NationStates Jolt Archive

I have one, that I think every person here can all equally hate.

Andrew Jackson.

Lets see, rape, murder, genocide, destroyed an economic institution due to a grudge with one of its operators (Which cost the US dearly in its development for a hundred years), and overall assholeness.

Whose your least favorite-worst president?

This topic has been done a few times.

I still stand with Warren G. Harding as the worst. Teapot Dome.

He really didn't do anything of value.

William Henry Harrison- He wrote the longest speech in the history of inaugurations, disregarded his wife when she told him to wear a coat when he read it, caught the flu and died 30 days later… what an idiot…

I also hate Taft.

Lyndon B. Johnson. Everything I hear about that guy furthers my belief that he was a complete idiot. His biggest blunder: treating the Vietnam War like it was his own personal tactics sandbox.

In my humble opinion...

Worst
#3 - GW Bush
#2 - Richard Nixon
#1 - Lyndon Johnson

Best
#3 - Dwight Eisenhower
#2 - Abraham Lincoln
#1 - Thomas Jefferson

(Note: George Washington would be #1+++++)

Most underrated
Jimmy Carter

Most overrated
Woodrow Wilson

This topic has been done a few times.

I still stand with Warren G. Harding as the worst. Teapot Dome.

He really didn't do anything of value.

Historians debate feverishly over who is the best president in American history. However, there is little disagreement over who was the worst. His name was Warren G. Harding (1921-1923), and he sucked.

The reasons he sucked are many and, to be truthful, have been widely cataloguedin the annals of presidential history. So, with your indulgence, I'd like to focus instead on the intensity of his sucking.

Warren G. Harding was a worthless piece of shit. Fuck him. His presidency was a taint, not just in the sense of a "stain on the office," but literally a taint - the anatomical area between the anus and the testicles.

I hate Warren G. Harding

That says it all

In my humble opinion...

Worst
#3 - GW Bush
#2 - Richard Nixon
#1 - Lyndon Johnson

Best
#3 - Dwight Eisenhower
#2 - Abraham Lincoln
#1 - Thomas Jefferson

(Note: George Washington would be #1+++++)

Most underrated
Jimmy Carter

Most overrated
Woodrow Wilson

I completely agree.

Fdr.

I'm not American, can someone tell me what crimes these presidents committed?

FD Roosevelt? WTF?

In my humble opinion...

Worst
#3 - GW Bush
#2 - Richard Nixon
#1 - Lyndon Johnson

Best
#3 - Dwight Eisenhower
#2 - Abraham Lincoln
#1 - Thomas Jefferson

(Note: George Washington would be #1+++++)

Most underrated
Jimmy Carter

Most overrated
Woodrow Wilson

The problem Lyndon had was that he tried to wage a "war on poverty" but at the same time Vietnam got dropped in his lap. He did do one very good thing at the begining of his presidency by getting black people more rights. This unfortunately sort of backfired in the race riots.

I'm not so sure about Eisenhower, thoughit is true he did what he was supposed to after Brown Vs Board, which is what some presidents (Jackson) wouldn't have done.

Jefferson's not as good as you think, what with the Emargo ("That cursed Ograbme!") and all.

I'm not American, can someone tell me what crimes these presidents committed?

FD Roosevelt? WTF?

I'm guessing he was either joking or is a conservative, as comservatives don't really like his policies, but i was during the Great Depression and the gov. needed to do something.

Although i'm a brit, i'd say FDR was the best. Took the world out of the depression and helped make the USA what it is today.

I'm surprised noone's mentioned Abraham Lincoln as one of the best either. But the worst? In terms of foreign policy I'd go as far as saying Reagan, since he ended the relative peace between the USSR and the USA. However, i'm not an american, so I wouldn't know :p

Truman best, Eisenhower worst. I suppose its a systems of ups and downs.

In defense of Jackson, Jonny Horton wrote a catchy little diddy about him.

Truman best, Eisenhower worst. I suppose its a systems of ups and downs.
I like the fact that, even though most Americans genuinely hated the Germans after WW2, Eisenhower decided to prevent massive starvation in Germany by sending a LOT of food to them. This is truly a gentleman's gesture, and a courageous decision. There are still German people today who fondly remember the American aid packages. This is definitely a PLUS for the US.
Eisenhower managed to convince the Canadians as well; with Canadian and American wheat, the German people survived through 1945-1948, until their food production became reasonable.
There was a lot of pressure in Eisenhower's government to "just let the Huns die". There was even a vindicative plan devised by a pissed-off general, calling for the "pastorisation of Germany", i.e. reducing the German population and industrial potential until the country reverts to an agriculture-based economy.
So it was one man's combat to do "the right thing".
This is why I greatly respect Eisenhower.

And Eisenhower's paranoia about the "military-industrial establishment" proved to be true in the long run. ;)

It's gotta be Warren G. Harding. Just because Stephen Colbert hates him, we must all hate him.

I like the fact that, even though most Americans genuinely hated the Germans after WW2, Eisenhower decided to prevent massive starvation in Germany by sending a LOT of food to them. This is truly a gentleman's gesture, and a courageous decision. There are still German people today who fondly remember the American aid packages. This is definitely a PLUS for the US.
Eisenhower managed to convince the Canadians as well; with Canadian and American wheat, the German people survived through 1945-1948, until their food production became reasonable.
There was a lot of pressure in Eisenhower's government to "just let the Huns die". There was even a vindicative plan devised by a pissed-off general, calling for the "pastorisation of Germany", i.e. reducing the German population and industrial potential until the country reverts to an agriculture-based economy.
So it was one man's combat to do "the right thing".
This is why I greatly respect Eisenhower.

And Eisenhower's paranoia about the "military-industrial establishment" proved to be true in the long run. ;)
Amen to that. My father is alive today because of that.

Woodrow Wilson.

FDR, no question.
A careful, unprejudiced analysis of the great depression reveals that, while FDR didnt cause the depression, the country had encountered similar causes in the past that didnt last nearly as long. Hoover's tariffs, Federal Reserve monetary mismanagement, and FDR's New Deal policies all helped to extend the monetary deflation/depression for a decade.
Every "job" that any spending program created only resulted in less jobs elsewhere. If putting money in one location creates jobs, taking that money from other places obviously destroys them. No positive "job creation" ever happened, only more reliance on political "generosity".
Tripling taxes just simply isnt a very good idea in that kind of a situation. But something had to pay for Roosevelt's ridiculous spending.

And we are still cleaning up FDR's mess
The tax-funded Savings and Loans scandals were enabled by deposit insurance, the cost estimated to be over $1 Trillion for these alone.
"Social Security," a giant ponzi scheme that forces people to rely on the government, is estimated to cost even more.

I would appreciate if anyone can name a single New Deal program that did what it was supposed to do, without causing a disproportionate amount of harm.

I like the fact that, even though most Americans genuinely hated the Germans after WW2, Eisenhower decided to prevent massive starvation in Germany by sending a LOT of food to them. This is truly a gentleman's gesture, and a courageous decision. There are still German people today who fondly remember the American aid packages. This is definitely a PLUS for the US.
Eisenhower managed to convince the Canadians as well; with Canadian and American wheat, the German people survived through 1945-1948, until their food production became reasonable.
There was a lot of pressure in Eisenhower's government to "just let the Huns die". There was even a vindicative plan devised by a pissed-off general, calling for the "pastorisation of Germany", i.e. reducing the German population and industrial potential until the country reverts to an agriculture-based economy.
So it was one man's combat to do "the right thing".
This is why I greatly respect Eisenhower.

And Eisenhower's paranoia about the "military-industrial establishment" proved to be true in the long run. ;)

Umm... Eisenhower wasnt president 1945-1948, Truman was. Therefore the statement about "a lot of pressure on Eisenhower's government' is incorrect. By the time of the Eisenhower administration, the German economy was well under way to recovery thanks to the Marshall plan and the Korean War boom and food aid was no longer really needed, at least in West Germany.
Thats not to say that Eisenhower, between 1945-48 did not have a say in keeping Germans fed during the first five years of the post-war period. I am merely saying he was not president at the time.

The worst American president of modern times has to be Ronald Reagan.

- For ignoring the AIDS crisis until he realised it was affecting heterosexuals

- For funding murderers and dictators in Nicaragua and El Salvador

- For funding the Taliban in Afghanistan turning it into one of the most brutal theocracies in the world

- For creating the world's biggest underclass

- For wrecking the environment more than any other president did

- For his friendship with Pat Buchanan

- For taking so fricking long to die

I also hate Taft.
You hate him because he's fat or something? ;)

President McKinley sent him to the Philippines in 1900 as chief civil administrator. Sympathetic toward the Filipinos, he improved the economy, built roads and schools, and gave the people at least some participation in government.

...his administration initiated 80 antitrust suits and that Congress submitted to the states amendments for a Federal income tax and the direct election of Senators. A postal savings system was established, and the Interstate Commerce Commission was directed to set railroad rates.

Seems like a nice guy...

Umm... Eisenhower wasnt president 1945-1948, Truman was. Therefore the statement about "a lot of pressure on Eisenhower's government' is incorrect. By the time of the Eisenhower administration, the German economy was well under way to recovery thanks to the Marshall plan and the Korean War boom and food aid was no longer really needed, at least in West Germany.
Thats not to say that Eisenhower, between 1945-48 did not have a say in keeping Germans fed during the first five years of the post-war period. I am merely saying he was not president at the time.
You're right. I have checked my sources and found that the plan to feed the Germans had been prepared by former president Herbert Hoover, and presented to Truman, begging for mercy for the Germans. Please read the text below.

And sorry for the inaccuracies.

""Mr. Hoover called for mercy to Germany.

"I can only appeal to your pity and your mercy...Will you not take to your table an invisible guest?"

Canadians and Americans set the table for the invisible guest.

According to prime minister Mackenzie King's chief foreign-affairs adviser, Norman Robertson, Canada was the only country that had kept its food commitments to help the starving. Only in Canada did rationing and price controls continue long after the war so that others could be fed.

This unique campaign saved 800 million lives, according to Mr. Hoover.

Some older Germans treasure the memory of the "Hoover *Spiese* (food) that warmed their bodies at school in 1947. Many millions--including hundreds of thousands of Canadians born in Germany--also remember their homes in parts of Germany now under Polish or Russian rule. None dreams of reparations; all yearn for us to know their story.""


PS: I still love Eisenhower's style. He was a complex man.

Grant sucked pretty hard, too.

For every reasonable choice that is put forward, like Harding or Grant or Jackson or Harrison (hahaha), you're going to have one hardcore liberal saying Reagan was the worst and one hardcore conservative saying FDR was the worst. This topic is always rife with partisan stupidity, every time a thread about it is created.

This topic has been done a few times.

I still stand with Warren G. Harding as the worst. Teapot Dome.

He really didn't do anything of value.




who does? saddam husaine? :sniper:

For every reasonable choice that is put forward, like Harding or Grant or Jackson or Harrison (hahaha),
Harrison? Harrison ruled! Imagine if all of our Presidents died after one month in office.

Harrison? Harrison ruled! Imagine if all of our Presidents died after one month in office.

Wasn't me. :D

William Henry Harrison- He wrote the longest speech in the history of inaugurations, disregarded his wife when she told him to wear a coat when he read it, caught the flu and died 30 days later… what an idiot…

I also hate Taft.

I just thought it was hysterical.

I'd have to say that JFK was pretty worthless. Dropped us into Vietnam, never did much of lasting use, but that describes alot of leaders world over (well, if you replace Vietnam with name of some other fuck up war). Anyway, my main problem with him is that he managed to avoid the disgust that he would hav heaped on his head by getting himself shot. And then there was that stupid movie. And the fact that he was a Kennedy.

George W. Bush.

William Henry Harrison- He wrote the longest speech in the history of inaugurations, disregarded his wife when she told him to wear a coat when he read it, caught the flu and died 30 days later… what an idiot…

LOL, is that true?

[QUOTE=Pencil 17]William Henry Harrison- He wrote the longest speech in the history of inaugurations, disregarded his wife when she told him to wear a coat when he read it, caught the flu and died 30 days later… what an idiot…

I also hate Taft.[/QUOTE:]

oooh, that's just pure nasty! poor taft
:eek:

I'm not American, can someone tell me what crimes these presidents committed?

FD Roosevelt? WTF?

some might not like FDR because he introduced wide-spread socialism to the United States.

I wouldn't rank him as one of the worst, however, because he DID help lead the country out of the great depression (with little understanding of how money works... a miracle, really) and didn't mess up WW 2.

LOL, is that true?

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

President March 4, 1841 to April 4, 1841.

This thread should be "flame-baiting for beginners"

The worst American president of modern times has to be Ronald Reagan.

- For ignoring the AIDS crisis until he realised it was affecting heterosexuals

- For funding murderers and dictators in Nicaragua and El Salvador

- For funding the Taliban in Afghanistan turning it into one of the most brutal theocracies in the world

- For creating the world's biggest underclass

- For wrecking the environment more than any other president did

- For his friendship with Pat Buchanan

- For taking so fricking long to die

hmmm... i'll let someone else berate you. i have to do some work.

5 Worst:
5. George W. Bush
4. Ronald Regan
3. Lyndon B. Johnson
2. Richard Nixon
1. Andrew Jackson

5 Best:
5. William Clinton
4. Woodrow Wilson
3. FDR
2. George Washington
1. Thomas Jefferson

George W. Bush.

Moron :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:

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

President March 4, 1841 to April 4, 1841.

Thank! This just made my day :D

I have one, that I think every person here can all equally hate.

Andrew Jackson.

Lets see, rape, murder, genocide, destroyed an economic institution due to a grudge with one of its operators (Which cost the US dearly in its development for a hundred years), and overall assholeness.

Whose your least favorite-worst president?

All of that is the fault of the man he followed. Mr. Lincoln, who started the war, and fought it cruelly.

Read this:
Every February 12 Americans think they are celebrating Lincoln’s birthday. But what they are really celebrating is the birth of the Leviathan state that Lincoln, more than anyone else, is responsible for bringing about. No wonder federal politicos have made his birth date a national holiday, engraved his face is on Mount Rushmore, built a Venus-like statue of him in Washington, D.C., and put his mugshot on the five dollar bill.
More than 130 years of government propaganda has hidden this fact from the American people by creating a Mythical Lincoln that never existed. Take, for instance, the fact that everyone supposedly knows – that Lincoln was an abolitionist. This would be a surprise to the preeminent Lincoln scholar, Pulitzer prize-winning Lincoln biographer David Donald, who in his 1961 book, Lincoln Reconsidered, wrote that "Lincoln was not an abolitionist." And he wasn’t. He was glad to accept on behalf of the Republican Party any votes from abolitionists, but real abolitionists despised him. William Lloyd Garrison, the most prominent of all abolitionists, concluded that Lincoln "had not a drop of anti-slavery blood in his veins."
Garrison knew Lincoln well. He knew that Lincoln stated over and over again for his entire adult life that he did not believe in social or political equality of the races, he opposed inter-racial marriage, supported the Illinois constitution’s prohibition of immigration of blacks into the state, once defended in court a slaveowner seeking to retrieve his runaway slaves but never defended a runaway, and that he was a lifelong advocate of colonization – of sending every last black person in the U.S. to Africa, Haiti, or central America – anywhere but in the U.S.
Garrison and other abolitionists were also keenly aware that the January 1863 Emancipation Proclamation freed no one since it specifically exempted all the areas that at the time were occupied by federal armies. That is, all areas where slaves could actually have been freed.
Historians have portrayed the Mythical Lincoln as a man who brooded for decades over how he could someday free the slaves. Nothing could be more absurd. According to Roy Basler, the editor of Lincoln’s Collected Works, Lincoln never even mentioned slavery in a speech until 1854, and even then, says Basler, he was not sincere.
When Lincoln first entered state politics in 1832 he announced that he was doing so for three reasons: To help enact the Whig Party agenda of protectionist tariffs, corporate welfare subsidies for railroad and canal-building corporations ("internal improvements"), and a government monopolization of the nation’s money supply. "My politics are short and sweet, like the old woman’s dance," he declared: "I am in favor of a national bank . . . the internal improvements system, and a high protective tariff." He was a devoted mercantilist, and remained so for his entire political life. He was single-mindedly devoted to Henry Clay and his political agenda (mentioned above), which Clay called "The American System."
Lincoln once announced that his career ambition was not to free the slaves but to become "the DeWitt Clinton of Illinois." DeWitt Clinton was the governor of New York in the early nineteenth century who is credited with having introduced the spoils system to America and supervising the building of the Erie Canal (which became defunct in a mere ten years because of the invention of the railroad).
Moreover, Lincoln destroyed the most important principle of the Declaration – the principle that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. Southerners no longer consented to being governed by Washington, D.C. in 1860, and Lincoln put an end to that idea by having his armies slaughter 300,000 of them, including one out of every four white males between 20 and 40. Standardizing for today’s population, that would be the equivalent of around 3 million American deaths, or roughly 60 times the number of Americans who died in Vietnam.
As H.L. Mencken said of the Gettysburg Address, in which Lincoln absurdly claimed that Northern soldiers were fighting for the cause of self determination ("that government of the people . . . should not perish . . .": "It is difficult to imagine anything more untrue. The Union soldiers in the battle actually fought against self determination; it was the Confederates who fought for the right of their people to govern themselves. The Confederates went into the battle free; they came out with their freedom subject to the supervision of the rest of the country."
Another Lincoln myth was that he "saved the Constitution." But this claim is an outrage considering that Lincoln acted like a dictator for the duration of his administration and showed nothing but bitter contempt for the Constitution. Even Lincoln’s idolaters, like historian Clinton Rossiter, author of the book, Constitutional Dictatorship, referred to him as a "great dictator" who had an "amazing disregard for the Constitution . . . that was considered by nobody as legal."
The Dictator Lincoln invaded the South without the consent of Congress, as called for in the Constitution; declared martial law; blockaded Southern ports without a declaration of war, as required by the Constitution; illegally suspended the writ of habeas corpus; imprisoned without trial thousands of Northern anti-war protesters, including hundreds of newspaper editors and owners; censored all newspaper and telegraph communication; nationalized the railroads; created three new states without the consent of the citizens of those states in order to artificially inflate the Republican Party’s electoral vote; ordered Federal troops to interfere with Northern elections to assure Republican Party victories; deported Ohio Congressman Clement L. Vallandigham for opposing his domestic policies (especially protectionist tariffs and income taxation) on the floor of the House of Representatives; confiscated private property, including firearms, in violation of the Second Amendment; and effectively gutted the Tenth and Ninth Amendments as well.
As Dean Sprague correctly pointed out in Freedom Under Lincoln, all of these dictatorial acts were bad enough, but their real, long-term effect was to "lay the groundwork" for such unprecedented acts of coercion as military conscription and income taxation.
Hundreds of books have been written about Lincoln the humanitarian, a soft and gentle man. But from the very beginning of his administration he intentionally waged a cruel and unbelievably bloody war on civilians as well as soldiers. As early as 1861, Federal soldiers looted, pillaged, raped and plundered their way through Virginia and other Southern states, completely burning to the ground the towns of Jackson and Meridian, Mississippi, Randolph, Tennessee, and others. Historian Jeffrey Rogers Hummel estimates that some 50,000 Southern civilians were killed during the war, and this number, even if it is exaggerated by a multiple of two, most likely includes thousands of slaves. In his March to the Sea, General William Tecumseh Sherman boasted of having destroyed $100 million in private property and that his "soldiers" carried home another $20 million worth.
In his memoirs Sherman wrote that when he met with Lincoln after his March to the Sea was completed, Lincoln was eager to hear the stories of how thousands of Southern civilians, mostly women, children, and old men, were plundered, sometimes murdered, and rendered homeless. Lincoln, according to Sherman, laughed almost uncontrollably at the stories. Even Sherman biographer Lee Kennett, who writes very favorably of the general, concluded that had the Confederates won the war, they would have been "justified in stringing up President Lincoln and the entire Union high command for violation of the laws of war, specifically for waging war against noncombatants."
Henry Clay’s American System had been vetoed as unconstitutional by virtually every president beginning with James Madison. But as soon as Lincoln took office, with the Southern Democrats absent from Congress, it was finally put into place, literally at gunpoint. In 1857 the average tariff rate was 15 percent, according to Frank Taussig’s classic, A Tariff History of the United States. The Morrill Tariff more than tripled that rate to 47 percent and it remained at that level for decades.
The National Currency Acts nationalized the banking system, finally, and lavish subsidies to railroad-building corporations generated the corruption and scandals of the Grant administrations, just as Southern statesmen had predicted for decades. Income taxation was introduced for the first time, along with an internal revenue bureaucracy that has never diminished in size. All of these policies put a great centralizing force into motion and were the genesis of the centralized, despotic state that Americans labor under today.
The biggest cost of the Lincoln’s war was the death of federalism and states’ rights, the value of which was expressed by John C. Calhoun several decades earlier when he said: "The great conservative principle of our system is in the people of the States, as parties to the Constitutional compact, and our opponents that it is in the supreme court . . . . Without a full practical recognition of the rights and sovereignty of the States, our union and liberty must perish." And they did.

BTW, sorry to be so long. :headbang:

All of that is the fault of the man he followed. Mr. Lincoln, who started the war, and fought it cruelly.

snip etc.

That was Andrew Johnson that followed Lincoln. Andrew Jackson was president 1829-1837.

