and his ferverent support of Habitat fo humanity

He has a good heart and soul he was USED by the machine like clinton and 9-11, to further the imperialistic agenda of the corporate military structure. I know all about iran in 79

alot more than many if not ,Most of you all
I was aboard a us Aircraft carrier in the I.O. the entire time

Kelly
05-17-2007, 11:36 AM
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON! Sure he got a B.J., but his job performance was undenyable! Every genuis has a skeleton in the closet: Van Goh's ear, Clinton's B.J.

Castle
05-17-2007, 08:04 PM
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON! Sure he got a B.J., but his job performance was undenyable! Every genuis has a skeleton in the closet: Van Goh's ear, Clinton's B.J.
Well yeah WJC was not bad. I can think of far worse like Jimmy Carter. However, I do question his intellect at times. I mean.....Monica Lewinsky? At least JFK was connected to Marilyn Monroe. However, we got the phrase "getting a monica" from slick willie. Why do I hear cow bells when I remember Monica? :D
Also, "depends on what your definition of "is" is". Priceless

-Castle

vyo476
05-17-2007, 08:12 PM
Im not

He was a GREAT president,Your just looking at it wrong.
He paved the way for the entire right wing corporate agenda.
I believe he was handpicked by the NWO to be put in the scapegoats seat so that the neo-cons could take power ...

It was a brilliant Coup on the part of the right wing extremists. By using the absolute WORST lame duck
President EVER IN HISTORY the American people were BEGGING for the neocon Ronnie Big Boy reagan agenda

It was all orchestrated brilliantly by the NWO/PNAC
TRI-LATS, and the C.F.R and FEMA and of course the corporate Might of american capitalism. Carter is the reason we are where we are today he so soured America on the democratic agenda that they wouldnt touch the left for many years afterwards


Clinton was used in the Same exact manner. what you need to realize is that there is NO speration of party any longer.all the same underlying agenda. thats what makes the peanut farmer great. That and his ferverent support of Habitat fo humanity

He has a good heart and soul he was USED by the machine like clinton and 9-11, to further the imperialistic agenda of the corporate military structure. I know all about iran in 79

alot more than many if not ,Most of you all
I was aboard a us Aircraft carrier in the I.O. the entire time

Do you prefer RokerijAxis or Abraxisdude?

Dave
05-17-2007, 09:07 PM
Do you prefer RokerijAxis or Abraxisdude?

I was thinking the same thing.

Abraxis Axis
05-18-2007, 05:22 AM
which president was that? I still think Carter was the best he allowed us to move forward in our imperialistic crusades without him we may have never moved forward..

thats my opinion anyhow clinton was ok but not the best by any means

vyo476
05-18-2007, 05:48 AM
which president was that? I still think Carter was the best he allowed us to move forward in our imperialistic crusades without him we may have never moved forward..

thats my opinion anyhow clinton was ok but not the best by any means

You just like Clinton because he really did inhale.

Abraxis Axis
05-18-2007, 05:53 AM
Actually the only thing i liked him for was his balancing of the budget and putting us in the black. and he had great hair

vyo476
05-18-2007, 05:56 AM
Actually the only thing i liked him for was his balancing of the budget and putting us in the black. and he had great hair

He actually was a decent musician too.

Abraxis Axis
05-18-2007, 06:01 AM
He actually was a decent musician too.

suprisingly yes he was

9sublime
05-18-2007, 08:04 AM
Actually the only thing i liked him for was his balancing of the budget and putting us in the black. and he had great hair

Rokers putting in a lot of effort on the comprehensible posting side of things.

Abraxis Axis
05-18-2007, 08:06 AM
Roker was banned pay attention

vyo476
05-18-2007, 08:58 AM
Roker was banned pay attention

I thought you weren't around when that happened.

Abraxis Axis
05-18-2007, 09:17 AM
I thought you weren't around when that happened.

Look below his name by the avatar thingie

Lindsay
05-18-2007, 11:26 AM
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON! Sure he got a B.J., but his job performance was undenyable! Every genuis has a skeleton in the closet: Van Goh's ear, Clinton's B.J.

