The worse U.S. President

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Timexwatch

Why not? I said his postpresidency activties not withstanding, he was, at most, impotent as a President.

Carter was naive when he became president, and suffered for it right through the 1980 election even though he was a fast learner and set the country on a good foreign and military policy path. A lot of the groundwork for the rebuilding of the U.S. military, the resumption of U.S. activity in the Cold War, and U.S. policy in the Arabian Gulf were laid by the Carter administration, even though they were played out under his successors to a much more generally realized degree. His sucess with the Camp David accords was a masterstroke, not only generating a lot of good press for Carter and the U.S., but also strategically in reigning in hostile states like Lybia and Syria.

[Odin]

how the heck was carter naive?

[ixnay]

Comedy "William Henry Harrison" Option.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by orange

Re: Wilson
Racism alone does not make you a bad president. LBJ for instance was a major racist in his words and speech, but look at what he tried to do about poverty and he did rule during the most powerful times of the civil rights movement...as long as you don't apply Racism to your actions, it matters not what you think of other races.

What words and what speech are you referring to?

I have read material where a historian has argued that LBJ was anti-racist, due to his contribution to trying to meet the demands of civil rights activists.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Du_Chateau
I thought this would be a war between Hoover and Buchanon.

Then why did you add Clinton and Bush?

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Odin
how the heck was carter naive?

Carter thought that by playing nice, the world would pay respect to the US. Well, under his admin, the US got fvcked around by every little thug out there. He eventually recognized the mistake, restarted the military buildup such as the Peacekeeper missle program. But it was too late for him to win back voters.

He should not have become the President, the post of the American President is not meant for good/nice people.

[Swissy]

Buchanan by far. If he put in half the effort either Clinton or Bush have put into their presidencies, the Civil War could have been avoided.

[Ramo]

Re: Wilson
Racism alone does not make you a bad president. LBJ for instance was a major racist in his words and speech, but look at what he tried to do about poverty and he did rule during the most powerful times of the civil rights movement...as long as you don't apply Racism to your actions, it matters not what you think of other races.

Wilson was one of the most imperialistic Presidents we've had. Unquestionably, he applied racism to his actions.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I thought this would be a war between Hoover and Buchanon.

Why Hoover? He was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. He actually did try something (the Reconstruction Finance Corportion). It was too little too late, but the most radical thing that was done to that point.

there was one famous picture of one of his secret police agents pointing a gun at somebody's head

Most misinterpreted photo of all time. The shooter was a general and the shootee was a spy. The general had to shoot the spy because he was in front of his troops and couldn't just let the spy go! That would have provided a bad example.

Odin: Sikander is right, on both accounts. It seems you have a rosy view of Kennedy and Carter. Perhaps you were reading the tabloids of how good Kennedy was? Kennedy and Carter were probably the two MOST unprepared Presidents we've ever had. They had no idea what they were doing.

As for Reagan, I'd vote for him for one of the best. The busting of the unions is one of the pluses for me . That, and his rhetoric of government being the problem changed the national consensus on size of government, and forced the Dems to move to the right to get elected, which moved the middle more to the right .

[David Floyd]

Most misinterpreted photo of all time. The shooter was a general and the shootee was a spy. The general had to shoot the spy because he was in front of his troops and couldn't just let the spy go! That would have provided a bad example.

I'm not sure how that justifies summary executions.

[CapitanGarlic]

Hoover or Reagan. I'll leave the arguing for my case to other people, as they all do it better than me.

I'm just surprised by how popular Reagan is -- I assume it's mostly because he was shot (as being shot increases one's popularity immensely) and lived, unfortunately.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'm not sure how that justifies summary executions.

Treason by a person in your unit.

In a state of war, that justifies it to me. Cannot have a lack of discipline on the lines. There is no right to a 'fair trial' a. while you are on the front and b. in a country without that right proscribed.

[David Floyd]

Treason by a person in your unit.

In a state of war, that justifies it to me. Cannot have a lack of discipline on the lines. There is no right to a 'fair trial' a. while you are on the front and b. in a country without that right proscribed.

I agree with you, if by treason you mean the person trying to kill you or somehow cause your death. That's legitimate self defense under any circumstances. If by treason you mean betraying the country, I don't think that's a valid excuse for execution (summary or otherwise).

Further, if he was drafted or forced into the military (I'm actually not sure what specific instance we're talking about, I'm just talking about summary executions and treason in general), a summary execution would be invalid under any circumstances - if someone forced me into the military, I'd see no problem with shooting my way out of it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

If by treason you mean betraying the country, I don't think that's a valid excuse for execution (summary or otherwise).

That's nice... but what does it matter that you don't think it's valid? Are you ever going to be in a position to make a decision on it?

Furthermore, since he was giving information about troop movements, they are saving their troops lives by killing the spy.

Further, if he was drafted or forced into the military (I'm actually not sure what specific instance we're talking about, I'm just talking about summary executions and treason in general), a summary execution would be invalid under any circumstances - if someone forced me into the military, I'd see no problem with shooting my way out of it.

And I'd see no problem with them shooting you .

[David Floyd]

That's nice... but what does it matter that you don't think it's valid? Are you ever going to be in a position to make a decision on it?

Not really and probably not

And I'd see no problem with them shooting you

Oh, you'd say that anyway