or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Best President of your country ancient and modern age
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best President of your country ancient and modern age - Page 3

post #81 of 160
...in fact he did absolurely nothing for a very long time
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #82 of 160
Since we keep debating all the bad things that he did, would anyone like to clarify and explain the good things that Reagan did? I fail to see any mention of anything good through out this forum.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #83 of 160
Andrew f'ing Jackson?!!!! The same f'ing president who booted the Cherokee of their land EVEN after the Supreme Court ordered him not to?? -- "I'm the one with the army." So much for the "law of the land."

What a total f'nut of a president. I HATE THAT GUY WITH A PASSION. Glad he's dead.
post #84 of 160
Nostradamus, THANK YOU! I am not alone!
Being an American in Canada Ill rate both

Modern:
US: Clinton (hmmm... Bush, Regan or li'l Bush are the other choices...)
Canada: Treadeu (SP?), this guy was the MAN!

Ancient
US: FDR, bloody cool guy. Though Clinton got in shit for playing with a cigar, FDR had rooms for his mistrises in the whitehouse. After that maybe Thomas Jefferson ("Beer is proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy")

Canada: Tough one, I really dont think that I could pick one out of the bunch.
Those who dance the dance must look very foolish to those who can't hear the music
Reply
Those who dance the dance must look very foolish to those who can't hear the music
Reply
post #85 of 160
[quote] FDR... I only wish he was president today because mircosoft would have a reason to fear the government. <hr></blockquote>
Nah, Teddy R. would have shut M$ down.
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
post #86 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by jhtrih:
<strong>
Nah, Teddy R. would have shut M$ down.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Interestingly enough, while TR was known as the "Trust Buster", Taft actually broke up more trusts. (just thought I'd share that random tidbit of information)
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #87 of 160
I'll vote for Reagan too.

First, he actually made American's feel proud to be American and wasn't part of the hate/blame America first crowd. He was also very good at communicating why socialism is actually bad...he came from the left, he lived and trained in it (Hollywood) and then left it for serious reasons...reasons which people die over. He stood his ground no matter what it cost him.

Plus, like it or not, it was his economic policies which created the boom in this country, the boom which Bush and Clinton both enjoyed.

As for Clinton, he's the reason parents had to explain what a blowjob was to 7 year old children. He had a total lack of any measure of personal responsibility. And as for terrorism, his responses to Somalia, the embassy bombings, and the Cole were a direct impact on the WTC attacks.
post #88 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by 1seaside1:
<strong>As for Clinton, he's the reason parents had to explain what a blowjob was to 7 year old children. He had a total lack of any measure of personal responsibility. And as for terrorism, his responses to Somalia, the embassy bombings, and the Cole were a direct impact on the WTC attacks.</strong><hr></blockquote>
More "blame America first" from the right-wing.
post #89 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by 1seaside1:
<strong>As for Clinton, .... And as for terrorism, his responses to Somalia, the embassy bombings, and the Cole were a direct impact on the WTC attacks.</strong><hr></blockquote>

To be fair ... I read <a href="http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=100001670" target="_blank">this</a> yesterday and found it very interesting.

[quote]<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/10/politics/10HOST.html" target="_blank">They Shoulda Shot</a>
The New York Times (link requires registration) has a timely reminder of what it was like when America was too timid to defend its interests. The paper interviews Rodney Sickman, who was a Marine guard at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran when terrorists took it over in 1979:


On orders from his superiors, Sergeant Sickmann did not so much as lob a tear gas grenade at the mob coming to occupy the embassy. Now he thinks he and his fellow guards should have started shooting.

"Had we opened fire on them, maybe we would only have lasted an hour," he said. But if he and 51 others had died there, rather than becoming hostages for the next 444 days, "we could have changed history," he said, by sending the message that Americans could not be attacked without cost. Instead, he said, the surrender sent the message that there was no penalty for attacking the United States.

"If you look back, it started in 1979; it's just escalated," he said in an interview.
<hr></blockquote>

Clinton's polls didn't tell him to fight the war on terror. But none of the other presidents acted that well either.

[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
post #90 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>
More "blame America first" from the right-wing.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Wake the eff up. Clinton dropped the ball when it came to dealing with terrorism. If he'd have taken Sudan's offer when they were prepared to turn bin Laden over, nobody would have been able to even think about "wag the dog".

