Bush Worst president ever?

[RuntheDamnBall]

Ha. OK. Since this board has turned into a grammar critiquing clinic ...

 

That was a great post of YOURS. 

858421[/snapback]

Thanks. I appreciate your kind words. You're getting there.

[Orton's Arm]

On the wacko front, doesn't FDR get the slack for pushing Japan over the "indignant brink" and "knowing" about Pearl Harbor in advance?

You're confusing two very distinct issues. FDR imposed an oil embargo on Japan, he began doubling the size of the U.S. Pacific fleet, and he moved the Pacific Fleet's center of operations from California to Hawaii. There's nothing "wacko" in suggesting that FDR's behavior towards Japan wasn't provocative. On the contrary, to suggest otherwise displays profound historical ignorance.

 

The question of whether FDR knew about Pearl Harbor in advance isn't one I've investigated in great detail, but I'm certainly unaware of any smoking gun to prove he did know.

[molson_golden2002]

One man's list of the worst presidents ever:

 

1. FDR - Most dictator-like president in U.S. history. Moved toward a centrally-planned economy. Insistence on "unconditional surrender" in WWII discouraged the German generals plotting against Hitler, it prolonged the war for years, and ultimately resulted in Soviet control of most of Europe.

2. LBJ - Great Society program an utter disaster. Vietnam War. Open border immigration policy.

3. Woodrow Wilson - Got the U.S. involved in WWI based on false Allied propaganda about German atrocities. WWI failed to achieve the stated goal of making the world safe for democracy.

4. Truman - Snubbed the British after Churchill gave his "Iron Curtain" speech. Republicans had to pressure him to enact the Marshall Plan. Destroyed two Japanese cities with nuclear weapons. Fired General MacArthur for wanting to win the Korean War.

5. George W. Bush - has asked American soldiers to die to "fight terror" while refusing to fight terror by securing America's borders. Sold out to corporations, and reduced civil liberties. Poor environmental record. Iraq war.

6. Grant - Deeply corrupt administration

7. Clinton - More corruption and lack of moral leadership. Weak environmental record. Bungled military efforts. Failed North Korean policy.

857956[/snapback]

FDR was a great President. You take one thing he id and make a mountain out of it. The Unconditional Surrender stance was a direct result of the fact we didn't do that in WW1, and look what happened there. We had to bomb them into submission and no more "stab in the back' theories for the next Hitler.

 

Truman and the bomb? I dunno. But he was in the lead on Truman and Marshall plans so your history is all wrong. The Taft wing of the Republican party is the one that needed to be convinced of the need for it.

 

I hate Woodrow Wilson, too. Idiot, reminds me of Bush.

 

Grant, well, he wasn't good at much but being a great general. What long term harm did he do though?

 

Clinton was simply an average president who lived in boring times and had a rabid, Conservative Congress to deal with. The Southern strategy was at its hight for the far right and Clinton did all he could to beat them down. Best part of Republican 'Southern Strategy' is that they are now stuck with having to appease the far right southern Conservatives to win the Presidential nomination. Should be fun!

[Orton's Arm]

FDR was a great President. You take one thing he id and make a mountain out of it. The Unconditional Surrender stance was a direct result of the fact we didn't do that in WW1, and look what happened there. We had to bomb them into submission and no more "stab in the back' theories for the next Hitler.

First, FDR got us into WWII through his escalating provocations against Germany and Japan. Then he conducted WWII in such a manner that the Soviets got the heart of Europe. This could have been avoided by giving the German generals a good reason to overthrow Hitler. They realized their nation couldn't win, and they wanted to avoid hostile foreign occupation (especially Soviet occupation). They would gladly have accepted any fair deal FDR had cared to offer. With the European war over several years early, the lion's share of Europe would have been out of Soviet hands. Jews would have been spared several years of concentration camps; and the nations of Europe and North America would have been spared several years of horrible war. FDR's refusal to even pursue this possibility wasn't just a minor slip-up. It was an outright disaster.

 

Nor is that the only problem with FDR's presidency. He moved the country toward a much more centrally planned economy. He had little respect for private property rights. He eliminated some of the constraints on the executive, and attempted to eliminate even more constraints. Had he not been constrained by external political forces, he would have become this nation's first dictator.

[GG]

Nor is that the only problem with FDR's presidency. He moved the country toward a much more centrally planned economy. He had little respect for private property rights. He eliminated some of the constraints on the executive, and attempted to eliminate even more constraints. Had he not been constrained by external political forces, he would have become this nation's first dictator.

859122[/snapback]

 

Even a genius like you can recognize the irony of this paragraph in a thread about Bush.

[/dev/null]

First, FDR got us into WWII through his escalating provocations against Germany and Japan.

859122[/snapback]

 

I don't know if you've heard of him, but there was this little German guy with a funny mustache named Hitler. Rumor has it he may have had something to do with that war too

[Orton's Arm]

Even a genius like you can recognize the irony of this paragraph in a thread about Bush.

859129[/snapback]

Oddly, you make a good point. Bush hasn't been shy about expanding the power of the executive branch himself.

[Orton's Arm]

I don't know if you've heard of him, but there was this little German guy with a funny mustache named Hitler.  Rumor has it he may have had something to do with that war too

859140[/snapback]

There's the start of WWII, which happened in 1939, and U.S. entry into WWII, which didn't happen until 1941. Hitler had initially hoped for a neutral U.S., because he had more than enough other problems to deal with. But when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, Hitler saw an opportunity to attack the U.S. shipping going to England and the Soviet Union while we were distracted elsewhere. In addition, he was tired of letting his own navy get harrassed in the Atlantic, while not being able to retaliate.

[molson_golden2002]

First, FDR got us into WWII through his escalating provocations against Germany and Japan. Then he conducted WWII in such a manner that the Soviets got the heart of Europe. This could have been avoided by giving the German generals a good reason to overthrow Hitler. They realized their nation couldn't win, and they wanted to avoid hostile foreign occupation (especially Soviet occupation). They would gladly have accepted any fair deal FDR had cared to offer. With the European war over several years early, the lion's share of Europe would have been out of Soviet hands. Jews would have been spared several years of concentration camps; and the nations of Europe and North America would have been spared several years of horrible war. FDR's refusal to even pursue this possibility wasn't just a minor slip-up. It was an outright disaster.

 

Nor is that the only problem with FDR's presidency. He moved the country toward a much more centrally planned economy. He had little respect for private property rights. He eliminated some of the constraints on the executive, and attempted to eliminate even more constraints. Had he not been constrained by external political forces, he would have become this nation's first dictator.

859122[/snapback]

I'm sure the German generals who looked the other way while Hitler committed horrible attrocities wanted to avoid losing the war, no doubt. Roosevelt was right to demand unconditional surrender, Germany had to be torn up and remade. Communism sucked but something had to be done. Had he allowed a coup to repalce Hitler who knows what would have replaced it.

 

And this 'centrally planned economy' thing. Please tell us what you mean. He saved capitalism by using stronger government controls. Good!

 

Dictator? Whatever

[/dev/null]

There's the start of WWII, which happened in 1939, and U.S. entry into WWII, which didn't happen until 1941. Hitler had initially hoped for a neutral U.S., because he had more than enough other problems to deal with. But when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, Hitler saw an opportunity to attack the U.S. shipping going to England and the Soviet Union while we were distracted elsewhere. In addition, he was tired of letting his own navy get harrassed in the Atlantic, while not being able to retaliate.

859160[/snapback]

 

And if FDR wasn't such a war mongerer the Germans would have just left us alone right?

[ExiledInIllinois]

I hate Woodrow Wilson, too. Idiot, reminds me of Bush.

859105[/snapback]

 

...WW went on to President Princeton I think?... Where will GWB move on to ?

 

[Orton's Arm]

I'm sure the German generals who looked the other way while Hitler committed horrible attrocities wanted to avoid losing the war, no doubt. Roosevelt was right to demand unconditional surrender, Germany had to be torn up and remade. Communism sucked but something had to be done. Had he allowed a coup to repalce Hitler who knows what would have replaced it.

 

And this 'centrally planned economy' thing. Please tell us what you mean. He saved capitalism by using stronger government controls. Good!

 

Dictator? Whatever

859162[/snapback]

The German generals were apolitical men who knew they would lose the war unless they got a peace treaty on either their eastern or western fronts. Their interests were military, not political. They would have accepted a democratic German government, had FDR demanded they do so as a condition of peace. Certainly, this democracy would have been better for Germany and the world than the tearing up and remaking performed by the Soviets in the eastern half of Germany.

 

FDR moved toward a centrally planned economy in that he had more and more spending take place at the federal level, instead of by the people. If goverment spending represents, say, 70% of total national spending, your economy is 70% centrally planned.

[/dev/null]

...WW went on to President Princeton I think?... Where will GWB move on to ?

