Adam Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 That spectrum is meaningless. Fascism and Communism/socialism are essentially different words for the police state. I guess you have a point- when you get too far to one side of the 'spectrum', you end up with the same thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I guess you have a point- when you get too far to one side of the 'spectrum', you end up with the same thing I prefer a more consistent spectrum with Totalitarianism on the far left and anarchy on the far right. One that ranges from total government control to no government control at all. I find the conventional spectrum to be a somewhat contrived as it groups stances together that are not necessarily consistent with one another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronc24 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I prefer a more consistent spectrum with Totalitarianism on the far left and anarchy on the far right. One that ranges from total government control to no government control at all. I find the conventional spectrum to be a somewhat contrived as it groups stances together that are not necessarily consistent with one another. [/quote Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Obama ahead of Reagan From now on out, anything these yahoos ever say should forever be mocked. Obama ahead of Reagan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 So did the communists. Just because both systems of government understood how to use steel and concrete doesn't make FDR Hitler. No, but the fact that he enlsaved the nation to the Social Security system does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 FDRs confiscation of gold was indefensible. We are free range cattle, not free people. The head of state will always be a statist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Fascism I don't think it means what you think it means. Words usually do have real and actual definitions, even if you are unaware of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 <Mindless Zombie Republican> Obama ahead of Reagan From now on out, anything these yahoos ever say should forever be mocked. Obama ahead of Reagan </Mindless Zombie Republican> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Fascism and Communism/socialism are essentially different words for the police state. This is such a false statement that it's damn near signature worthy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Obama ahead of Regan??? Scathing indictment of presidential scholars, Siena College and the education system as a whole. Note too self. Don't let my kid go to Siena. I thought Siena College was filled with spoiled Catholic consevartive rich kids? You think they would have rated Ronnie higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 I wouldn't mind if President Roosevelt was in office right now- he is worlds better than President Obama. You think he could get things done in this climate? Civil liberties and other scumbag lawyers would be all over his ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 One of the stupidest posts............................ever. He (RR) is dropping in the polls as history marches on. RR was the first to really bang and implement the deregulation drum... And the fallout isn't helping him as time progresses. The proof is int he pudding/polls. I honestly think GWB will fair better as time marches on... Go ahead and shoot this crazy lib! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Presidents are like balls in a pin ball machine: They are launched into a strange context, bounce around a bit, follow a route determined by uncontrollable obstacles, score some points, hit some awkward bumpers and finally drop out of sight. Bells ring, strange sounds are heard and nothing changes. No matter what the ball scores, it will soon be eclipsed by someone with the price to play the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 I rank this survey high in 'luck' (12th) and 'imagination' (3rd), but that is offset by 'intelligence' at 37th. But I'm glad the hot pockets are done and we can now 'rank' Obama when he's not even halfway through his term. As for Reagan, I presume he'd be ten spots higher if he had called his economic policies (you know, the ones that triggered a quarter century of unprecedented growth and prosperity) as 'stimulus'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 conner is running stride for stride in that race. It's almost unfair to include him in the contest. I was grading on the Bell Curve and automatically tossed out his comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 <Mindless Zombie Republican> </Mindless Zombie Republican> I thought you agreed with me it was insane to put Obama in this list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 Siena College surveyed 238 presidential scholars and they ranked all the presidents. FDR is #1. Andrew Johnson is the worst ever. Obama is ahead of Reagan. George W. Bush is fifth-worst. Discuss.Presidents from first to worst Anytime you see anything rated by "scholars" just ignore it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WisconsinBillzFan Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 As for Reagan, I presume he'd be ten spots higher if he had called his economic policies (you know, the ones that triggered a quarter century of unprecedented growth and prosperity) as 'stimulus'. Bingo. Reagan was the best president of the 1900's and it drives libs crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 This is such a false statement that it's damn near signature worthy. Conner's like that guy in philosophy class who stands up and states an opinion. Then as you sit up and direct your attention to hear him explain said opinion, he sits back down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 2, 2010 Share Posted July 2, 2010 No, but the fact that he enlsaved the nation to the Social Security system does. I sure hope you aren't serious about that statement. Disagreeing with policy is one thing, but comparing Social Security to the Holocaust is completely another. Bingo. Reagan was the best president of the 1900's and it drives libs crazy. FWIW, it was before my time, but a lot of conservatives I know consider Richard Nixon the best conservative president in recent history. I have heard good things about him from people on the left. I was fairly young when Reagan was president, but most of the people on the left that I talk to consider him a good man and an ok president. I will never forget the celebration in school when the hostages were freed from Iran. On a separate issue, I think these rankings are more a reflection of the federal government as a whole during a president's term, than a reflection of the man who held the Oval Office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts