If you could LOSE any previous president...

[judasmachine]

Andrew Jackson, he ordered many people to their deaths for no good reason other than they were in the way. He was one of the first to order the extermination of entire nations of indigineous peoples. Many more after him including Abraham Lincoln continued the genocide.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jtusa4
Did I mention anything about Monica? No, you must be the one who's preoccupied with it when hearing Clinton mentioned.

What else could you have been talking about? Asides from the Monica incident, the rest of Clinton's presidency is regarded as quite exceptional. Sound policy, both at home and abroad, he came to office at the end of a nasty recession and led through 8 solid years of economic prosperity. Even managed to balance the budget 2 years in a row, when a weaker president would have used the increased revenues to keep spending into the red.
He was by no means perfect, and I would have liked to see some changes, but overall the 90s were good times led by a capable president (despite the idiot rantings on the talk radio). Even my diehard Republican friends admit he was almost on par with Reagan. Blaming 9/11 on him is simply having 20/20 hindsight. Before it happened, no one thought the terrorists capable of that kind of attack.

Giving him credit for the economy is giving credit where it isn't due. There are too many factors involved in economics to say that Clinton made the 90s economy good. Presidents do have an impact, but generally that impact is not felt until after they are out of office. I am by no means an expert on economics, but I know that much.
Libs are quick punish Bush for Iraq, but look at Somalia and Kosovo. Not exactly gleeming examples of a great foreign policy. There's also the issue of him giving China, a communist country, top secret information.
You're right, there are worse presidents that I probably should have picked instead of Clinton, but he's the first one that popped into my head since I'm not big into political history.

He also helped give rise to Hillary's political career. :Q

 

[Vic]

Yeah, I'm no fan of Hillary.

*shudders*

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: glugglug
Does dubya count as previous yet? If not, McCarthy I guess.

I started googling it, but got distracted by http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/life/ovaloffice.html

anyways, I'm pretty sure McCarthy was a congressman, not president.

I'd have to go with Grant. or someone useless like James Buchanan

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Genesys
Clinton.

terrorism grew

I don't remember anyone flying planes into buildings on his watch.

tech bubble grew and burst during his presidency[/b]

The bubble burst due to W's irresponsible budget busting record deficit producing tax cuts.

downsized our military


castrated our intelligence agencies

Haven't you heard? Cheney took credit for downsizing the military and intelligence agencies.
Cheney acknowledges defense cuts began on his watch

had sexual misadventures in the oval orfice, bringing shame and humiliation to the Presidency

Yeah, I'd much rather have Bush using the oval office to bring shame and humiliation on the presidency by lying to the nation and the entire world about Iraq.

a bold faced liar [or typical politician, whichever you choose]

See above.

involved in numerous scandals, before and during Presidency

Now who's the liar? The 'scandals' Ken Starr wasted 70 million taxpayer dollars on were all a bust.

draft dodger

Student deferrments, just like Cheney, Bush, all the chickenhawks you support now. And technically, besides being AWOL, Bush is a deserter. Hypocrite.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Hossenfeffer
Taft. That bastard.

Yaknow, you're right. That fat son of a bitch passed the 16th Amendment (income taxes).

:|

the democrats' HERO!

Except for one small fact, genius. Taft was a Republican.

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Vic
You realize George W. Bush is just as much as draft dodger as Bill Clinton, right? One's the fortunate son, the other gets college deferment. But being the fortunate son is okay while the college deferment is not, right? <^>

Never mind the law or what really happened.

I do have one question: who here is voting for Kerry based largely on his ability to lead or other qualities that he purportedly demonstrated in Vietnam?

Of you, who voted for Bob Dole?

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: jtusa4

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jtusa4
Did I mention anything about Monica? No, you must be the one who's preoccupied with it when hearing Clinton mentioned.

What else could you have been talking about? Asides from the Monica incident, the rest of Clinton's presidency is regarded as quite exceptional. Sound policy, both at home and abroad, he came to office at the end of a nasty recession and led through 8 solid years of economic prosperity. Even managed to balance the budget 2 years in a row, when a weaker president would have used the increased revenues to keep spending into the red.
He was by no means perfect, and I would have liked to see some changes, but overall the 90s were good times led by a capable president (despite the idiot rantings on the talk radio). Even my diehard Republican friends admit he was almost on par with Reagan. Blaming 9/11 on him is simply having 20/20 hindsight. Before it happened, no one thought the terrorists capable of that kind of attack.