Lyndon Johnson gets a hard time, without his forward thinking social policies America it is likely that "libral America" would have ceased to exist. He inherited Kennedy's war, who in turn inherited it from Ike. The man was a visionary, to whom America owes a great debt. The thing to remember is Vietnam was political cancer. He dealt with it as best he could.

Best:
1. Abraham Lincoln
2. Thomas Jefferson
3. Ronald Reagan - economic boom of the 80s... is to free enterprise what michael jordan is to basketball. realized that the best way to a strong economy is to keep taxes low on everyone to free up cash, and by doing it this way, you keep sacred the american ideal of financial freedom.
4. Dwight Eisenhower - reasons mentioned above...
5. George Washington - stepped down after two terms... otherwise might presidency have evolved into a monarchial situation, with 30-year presidents?

Worst:
1. Warren Harding
2. Andrew Johnson
3. John Quincy Adams
4. Hoover (Hoovervilles... though it was people's foolishness with the stock market and all those junk stocks, it happened during his time and he didn't do anything about it while the country needed a quick fix, at least)
5. LBJ/Nixon (tie) - I guess it's fitting... LBJ for his mismanagement of the Vietnam conflict; Nixon, for Watergate (though Nixon did some pretty awesome things before Watergate).

That was Andrew Johnson that followed Lincoln. Andrew Jackson was president 1829-1837.

You're right. Although Lincoln and Jackson were quite a lot alike. So, I still believe neither of the Andrews were bad. Just like modern school books blame people in america for buying slaves, instead of blaming the slew of Europeans and New Englanders who brought the slaves here, I will ignore Jackson's crimes, and blame the people who supported him.

For laughs:

It's once again time to review the winners of the annual Stella Awards.
The Stellas are named after 81-year old Stella Liebeck who spilled
coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's. That case inspired
the Stella Awards for the most frivolous successful lawsuits in the
United States.

THIS YEAR'S AWARDS GO TO:


5TH PLACE (TIED):

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $780,000 by a jury of
her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was
running inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving
toddler was Ms. Robertson's Son.

5TH PLACE (TIED):

A man, 19-year old Carl Truman of Los Angeles, won $74,000 and medical
expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr.
Truman apparently did not notice there was someone at the wheel of the
car when he was trying to steal the hubcaps.


4TH PLACE:

Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas was awarded $14,500-and medical
expenses--after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's
Beagle dog. The Beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. The
award was less than sought for because the jury felt the dog might have
been a little provoked. At the time, Mr. Williams, who had climbed over
the fence into the yard, had been shooting it repeatedly with a pellet
gun.

3RD PLACE:

A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, $113,500 after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her
coccyx (tailbone). The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson had
thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier, during an argument.

2ND PLACE:

Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware sued the owner of a Night Club in a
neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and
knocked out two of her front teeth. This occurred whilst Ms. Walton was
trying to sneak in the window of the Ladies Room to avoid paying the
$3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses.

1ST PLACE:

This year's runaway winner was Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma. Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new Winnebago Motor home. On
his trip home from an OU football game, having driven onto the freeway,
he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to
go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the
RV left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued
Winnebago for not advising him in the owner's manual that he could not
actually do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago
Motor home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of
this suit just in case there were any other complete morons buying their
recreational vehicles!



UNBELIEVABLE!

For laughs:

It's once again time to review the winners of the annual Stella Awards.
The Stellas are named after 81-year old Stella Liebeck who spilled
coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's. That case inspired
the Stella Awards for the most frivolous successful lawsuits in the
United States.
~snip~


I love spam!!

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!

The unemployment rate was 25% when FDR took office. December 7, 1941, 9 years later the unemployment rate was 20%. A rush for production for WW2 got us out of the Depression, not FDR.

Worst President of All Time...Lyndon Baines Johnson.

1939: Elected to Congress in what newspapers called a campaign racked by massive fraud. Served on the Naval Affairs Committee.

WW2: Left Congress for Navy and entered as a Lieutenant Commander (3 ranks below Admiral). National Public Radio reported he demanded Gen Douglas MacArthur (Arkansas native) to award him the Silver Star for being in a plane that was fired on June 9, 1942 near Port Moresby. He was discharged shortly after this.

War on Poverty: America has never seen more than a 4% decrease in the poverty rate since Johnson's war on poverty started. $3.500,000,000,000 dollars (that's $3.5 TRILLION) has spent thus far...enough to give every one in the state of and Alaska, Hawaii and Arkansas $1 million cash each.

Micromanagement of Vietnam has already been mentioned. Vietnam was not dropped into his lap. He escalated the war as Kennedy did not. He ground our guys into the soil of Vietnam, into a quagmire. Vietnam brought shame, right or wrong, upon our nation that we have still not shook off.

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!


United States Unemployment rate 5.2%
Social Security return rate 2% interest on your investment, not good enough for me. Iraq, mission not accomplished

Lieutenant Commander (3 ranks below Admiral).This is incorrect.

The progression of U.S. Navy ranks during peacetime:

Admiral
Vice Admiral
Rear Admiral Upper Half
Rear Admiral Lower Half (sometimes Commodore)
Captain
Commander
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant
Lieutenant Junior Grade
Ensign

There are an assortment of warrant officers, but for the sake of simplicity, I won't mention those. Also, enlisted crews are not referred to as ranks in standard naval practice; they're referred to as rates, though that may be falling out of favour at least with the USN.

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!

So then what happened to your decent job, mr objective observer?

And Bush is the worst president ever because you can't get a job? What were you doing during Lincoln's presidency?

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!

I agree. While I'm sure there have been other bad presidents Nixon being one, still, it's different reading about the bad things a president did 100 years ago and living with it today. George. W. Bush is in my opinion the worst president in the history of the USA!

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!

Bush didn't destroy the economy. The recession stemmed from the dot-com bubble burst in 2000. In fact, the recession was already beginning in October of 2000, and the stock market peaked before Bush took office.

The job market is decent, with only 5.1% unemployment, and the economy is growing at a comparable pace to the late 90's.


9/11 cost the US 1,000,000+ jobs, and the collapses of corporations (from excesses during the 90's) did little to help either.

The job market is decent, with only 5.1% unemployment, and the economy is growing at a comparable pace to the late 90's.
Yeah, but it's not quality growth. Buy oil stocks, read Barrons.

I agree. While I'm sure there have been other bad presidents Nixon being one, still, it's different reading about the bad things a president did 100 years ago and living with it today. George. W. Bush is in my opinion the worst president in the history of the USA!

You've hit the nail on the head as to why nobody can call GWB the worst president ever without coming across as a muppet. GWB is the president now. it is impossibel to be subjective about his presidency.

Yeah, but it's not quality growth. Buy oil stocks, read Barrons.

Well, "quality growth" is hard to define. Many of the gains during the 90's could not be called "quality" because the income gap widened faster than ever and economic inequality grew.

You've hit the nail on the head as to why nobody can call GWB the worst president ever without coming across as a muppet. GWB is the president now. it is impossibel to be subjective about his presidency.

While that certainly does make sense, I still get the feeling history will not be kind to Mr. Bush.

1) Lincoln
2) John Adams (You and your Alien and Sedition Acts :mad:)
3) Grant
Don't worry, FDR is still somewhere up there

I have one, that I think every person here can all equally hate.

Andrew Jackson.

Andrew Jackson is my favorite US President ever.

William Henry Harrison. He made a long boring speech in the rain, got sick, ate up money trying to get better, then he died. As a person, he was O.K., but his Presidency sucked.

Best President in modern Times: President Clinton (from an outsiders POV), he has got to be the best statesmen ever.

Worst President in modern times: Nixon, the watergate affair!? Vietnam, pure paranoia over the USSR, escalating Tensions again, the list goes on...

Well thats what a Brit thinks!

Graham Harvey

For laughs:

It's once again time to review the winners of the annual Stella Awards.
The Stellas are named after 81-year old Stella Liebeck who spilled
coffee on herself and successfully sued McDonald's. That case inspired
the Stella Awards for the most frivolous successful lawsuits in the
United States.

THIS YEAR'S AWARDS GO TO:


5TH PLACE (TIED):

Kathleen Robertson of Austin, Texas, was awarded $780,000 by a jury of
her peers after breaking her ankle tripping over a toddler who was
running inside a furniture store. The owners of the store were understandably surprised at the verdict, considering the misbehaving
toddler was Ms. Robertson's Son.

5TH PLACE (TIED):

A man, 19-year old Carl Truman of Los Angeles, won $74,000 and medical
expenses when his neighbor ran over his hand with a Honda Accord. Mr.
Truman apparently did not notice there was someone at the wheel of the
car when he was trying to steal the hubcaps.


4TH PLACE:

Jerry Williams of Little Rock, Arkansas was awarded $14,500-and medical
expenses--after being bitten on the buttocks by his next door neighbor's
Beagle dog. The Beagle was on a chain in its owner's fenced yard. The
award was less than sought for because the jury felt the dog might have
been a little provoked. At the time, Mr. Williams, who had climbed over
the fence into the yard, had been shooting it repeatedly with a pellet
gun.

3RD PLACE:

A Philadelphia restaurant was ordered to pay Amber Carson of Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, $113,500 after she slipped on a soft drink and broke her
coccyx (tailbone). The beverage was on the floor because Ms. Carson had
thrown it at her boyfriend 30 seconds earlier, during an argument.

2ND PLACE:

Kara Walton of Claymont, Delaware sued the owner of a Night Club in a
neighboring city when she fell from the bathroom window to the floor and
knocked out two of her front teeth. This occurred whilst Ms. Walton was
trying to sneak in the window of the Ladies Room to avoid paying the
$3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 and dental expenses.

1ST PLACE:

This year's runaway winner was Mr. Merv Grazinski of Oklahoma City,
Oklahoma. Mr. Grazinski purchased a brand new Winnebago Motor home. On
his trip home from an OU football game, having driven onto the freeway,
he set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to
go into the back and make himself a cup of coffee. Not surprisingly, the
RV left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Mr. Grazinski sued
Winnebago for not advising him in the owner's manual that he could not
actually do this. The jury awarded him $1,750,000 plus a new Winnebago
Motor home. The company actually changed their manuals on the basis of
this suit just in case there were any other complete morons buying their
recreational vehicles!



UNBELIEVABLE!

Can't beat the US Justice system can you! Absolutly ridiculous culture, i mean are all these law suits really necessary, it is creating your compensation culture, whcih is harming your countries image, and making everyone laugh at you! Sooo stupid!

Is there not a women in the States suing McDonalds because their food made her fat and there were no warning signs!? OMG, how much warning do you need, its on the TV all the time on what you should and should not eat, McDonalds being in the should not eat section! aghhhh

Rant over.

Graham Harvey

Yea it is....loser..

Anyway, the worst would either be Jackson or Bush, but mainly jackson for what he did to the native tribes and such. Terrible president, just horrible.

Moron :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5:
Heron-Marked Warriors, your post history shows a marked tendency to attack the poster, not the argument. Change that attitude fast, Mister. You won't last long around here as a flamer, I assure you.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator
The One-Stop Rules Shop

This unique campaign saved 800 million lives, according to Mr. Hoover.

Did hoover actually say this? A food-aid program saving about 1/4th of the worlds current population(at that time)?

In my humble opinion...

Worst
#3 - GW Bush
#2 - Richard Nixon
#1 - Lyndon Johnson

Best
#3 - Dwight Eisenhower
#2 - Abraham Lincoln
#1 - Thomas Jefferson

(Note: George Washington would be #1+++++)

Most underrated
Jimmy Carter

Most overrated
Woodrow Wilson

I can agree with that list.

You're right. I have checked my sources and found that the plan to feed the Germans had been prepared by former president Herbert Hoover, and presented to Truman, begging for mercy for the Germans. Please read the text below.

And sorry for the inaccuracies.

""Mr. Hoover called for mercy to Germany.

"I can only appeal to your pity and your mercy...Will you not take to your table an invisible guest?"

Canadians and Americans set the table for the invisible guest.

According to prime minister Mackenzie King's chief foreign-affairs adviser, Norman Robertson, Canada was the only country that had kept its food commitments to help the starving. Only in Canada did rationing and price controls continue long after the war so that others could be fed.

This unique campaign saved 800 million lives, according to Mr. Hoover.

Some older Germans treasure the memory of the "Hoover *Spiese* (food) that warmed their bodies at school in 1947. Many millions--including hundreds of thousands of Canadians born in Germany--also remember their homes in parts of Germany now under Polish or Russian rule. None dreams of reparations; all yearn for us to know their story.""


PS: I still love Eisenhower's style. He was a complex man.

I'm pretty sure it wasn't the Germans but one of the countries the Germans had conquered and it was during WW1

I'm pretty sure it wasn't the Germans but one of the countries the Germans had conquered and it was during WW1
How about the fact it's written "1947" in this article, and that you can make a Google search if you're not too lazy.


Here's a ref.
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/hoover/documents.php?page=3

How about the fact it's written "1947" in this article, and that you can make a Google search if you're not too lazy.


Here's a ref.
http://www.trumanlibrary.org/hoover/documents.php?page=3

So really Hoover managed to feed a starving country twice, because there was a relief effort during WW1 headed by Hoover

I'm not American, can someone tell me what crimes these presidents committed?

FD Roosevelt? WTF?

There was that incident of racially condemning tens of thousands of innocent American citizens and interning them in hastily built concentration camps.

While that certainly does make sense, I still get the feeling history will not be kind to Mr. Bush.

No, but I doubt he will be condemned as the worst president ever in 50 years time. They'll be too busy calling the current one that. ;)

3 Best
#3 Hoover
#2 Reagan
#1 Eisenhower

3 Worst
#3 Kennedy
#2 Johnson
#1 :D Harrison

well, i'm not from there, but if you don't mind me chipping in my two cents:

3 best:

3: Ike
2: FDR
1: Jefferson
Honorable Mention - Jimmy Carter

3 worst:

3: Hoover
2: Jackson
1: Nixon
(dis)Honerable Mention - GWB

I'm new, I appologise.

It's quite easy this one really, FDR is probably the greatest although the expansion of powers he gave the president has had terrible effect on US politics today, but much like the writers of the constitution, he couldnt see the ramifications of his actions into the future and really it was all about right then, seeing as he basicly saved the US in my opinion he should get the top spot.

On the flip side we have Hoover, whom as far as i can tell did absolutely nothing.


Of the two ive lived through and can rememeber (I'm rather young im afraid) Clinton's presidency was the more enjoyable (well, obviously compared to Bush really) and the fact he knew about diplomacy, America was in pretty good stead at that time if my information is correct.

If it wasn't for Theodore Roosivelt we wouldn't have the Natonal Park System. So i give him props for that.

FDR, no question.
A careful, unprejudiced analysis of the great depression reveals that, while FDR didnt cause the depression, the country had encountered similar causes in the past that didnt last nearly as long. Hoover's tariffs, Federal Reserve monetary mismanagement, and FDR's New Deal policies all helped to extend the monetary deflation/depression for a decade.
Every "job" that any spending program created only resulted in less jobs elsewhere. If putting money in one location creates jobs, taking that money from other places obviously destroys them. No positive "job creation" ever happened, only more reliance on political "generosity".
Tripling taxes just simply isnt a very good idea in that kind of a situation. But something had to pay for Roosevelt's ridiculous spending.

And we are still cleaning up FDR's mess
The tax-funded Savings and Loans scandals were enabled by deposit insurance, the cost estimated to be over $1 Trillion for these alone.
"Social Security," a giant ponzi scheme that forces people to rely on the government, is estimated to cost even more.

I would appreciate if anyone can name a single New Deal program that did what it was supposed to do, without causing a disproportionate amount of harm.

CCC

If it wasn't for Theodore Roosivelt we wouldn't have the Natonal Park System. So i give him props for that.

...yeah, all roosivelts are pretty good.

Kennedy-Called himself a jelly donut in German while visiting West Berlin

Washington-Too many lies such as the cherry tree

Lincon(sp)-Overrated

edited-I placed FDR instead of kennedy oops

Nixon. Him and his buddy Kissinger should be sent to Chile and tried for war crimes. While we're at it, send Reagan to Nicaragua, Carter to El Salvador, Clinton to Sudan, LBJ to Vietnam and the Dominican Republic, JFK to Cuba, Ike to Iran and Guatemala, and Truman to Japan.

Oh, and let's not forget W. and H.W....

I'm sticking with the worst few presidents being Hoover, Carter, and LBJ, by a mile. I'm sticking with the stupidest people being those who place Bush Jr. in the top five worst presidents, especially since his dad was worse. Anyone who places Bush, Clinton, or Bush Jr. in the top or bottom 5 is one of two things: historically ignorant or young.

Jimmy Carter's presidency:

Supported the actions of Ayatollah Khomenei while he was resideing in France. 66 American hostages taken by Iranians. Carter ordered a fantastically complicated rescue mission which was a disaster further tarnishing America's name in the global community.

Economic recession, double digit inflation and interest rates. This started the Savings and Loan crisis.

Protested when Marxist Robert Mugabe (Archbishop Desmund Tutu called him "caricature of an African dictator") was not allowed to participate in elections in Zimbabwe (the Rhodesia). <google search Mugabe>

Prohibited Americans from participating in the Moscow Summer Olympics in 1980.

Gave away the Panama Canal Zone. A corporation owned by the Peoples Liberation Army of China manages it today. They can cut off half of the American fleet and shipping at the push of a button.

Kowtowed to OPEC resulting in oil shortages and great loss of face to America.

Campaign Promise: Find the truth about the UFO coverup.

Supported the government of Indonesia when they were committing genocide against citizens in East Timor.

Post Presidency: Awarded Nobel Peace Prize for convincing North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons by bribing them with Indonesian coal and oil paid for by the US.

His failures thrilled those that hate America but he didn't work for those folks, he worked for us.

I don't know about the worst president, but the worst candidate was William Jennings Bryan.

I don't know about the worst president, but the worst candidate was William Jennings Bryan.

Stupidest "Lawyer" in American history too...

Worst: Harding, followed by Nixon

Most Dislikeable: Bush Junior

Most Underrated: Carter

Most Overrated: Kennedy

So then what happened to your decent job, mr objective observer?

And Bush is the worst president ever because you can't get a job? What were you doing during Lincoln's presidency?

Well now...what was I doing during Lincoln's presidency?? Unless I was in a past life of which I have no knowledge, I was not yet born during Lincoln's presidency.

As to my decent job? It's rather a long story, I'll try to condense it...

November 2002, I returned from a vacation in Thailand to my decent job, only to learn that my company had lost their bid to retain the State contract we worked on. We had about a year left to work.

April, 2003, the new company had an open house seminar with all of us from the old company, and recruited us to come work for them when our contract had ended. We were assured that, though the salary structure would change, that we would, most of us, be making more than we had previously, and not less. They were going to a piece-rate salary plan as opposed to the hourly rate we were currently paid on. At this point I was making $10.50 an hour. When asked, in this meeting, what they thought their piece-rate would work out to, on an hourly rate, we were told it would be between 11 to 16 bucks an hour, with the company-wide average targeted to 13 bucks an hour.

Septeber 2003, I and several of my co-workers were offered jobs with the new company once our duties with the old company were completed. Naturally, I accepted the position, as I believed it would pay me at the same, or better rate than I was currently making.

December 2003 - Began with the new company. they started us all at a "training wage" of $9.50 an hour. This was explained as "temporary" until they got a handle on what production was, so that they could fix a fair piece-rate (so, already, I was now making $1 per hour less than I had been making for doing the same work!!) I accepted this at the time, since it was temporary, and we were again assured our pay rate would at least be comparable to what we had been making. again, they brought up the figures of 11 to 16 bucks an hour, with an average of 13 bucks an hour.

February, 2004 - Piece-rates introduced...and they universally sucked. The company-wide average on these piece rates was nearly 8 bucks an hour, my own rate was $9.25 an hour, approximately. Many employees complained, and we were placed back on the "training wage" until the issue could be looked at and resolved.

April, 2004 - Piece-rates rolled out again, this time, they were even worse than the first set! In some cases, the rates had been cut in half! They claimed, because of new "efficiencies" built into the system, that these rates would be adequate. The company average was found to be nearly 7 bucks an hour, and my own personal rate was just over 8 bucks an hour.

When I complained about this, and asked them where the 13 bucks an hour was...they said "Prove we ever said that...where's it in writing? Prove it! Prove it! Prove it!" I presented the CEO of the company with a letter signed by 23 co-workers who were also at that meeting in April, 2003 and who remembered hearing the same thing. Still nothing was done to correct the rates.

Towards the end of the month, a memo went out to the effect that the rates were where they were going to be, and that they might even get lowered further if new "effeicincies" were built into the system.

It was then I realized I was on a George Jestson-esque slidewalk yelling "Help! Jane! Stop this crazy thing!!" and that my only reward for working harder was going to me more work...not more money. If we all got more efficient, they were going to lower our rates...and the memo even said so.

So, here I was now, making a full $2.50 less an hour for dooing the same work...meanwhile, we were getting killed with overtime, and had been since January...we had been working a mandatroy 24 hours a week of overtime on top of the 40 hour work week. And all that for $2.50 less an hour.

We were lied to and cheated...we were decieved. By lying to us about the salary, they had taken away our ability to make an informed decision about our own career futures. If they'd been honest, and up-front, at that meeting in April, 2003, I would have had 8 months, while still employed...to look for a different job...and a nice, safe layoff with unemployment benefits if I was unsuccessful. Instead, I was forced to quit, due to unsatisfactory work conditions.

Therefore, I was denied unemployment benefits. Until I earned six times my weekly benefit rate at alternative employment...which I finally did manage to do. I delievered newspapers, and did what little temporary work I could find.

And the kicker? Just before I left the company...we were all informed it was a requirement of this company that we all take a business ethics course. And this course was to be taught by the company. Imagine, the company that lied to us about our salary expectations teaching US about business ethics!!

And this was a Fortune 500 company, incidentally. Last I checked, they were number 447. And now I know how they got to be a Fortune 500 company - by screwing their employees!

And, I have not had a decent-paying, steady, permanent job since I walked out of that company in April 2004. It is now June 2005 (and really, for all practical purposes, it is now July, 2005.) That is now 15 months working shit temp jobs when I could get them, for substandard pay, and subsisting on that and unemployment.

THAT is what happened to my decent job. And all made possible by Bush and his policies of outsourcing so many jobs as to drive down wages in this country to the point where the new company was able to get away with shenanigans like that! wouldn't have worked for them in the mid-late 90's when jobs were plentiful...they woulda had people walking out on them in droves, and getting new jobs within weeks! and they wouldn't have been ABLE to play Mickey Mouse with our salaries!

And so NOW you know why I hate George Fucking Dumbya Bush...asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!! He fucked up my life, he fucked up my career, he is a fucking King Sadim (reverse Midas - everything HE touches turns into a great big pile of shit!!)

Bush didn't destroy the economy. The recession stemmed from the dot-com bubble burst in 2000. In fact, the recession was already beginning in October of 2000, and the stock market peaked before Bush took office.

The job market is decent, with only 5.1% unemployment, and the economy is growing at a comparable pace to the late 90's.


9/11 cost the US 1,000,000+ jobs, and the collapses of corporations (from excesses during the 90's) did little to help either.

Well, the "decent job" I mentioned...I got in August, 2001. The economy wasn't noticibly slowing down, to me...until after 9/11.

Second, you say the job market is decent. From that, I know YOU aren't a job-hunter...you got a nice little job, so of course YOU think it's decent.

Well, in Clinton's time, the unemployment rate was around 2.1 or 2.2 percent.

Fourth, that 5.1 percent rate you mention does not include any of the "discouraged workers" who have quit looking for work...and all those who are not collecting U/E benefits are not inculded...or those who have exhausted their benefits are not included in your 5.1 percent.

Fifth...if the economy is growing at a pace comparable to the late 90's then where's the fucking JOBS that were there in the late 90's!!?? Where are they?!!? No, the economy might be growing, but the average American worker is not benefitting from a growing economy, only the uber-wealthy are. so who gives a shit about the economy?

Is the Average working Joe doing better or worse now than in the late 90's? Well, I saw something about how the buying power of the average American had fallen 9.2 percent from just last year, so maybe you can answer that question.

No, spin it how you like, Bush is King Sadim...everything he touches turns into a great big pile of shit! The economy, Iraq...and now he wants us to trust his ass with Social Fucking Security?!!?!? BULLSHIT!!!

No, but I doubt he will be condemned as the worst president ever in 50 years time. They'll be too busy calling the current one that. ;)

Not if the current one is a Democrat.

Basic rule of thumb:

Democrat = good for America, good for workers, good for the common man

Republican = good for nobody except the uber-wealthy, at the expense of the common man.

I don't know about the worst president, but the worst candidate was William Jennings Bryan.

I could go along with that, although Aaron Burr was a piece of work, too.

In no particular order:

Dishonest Abe
F.D.R. (Fascist Dictatorial Rogue)
H.S.T. (Harebrained Soviet Tool)
D.D.E. (Dumb, Dinglefritz, Extremely overrated)
J.F.K. (Jolly Friend of the Kremlin)
L.B.J. (Loser, Bolshevik, Jackass)
R.M.N. (Raving Mad Nut)
G.F.R. (Goofball, Fool, Retard)
J.E.C. (Jolly Eccentric Communist)
R.W.R. (Reallysenile Wowishesenile Reallysenile)
G.H.W.B. (God-awful Harebrained World-government Bringer)
W.J.C. (Womanizer Jackass Criminal)
G.W.B. (Guy Without Brains)

Jimmy Carter's presidency:

Supported the actions of Ayatollah Khomenei while he was resideing in France. 66 American hostages taken by Iranians. Carter ordered a fantastically complicated rescue mission which was a disaster further tarnishing America's name in the global community.

Economic recession, double digit inflation and interest rates. This started the Savings and Loan crisis.

Protested when Marxist Robert Mugabe (Archbishop Desmund Tutu called him "caricature of an African dictator") was not allowed to participate in elections in Zimbabwe (the Rhodesia). <google search Mugabe>

Prohibited Americans from participating in the Moscow Summer Olympics in 1980.

Gave away the Panama Canal Zone. A corporation owned by the Peoples Liberation Army of China manages it today. They can cut off half of the American fleet and shipping at the push of a button.

Kowtowed to OPEC resulting in oil shortages and great loss of face to America.

Campaign Promise: Find the truth about the UFO coverup.

Supported the government of Indonesia when they were committing genocide against citizens in East Timor.

Post Presidency: Awarded Nobel Peace Prize for convincing North Korea to abandon nuclear weapons by bribing them with Indonesian coal and oil paid for by the US.

His failures thrilled those that hate America but he didn't work for those folks, he worked for us.

Carter was a real piece of shit.

oh so many choices...

Number 1 worst.... Buchanan (the President before Lincoln).. sat on his ass while Pro South members of his cabinet set the stage for the Civil War, failed to make any serious attempt to prevent the split and final secession, and generally made no effective attempt to prevent the worst war in American history.

Number 2... Cooledge, who sat on his hands while the economy of the United States overheated, ignored advice from the Federal Reserve that things were getting serious, allowed the passage of several tariffs that led to a general tightening of trade world wide (a direct cause of the Great Depression), ignored the plight of the farmers who even before the Depression spent most of the 20s in serious trouble (the Dust Bowl was just the final straw), and then poor Hoover was in office a mere 7 months when the Crash finally came. The ripples of that crash went world wide.

Grant and Harding are tied for the most corrupt administrations in history (as far as actual criminal convictions having to do with just plain old greed), Harding had the potential to get dragged down with his advisors but had the fortune to die. Poor Grant was betrayed by a lot of his friends and family.

Nixon .... Watergate is such a serious scandal because he essentially tried to interfere with the electoral process and then lied about it. However, he did secure a number of very real achievements for the US during his Administration. Poor bastard, if he had simply had more faith in himself he would be numbered among the more effective Presidents in American history.

Other Presidents had their problems, but none of them did the real damage that Coolidge and Buchanan did, nor did anyone else leave the kind of disaster waiting in the wings for their successors.

Even LBJ, who would be number five on my list because of the Vietnam War policy decisions he made still didn't leave things in so bad a mess that they couldnt be dealt with relatively easier than the Civil War or Depression.

Well now...what was I doing during Lincoln's presidency?? Unless I was in a past life of which I have no knowledge, I was not yet born during Lincoln's presidency.

~snip~

And so NOW you know why I hate George Fucking Dumbya Bush...asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!! He fucked up my life, he fucked up my career, he is a fucking King Sadim (reverse Midas - everything HE touches turns into a great big pile of shit!!)

That was the short version?? WTF?? Anyway, WTF? Nothing to dowith Bush. The company screwed you over, not Bush. Grow up.

Wouldn't Sadim turn everything to dlog?

Nixon .... Watergate is such a serious scandal because he essentially tried to interfere with the electoral process and then lied about it. However, he did secure a number of very real achievements for the US during his Administration. Poor bastard, if he had simply had more faith in himself he would be numbered among the more effective Presidents in American history.

The thing is that Nixon didn't actually interfere with the election process. Watergate was just one of many things that he and his people were doing, and he was in the dark about Watergate specifically. He did quite a few other relatively underhanded things, but Watergate wasn't one of them - besides, what President doesn't? What got him in trouble is that after the whole Watergate scandal was uncovered, he tried to protect the chronies of his that got caught, and he got screwed for it.

No contest. George W. Bush

He tanked the fucking economy to the point I can't find decent work anymore.

He wants to screw people out of their Social Security.

He lied us into a war that, to date, has gotten over 1,700 of our servicemen and women killed (mission accomplished my ass!)

General all-around asshole, liar, thief, cheater, and in it all for his cronies to rob the Treasury blind!

I never had this kind of trouble finding a decent job when CLINTON was President.

Fuck GWB!! Asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!!!

ah, yes, another democrat who thinks that the president runs the economy.

Tell me EXACTLY what Bush did to keep you out of work.

The fact that you blame your joblessness on the president shows me that you're not one who takes responsibility for himself.

You probably never had trouble finding a job when the intern-plugger was in the office because of the tech boom, which Clinton had nothing to do with.

What I hope you'll take out of this lesson is that the American economy is not a control economy (like communists use) and, thus, is not controlled by the government. Nay, our economy is controlled by people like you and me (consumers), investors, and companies/entrepreneurs.

As for screwing people out of their social security.

Here's another free lesson... I'll call it the Time Value of Money lesson:

The money you're forced to put into social security (thanks FDR), since a president long ago didn't think you'd be smart/diligent enough to plan your own retirement savings, presently simply sits there, gathering no interest.

Since it gathers no interest, it loses value over time... because while your stagnant money simply sits there, there is this constant thing called inflation. Inflation decreases the buying power of money... so that we have to make more money to keep the same standard of living -- to be able to buy the same things, live in the same house/apartment, etc.

Inflation in the United States is generally about 2%-3% annually.

So one dollar you put into the current social security system will really only be worth about 97-98 cents a year from today.

Imagine all the money you've been forced to put into social security over the years... and how much value all of it has lost because it has not grown to offset the effects of inflation.

Example:
Suppose you made $10,000 25 years ago. Let's say $400 of that went into social security (4% of income).

Now let's say that 25 years ago, that $400 would have bought 20 pairs of good shoes.

If you were to take that same $400 out today, it might buy ten pairs of good shoes. Or five.

You see what I'm saying? Social security is like putting your savings under your mattress -- it can gain no interest and thus, loses buying power over time, as inflation decreases its value.

President Bush wants to give you the option of putting some of your social security money into stocks and/or bonds (not sure on the details of investment possibilities), where it stands a great chance of gaining interest and thus offsetting the cheapening effects of inflation.

IF you still don't like it, remember:

a)If passed, the investment plan will be optional
b)You won't be able to blame late-life poverty on him, since you were given the chance to invest money that otherwise would have simply sat there, losing value over time. Also... you've had your entire life to save money for retirement... if we can't retire comfortably in this country, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

Now that you understand more about this, are you still going to call him names without providing any reasoning behind your hatefulness?

ah, yes, another democrat who thinks that the president runs the economy.

Tell me EXACTLY what Bush did to keep you out of work.