Haha, I love the analogy.. Clinton's BJ and Van Gogh's ear... hahahahaha niiiiice.

Dave
05-18-2007, 01:09 PM
Look below his name by the avatar thingie

So I guess its just a coincidence that you show up right after Roker got banned. Anyone notice that Roker's signature was "Fly Navy" and then we get this guy showing up claiming to have been on an aircraft carrier in the Middle East in the 70's and has an avatar of pilot's wings? That's what we in the intelligence field call an indicator.

vyo476
05-20-2007, 08:09 AM
It is interesting to note that, on Wikipedia's "Historical Rankings of United States Presidents" (I'll post a link below), Abraham Lincoln is number one...followed by FDR.

It should also be noted that James Polk, Lyndon Johnson, and Harry Truman are all higher than Ronald Reagan. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents

USMC the Almighty
05-20-2007, 10:30 AM
They have a lot of what I would consider to be terrible ranks. Wilson, JFK, LBJ are all way too high.

That LBJ one has me baffled.

vyo476
05-20-2007, 11:10 AM
They have a lot of what I would consider to be terrible ranks. Wilson, JFK, LBJ are all way too high.

That LBJ one has me baffled.

The lasting contributions of the Great Society and War on Poverty (which decreased the percentage of impoverished Americans from 19% to 11.1% and instituted programs that have kept that percentage from getting above 15% since, in contrast to the previous American average of 20-23%) are what LBJ's high ranking is based on.

The one that threw me the most was John Adams' high ranking. The best things he did were things that involved him not doing much: not making a big deal about having to transfer power to a rival party and not going to war with France even though most of the country wanted to. He was a terribly unpopular president who consistently defied the wishes of the American public (even if, in hindsight, we can see that he was right not to go to war with France in 1798).

USMC the Almighty
05-20-2007, 11:36 AM
The lasting contributions of the Great Society and War on Poverty

The lasting contributions are not favorable, and this is what throws me.

The Great Society's promise of "abundance for all" is one that cannot be kept and will not be kept if we want our children to have the same standard of living that we enjoy today and the U.S.'s ability to be competitive on a larger scale will diminish.

The Great Society has saddled the U.S. with great economic liabilities that threaten this country at least as much as the foreign threat of terrorism.

Truth-Bringer
05-21-2007, 10:28 AM
It is interesting to note that, on Wikipedia's "Historical Rankings of United States Presidents" (I'll post a link below), Abraham Lincoln is number one...followed by FDR.

It should also be noted that James Polk, Lyndon Johnson, and Harry Truman are all higher than Ronald Reagan. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents

Well, honestly, what would you expect from Wikipedia? They're a bunch of statists.

The best President without question was Thomas Jefferson, because of his clear understanding of the original intent of the Constitution.

Abraxis Axis
05-21-2007, 12:24 PM
I still say Carter see carter thread in world news for another example of why

vyo476
05-22-2007, 02:25 AM
Well, honestly, what would you expect from Wikipedia? They're a bunch of statists.

The best President without question was Thomas Jefferson, because of his clear understanding of the original intent of the Constitution.

I'm a big fan of Jefferson too, but the economic policies he implemented late in his administration were disastrous. And he only managed to cut taxes the way he did because he more or less dismantled the armed forces (what there was of them in 1801, anyway).

I still think that Jefferson was closest to the spirit of the Revolution, probably closer to it than most of the revolutionaries (John Adams comes to mind) - either that or Jefferson was a maverick who attempted to make the Revolution mean what we today wish it had meant - freedom and equality for all.

Best president? Sorry. Most idealistically accurate, perhaps, but not "best." At least in my opinion.

Truth-Bringer
05-22-2007, 02:13 PM
I'm a big fan of Jefferson too, but the economic policies he implemented late in his administration were disastrous.

If they were so "disastrous" as you allege - why did Jefferson's Party win the next several Presidential elections? His administration was a very prosperous time for America. The country expanded and the national debt was reduced. Americans were quite well off compared to the rest of the world during this time.

And he only managed to cut taxes the way he did because he more or less dismantled the armed forces (what there was of them in 1801, anyway).

