Americans: Which Presidents from the other party do you admire?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Will9
I have a queston for Dems: WHER IS REAGAN ON YOUR LISTS?

Absent; as for the reason, feel free to choose between his astrologer, his appointments of James Watt and Ed Meese, his general indifference to poor Americans, and -- my favorite -- Iran-Contra. Next question?

[DRoseDARs]

The dead ones. Can't hate a corpse.

[Bosh]

Well with Lincoln he's the only leader EVER (as far as I know) who allowed real elections to take place during a civil war.

[Will9]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Absent; as for the reason, feel free to choose between his astrologer, his appointments of James Watt and Ed Meese, his general indifference to poor Americans, and -- my favorite -- Iran-Contra. Next question?

What about the war on drugs, ending the Cold War, being elected Greatest American, and my favorite 525 to 13.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Lincoln

What's your problem with W again? It can't be anything to do with a lack of respect for civil rights or the US Constitution.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Will9


What about the war on drugs,

You're right - that's another reason to keep him off the list.

ending the Cold War,

His role in this is overrated, but its still a plus. Not enough for me to overlook all teh minuses and admire him, though.

being elected Greatest American,

By whom, and in what venue? At any rate, opinions of majorities gave us Bush and American Idol...so, no.

my favorite 525 to 13.

Doing something as simple as beating Walter Mondale isn't cause for admiration...

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What's your problem with W again? It can't be anything to do with a lack of respect for civil rights or the US Constitution.

My basic problem with him is competence. Lincoln didn't respond to the secession of the South by invading Canada, after all.

[DinoDoc]

So there are times when you believe it is alright, admirable even, to trample on the Constitutional rights of Americans and use the document for toilet paper?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ninot
Nixon: Terribly underrated for some of the things he accomplished.

QFT

[Odin]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
So there are times when you believe it is alright, admirable even, to trample on the Constitutional rights of Americans and use the document for toilet paper?

The Constitution clearly says that certain extra-constitutional things (such as suspension of Habeas Corpus) are allowed in rebellions and insurrections or if the US is invaded. The US isn't being invaded and there is no civil war here that I'm aware of...

[Odin]

Lincoln
T. Roosevelt
Ike

[LordShiva]

History Forum

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Odin
The US isn't being invaded and there is no civil war here that I'm aware of...

You of all people should be glad Bush isn't Lincoln. Anti-war Democrats got hauled before Military Commissions in his day.

Also if the situation was as clear cut as you say, why did Lincoln feel compelled to ignore Court rulings against his dictatorial grab for power.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Odin
The Constitution clearly says that certain extra-constitutional things (such as suspension of Habeas Corpus) are allowed in rebellions and insurrections or if the US is invaded.

And Lincoln went well beyond that. Even Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus was illegal. And they are allowed in rebellions and insurrections and wartime.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I don't think I have a party anymore, though I have to say Andrew Johnson unfortunately benefits from certain historians reading of his administration. He was pure scum and one of the worst Presidents this country has ever had. Willing to trample on rights of former slaves to have a "lenient reconstruction", he vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which was designed to counter the fact that Johnson's appointed governments in the South all passed Jim Crow laws. It was overriden, fortunately. He vetoed the 14th Amendment, but was overridden again.

Both were considered moderate proposals, and supporting them would have put power in moderate hands, which would have led to a more speedy re-admittance of Southern states. But by vetoing both, he gave power to the radicals in Congress (which were far, far less horrible than some would like to portray them... I mean equality for blacks is generally not considered evil these days).

His only redeeming quality is that he bought Alaska. Otherwise, he was a spectacular failure. His impeachment may have been a sham, but Hell, he deserved to go.