The fact that you blame your joblessness on the president shows me that you're not one who takes responsibility for himself.

You probably never had trouble finding a job when the intern-plugger was in the office because of the tech boom, which Clinton had nothing to do with.

What I hope you'll take out of this lesson is that the American economy is not a control economy (like communists use) and, thus, is not controlled by the government. Nay, our economy is controlled by people like you and me (consumers), investors, and companies/entrepreneurs.

As for screwing people out of their social security.

Here's another free lesson... I'll call it the Time Value of Money lesson:

The money you're forced to put into social security (thanks FDR), since a president long ago didn't think you'd be smart/diligent enough to plan your own retirement savings, presently simply sits there, gathering no interest.

Since it gathers no interest, it loses value over time... because while your stagnant money simply sits there, there is this constant thing called inflation. Inflation decreases the buying power of money... so that we have to make more money to keep the same standard of living -- to be able to buy the same things, live in the same house/apartment, etc.

Inflation in the United States is generally about 2%-3% annually.

So one dollar you put into the current social security system will really only be worth about 97-98 cents a year from today.

Imagine all the money you've been forced to put into social security over the years... and how much value all of it has lost because it has not grown to offset the effects of inflation.

Example:
Suppose you made $10,000 25 years ago. Let's say $400 of that went into social security (4% of income).

Now let's say that 25 years ago, that $400 would have bought 20 pairs of good shoes.

If you were to take that same $400 out today, it might buy ten pairs of good shoes. Or five.

You see what I'm saying? Social security is like putting your savings under your mattress -- it can gain no interest and thus, loses buying power over time, as inflation decreases its value.

President Bush wants to give you the option of putting some of your social security money into stocks and/or bonds (not sure on the details of investment possibilities), where it stands a great chance of gaining interest and thus offsetting the cheapening effects of inflation.

IF you still don't like it, remember:

a)If passed, the investment plan will be optional
b)You won't be able to blame late-life poverty on him, since you were given the chance to invest money that otherwise would have simply sat there, losing value over time. Also... you've had your entire life to save money for retirement... if we can't retire comfortably in this country, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

Now that you understand more about this, are you still going to call him names without providing any reasoning behind your hatefulness?
Except for the slight fact that social security isn't effected by inflation as the money it gets goes out the door (either through the government using it or it being paid to retirees) and the money that you will get will be, in essence, 'fresh money' that was just paid by the current lot of workers.

James Garfield.
The reasons why he sucked hasve long been debated and established, lets just says that he sucked a golf ball through a garden hose. He sucked like a gay hooker doing overtime. he sucked like...well, you get my point

Cool someone agrees with me on Jackson. Man that guy was a terrible human being. You forgot to mention the fact that he chose Van Buren, the worst eyesore in the history of politics, as his Vice President.
http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/amer_pol_hist/fi/00000091.htm (http://)

FDR, Lincoln and Washington are the three most important and effective Presidents in US history because they literally prevented the United States from falling apart. Washington made the constitution work, and put down the Whisky Rebellion using due process and set the stage for everything that followed. Of course as a General he literally held things together for the Revolution to work but we are just talking about actions as President here.

Lincoln won the Civil War and kept the US united.

FDR gave hope and kept the country together during the worst economic crisis in American and indeed World history, prevented the extremists from gaining power (like they did elsewhere), and then guided the US and the Allies to victory in World War II (with help from Churchill and Stalin of course).

Eisenhower managed to prevent on several occasions major crisis from becoming World War III during the worst days of the Cold War.

Truman did the same.

those are some of our best Presidents....

the worst of the lot are the ones who through inaction or action led the US into disaster or near disaster... Cooledge and Buchanan (see earlier post)

or were clearly corrupt or too incompetent as leaders to prevent corruption and didn't have any acheivements to offset their poor leadership... Grant, Harding

even Nixon and LBJ had real and important achievements, while Carter at least wasn't corrupt (not terrifically effective, but no corrupt). Clinton, although impeached is much like Johnson (Abes successor). They were impeached for purely partisan reasons because elements of the Republican party dominated the House and wanted it done and they had sufficient personal failings as men to leave themselves vulnerable to that kind of attack.

Our current President is still in office, so the jury is out on whether he will join the list of effective or bad Presidents.

United States Unemployment rate 5.2%
Social Security return rate 2% interest on your investment, not good enough for me. Iraq, mission not accomplished

May I mention something completely amazing?

the unemployment rate, is, to the public, 5.2%. However, what most people don't know is that the unemployment rate only counts unemployed people looking for jobs. People that have given up are not counted. I don't know what the real unemployment rate is, but... it's gotta be much higher.

Oh, and I'd say that GW Bush is worst.

there are the obvious reasons, like destroying the economy (Republicans are right, it was tanking before he came into power - however, he didn't help did he?), Launching a war in a Iraq where he lied to the American people about reasons (The white house has given, like, 5 different reasons for invading), where over 120,000 Iraqis have died (more than saddam killed, and mostly civilian), where 1,700 servicemen and women have died, not counting special forces, where MANY more have been wounded, where Donald Rumsfeld admits we could be stuck for 12 more years, where we are fighting for oil (we are guarding oil wells more closely than weapons facilities... this war is for oil), Making the wealthy richer while the poor get poorer, trying to put corrupt officials into positions of power, (bolton, judicial nominees... those nominees are extremely right-wing, not to mention his regular cabinet), trying to destroy social security while the real problem is medicare, as all economists agree upon, destroying the sympathy we had from the world after 9-11, and using Orwellian tactics to advertise idiotic plans ("clear skies, healthy forests") that are the opposite of their names, breaking the constitution with his patriot act. Then there are the numerous outright lies that he has told to the American people... Saddam was in cahoots with Bin Ladin? ya know, Bin Ladin actually requested aid from Saddam... and Saddam refused. Oh yeh, and did I mention that he allowed the US to become a major human rights offender? And has labled anything that opposes him as anti-american? Oh, and he has the lowest IQ of any president. like 92 or something.

Then there is the overall badness that he's done, which is destroying American values. His campaigning style - labeling and attacking your opponent rather than focus on what you're going to do (note, this style of campaigning was mostly due to rove) has made America distrust it's politicians, and has given us a bleak view of the future. Combine that with a war that we were lied to about, us learning about major human rights abusements, and failure everywhere, not to mention the extreme propaganda we are getting from both sides, although mainly from Republicans, and his breaking of the constitution with the patriot act, and we lose almost all hope for our country. We are a recently started empire that is already in decline, due to one person - George W Bush. I would say that already he has done much more bad than other presidents, too much to make him good at all - too corrupt for that. Plus, I doubt he will get any better as this second term progresses. His track record is too bad, and now that it is his second term, he knows he can do anything, which is why he left social security alone in his first term.

He also cheated in both elections, but I won't get into that - I need to go for one thing, and I would take up an entire page listing what he did.

some might not like FDR because he introduced wide-spread socialism to the United States.

I wouldn't rank him as one of the worst, however, because he DID help lead the country out of the great depression (with little understanding of how money works... a miracle, really) and didn't mess up WW 2.


Shows that you don't know how money works either. That widespread socialism sure seems popular in Europe doesn't it? Why is socialism treated like a bad word? I mean, Social Security is the ONLY income for most retired people in the US today. What is the other option, that they starve to death? Seriously, conservatives and libertarians make themselves out to be assholes with comments like this.

Don't you fucking treat me like a child, you Bush-lover! You got your nose so far up the Republicans that if they made a quick left, you'd break your nose, wouldn't you?

You fail to understand that, by implementing policies making it profitable and easy to move jobs overseas, he (Bush) has contributed to there being fewer jobs in America. Thus, there are more people looking for work...and more desperate.

Thus, employers are able to pay less, because they will find some poor schlimp willing to work for substandard wages.

Therefore, it IS Bush's fault that my decent job became an indecent job...and it IS Bush's fault that I cannot find another decent job.

He fucked the economy royally. For everyone but the uber-wealthy, anyway.

No wonder corporations love Bush...his policies make it possible for them to screw their employees!

No, YOU need to learn...what Bush does, with his policies, creates ripples that cause other events...and the ripples affect everyone in this country...most of us, in a negative way, too.

OK, so Bush isn't personally standing in the way of me getting a job...but his policies are making it so that jobs are scarcer and scarcer...and good jobs are nearly non-existent!

It is because of Bush's policies that we have come to this point...and so, yes, I BLAME BUSH!!

It's his fucking fault...every bit his fault. His policies made it all possible, and that makes him as guilty as if he did it himself.

Word!

That's way to true. If he actually gave a damn about the people he would put a huge 'outsource' tax. (1x # of Oversea's workers. in $$$) With people over seas being paid at max 10 cents. That would add up to a -.90 Per outsourced person. Sounds good to me. :D And it would balance the budget even!

Originally Posted by Matchopolis
United States Unemployment rate 5.2%
Social Security return rate 2% interest on your investment, not good enough for me. Iraq, mission not accomplished

Sure 95.7% are working but the quality of jobs are down. I've seen collage grads working at Burger King! I can imagine. "Hi I'm Dr.______ can I take your order?" Newest Business phase to learn: "Do you want fries with that?" Because that's our fate if it keeps up.

One thing as a TRUE centerist i respect about the democratic party.

They can make anything positive look negative.

unemployment around 5%?

oh well thats because those that quit looking arnt counted!!!! of course a totally unprovible or disprovible factoid. Which we all know the motto for the american media....if it cant be disproved then it is true.

Give the OPTION for somebody to put some of their money from SS into the stock market..

Play a card to make it sound totally terrible for americans to have the freedom of choice and basically say the average american is too much of an moron to make a decision for himself

Another thing i admire is the rabid loyalty of their fanbase. I say fanbase because thats truely what democratic voters are.....cheerleaders that repeat what they are told to repeat. I always found that intresting, if you debate an issue with one democratic guy youve debated with them all cause they will all use the same arguements, and they are always from another source usually a higher up in democatic party, or from the american media

of course those on the right do it to a certain extent as well. but when ive debated them they at least for the most part bring up different ideas.


Anyways, worst prez IMHO...

Carter (only based on his handling of Iran, and the fact that he got his butt whooped in his re-election election)

I dont really know too much about the earlier prezs so i cant make much of them.

[QUOTE=The Lone Alliance]That's way to true. If he actually gave a damn about the people he would put a huge 'outsource' tax. (1x # of Oversea's workers. in $$$) With people over seas being paid at max 10 cents. That would add up to a -.90 Per outsourced person. Sounds good to me. :D And it would balance the budget even![QUOTE]


I recommend you watch the outsourcing documenty that appears on discovery times now and then. It focuses on IT jobs outsourcing to India, i was against it till i saw that and saw what effect it has on the people on the otherside. Contrary to what you have been told, not every outsourced job means the person on the other side is getting a sweatshop salary. I just graduated btw......