I also think Reagan had a hand in encouraging terrorists with his screwed up effort in Lebanon. He at least undid some of that damage with the raid on Libya.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #91 of 160
My beef with Clinton stems from Somalia. Even though public reaction and Congress urged him to get out, the message sent was simple: kill a few American soldiers and we pack up and leave. Total lack of political will and totally driven by poll numbers. The outcome then affected how Bosina was conducted, from the air so no soldiers were killed. Terrorists notice this behavior and few it as weak.
post #92 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>
More "blame America first" from the right-wing.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No it's more "Blame Clinton First". Which is easy because he ****ed up so bad.
post #93 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:

More "blame America first" from the right-wing.<hr></blockquote>

Hee hee.
post #94 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>

No it's more "Blame Clinton First". Which is easy because he ****ed up so bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>

How so? (Your cryptic bashing isn't really enlightening any of us)
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #95 of 160
I posted in the other thread. If you have to ask what Clinton ****ed up then you need to read some old news papers.
post #96 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by Timo:
<strong>Hee hee.</strong><hr></blockquote>Yeah, that was my Scott_H-like response. It's kinda fun, actually; I can see why he does it. It just ticks people off and you don't have to really say anything of substance yourself.
post #97 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>I posted in the other thread. If you have to ask what Clinton ****ed up then you need to read some old news papers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, then, I responded to the other thread, and I read the newspaper on a daily base. I just tend to let the facts cloud my reasoning.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #98 of 160
"Blame Clinton First" is a goot retort. You should hang on to that one.
post #99 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>No it's more "Blame Clinton First". Which is easy because he ****ed up so bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>Wake the eff up. Clinton dropped the ball when it came to dealing with terrorism.</strong><hr></blockquote>You guys think it's OK to blame America, as long as it's an American you don't like. Clinton, homos in San Francisco, whoever your bad guy is, it's their fault. (And what is it with political discourse from right-wingers that they can't avoid emotional arguments and **** words.)

Let me ask you guys something - do you blame Bush too? He did absolutely nothing regarding terrorism for 9 months into office, and then under his watch we got nailed worse than any other time in history. Clinton did take several actions, and was criticized by the right-wing for taking those actions at all. And Clinton prevented a terrorist action on the scale of 9/11 (the Millennium bombing plot). Bush is more to blame than Clinton, if you're going to play that game.

But I personally blame the terrorists themselves for terrorism. You guys blame other Americans.
[quote]If he'd have taken Sudan's offer when they were prepared to turn bin Laden over, nobody would have been able to even think about "wag the dog".<hr></blockquote>
That was in what - 1994? Years before the Embassy bombings and the Cole. Sure, that would have been great, in hindsight. They had him expelled instead, and he just went to Afghanistan to operate, and so it was even harder to get to him. And now the Sudanese say they would have turned him over to us, but do we really know that? No. It could have been just like the Taliban. It's all hindsight.

But if you want to play that game, bin Laden was on the CIA's radar screen even during the previous Bush administration. So both HW and W are at least as much to blame as Clinton, if you're going that route.
post #100 of 160
Who blamed homos besides those twits on TeeVee?


Bush was working on a plan. He didn't get it done fast enough. You could blame him for that but ... he wasn't in office for a year yet. Clinton faded in the face of one terrorist attack after another. He failed to respond. He was not working on a plan of action.

All he worked on what getting a blow job.
post #101 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>
Bush is more to blame than Clinton, if you're going to play that game.

But I personally blame the terrorists themselves for terrorism. You guys blame other Americans.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Right. You blame Bush but you don't really blame Bush.

Do you even read your own words? Have you ever said even one critical thing of Clinton? Do you really think it was an infallible 8 years? Clinton is responsible for his screwups. Holding him accountable for them doesn't mean I think America's enemies shouldn't be held responsible for the evil they do. Why is that too subtle a distinction for you to make?
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #102 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by BRussell:
<strong>
That was in what - 1994? Years before the Embassy bombings and the Cole.</strong><hr></blockquote>

It was after Mogadishu.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #103 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by jhtrih:
<strong>Nah, Teddy R. would have shut M$ down.</strong><hr></blockquote>

We all would hope that would happen.

[quote]Originally posted by agent302:
<strong>Interestingly enough, while TR was known as the "Trust Buster", Taft actually broke up more trusts. (just thought I'd share that random tidbit of information)</strong><hr></blockquote>

Very True.

"Speak softly and carry a big stick, and you will go far." -TR

The best TR quote
"Don't hit at all if you can help it; don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." -TR
hehe, oh this is some good stuff.
post #104 of 160
There's a difference between blaming America and blaming an American.
post #105 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by 1seaside1:
<strong>There's a difference between blaming America and blaming an American.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thank you.

I'm still scratching my head and trying to figure out how blaming "America" as a whole for all of the worlds ills is somehow on par with blaming a specific individual for a specific failing with a specific list of reasons.

But I suppose you have to be a "rational" member of the Left to understand that logic.
post #106 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>

It was after Mogadishu.</strong><hr></blockquote>

And Mogadishu was a terrorist insurgency by Bin Laden's group? I think not. Somalia was more a case of the U.S. overextending itself and intervening in a local Civil War. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Bin Laden or Middle Eastern terrorists.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #107 of 160
[quote]Somalia was more a case of the U.S. overextending itself and intervening in a local Civil War.<hr></blockquote>

So this is the direction the historical revisionists are going to move in?

America was yet again meddling in a place it shouldn't have been?

proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #108 of 160
Actually, there's evidence that much of the militia forces were trained by Bin Laden, specifically in urban warfare and shooting down helicopters with RPG's. I forgot where I read this. I'll look for it; I think it was in a British paper. Anyway, it was a test in US resolve. Clinton failed for 8 years in any form of resolve. Bush, probably because of poll numbers and a search for re-election, but also perhaps he believes in it, is now going after terrorism. You might call it simple-minded, but he has the resolve.

And remember, the original mission in Somalia was to end the famine...it was only after the Marines pulled out and Adid started killing UN soldiers that mission changed to going after Adid.
post #109 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by agent302:
<strong>

And Mogadishu was a terrorist insurgency by Bin Laden's group? I think not. Somalia was more a case of the U.S. overextending itself and intervening in a local Civil War. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Bin Laden or Middle Eastern terrorists.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Bin Laden claimed reponsibility for Mogadishu. Why else would Sudan even think we'd be interested in him in 1994?
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #110 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>

Bin Laden claimed reponsibility for Mogadishu. Why else would Sudan even think we'd be interested in him in 1994?</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's difficult to think of someone claiming responsibility for the acts in Mogadishu. It's not like someone bombed a building. The events in Mogadishu resulted from a fire fight between Army Rangers and Somali rebels. In verges more on an act of war than an act of terrorism, and that's the point I was trying to make. It's inherently different than the attacks on the Cole and the WTC.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #111 of 160
<a href="http://www.fbi.gov/contact/fo/nyfo/pressrels/1998/11041998.htm" target="_blank">The FBI got a grand jury to indict bin Laden</a>, in part for his involvement in Somalia.
[quote]According to the Indictment, several of these fatwahs called for attacks on American troops stationed in Saudi Arabia and Somalia. The Indictment also alleges that American troops in Somalia were indeed attacked and killed by persons who received training from al Qaeda members or those trained by al Qaeda.<hr></blockquote>
But it wasn't until 1998. I'm not sure when they linked bin Laden to Somalia - I don't think it was until a few years after it happened, maybe the mid-1990s. I believe the first act of terrorism they have linked to bin Laden was the first WTC bombing, back in 1993, and that was indirect, and bin Laden was just one of many indirect links.

But he was a known militant after the US made the deal with Saudi Arabia in 1990 to go there after Iraq invaded Kuwait, and bin Laden had opposed the US being there. He slowly became seen as more and more of an important terrorist figure after that, culminating in the late 1990s with the Embassy bombings and then the Cole.

<a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/binladen/" target="_blank">Here's where I get most of my info about him.</a>
post #112 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:

Somalia was more a case of the U.S. overextending itself and intervening in a local Civil War.


So this is the direction the historical revisionists are going to move in?

America was yet again meddling in a place it shouldn't have been?<hr></blockquote>

As far as this goes Agent302 has it right. The mission originally was about famine relief but it changed. And that was a mistake.

We went over there to save lives. We bailed after a firefight in which thousands of Somalis died. Yes, they were fighting for a very bad man but clearly killing Somalis wasn't what we went over there to do. It doesn't matter if you are left, right or center it's hard not to see this as one big cock-up.
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #113 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by roger_ramjet:
<strong>

As far as this goes Agent302 has it right. The mission originally was about famine relief but it changed. And that was a mistake.

We went over there to save lives. We bailed after a firefight in which thousands of Somalis died. Yes, they were fighting for a very bad man but clearly killing Somalis wasn't what we went over there to do. It doesn't matter if you are left, right or center it's hard not to see this as one big cock-up.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thank you
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #114 of 160
He said "Somalia", not any specific incidents within Somalia.