This is a clear lie on your part. There was no need to cut ANYTHING, since tariff revenues exceeded the previous tax and tariff revenues combined:

"By 1806, duties proved so lucrative that Gallatin and Jefferson fretted about what to do with the surplus above that required for debt retirement. Treasury reserves increased from $3 million to $14 million between 1801 and 1808." (http://www.tax.org/Museum/1777-1815.htm)

Jefferson would have had available funds to increase the size of the military had he wanted to do so.


Best president? Sorry. Most idealistically accurate, perhaps, but not "best." At least in my opinion.

Your opinion is slanted by your failure to acknowledge and accept the truth of the matter.

vyo476
05-22-2007, 03:00 PM
If they were so "disastrous" as you allege - why did Jefferson's Party win the next several Presidential elections? His administration was a very prosperous time for America. The country expanded and the national debt was reduced. Americans were quite well off compared to the rest of the world during this time.

Because the Federalists had horse****ed themselves by implementing policies that were blatantly against the Constitution of the United States.

I mean, sure, the Democratic-Republicans managed to hold on to the Presidency in 1824 and 1828 - but only members of the Democratic-Republican Party were running.

The disaster to which I'm referring is the Embargo Act. Economic depression, widespread smuggling...yeah, that worked well.


This is a clear lie on your part. There was no need to cut ANYTHING, since tariff revenues exceeded the previous tax and tariff revenues combined:

"By 1806, duties proved so lucrative that Gallatin and Jefferson fretted about what to do with the surplus above that required for debt retirement. Treasury reserves increased from $3 million to $14 million between 1801 and 1808." (http://www.tax.org/Museum/1777-1815.htm)

Jefferson would have had available funds to increase the size of the military had he wanted to do so.

More Wikipedia:

Jefferson attempted to eliminate the national debt because of his wish for small government. If there was no national debt, there wouldn't be any need for taxes. He also decreased the size of the military which would later come back to hurt the U.S. in the War of 1812.

Perhaps it wasn't done due to monetary reasons. It was still done.


Your opinion is slanted by your failure to acknowledge and accept the truth of the matter.

What opinion is that? That he wasn't necessarily the best? The only reason I say I don't believe him to be the best was because of the Embargo Act and the way in which he reduced our armed forces, which had a negative affect on our ability to make war in 1812. Other than that he's one of my favorites.

Truth-Bringer
05-23-2007, 05:37 AM
Because the Federalists had horse****ed themselves by implementing policies that were blatantly against the Constitution of the United States.

Or the American people were voting for candidates they actually wanted, rather than voting defensively, as many do today.


I mean, sure, the Democratic-Republicans managed to hold on to the Presidency in 1824 and 1828 - but only members of the Democratic-Republican Party were running.

And that was due to popularity and a general consensus among the people that the government was following the original intent of the Constitution. Not like today when the two major parties have all sorts of laws in place to limit their competition. Competition was completely free and open - no one bothered due to the fact that they felt Jefferson's party was doing its proper duty and defending the unalienable rights of the citizenry.


The disaster to which I'm referring is the Embargo Act. Economic depression, widespread smuggling...yeah, that worked well.

No, it didn't work. It was a hasty decision made due to war in Europe, and it was a mistake. But at least his intentions were to try nonviolent resistance first. (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9032502/Embargo-Act) And unlike other Presidents such as Bush, Jefferson actually admitted that it didn't work and signed the Non-Intercourse Act two days before he left office to effectively nullify the Embargo Act.

Jefferson made mistakes, I just think he made less than other Presidents.


Perhaps it wasn't done due to monetary reasons. It was still done.

The main issue with the War of 1812 was that we didn't lose. Therefore, whatever harm anyone claims was done to the military, did not affect the independence of the country. Our military wasn't set up to declare and wage an offensive war. Our national militia was a purely defensive measure.

Jefferson could have used the "bully pulpit" to prepare people for war earlier and urged all Americans to stockpile ammunition and make sure they were armed. He also could have urged for voluntary training measures and local drills. Madison could have done this as well after realizing Jefferson's embargo measures failed. I think they all had a sense the war in Europe could draw them in at any time.

