wireline Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Here's the real deal, folks... Every President has been accused of being the worst by the other side (save George Washington, there was no other side for his first term...) It really depends on perspective... Example: if Abe Lincoln had the same sort of public, real time scrutiny as we have today, his critics would have immediately turned fanatical because he did not placate the free trade issues leading to the Civil War (oxymoron)....Lincoln took a LOT of heat during the war, and was sharply critized by many on both sides for the Emancipation Proclamation...His assassination is still thought by some to have been politically motivated. Point? Regardless of your political affiliation and leanings, the term "worst" can only apply to the other party's guy...and the voluntary removal of critical thinking and analytical skills only leads to these kinds of things: hate filled, redundant, and meaningless attacks against one party by the other. Please, everyone do yourselves a favor: No President's action (or inaction if you prefer) can have the immediate impact on every facet of life as claimed herein...it takes months, years, even decades before a society can reap the benefits (good or bad) of a single administration...any immediate changes are more often than not 'growing pains.' Its much like weather patterns - by not understanding the timelines and sheer reference scales, all we can do is act like Chicken Little. Instead of thinking the sky is falling, perhaps we should all be thinking of the long term and critically examine the Big Picture...stop thinking in the here and now, as you really aren't that important.... If one is incapable of critical thinking and independent thought, then perhaps posting mundane polls such as this are the pinnacle of understand for the poster. This serves no purpose other than to even further polarize the readership, and to cement the concept of blind partisanship for its own sake, as no realistic outcome based on results can occur. Want to change the world? Perhaps a media campaign directed exclusively to 1) those who can change the current system (US voters - it does no good to bemoan your opinions to those who cannot vote) and 2) offer an alternative as opposed to just the endless bitching and whining... So What ARE We Gonna Do With 8 Tracks...Fire the Arranger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyRubberDuck Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 OK, I'm not afraid to admit it. I don't know enough about Bush or what he is actually doing to judge him. My only sources of info are the media, which I never believe, and you guys. Nothing personal, but I don't know if I'm ready to buy into every crack-pot theory that gets thrown up on a message board. DRD "Cherry Mistmas, and a Nappy Yew Hear" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alndln Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 Originally posted by GZsound: Can't you imagine the warm glow you would feel sitting in a cafe in Paris surrounded by like minded friends who all hate the american president? Why waste the money on aifare when I can do that here just about anywhere?In a crappy deli even!!! "A Robot Playing Trumpet Blows" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Moore Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 The Country doesn't bother me, it's the ignorance of some of it's citizen's, mostly George Bush supporters well that WOULD be well over half the people in the country at this point wouldn't it? Chuck Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 I doubt it, since half the people in this country don't vote anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stranger Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 No, that would well over half of the people they choose to poll. Big difference. Anybody here ever once get asked to participate in any of these polls? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 No, Bush is not the most corrupt president in this country's history. Harding comes to mind, so does Nixon. Andrew Johnson was pretty damned bad. Harding was a wholly owned subsidiary of the "machine bosses". Bush's administration is pretty bad, but then look at where he pulled his Cabinet from - Reagan's old cabinet - and Reagan's old cabinet was made up primarily of Nixon administration people who had managed to avoid jail. He's still not the worst in our history, though... A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Moore Posted December 19, 2003 Share Posted December 19, 2003 I agree on Harding.... and I'd probably rank Grant way up on the corruption scale as well. Chuck Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 20, 2003 Author Share Posted December 20, 2003 I dunno, I think the Bush Regime is the worst. But you could use some objective standards as your measuring stick. For example: Who had the most people go to jail? Who did the most damage to the economy or spent the most money? Who gave away the biggest sweetheart deals, land, contracts etc? Who did the most damage to the environment? Who attempted to abuse the most laws and roll back protections for regular people? When you go through a series of questions like this, which most of us would agree are bad things, then you may arrive at a way to rate a specific president as "The Worst." For me, and my limited analitical ability, the process leads to one, and only one conclusion: The Bush Regime is the most corrupt in all of history! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Johnny - do you know anything about the people I listed (or Grant, for that matter?) Andrew Johnson (and Ulysses Grant) were partakers in one of the most despicable government policies ever implemented - Reconstruction. Throw in their policies towards Native Americans and you've got human rights abuses that make Bush's attacks on the environment seem like charity work. A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GZsound Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Originally posted by Griffinator: Johnny - do you know anything about the people I listed (or Grant, for that matter?) Grif, don'y you know anything about Johnny B.? He doesn't know anything about anything. Asking him to consider history is like asking a dog to not bark. You are wasting your time and your research with Johnny, he knows nothing, he remembers nothing. And a question. Do we rank the most corrupt government administration by the one with the largest number of convicted members? Do we count administrations where only the charges that were found to be true against the president count? After all, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents in history that have been impeached. Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment. Clinton has been disbarred for breaking the law. And I believe he has had more members of his administration convicted of a crime than any other in history..and we won't even count the dead bodies surrounding his administration. And are we only counting presidents that got us into war? If that is the case, the list is filled with democratic presidents. I guess, other than using Johny B., Alcohol and Dan as "evidence" there just does not seem to be actual criminal charges being prosecuted against this administration and I can't think of any business associates, attorney friends, etc. of Mr. Bush that have wound up dead. Funny how the reactions around here are so based on partisan political viewpoint.. I appreciate the history.. Mark G. "A man may fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame others" -- John Burroughs "I consider ethics, as well as religion, as supplements to law in the government of man." -- Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 20, 2003 Author Share Posted December 20, 2003 Grif, It's kind of relative isn't it? I'm not saying that Grant and A. Johnson's admins were not corrupt, they were. I'm also not sure who is responsible for the most killing, Grant, Johnson or Bush Jr. Perhaps, my view is a liittle biased, in that, what Bush is doing is happening in my lifetime and affects me. In fact, what Bush and Cheney are doing has a significant negative impact on the entire world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Moore Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Andrew Johnson (and Ulysses Grant) were partakers in one of the most despicable government policies ever implemented - Reconstruction. Throw in their policies towards Native Americans and you've got human rights abuses that make Bush's attacks on the environment seem like charity work. Definately agree on that. Reconstruction was a disaster, leading to nearly a century of relative poverty in much of the south, as well as giving rise to the KKK. In my opinion it was mearly a thinly veiled policy of continuing to punish the confederate states years after the war had ended. wait a minute......is that an agreement between Scott and I??? nawwwwww couldn't be Chuck Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 20, 2003 Author Share Posted December 20, 2003 Mark, I dunno if Clinton's admin had more or less convicts than Nixon or Reagan, got links to credible sources? And from Chuck and Grifs posts I can see there are other valid ways for a person to make their own evaluation, still I am bound to my own experience, I don't think I've ever seen it worse than it is under the Bush Admin. No Bid Contracts--a minimum of One Hundred Sixty Billion Dollars and Growing???? And that's just the tip sticking out of the water...it's gonna end up being far worse... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GZsound Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Originally posted by Johnny B: Grif, It's kind of relative isn't it? I'm not saying that Grant and A. Johnson's admins were not corrupt, they were. I'm also not sure who is responsible for the most killing, Grant, Johnson or Bush Jr. Perhaps, my view is a liittle biased, in that, what Bush is doing is happening in my lifetime and affects me. In fact, what Bush and Cheney are doing has a significant negative impact on the entire world. All right.. there is hope for us all!! Johnny, I appreciate the even tempered response and it makes perfect sense. You are correct, the current administration is the one that is affecting you right now and it is easy to forget the past. Believe me, there have been some really corrupt administrations in the past, even worse than this one. Good post. Mark G. "A man may fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame others" -- John Burroughs "I consider ethics, as well as religion, as supplements to law in the government of man." -- Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 20, 2003 Author Share Posted December 20, 2003 Mark, I really would like to see the conviction numbers if you have them. A number for the more recent batch say begining with IKE and coming forward would be helpful, but if we had a complete list going all the way back to Washington, that'd be even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wireline Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Originally posted by Johnny B: Mark, I really would like to see the conviction numbers if you have them. A number for the more recent batch say begining with IKE and coming forward would be helpful, but if we had a complete list going all the way back to Washington, that'd be even better.Not really a valid request, as the Government did not freely disseminate this type of information before the Freedom of Information Act...All anyone really has to go in is anecdotal evidence...A lot of stuff was sealed and/or destroyed during WWII, McCarthy era, Cold War, WWI, and heading back to the nation's origins... Here's something to consider, though: instead of everyone wasting time and resources to determine who was corrupt and who wasn't (impossible to determine - corruption is a qualitative measurement, therefore no benchmark can be established...) why don't you put forth YOUR agenda as to how to fix the evils in the world? No bashing, no spin, no partisanship, no name calling or other 2d grader tactics...How do you (realistically) propose to address the needs of the entire US, while supporting our allies, while protecting the citizenry from current and future threat, while growing the economy, while maintaining a disciplined form of self government, while identifying the future needs of the nation in 10-50 years away and acting now to establish a positive workable situation, while maintaining an ecological balance, while not raising taxes, while ensuring we have enough gasoline to run our cars and heat our homes, while making sure your platforms are not so far left nor far right as to prevent your election (the best laid plans are worthless on the un-electable) Now's your chance to reverse the endless blather, Johnny...you have the opportunity to put together a national agenda, right here right now, that meets these criteria... Remember - your plan has to be do-able, and not some fantasy land Utopian approach in which everyone walks around in loin cloths eating passion fruit (although that don't sound so bad )... So What ARE We Gonna Do With 8 Tracks...Fire the Arranger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
declan Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Great post here Griffinator and GZ, particular hat's off. Reconstruction was a disaster and it's effects were felt up to my early childhood. Truly sad for this country that fought our bloodiest war against ourselves for the soul of this nation. But I'm not down with you Griffinator regarding A. Johnson or Grant. AJ was a disater, got steamrolled and falsely accused of treason when he attempted to carry through a small piece of Lincoln's reconstruction program. JFK in "Profiles in Courage" wrote about the senator that cast the vote deciding whether AJ was to be removed from office after impeachment - nifty chapter titled "I looked down into my open grave". Andrew Johnson was painted as an antichrist while those same vultures would have been attacking the now deified Lincoln with very little less restraint if he'd been alive. Grant's much trickier. First of all, everything I read about him in college is, if not wrong, highly suspect. Amazing, but this guy was an easy target - at least one or two terrible decisions and his out-of-control administration was corrupt. And I think historians read too much into his unreadable autobiography written as he was dying. But what I've read since seems to reacess a great deal of what he tried to do. The opinion seems to be Johnson and Grant were less despicable than many of the presidents that served for the last 24 years of the 19th century. They were the first to get trampled, but there was too much money to be made after 4 years of civil war and everything got ugly - brutish really - following Lincoln's murder. Lincoln's call for the country to "summon the better Angels of our nature" in his second inaugural was spitting into a hurricane. It makes me cringe when Bush paraprhrases it as "our better angels" (Mr. President, I have few angels and my worst is a godsend). I'm not disputing any opinions here. But A. Johnson and Grant are in my "chumps" list of presidents. My "good but very scary" category is my favorite. :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffinator Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 While I appreciate your viewpoint, declan, I look at Johnson's callous attitude towards the black freedmen and Native Americans alike, and I see a man with little grasp of human rights, and way too much sympathy for people who deserved none. Meanwhile, Grant went all the way the other direction in the South, while still maintaining an extremely hostile stance against the Native Americans. Yes, it got worse as the industrial age dawned, but these two opened the floodgates of human rights abuses in this country and sewed the seeds of hate deep into the fabric of a nation trying to heal itself. And yes, the aftereffects of Reconstruction can still be felt in the South today - you can see it in the eyes of the smalltown rednecks every time a "Yankee" moves into town. A bunch of loud, obnoxious music I USED to make with friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GZsound Posted December 20, 2003 Share Posted December 20, 2003 Originally posted by WireLine Studio: why don't you put forth YOUR agenda as to how to fix the evils in the world? No bashing, no spin, no partisanship, no name calling or other 2d grader tactics...How do you (realistically) propose to address the needs of the entire US, while supporting our allies, while protecting the citizenry from current and future threat, while growing the economy, while maintaining a disciplined form of self government, while identifying the future needs of the nation in 10-50 years away and acting now to establish a positive workable situation, while maintaining an ecological balance, while not raising taxes, while ensuring we have enough gasoline to run our cars and heat our homes, while making sure your platforms are not so far left nor far right as to prevent your election (the best laid plans are worthless on the un-electable) Now's your chance to reverse the endless blather, Johnny...you have the opportunity to put together a national agenda, right here right now, that meets these criteria... Great idea. It would be refreshing to hear actual valid reasoned approaches to fixing some of our problems. The too simple minded answer "jail Bush" does nothing to continue the dialogue. I would love to hear some ideas for all the problems you described... How about it guys & gals? Remember - your plan has to be do-able, and not some fantasy land Utopian approach in which everyone walks around in loin cloths eating passion fruit (although that don't sound so bad )... Let us see.. Mark G. "A man may fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame others" -- John Burroughs "I consider ethics, as well as religion, as supplements to law in the government of man." -- Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