Unlike the guy above i prepaired myself since i was a sophmore, making sure i had the best qualifications and coming to understanding that a good job isnt a 'right' it is something you actually have to work and prepare for, not just expect because you finished college. Which i believe is the MAJOR problem with people these days.

Best: None of them!

Worst: All of them!

WORST US PRESIDENTS

These two are related aren't they?

http://portland.indymedia.org/icon/2003/07/268482.jpg

http://www.medaloffreedom.com/RichardMNixon.gif

A President has only slight control over our economy. That is up too the People. Litterly. You don't buy things, Economy goes down. You buy, Economy goes up. That simple.

Hes our Comander And Cheif. Not the Supreme High Comander of all the American People. The most control he has is in the Armed Forces.

This love affair with Jimmy Carter is turning my stomach. My father had a thriving small business until Mr. Carter took over. I had to get a job when I was 13 to pay the rent (I mowed lawns-IN TEXAS-IN THE SUMMER!!).
The economy stagnated. Inflation and unemployemnt were double digit. Mr. Carter's inspiring response to the oil crisis was to tell everyone to buy a sweater and turn down their heaters. He talked about a national 'malaise' and did nothing about it.
The Iranians invaded American soil in Tehran and he twisted in the wind for 444 days. (The day that they sent those helicopters into rescue the hostages and they crashed, was also the day of my grandfathers funeral.)
Egypt/Israeli peace treaty-the two parties agreed on everything and then needed someone to pay for it all. The Russians couldn't do it because they were broke. That's what Jimmy accomplished. They agree not kill each other if the US taxpayer will pay them not to?! WTF!
Where does this man's halo come from? What did he accomplish for his country? What great vision did he have that was brought to fruition?
Now he goes around certifying elections for tin pot dictators like Hugo Chavez and talking shit about the country he damn near ran into the ground. What moral high ground does he have claim to do such a thing?
He is the worst President and ex-President his country has had in the entire 20th Century, and there were some bad ones.

A President has only slight control over our economy. That is up too the People. Litterly. You don't buy things, Economy goes down. You buy, Economy goes up. That simple.

Hes our Comander And Cheif. Not the Supreme High Comander of all the American People. The most control he has is in the Armed Forces.

Yeah, well...maybe if we had decent jobs, and therefore a decent income we WOULD buy things. But we don't buy things because we have shit jobs that pay crap. If we're lucky.

Because all the good jobs are getting outsourced overseas so that the robber barons can pay Indians and Pakistani's ten percent of what they'd have to pay an American to do it.

And then they wonder why Americans aren't out buying more shit??

Simple: THEY DON'T HAVE THE FUCKING MONEY TO BUY SHIT, THANKS TO THE ROTTEN FUCKING ECONOMY!!

This love affair with Jimmy Carter is turning my stomach. My father had a thriving small business until Mr. Carter took over. I had to get a job when I was 13 to pay the rent (I mowed lawns-IN TEXAS-IN THE SUMMER!!).

awww, poor fucking baby. I got your ass beat! During the Reagan years...when I was fifteen...my dad had a roofing business. Things got so bad I ended up having to spend my summers working on his roofing crew, for minimum wage, and, when money was short, guess who went without their paycheck? The rest of the crew got paid, but I didn't.

And let me tell you, buddy, there is nowhere on EARTH hotter than a black pitch roof in the middle of a TEXAS SUMMER. And yes, this was in Austin, too, as a matter of fact...I am a Crockett Alumnus, class of 1989.

If you know of an apartment complex on 38 1/2th street, just east of IH35...that, at the time was called "The Rampart?" Well, the roofs of those motherfucking apartments was where I spent the summer of 1986. I rode my bicycle 12 1/2 miles one way, every day, to get to the worksite (my father would not take me in the company truck) and then spent my day hauling 90-pound rolls of Nord-Bittumi roofing material up to those hot fucking roofs, made all the hotter by the Texas summer...and the fact that this material was applied with a blowtorch!!

So you got all my sympathy for mowing fucking lawns at 13 in a Texas summer. I know what it's like. you blame Carter for your unfortunate circumstances. I blame Reagan for mine back then.

And I blame Bush for mine now.

All's I can say is I never hurt, economically, when a DEMOCRAT was in the White House. I have universally suffered, economically, when a REPUBLICAN was in the White House.

So I'm a yellow-dog Democrat now. Fuck Republicans. They suck.

A President has only slight control over our economy. That is up too the People. Litterly. You don't buy things, Economy goes down. You buy, Economy goes up. That simple.

Hes our Comander And Cheif. Not the Supreme High Comander of all the American People. The most control he has is in the Armed Forces.

I agree with you.

However, fyi, the title is Commander In Chief

awww, poor fucking baby. I got your ass beat! During the Reagan years...when I was fifteen...my dad had a roofing business. Things got so bad I ended up having to spend my summers working on his roofing crew, for minimum wage, and, when money was short, guess who went without their paycheck? The rest of the crew got paid, but I didn't.

And let me tell you, buddy, there is nowhere on EARTH hotter than a black pitch roof in the middle of a TEXAS SUMMER. And yes, this was in Austin, too, as a matter of fact...I am a Crockett Alumnus, class of 1989.

If you know of an apartment complex on 38 1/2th street, just east of IH35...that, at the time was called "The Rampart?" Well, the roofs of those motherfucking apartments was where I spent the summer of 1986. I rode my bicycle 12 1/2 miles one way, every day, to get to the worksite (my father would not take me in the company truck) and then spent my day hauling 90-pound rolls of Nord-Bittumi roofing material up to those hot fucking roofs, made all the hotter by the Texas summer...and the fact that this material was applied with a blowtorch!!

So you got all my sympathy for mowing fucking lawns at 13 in a Texas summer. I know what it's like. you blame Carter for your unfortunate circumstances. I blame Reagan for mine back then.

And I blame Bush for mine now.

All's I can say is I never hurt, economically, when a DEMOCRAT was in the White House. I have universally suffered, economically, when a REPUBLICAN was in the White House.

So I'm a yellow-dog Democrat now. Fuck Republicans. They suck.

You still haven't explained how EXACTLY Reagan affected your life. WTF did Reagan, the most pro-business president perhaps in American history, specifically do to hurt your (or your father's) roofing business?

Could it be that there was simply a random decrease in people who needed their roofs fixed?

Or an increase in competition? Was the competition offering better prices to roofing customers?

He sure as hell wasn't paying higher taxes on his business...

There could be myriad reasons why the family business didn't prosper under republicans, none of which can be that it was because of the republican presidents. That's absurd. Go get an MBA and figure out why your business suffered.

Useless s grant he was a briliant general but horrible president

Yep, good old US Grant swung the tide of the Civil War with ruthless resolve in the West, but he was not a politician.

Yep, good old US Grant swung the tide of the Civil War with ruthless resolve in the West, but he was not a politician.If you ask me its because he trusted his friends to much even though they were just interested in there own selfish gains.

I'm reading Grant's Memoirs now... lol that book is huge.

At any rate, when I get to the part about his presidency, which should be (hopefully) not more than three years from now, I'll let you know what he had to say about the job he did as Prez.

------------------------------------------------

Lyric

The president does not control the economy, for good or bad.

The 90s were good because of the tech boom; stocks were overvalued and began to drop about the summer of 2000 -- Clinton had nothing to do with either.

Bush inherited the tech bust and a faltering DOW, and then 9/11 hit us and we've been recovering (financially) ever since.

IT IS NOT THE PRESIDENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO RUN THE ECONOMY. WE ARE NOT A COMMUNIST COUNTRY (in which government calls all the economic shots and runs the businesses), NOR ARE WE A TOTALITARIAN REGIME (in which one dude calls all the shots, more or less).

If you want to believe that one man has such control -- and actually want to be right in believing that -- go live in Cuba. Go find out what happens to economies when Communism is in force.

As for jobs going overseas, i need to ask you something:

If you wer a business executive and your #1 concern was providing value for shareholders... and the #1 way to do that was to show a profit... and given that:

R - E = P (Revenue - Expenses = Profit)

and Labor is an expense....

Would you be willing to pay $20 an hour to americans to do the same work (or slightly better work; our labor is effective) as someone in Punjab would be willing to do for $3 an hour?

Think about that. Our labor is very good, but it's expensive as hell (great job, unions... way to outprice the competition), and when executives have to turn a profit to keep the company solvent, cheap labor becomes (in some industries) a viable option.

Personally, if I ever started my own company, I would only employ americans. I would imagine that the vast majority of executives would (and do) employ Americans if it were at all economically possible.

The bad news is, whatever our government decides to do about outsourcing, someone will get hurt:

If we pass laws that eradicate or limit companies' flexibility in hiring practices, we are not only possibly sentencing some of them to death -- and when companies go down, nobody wins -- but we are also sending an anti-free enterprise message that goes against the American business ideal (that being, that businesses should be more or less free to operate as they see fit).

If we don't limit overseas labor-hiring, we are leaving many American workers out in the cold.

There is no easy solution.

When Reagan came into office my dad quit his other job and then a few years later we moved out of the roach infested, shithole (there was literally shit in our front yard because the septic tank and plumbing were broken) we had been living in during Carter. I got to quit mowing lawns and, more importantly, I got to see my dad again. My dad went from being the night dispatcher and janitor for a trucking company in New Braunfels and is getting ready to retire as the VP of Sales and Maketing for the same company. ONLY IN AMERICA! But not during Jimmy Carter's American Malaise Tour.

This one is for Lyric, since we're telling sob stories:
My dad always had a job lined up for me during the summer. He had friend who was plumber so they agreed that I would work for him that summer, working for minimum wage (I was 9-so the minimum wage was about $2.50/hr. then). My first day, he had me humping PVC across the rebar grid (you know way it looks before they pour the foundation), digging holes, basically every crap job than needed to be done so that the Mexicans could do more productive work. I remember he yelled at me a lot to move faster, dig deeper, etc., and the Mexicans kept giving me water.
I got pretty fed up with that asshole by lunch, which I had forgotten to bring with me. So he took me to a honky tonk that served burgers. He drank beer. I ordered a burger, fries and a coke. Then another coke. Then another coke. And another.
We worked a few more hours and when it came time to pay me he reached into his wallet and pulled out $10 and gave it to me. I thought he was joking. I asked him where the rest was and he said, "In your belly."
The next day I slept late and went swimming with my friends in Barton Creek.

THAT is what happened to my decent job. And all made possible by Bush and his policies of outsourcing so many jobs as to drive down wages in this country to the point where the new company was able to get away with shenanigans like that! wouldn't have worked for them in the mid-late 90's when jobs were plentiful...they woulda had people walking out on them in droves, and getting new jobs within weeks! and they wouldn't have been ABLE to play Mickey Mouse with our salaries!

And so NOW you know why I hate George Fucking Dumbya Bush...asshole from the ninth plane of HELL!! He fucked up my life, he fucked up my career, he is a fucking King Sadim (reverse Midas - everything HE touches turns into a great big pile of shit!!)


It is not the president's fault that companies outsource, nor is it the president's responsibility to prevent layoff's, he has no control over it. In the 4 1/2 years Bush has been president, I have found absolutely no problem finding a job, and this is in a state that is very much anti-business.

Lincoln is overrated. He freed the slaves, now hear me out on this one. I'm not saying that there should be slavery, not at all. But basically, what he did was send a large group of people (the slaves) out into the free world with no formal education, no place to work, no place to live, etc. Basically putting them out there to provide for themselves when a nice chunk of them had no real means to provide for themselves. There was no real plan for the slaves after they were freed. Yes, they were freed, but freed into what? Total confusion.

Launching a war in a Iraq where he lied to the American people about reasons (The white house has given, like, 5 different reasons for invading), where over 120,000 Iraqis have died (more than saddam killed, and mostly civilian), where 1,700 servicemen and women have died, not counting special forces, where MANY more have been wounded, where Donald Rumsfeld admits we could be stuck for 12 more years, where we are fighting for oil (we are guarding oil wells more closely than weapons facilities... this war is for oil), Making the wealthy richer while the poor get poorer, trying to put corrupt officials into positions of power, (bolton, judicial nominees... those nominees are extremely right-wing, not to mention his regular cabinet), trying to destroy social security while the real problem is medicare, as all economists agree upon, destroying the sympathy we had from the world after 9-11, and using Orwellian tactics to advertise idiotic plans ("clear skies, healthy forests") that are the opposite of their names, breaking the constitution with his patriot act. Then there are the numerous outright lies that he has told to the American people... Saddam was in cahoots with Bin Ladin? ya know, Bin Ladin actually requested aid from Saddam... and Saddam refused. Oh yeh, and did I mention that he allowed the US to become a major human rights offender? And has labled anything that opposes him as anti-american? Oh, and he has the lowest IQ of any president. like 92 or something.

Then there is the overall badness that he's done, which is destroying American values. His campaigning style - labeling and attacking your opponent rather than focus on what you're going to do (note, this style of campaigning was mostly due to rove) has made America distrust it's politicians, and has given us a bleak view of the future. Combine that with a war that we were lied to about, us learning about major human rights abusements, and failure everywhere, not to mention the extreme propaganda we are getting from both sides, although mainly from Republicans, and his breaking of the constitution with the patriot act, and we lose almost all hope for our country. We are a recently started empire that is already in decline, due to one person - George W Bush. I would say that already he has done much more bad than other presidents, too much to make him good at all - too corrupt for that. Plus, I doubt he will get any better as this second term progresses. His track record is too bad, and now that it is his second term, he knows he can do anything, which is why he left social security alone in his first term.

He also cheated in both elections, but I won't get into that - I need to go for one thing, and I would take up an entire page listing what he did.

He did not lie about WMDs in Iraq. You are ignorant if you think that. Guess who said these following quotes?

1. "We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.Constitution and Laws, to take necessary actions, (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs."

2. "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

3. "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue a pace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

4. "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

The list can go on.... the quotes are from 1. John Kerry and Tom Daschle in 1998, 2. Nancy Pelosi in 1998, 3. A 2001 letter to Bush urging him to go to war in Iraq, signed by Bob Grahm and Joe Lieberman, 4. Ted Kennedy in 2002.
If you want to say Bush lied, than so did everyone because we all thought it was true, even before Bush presented his evidence. Bush was misinformed, and he only told what he knew, that is not lying.


120,000 iraqi civilians have not died, the number is around 15,000. Most of those are from suicide car bombs from other Iraqis. And yes, Special Forces are included in the death count... I don't know how far up your ass you had to dig to get the information, but you are wrong. We have only lost a very small amount of them.

The reason why we are guarding oil wells is not to keep it, it is to guard them from attack. Oil is the primary economic resource from Iraq, and the insurgents bombing it hurts the development of Iraq, so we need to guard them. Bombing oil wells in Iraq is the equivalent of bombing car factories and electronics plants in Japan.

And if you want to purse swing by saying Bush has the lowest IQ, which is most likely not true: (http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bliq-bush.htm) I will say this, Kerry's IQ is lower, he did worse in college.

You guys try to make a point, but if people were smart and did research, they would find Democrats are just as guilty. Quit your damn purse swinging and grow up.

Punta Irwin:

I am not denying that he did what you say. The problem is that 1) you're looking at him through the lens of the 21st Century. That's not a good way to judge a presidency. You're not looking at the issue in the context of the times in which it existed. 2) Most labor back then didn't require an education. The job training program consisted of: here's a shovel, stick it in the ground, throw what's in the shovel somewhere besides where it came from and repeat for 12 hours.

Most of them escaped (the whites still needed them to work their land so they intimidated and lynched anyone who tried to leave) to the north where the industry was and found jobs there. Others escaped West and founded farming communities. The people who stayed continued to do what they had been doing under pretty much the same conditions.

You still haven't explained how EXACTLY Reagan affected your life. WTF did Reagan, the most pro-business president perhaps in American history, specifically do to hurt your (or your father's) roofing business?

Could it be that there was simply a random decrease in people who needed their roofs fixed?

Or an increase in competition? Was the competition offering better prices to roofing customers?

He sure as hell wasn't paying higher taxes on his business...

There could be myriad reasons why the family business didn't prosper under republicans, none of which can be that it was because of the republican presidents. That's absurd. Go get an MBA and figure out why your business suffered.


Why would I want an MBA to be another bloodsucking corporate apologist? I'm going for a J.D. so I can one day be a corporate ball-breaking attorney, and represent the little guy against the oppression of corporations.

I'm reading Grant's Memoirs now... lol that book is huge.

At any rate, when I get to the part about his presidency, which should be (hopefully) not more than three years from now, I'll let you know what he had to say about the job he did as Prez.

------------------------------------------------

Lyric

The president does not control the economy, for good or bad.

SNIP

As for jobs going overseas, i need to ask you something:

If you wer a business executive and your #1 concern was providing value for shareholders... and the #1 way to do that was to show a profit... and given that:

R - E = P (Revenue - Expenses = Profit)

and Labor is an expense....

Would you be willing to pay $20 an hour to americans to do the same work (or slightly better work; our labor is effective) as someone in Punjab would be willing to do for $3 an hour?



Wellnow, here's the fallacy in your argument. Bush has supported policies that have made it not only possible...but profitable, to move the jobs overseas. This has, therefore, indirectly caused unemployment to become higher here, affecting our economy in a deleterious manner.

As to your rhetorical question about if I were a business executive, here's my reply to that...

Providing more value to shareholders is fine...except when you do it at the expense of American workers!

This putative business executive of whom you give example...who wants to provide better value to his shareholders...is being penny-wise and dollar-foolish. He is robbing the American worker of a livelihood, and thus, Americans are not going to be able to afford the goods or services the executive's business produces. Thus, eventually, the business will make less sales, and thus, have less profit.

In the short term, it'll look good on paper, sure, but what about the long-term effect on the company when Americans can no longer afford the goods or services the company in question is producing, because there are no longer any decent-paying jobs here?

Basically, the executive who acts in the manner you described is failing to see the forest for the trees. Unfortunately, most executives these days now have those very same blinders on. they see the short-term gain, and it makes the balance sheet look pretty for now...but what of the long-term effect?

When Reagan came into office my dad quit his other job and then a few years later we moved out of the roach infested, shithole (there was literally shit in our front yard because the septic tank and plumbing were broken) we had been living in during Carter. I got to quit mowing lawns and, more importantly, I got to see my dad again. My dad went from being the night dispatcher and janitor for a trucking company in New Braunfels and is getting ready to retire as the VP of Sales and Maketing for the same company. ONLY IN AMERICA! But not during Jimmy Carter's American Malaise Tour.

This one is for Lyric, since we're telling sob stories:
My dad always had a job lined up for me during the summer. He had friend who was plumber so they agreed that I would work for him that summer, working for minimum wage (I was 9-so the minimum wage was about $2.50/hr. then). My first day, he had me humping PVC across the rebar grid (you know way it looks before they pour the foundation), digging holes, basically every crap job than needed to be done so that the Mexicans could do more productive work. I remember he yelled at me a lot to move faster, dig deeper, etc., and the Mexicans kept giving me water.
I got pretty fed up with that asshole by lunch, which I had forgotten to bring with me. So he took me to a honky tonk that served burgers. He drank beer. I ordered a burger, fries and a coke. Then another coke. Then another coke. And another.
We worked a few more hours and when it came time to pay me he reached into his wallet and pulled out $10 and gave it to me. I thought he was joking. I asked him where the rest was and he said, "In your belly."
The next day I slept late and went swimming with my friends in Barton Creek.


Don't blame you there! But, again, if you were making $2.50 an hour...and worked 8 hours, that would be 20 bucks. And if your food came to 10 bucks, he didn't stiff ya. But he shoulda told you he was taking the lunch outta your pay. I woulda walked on him, too. Barton Creek, eh? I've some fond memories of that place! Loved it. Nothing better than on a hundred-plus degree day to just get on the diving board and plunge right into that constant 68-degree water! cooled ya off in a helluva hurry, eh?

It is not the president's fault that companies outsource, nor is it the president's responsibility to prevent layoff's, he has no control over it. In the 4 1/2 years Bush has been president, I have found absolutely no problem finding a job, and this is in a state that is very much anti-business.

But the President should have the interests of THE AMERICAN PEOPLE first and foremost. And his policies should reflect that. In this President's case, it is obvious he has put the interests of BIG BUSINESS ahead of the interests of THE PEOPLE. His policies have made it easier, possible...and profitable...to outsource jobs to other countries...and that eventually comes back to harm the American worker...and the economy, because, as more and more people are unemployed...or forced to work for a substandard wage...the demand for products and services go down...the American consumer is not as willing to SPEND as once he was...and the downward spiral continues.

Seems to me a President should be supporting policies that benefit the American people...and the American worker...because, in turn, that will cause the economy to do better, as Americans are generally pretty rabid consumers when they have the spare money. they aren't gonna hang onto it if they got enough. They will spend it back into the economy.

But, if they don't have enough...then they will NOT spend...and the economy stagnates.

Short-term gain for the company, in terms of labor costs. Long-term loss for the company in terms of net sales...and thus, the profits go down, too. The problem is...too many businesses are seeing only the short-term...and failing to realize what the long term negative impact of this practice will be.

Sadly companies have found that it's easier to make profits by screwing your employees for the shareholders than actually selling your products. I think the econmy would improve if all of the Fat Cat Ceo's and upper Management of the outsourcing companies fell into a coma tomorrow.

Grant and his Era of Good Stealing.... Ohhh, it makes me laugh.

Jimmy Carter. "He's histories greatest monster!" :P