But the fact remains - any private ship that enters into war zone takes full responsibility for doing so. And the government should have made this abundantly clear to people - that was another failure of Jefferson's. They should have put out constant notices to people telling them "you risk EVERYTHING if you send goods overseas during a war." The government has no obligation to protect private citizens or private goods that leave the country.

Justinian
05-25-2007, 11:44 AM
There's so many of them. My list of top 5.

1. Teddy Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. FDR
4.Abraham Lincoln
5.Andrew Jackson tied with Woodrow Wilson, the Wizard of Oz.

USMC the Almighty
05-25-2007, 12:07 PM
"Speak softly and carry a big stick..."

Think for myself
05-25-2007, 12:08 PM
There's so many of them. My list of top 5.

1. Teddy Roosevelt
2. Ronald Reagan
3. FDR
4.Abraham Lincoln
5.Andrew Jackson tied with Woodrow Wilson, the Wizard of Oz.

The political doctrine of all of those presidents are so different that as whole that list makes no sense. It's big government, little government back and forth.

USMC the Almighty
05-25-2007, 12:12 PM
The political doctrine of all of those presidents are so different that as whole that list makes no sense. It's big government, little government back and forth.

You are right, there really isn't any discernible pattern.

vyo476
05-25-2007, 01:32 PM
You are right, there really isn't any discernible pattern.

Sure there is. They were all strong leaders, skilled at setting goals and accomplishing them.

USMC the Almighty
05-25-2007, 01:41 PM
Sure there is. They were all strong leaders, skilled at setting goals and accomplishing them.

That's a very broad way to chose the "best president".

vyo476
05-25-2007, 02:17 PM
That's a very broad way to chose the "best president".

Not really. What's the purpose of a President? To implement and enforce the policies of the government. That's just my take on it.

USMC the Almighty
05-25-2007, 05:10 PM
Not really. What's the purpose of a President? To implement and enforce the policies of the government. That's just my take on it.

I know, but it's what those policies are that determines the success of a certain president, in my opinion, not just the fact that they implement their own policies effectively.

vyo476
05-25-2007, 09:15 PM
I know, but it's what those policies are that determines the success of a certain president, in my opinion, not just the fact that they implement their own policies effectively.

Mine too, mostly, but I still understand where Justinian was coming from.

Justinian
05-28-2007, 04:42 PM
"Speak softly and carry a big stick..."


Actually, the entire quote is "Speak softly, carry a big stick and you will go far."

Justinian
05-28-2007, 04:43 PM
The political doctrine of all of those presidents are so different that as whole that list makes no sense. It's big government, little government back and forth.

Your point? Did you take stupid pills this morning or are in the process of still being born?

Justinian
05-28-2007, 04:45 PM
That's a very broad way to choose the "best president".

A very "Broad way" huh? I just want to say all the comments that criticized my own personal list of best Presidents are some of the stupidest and most meaningless I've ever read. All of you are dumber to have posted them. For instance none of you ever attempted to explain yourselves or give your own view and principles on how you picked or profess other people to pick their own opinion of best American Presidents. Therefore you have no right or ground to criticize my own opinion when your criticisms are only governed by the presumed lack if principle and sheer display of idiocy.

drippinhun
05-29-2007, 02:15 AM
I would have to say Franklin Roosevelt and Theodore Roosevelt were the best of the twentieth century. They both instituted progressive programs that benefited our nation. The best overall would have to be George Washington for not wanting to hold onto power.

The Founders Intent
05-29-2007, 10:35 AM
Oh dear god, thems is fighting words.

Reagan? Reagan was the worst president, I even say he is worse then our current president (though few agree with me on that statement).

Of course, because he kicked the communists in the ass.

The Founders Intent
05-29-2007, 10:40 AM
I don't think anyone here has enough knowledge of history to pick the best president. All these superficial half-truths and down-right wrong facts, are not a measure of a presidency only. Why all the rhetoric instead of a thought dialogue on the the subjest? Because no one is interested in that, you'd rather blurt out BS than talk of leadership and ideology.

USMC the Almighty
05-29-2007, 12:43 PM
I don't think anyone here has enough knowledge of history to pick the best president. All these superficial half-truths and down-right wrong facts, are not a measure of a presidency only. Why all the rhetoric instead of a thought dialogue on the the subjest? Because no one is interested in that, you'd rather blurt out BS than talk of leadership and ideology.

Who are you talking to? I've seen plenty of thoughtful analyses in this thread. One doesn't have to be an expert on U.S. History to give their opinion on who this country's best president is.

ArmChair General
05-29-2007, 01:03 PM
I don't think anyone here has enough knowledge of history to pick the best president. All these superficial half-truths and down-right wrong facts, are not a measure of a presidency only. Why all the rhetoric instead of a thought dialogue on the the subjest? Because no one is interested in that, you'd rather blurt out BS than talk of leadership and ideology.

Well hello Mr. Fancy Pants.

Think for myself
05-30-2007, 05:15 AM
Your point? Did you take stupid pills this morning or are in the process of still being born?

Well that certainly wasn't very nice.

ChairmanMeow
08-07-2007, 04:42 PM
Jimmy Carter!! (Unfortunately everybody hated him.) What a great guy!

vyo476
08-07-2007, 05:16 PM
Jimmy Carter!! (Unfortunately everybody hated him.) What a great guy!

And he did...what, exactly?

NO Obamanation
04-13-2008, 05:30 PM
Fidel Castro?

:) :) :) :)

American President? N/A

Castro? oh we was such a good president people were DYING to get away from him.

NO Obamanation
04-13-2008, 05:35 PM
WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON! Sure he got a B.J., but his job performance was undenyable! Every genuis has a skeleton in the closet: Van Goh's ear, Clinton's B.J.

I wonder if you still think this? The Clintons were loved by every dem from east to west till they drank the kool-aid obama was giving out. Now the clintons are scum suckers in their book. I hope you are still around to let me know a year later.......... Is he still the best :)

ilikeboobs
04-16-2008, 10:08 AM
George Washington. Hands down.

KingClovis
04-21-2008, 02:33 AM
Lincoln.

WileE
04-21-2008, 07:02 AM
Really kind of hard to say who was absolutely the "best" president, because our nation has gone through a lot of major events, and who's to say that a different president may or may not have handled a certain situation better that the guy in the "hot seat" at the time?

While not my first choice, I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned Franklin D. Roosevelt. Social Security was enacted during his administration, to mention just one of the many pieces of New Deal legislation that changed our nation, for better or worse. Then, he led us through World War Two, which pretty much saved his reputation.

My personal pick is Reagan.

American First
04-21-2008, 08:20 AM
I think John F. Kennedy would have made a wonderful president, but his life was taken too soon and for what reason. I don't think we as United States citizens should have been denied the information in the capsule.

bododie
05-30-2008, 05:01 PM
Teddy Roosevelt.
He set aside land so future illegal immigrants could throw dirty baby diapers in the rivers of our national parks, and ***** about how we stole the land.

Oh yeah, he also said "The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities. "

Gosh, could that really happen?

Here We Go
05-30-2008, 05:51 PM
http://www.animation-station.com/holiday/images/holi0016.gif

John Fitzgerald Kennedy - I saw him go by right before he was assassinated. :(

NO Obamanation
05-30-2008, 06:05 PM
http://www.animation-station.com/holiday/images/holi0016.gif

John Fitzgerald Kennedy - I saw him go by right before he was assassinated. :(

Dang, that must have been really sad. I was born about the time he was killed, but when I have seen the clip of it, it was sad for me. It had to be a whole lot worse if you were there.

My sister told me that they told everyone at school over the intercom. I don't think they would do that today. (And I don’t mean because people don’t like Bush) just because they would be afraid of the kids having trauma

GaiusJuliusCaesarAugustus
05-30-2008, 10:53 PM
Who's the best president in your opinion?

:p
I can only judge those in my lifetime.

Bill Clinton

GaiusJuliusCaesarAugustus
05-30-2008, 10:57 PM
I'm sure the 66 American hostages held in Iran for 444 days would disagree.

Carter policy kept them alive.

credit where due