Giving him credit for the economy is giving credit where it isn't due. There are too many factors involved in economics to say that Clinton made the 90s economy good. Presidents do have an impact, but generally that impact is not felt until after they are out of office. I am by no means an expert on economics, but I know that much.
Libs are quick punish Bush for Iraq, but look at Somalia and Kosovo. Not exactly gleeming examples of a great foreign policy. There's also the issue of him giving China, a communist country, top secret information.
You're right, there are worse presidents that I probably should have picked instead of Clinton, but he's the first one that popped into my head since I'm not big into political history.

He also helped give rise to Hillary's political career. :Q

Funny how Bush takes credit for the economy when it's good (which, under him, hasn't been often) yet he comes up with the same hogwash you are talking when it's bad. Hmmm...

Quick to punish Bush on Iraq??? Who else would you suggest we punish??? Bush told the lies. They're his and so is the fiasco they've created.
Somalia and Kosovo weren't all out invasions based on lies. Kosovo was a success compared with Iraq. Clinton had an exit strategy.

I have no idea why you mention Senator Clinton other than the usual Rush inspired diatribe you people all spout about her. You didn't have to admit your ignorance of history. It's quite apparent.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Genesys
Clinton.

terrorism grew
tech bubble grew and burst during his presidency
downsized our military
castrated our intelligence agencies
had sexual misadventures in the oval orfice, bringing shame and humiliation to the Presidency
a bold faced liar [or typical politician, whichever you choose]
involved in numerous scandals, before and during Presidency
draft dodger

:roll:

You realize George W. Bush is just as much as draft dodger as Bill Clinton, right? One's the fortunate son, the other gets college deferment. But being the fortunate son is okay while the college deferment is not, right? <^>

As for the rest, let's just say that I don't think the President should have so much control over the markets and the economy that he could actually prevent something like the tech bubble, as it would be a obvious goverment intrusion into the free marketplace. But maybe I only feel that way because I saw it for what it was early, sold before the top, and think you fools who didn't see it coming got what fools deserve.
"Wow, my stock in that company that has never made one dime of profit is up to $200/share! What should I do?"
"Oh, hold on to that one. Hell, buy even more shares, it's going higher! There's a bright future ahead for a company swimming in a sea of red!"
:roll::roll:

i see you dont have a very good short term memory. it was specifically stated that in no way did ANYONE in the Bush family request, wrangle, or finagle any sort of position in the Air National Guard. He applied and he got chosen. Simple as that.

As for the rest, he could have mentioned something to Alan Greenspan and some sort of plan could have been worked out. Maybe make it harder to go forword with an IPO after starting a new company? Perhaps make it to where you had to have some sort of tangible product or IP instead of just being a silly middle man? You know, simple things that dont really impede on the free markets.

And i'm glad you were one of the smart ones. I was to young to invest at the time, so I didnt get hurt any either.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: jtusa4

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jtusa4
Did I mention anything about Monica? No, you must be the one who's preoccupied with it when hearing Clinton mentioned.

What else could you have been talking about? Asides from the Monica incident, the rest of Clinton's presidency is regarded as quite exceptional. Sound policy, both at home and abroad, he came to office at the end of a nasty recession and led through 8 solid years of economic prosperity. Even managed to balance the budget 2 years in a row, when a weaker president would have used the increased revenues to keep spending into the red.
He was by no means perfect, and I would have liked to see some changes, but overall the 90s were good times led by a capable president (despite the idiot rantings on the talk radio). Even my diehard Republican friends admit he was almost on par with Reagan. Blaming 9/11 on him is simply having 20/20 hindsight. Before it happened, no one thought the terrorists capable of that kind of attack.

Giving him credit for the economy is giving credit where it isn't due. There are too many factors involved in economics to say that Clinton made the 90s economy good. Presidents do have an impact, but generally that impact is not felt until after they are out of office. I am by no means an expert on economics, but I know that much.
Libs are quick punish Bush for Iraq, but look at Somalia and Kosovo. Not exactly gleeming examples of a great foreign policy. There's also the issue of him giving China, a communist country, top secret information.
You're right, there are worse presidents that I probably should have picked instead of Clinton, but he's the first one that popped into my head since I'm not big into political history.

He also helped give rise to Hillary's political career. :Q

Funny how Bush takes credit for the economy when it's good (which, under him, hasn't been often) yet he comes up with the same hogwash you are talking when it's bad. Hmmm...

Quick to punish Bush on Iraq??? Who else would you suggest we punish??? Bush told the lies. They're his and so is the fiasco they've created.
Somalia and Kosovo weren't all out invasions based on lies. Kosovo was a success compared with Iraq. Clinton had an exit strategy.

I have no idea why you mention Senator Clinton other than the usual Rush inspired diatribe you people all spout about her. You didn't have to admit your ignorance of history. It's quite apparent.

I never said Bush deserves credit for the economy. Not once did I mention Bush when talking about the economy. BBond, your rabid hate for Bush has prevented from thinking about things rationally.

Clinton had an exit strategy huh? What was his exit strategy in Somalia? Turn tail and run when it got bad. We shouldn't have been there in the first place, but we were, so we should have stayed and finished business. But instead, as soon as things got bad, he left because he didn't want the incident to due anymore damage to his rep. Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not, you have to agree that to just leave now would be disastrous. We're in it, so we have to stay in it 'til the end.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: jtusa4


I never said Bush deserves credit for the economy. Not once did I mention Bush when talking about the economy. BBond, your rabid hate for Bush has prevented from thinking about things rationally.

Clinton had an exit strategy huh? What was his exit strategy in Somalia? Turn tail and run when it got bad. We shouldn't have been there in the first place, but we were, so we should have stayed and finished business. But instead, as soon as things got bad, he left because he didn't want the incident to due anymore damage to his rep. Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not, you have to agree that to just leave now would be disastrous. We're in it, so we have to stay in it 'til the end.

I never said you said Bush deserves credit for the economy. I said Bush TAKES credit for the economy when it's good and denies blame when it's bad. Typical for Bush. He never makes mistakes. Just ask him.

As for my rabid hatred for Bush, I read the news. I follow Bush's agenda. Bush is responsible for the largest deficit in American history. He is responsible for taking a surplus and turning it into that deficit. His "Clear Skies" inititiative has turned back decades of improvement in air quality. His conservation program for our wilderness areas opened them up to corporate rape of the environment. His No Child Left Behind left all children behind because the cynical jerk didn't fund it. His AIDS initiative is over a year old and he hasn't funded that either. His plan to provide seniors with a drug benefit is a huge failure and cost us vastly more than Bush would admit and even though HHC's chief accountant KNEW the plan would cost way over what the Bush administration was telling us they kept him quiet by threatening his job. Someone in the Bush White House traitorously released the name of a CIA operative and after 15 months Bush still hasn't had the courage to make that person or persons own up to it. Bush lied to us all and invaded a nation based on those lies where American soldiers are dying and being maimed because Bush listened to a pack of neocon madmen and failed to plan for the aftermath of his invasion.

Is that hatred? Or just a brief statement of a few of the facts about the Bush administration? I would say your blind allegiance to this despot is keeping you from facing the truth and that makes the facts seem like hatred. It's not. They're simply the facts. Bush is a disaster for America and the sooner he's back in Crawford for good the better off we'll all be.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: jtusa4


I never said Bush deserves credit for the economy. Not once did I mention Bush when talking about the economy. BBond, your rabid hate for Bush has prevented from thinking about things rationally.

Clinton had an exit strategy huh? What was his exit strategy in Somalia? Turn tail and run when it got bad. We shouldn't have been there in the first place, but we were, so we should have stayed and finished business. But instead, as soon as things got bad, he left because he didn't want the incident to due anymore damage to his rep. Whether you agree with the war in Iraq or not, you have to agree that to just leave now would be disastrous. We're in it, so we have to stay in it 'til the end.

I never said you said Bush deserves credit for the economy. I said Bush TAKES credit for the economy when it's good and denies blame when it's bad. Typical for Bush. He never makes mistakes. Just ask him.

As for my rabid hatred for Bush, I read the news. I follow Bush's agenda. Bush is responsible for the largest deficit in American history. He is responsible for taking a surplus and turning it into that deficit. His "Clear Skies" inititiative has turned back decades of improvement in air quality. His conservation program for our wilderness areas opened them up to corporate rape of the environment. His No Child Left Behind left all children behind because the cynical jerk didn't fund it. His AIDS initiative is over a year old and he hasn't funded that either. His plan to provide seniors with a drug benefit is a huge failure and cost us vastly more than Bush would admit and even though HHC's chief accountant KNEW the plan would cost way over what the Bush administration was telling us they kept him quiet by threatening his job. Someone in the Bush White House traitorously released the name of a CIA operative and after 15 months Bush still hasn't had the courage to make that person or persons own up to it. Bush lied to us all and invaded a nation based on those lies where American soldiers are dying and being maimed because Bush listened to a pack of neocon madmen and failed to plan for the aftermath of his invasion.