 

 

859174[/snapback]

 

Actually Wilson had a stroke near the end of his 2nd term which left him in a wheelchair (and rumors that his wife actually was running things)

 

WW was President of Princeton before he got into politics

[ExiledInIllinois]

Actually Wilson had a stroke near the end of his 2nd term which left him in a wheelchair (and rumors that his wife actually was running things)

 

WW was President of Princeton before he got into politics

859177[/snapback]

 

Oops... My bad!

 

After I posted... I was thinking about the stroke thingy... Thought it was later.

 

Thanx...

 

 

 

GWB... Did own the Rangers prior to his POTUS... Does that rank?

 

[molson_golden2002]

The German generals were apolitical men who knew they would lose the war unless they got a peace treaty on either their eastern or western fronts. Their interests were military, not political. They would have accepted a democratic German government, had FDR demanded they do so as a condition of peace. Certainly, this democracy would have been better for Germany and the world than the tearing up and remaking performed by the Soviets in the eastern half of Germany.

 

FDR moved toward a centrally planned economy in that he had more and more spending take place at the federal level, instead of by the people. If goverment spending represents, say, 70% of total national spending, your economy is 70% centrally planned.

859175[/snapback]

That first sentence just kills me!!! They knew what happened in Poland and did nothing. The mass murder of the entire educated population and the Generals only asked where to fight next. Ya, they would have been great choices to turn the country over to. Ludendorf and Hidenburg accepted the Weimar Republic, at least for awhile, but who appointed Hitler chancellor?

 

FDR made the depression survivable for the people, that's why the elected him 3 times and a forth to win the war. He saved the banking system, got people work, brought electricity to the south, created social security, regulations on business to try and stop cheaping. Great president!

[molson_golden2002]

...WW went on to President Princeton I think?... Where will GWB move on to ?

 

 

859174[/snapback]

Bush will probably be a televangelist

[/dev/null]

GWB... Did own the Rangers prior to his POTUS

859179[/snapback]

Where he traded away Sammy Sosa for Harold Baines

[Orton's Arm]

And if FDR wasn't such a war mongerer the Germans would have just left us alone right?

859172[/snapback]

I'm no expert, but I haven't heard any historian suggest that Hitler had plans to invade the U.S. He'd focused his attention on building up his army and air force, not his navy. The navy he had largely consisted of submarines, which would have been unsuitable to any invasion of the United States.

 

On the one hand, Hitler wasn't in a position to conquer the United States. On the other hand, his lebensraum objective would have been achieved by a successful war against the Soviet Union. He lacked both the means and the motive to go to war against the U.S.

[molson_golden2002]

I'm no expert, but I haven't heard any historian suggest that Hitler had plans to invade the U.S. He'd focused his attention on building up his army and air force, not his navy. The navy he had largely consisted of submarines, which would have been unsuitable to any invasion of the United States.

 

On the one hand, Hitler wasn't in a position to conquer the United States. On the other hand, his lebensraum objective would have been achieved by a successful war against the Soviet Union. He lacked both the means and the motive to go to war against the U.S.

859185[/snapback]

True, he was all about the Soviet Union, and really, he did not have the strength to conquer them even. Now, had Hitkler's scientists developed the atomic bomb first, well, who knows

[Orton's Arm]

That first sentence just kills me!!! They knew what happened in Poland and did nothing. The mass murder of the entire educated population and the Generals only asked where to fight next. Ya, they would have been great choices to turn the country over to. Ludendorf and Hidenburg accepted the Weimar Republic, at least for awhile, but who appointed Hitler chancellor?

 

FDR made the depression survivable for the people, that's why the elected him 3 times and a forth to win the war. He saved the banking system, got people work, brought electricity to the south, created social security, regulations on business to try and stop cheaping. Great president!

859180[/snapback]

Hindenburg tried to build a non-Hitler coalition, which soon collapsed. Eventually, Hindenburg became convinced that including Hitler in the government might be necessary to avoid a civil war. The Nazis were initially given only a minority of the cabinet positions; which represented Hindenburg's plan to keep Hitler under control. Ultimately, Hindenburg bowed to political pressure created by Hitler, just as the German generals had earlier bowed to political pressure created by the WWI Allies. They would have bowed to political pressure created by FDR; had he cared to impose any.

 

FDR's economic policies were a failure, as demonstrated by the fact he presided over the longest depression in U.S. history. Most of the depression was on his watch, and was a direct result of the climate of uncertainty and unpredictability he created for businesses.