It's only a screw-up if you don't carry out your mission. The mission was to save lives, we pulled out before that mission was accomplished.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #115 of 160
Well, the first mission was to restore the supply line of food to the starving masses. Once that was accomplished, the Marines pulled out and let the UN take over.

The second mission was to capture Adid once he started to target UN and American soldiers. That mission ended when the US pulled out after the firefight which left 18 US soldiers and 500-1000 Somalies dead.
post #116 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by 1seaside1:
<strong>As for Clinton, he's the reason parents had to explain what a blowjob was to 7 year old children. </strong><hr></blockquote>

No, the media is the reason parents had to explain that to children. In fact, parents are the fact that they had to explain that to their children.

Whatever Clinton did with Ms. Lewinskey had nothing to do with what kind of President he was. It made him a bad husband, not a bad President. IMO, this should have stayed out of the media altogether - it was part of his private life which shouldn't be any of our business.

Why do I say blame the media and the parents? JFK had secret servicemen bring prostitutes to the white house, FDR (I believe, it was him... can't remember who at the moment) lived with his mistress while his wife lived with her lesbian lover. There was also the President (again, can't remember who) who was a cross dresser. Yet no one had to go explaining to their 7 year old what a prostitute was, what a lesbian was, why the president didn't live with his wife, or why some men dress up in women's clothing. As none of this had anything to do with the job of President, it was kept out of the media. There, media's fault.

Even if you think that the public has a right to know what's going on in the President's personal life, it is still up to the parents to keep their 7 year old kids from watching the news or reading the newspaper about such matters they would consider inappropriate. There, parent's fault.
Microsoft knows what's best for you, so keep quiet, open your wallet, and be a team player.
Reply
Microsoft knows what's best for you, so keep quiet, open your wallet, and be a team player.
Reply
post #117 of 160
Since when is it okay for a boss to prey on young interns for sex? What planet is there where that's okay? How can a boss be a good boss if he's trying to get some from the interns all the time? Then get them great jobs afterward. What about the girls that wouldn't drop to their knees and suck his cock? What kind of job recommendations did they get? Good ones? I doubt it.

So please don't tell me it has nothing to do with what kind of president he was. Clinton created an environment where sex=promotion/recommendations. That makes him a bad boss and thus a bad president.

It's so fukcing simple I can't understand why people can't see it.

Also when he lied under oath that made him a bad president and then there was that time as president he went on TeeVee and lied to all of us to our faces point blank. That make him a bad president.
post #118 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by Scott H.:
<strong>Since when is it okay for a boss to prey on young interns for sex? What planet is there where that's okay? How can a boss be a good boss if he's trying to get some from the interns all the time? Then get them great jobs afterward. What about the girls that wouldn't drop to their knees and suck his cock? What kind of job recommendations did they get? Good ones? I doubt it.

So please don't tell me it has nothing to do with what kind of president he was. Clinton created an environment where sex=promotion/recommendations. That makes him a bad boss and thus a bad president.

It's so fukcing simple I can't understand why people can't see it.

Also when he lied under oath that made him a bad president and then there was that time as president he went on TeeVee and lied to all of us to our faces point blank. That make him a bad president.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Any bad policies though? You still haven't named any. And don't relieve Monica Lewinsky of all blame; she was a willing participant.
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
"Oh boy, sleep! That's where I'm a viking!"
Reply
post #119 of 160
[quote]Originally posted by agent302:
<strong>

Any bad policies though? You still haven't named any. And don't relieve Monica Lewinsky of all blame; she was a willing participant.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The bad policy being if you suck Bills cock you get a good job. That's a bad way to run an office, The White House, and no way to lead the office, the entire country. Also consider that he opened the US up to a sexual harrasment lawsuit. It's such ****ing poor judgement on his part.

****! Why is that so hard to understand?

Monica Lewinsky is not president.
post #120 of 160
[quote]Also when he lied under oath that made him a bad president and then there was that time as president he went on TeeVee and lied to all of us to our faces point blank. That make him a bad president. <hr></blockquote>

Wow. If you really think that lying to the American people makes you a bad President, then there hasn't been a good President.

Don't think that Dubya is immune to this either. After all, he went on 'teevee', as you put it, and made a lot of campaign promises that he has broken. So he must be a bad President, right?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Best President of your country ancient and modern age