Is that hatred? Or just a brief statement of a few of the facts about the Bush administration? I would say your blind allegiance to this despot is keeping you from facing the truth and that makes the facts seem like hatred. It's not. They're simply the facts. Bush is a disaster for America and the sooner he's back in Crawford for good the better off we'll all be.

Yeah, it's hatred since you're the one that brought up Bush when this wasn't really a Bush thread.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: jtusa4


Yeah, it's hatred since you're the one that brought up Bush when this wasn't really a Bush thread.

It's my thread. Bush is my choice of which president I'd LOSE.

But yeah, I can see your point. Bush isn't really an elected president. I guess I can see how you'd think he shouldn't be included in a thread about U.S. presidents.

 

[jtusa]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: jtusa4


Yeah, it's hatred since you're the one that brought up Bush when this wasn't really a Bush thread.

It's my thread. Bush is my choice of which president I'd LOSE.

But yeah, I can see your point. Bush isn't really an elected president. I guess I can see how you'd think he shouldn't be included in a thread about U.S. presidents.

I don't recall saying Bush shouldn't be included in the choosing. I was basically saying that you were turning this thread into a Bush-bashing thread like you do everyother one.

 

[Thegonagle]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Maybe Clinton, not sure. during his administration, terrorism grew and grew and nothing was done. it showed its face on 9/11.

I'd laugh, but somehow I think you're serious;

Was nothing done in the wake of the World Trade Center Bombing in '93? As I recall, at least 5 individuals were arrested and convicted.

Do you recall nothing about the Landmark Bomb Plot? The UN building, the Lincoln and Holland tunnels, the George Washington bridge, and the NYC FBI offices were all to be bombed on July 4, 1993. The plot was uncovered and prevented. 10 suspects were tried and convicted.

How about the Anti-Terrorism Act that Clinton singed into law in 1996? Under that new law, Timothy McVeigh was sentenced to death for his roll in the Oklahoma City Bombing.

How about the thwarted Millennium Bomb Plot against LA International Airport?

Now, ask yourself, under whose watch did the 9-11 attacks occur? George W. Bush largely ignored a memo entitled "Osama Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside United States," which warned of a plot to use airplanes as cruise missiles. Ask whether investigations were stepped up after one of the alleged hijackers was arrested at a flying school after attempting to pay his tuition in cash. (Answer: No. The FBI agency responsible for that arrest pushed for more investigations, and was all but ignored.) Ask whether airport security was stepped up in response to the "OBL Determined. . ." memo. (Answer: No--It was business as usual.)

Why was George W. Bush against the 9-11 commission every step of the way? (I believe it was because he knew he f-cked up big time, and they would make him look incompetent. Guess what? The 9-11 commission made George W. Bush look incompetent--but they don't tell you that on cable news and right-wing radio.)

Clinton's administration did a hell of a lot more than "nothing" about terrorism. Outgoing Clinton White House staff tried to brief the next administration on everything that was being done, but was all ignored until it was too late. Pass ruled incomplete; Bush dropped the ball.

 

[MidasKnight]

President Carter &amp; President Nixon ( Tie )

 

[Zebo]

Without a doubt GWB.
All His ex-employees coming out to say what a con-artist he is should be enough but here are some things That keeps my vote away from him.


Screwing up our good name and goodwill around the globe and basically destroying the international coalition thinking we can go it alone. This will cost us big time in future. It is now with only UK and a few puny straglers along for the Iraq ride.

He wants to give his rich friends a free ride with no taxes (cap gains) while basically keeping hard taxation on wages (SS). His tax cuts during time of war are totally unpresdented.

Poor children and thier families make sacrifices everyday in Iraq for a lie he orchastrated.

His Orwellian naming schemes Like "Clear Skies Initiative" which increase allowable pollution levels and "Healthy Forest Initiative" for loggers to clear cut National forests.

His total disreguard for the contsitution and any repect for western law with secret jails, no habeus corpus for the accused to challange charges brought against them and toture apparatus he's fostering in Iraq and who knows where else..it's all secret. Hamdi was let go after three years of who knows what. Three years rotting for nothing is bad enough. How about if that were your brother or father?

His insane spending spree increasing the national debt by 2 trillion dollars which took Nixon, ford, carter, and reagan 20 years to do. Oh all while slashing or eliminating the wealthest americans taxes and during war time. Can't have them sacrifice at all.