declan Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Griffinator I agree with you assessments. But I have to admit though I'm a Texan I grew up in Houston and lived only in Dallas and now Austin. I never really hung out with rednecks, but I loathe to here things are still racially paralyized anywhere in this country - even if we're talking about yankees. Yeah, just kidding. In regard to Native Americans the United States alternately tried to commit and prevent genocide with terrible results. Your point is well-taken with Johnson here - but the racist he was, I'm not sure was taken into the slaughter of his presidency. Well Lincoln reluctantly let him on the ticket and there's far too much going on then for me to say "the buck stopped" at the presidency. Any disgust I have(which is substantial) still falls into pity. Grant again is tricky, he wrote of great respect and wonder of Native Americans. And his results are unfathomable. I was almost seven when Bobby Kennedy was running for president. I was still not being taught anything except Indians taught us to raise corn and brought foof to those wacky Pilgrims. I remember many of the RFK clips of the evening news from 1968. When I saw him talking about the plight of these Americans, native to our land living in squalor worse than none, my 6 year old brain said: WTF? But as years went on not much of significance happened until Carter in regard to Native Americans. And only one guy running for president ever talked about Native Americans. What I'll always be trying to figure out is who's most stupid when. Often I think it's us now, and often I see great progress with this "grand experiment". But still I'd like my heroes to have our knowledge but I gotta take solace and try to impart knowledge in my nieces and nephews that may not be relevant when they really need it. What I love about history is everyone's kind of on the right or wrong side of it. Truth to tell I still find great work on both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 Grif, You got any numbers or estimates on how many Native Americans were massacred? We could then compare it to the numbers of Afghanis and Iraqis that Bush and Cheney killed. Or, what were the dollar figures of Harding's give-aways, compared to Bush and Cheney's favored corporation give-aways? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodiddley Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 You guys be given da presidents way more credit and blame dan dey deserve. Dey really don't control da economy an thangs as much as people thanks they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nursers Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Hey Johnny, did you get rid of your sig? The Keyboard Chronicles Podcast Check out your fellow forumites in an Apple Music playlist Check out your fellow forumites in a Spotify playlist My Music: Stainless Fields Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 I did not change it? But are you using another name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nursers Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Look four posts above mine - your sig is missing. The inane one that implores people to Jail bush but gives no direction on how to do so... The Keyboard Chronicles Podcast Check out your fellow forumites in an Apple Music playlist Check out your fellow forumites in a Spotify playlist My Music: Stainless Fields Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 I think most juries presented with the evidence of Bush and Cheney's crimes would send them to prison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
declan Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Johnny B, man what's up with the numbers fixation? To assuage you I can promise that we killed more native Americans than Bush will ever kill foreigners. I've remained apolitical while admitting where I stand. But, what in any God's name would you have done after September 11th if you were king? Clinton bombed Afghanistan for Chrissake. Are you a *****g drummer? Or do you think feeding your stupidity is harmless? I'll get back to you Nov. 2, 2004. 'Til then, rave on without a clue with what you're saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Johnny B Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 First, I took no part in slaughtering any American Indians. I object to the use of word "we" in that context. Similairly, I object to the use of the word "we" in the context of bombing civilians in Iraq. That's on Bush and Cheney, THEY made that call, not "me" and not "we." I happen to believe there were much less draconian measures that would have effectively dealt with SH, and many of the world's leaders and citizens all over the world agree with this assesment. Bush and Cheney either screwed up, or they lied for ulterior motives, like black gold and tons of cash. In addition, THEY (Bush and Cheney) have committed crimes which are apparent on the face of THEIR actions. Thus, THEY should be charged, tried and convicted like any other criminal. Bush and Cheney are criminal scumbags. Face it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodiddley Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Declan, you can rest easy. You understand what johnny don't git: Them native americans was tree-huggin, peace lovers, too. An they got slaughtered. All these wise-cracks that thank we ain't got no business fightin', they'd probably get slaughtered too if it wudden fer somebody to go out and kick some tail to protect em from what they don't even know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.