His continuing to promotion of free trade putting you in competition with third world cess pool labor.

His using "the terroist card" while lying his way into IRAQ and lining his friends pockets with your tax dollars...plus a little blood of your sons and daughters for this payola.

His doing nothing really about terror here at home dispite his tough talk. We haven't increased port inspections. We haven't adequately funded first responders. No investigation into the intelligence failure that led to 9/11. We haven't reorganized our intelligence services. We hav'nt adequately shut down the borders and at least 5000 potential terrorists cross everyday.

W's economy has lost more jobs than any president since hoover I read.

Outing CIA agents (treason) and disparaging or ruining anyone who disagrees with him.

His scam of a medicare percription drug plan to line big pharmas pockets with your money instead of your parents and grandparents..

Finally he showed his true colors that this "war on terror" is a sham when he said "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."

Indeed, turning USA into a police state and sucking americans dry over to your rich freinds is your priority

 

[Zebo]

Was nothing done in the wake of the World Trade Center Bombing in '93? As I recall, at least 5 individuals were arrested and convicted.

-----------------------
Exactly how many has Bush/Asscroft Convicted dispite taking a sh1t on the constituion? ZERO ziltch notta.

Ashcroft batting 0 for 5,000 on terror


Not to mention Bush has created a hell of a lot more "terrorists" who killed 1100 of our troops already and maimed another 10-15000 for life. Plus ones we have yet to see at home and abroad. The fool went to war with 1 billion muslims.

Tip: stay away from europe, egypt, and pretty much anyplace other than NZ, OZ, UK, and Israel

 

[chess9]

McCarthy never made it to the Presidency.

Taft was hardly the worst President, and by a long shot. As Republicans go he was very liberal. Of course, his sheparding of the income tax amendment might have some of you Libertarians voting agin' him. And, if I recall correctly, wasn't that one of Teddy Roosevelt's big ideas?

As much as I hate LBJ he had so many good accomplishments I'd be loathe to name him the worst.

My vote would be for Garfield with Arthur in second place.

The best President? James Madison with Lincoln second, IMHO.

-Robert

 

[Zeav]

I'd pick Clinton, although the economy was decent (It's growing better now), he had at least 4 opportunities to kill/capture Osama Bin Laden.

He unfortunatly seemed like he was busy doing other things rather than deal with terrorism.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Never mind the law or what really happened.

I do have one question: who here is voting for Kerry based largely on his ability to lead or other qualities that he purportedly demonstrated in Vietnam?

Of you, who voted for Bob Dole?

Not me. I voted for Browne in '96.

Originally posted by: Genesys
i see you dont have a very good short term memory. it was specifically stated that in no way did ANYONE in the Bush family request, wrangle, or finagle any sort of position in the Air National Guard. He applied and he got chosen. Simple as that.

Hehe. And passed right through a 3 year waiting list. There may be no documentation but trust me, there was a phone call. I know how business works.

As for government control of a market bubble, it's just not that easy. When investors have money to invest, they are going to invest it. When a lot of new money enters the market at once, the power of that new money can be enough in itself to move prices up even when the reality doesn't justify it. Such was dot-com, which started that way and then took on a whole new life of its own.

 

[chess9]

Genesys:

Please tell me you don't actually believe that Bush got into the Air National Guard on merit. Why even make that argument? All available slots that year went to the sons of powerful politicians. This is the way it still is. Try getting into West Point or the Naval Academy if you are the son of the Vice-President versus being some smart kid from Podunk, Utah.

My SAT scores were quite a bit higher than Bush's and I was wait listed for acceptance to Duke. Yet, he got into Yale. I could say I didn't understand....

Pull the blinders off. Both Republicans and Democrats pull this stuff. It doesn't matter if you are the son of the most liberal Dem or the most conservative Republican, power is the name of the game.

-Robert

 

[bozack]

Clinton....

self aggrandizement and personal gain were his only two motivators for anything....plus a few of the points Genesys mentioned.

 

[Mayax]

Lincoln.


Should have let the states leave before plunging the American people into a civil war.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: glugglug
Does dubya count as previous yet? If not, McCarthy I guess.

I started googling it, but got distracted by http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/life/ovaloffice.html

anyways, I'm pretty sure McCarthy was a congressman, not president.

I'd have to go with Grant. or someone useless like James Buchanan

lol, I was just wondering the same thing. thought maybe I was dumb not knowing we had a president named McCarthy.