Best president and why?
Worst pres and why?
Feel free to argue with other people about who.
I won't post my opinions unless requested
Request :P
Best: Probably FDR for having the most beneficial influence and going against the common policies of his era to help the depression.
Worst: Andrew Jackson. He did some messed up things to Native Americans, disobeyed the Supreme Court when they ordered him to stop, and wrecked the economy.
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 04, 2014, 10:40:21 PM
Request :P
😦
Best: either JFK or Johnson. Nice policies, did the right things most of the time. JFK was pretty interesting in general.
Worst: George W. Bush
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
Now I'm in no way a bush fan, I don't even vote because the system we have at the moment isn't a democracy and my one vote doesn't count for .poo.. But I'm just saying that he isn't even close to as bad as Obama.
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
Now I'm in no way a bush fan, I don't even vote because the system we have at the moment isn't a democracy and my one vote doesn't count for .poo.. But I'm just saying that he isn't even close to as bad as Obama.
He's waaaay worse! In what ways are he BETTER?!?!?!?
Quote from: CbStrad on February 04, 2014, 11:16:50 PM
Quote from: Mishra, Artificer Extraordinaire on February 04, 2014, 11:15:58 PM
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
Now I'm in no way a bush fan, I don't even vote because the system we have at the moment isn't a democracy and my one vote doesn't count for .poo.. But I'm just saying that he isn't even close to as bad as Obama.
He's waaaay worse! In what ways are he BETTER?!?!?!?
Obamacare and gun control, for starters
For or against?
I believe I named 3 things in the beginning of my post, maybe you jut skipped over them TL;DR style.
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:17:31 PM
I believe I named 3 things in the beginning of my post, maybe you jut skipped over them TL;DR style.
Obama is an American citizen...
Quote from: Mishra, Artificer Extraordinaire on February 04, 2014, 11:18:28 PM
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:17:31 PM
I believe I named 3 things in the beginning of my post, maybe you jut skipped over them TL;DR style.
Obama is an American citizen...
Bet you believe he went to Columbia as well...
Regean was one of the greats, however I have to say Abraham Lincoln. He was the one who really addressed the racial issues, and he also was a smart cookie when it comes to tactics in war.
Worst is for me Obama. I could go into my whole list of reasons, however I will not because I don't feel like political debates right now. They get me fired up, and irritable. It reminds me what is wrong with this country.
However, being as I have to give a reason, I will have to say I hate him most because of Bengazi. And the fact it still hasn't been something that he has properly addressed to this day. :(
Quote from: FlickerYourOwnIdentity on February 04, 2014, 11:25:32 PM
Regean was one of the greats, however I have to say Abraham Lincoln. He was the one who really addressed the racial issues, and he also was a smart cookie when it comes to tactics in war.
Worst is for me Obama. I could go into my whole list of reasons, however I will not because I don't feel like political debates right now. They get me fired up, and irritable. It reminds me what is wrong with this country.
However, being as I have to give a reason, I will have to say I hate him most because of Bengazi. And the fact it still hasn't been something that he has properly addressed to this day. :(
+1 well said.
For a teenager, you are well versed. I'm glad to see some of our youth to be educated politically.
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
-Congress and the House make laws and budgets, you can't blame Obama for our debt or deficit. (or Obamacare, because the national debt was still a huge number before it was passed)
-Obama isn't trying to take away our Second Amendment, he is merely trying to get reasonable gun control passed, something nearly every other modern country has done.
-You have no evidence to suggest he is not an American citizen. If there was any legitimate evidence, Obama would be impeached or stopped from running in the first place.
I don't believe Obama is the best president, but I also don't think he's the worst. I would like to remind you that the Ultimate Law says not to lie, which you blatantly did. :)
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 05, 2014, 12:05:30 AM
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
-Congress and the House make laws and budgets, you can't blame Obama for our debt or deficit. (or Obamacare, because the national debt was still a huge number before it was passed)
-Obama isn't trying to take away our Second Amendment, he is merely trying to get reasonable gun control passed, something nearly every other modern country has done.
-You have no evidence to suggest he is not an American citizen. If there was any legitimate evidence, Obama would be impeached or stopped from running in the first place.
I don't believe Obama is the best president, but I also don't think he's the worst. I would like to remind you that the Ultimate Law says not to lie, which you blatantly did. :)
Money can make people look past anything sir.
You act as if politicians are truthful.
Quote from: Ertai on February 04, 2014, 11:27:05 PM
Quote from: FlickerYourOwnIdentity on February 04, 2014, 11:25:32 PM
Regean was one of the greats, however I have to say Abraham Lincoln. He was the one who really addressed the racial issues, and he also was a smart cookie when it comes to tactics in war.
Worst is for me Obama. I could go into my whole list of reasons, however I will not because I don't feel like political debates right now. They get me fired up, and irritable. It reminds me what is wrong with this country.
However, being as I have to give a reason, I will have to say I hate him most because of Bengazi. And the fact it still hasn't been something that he has properly addressed to this day. :(
+1 well said.
For a teenager, you are well versed. I'm glad to see some of our youth to be educated politically.
Yes, so well versed in .politics. he can't spell "BENGHAZI" correctly. Also, he has addressed it. Here is one of the many times he has addressed it: http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2012/09/12/president-obama-speaks-attack-benghazi
So because of a spelling error, he isn't versed? Hahahahaha. How naive.
You post all the links you want, bud. If you a believe a word that comes out of that man's mouth, then you are obviously gullible.
Quote from: Ertai on February 05, 2014, 12:09:57 AM
Quote from: Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth on February 05, 2014, 12:05:30 AM
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:12:29 PM
He didn't spend trillions of dollars on nothing. He didn't try to take away our second amendment. And he also was an American citizen.
-Congress and the House make laws and budgets, you can't blame Obama for our debt or deficit. (or Obamacare, because the national debt was still a huge number before it was passed)
-Obama isn't trying to take away our Second Amendment, he is merely trying to get reasonable gun control passed, something nearly every other modern country has done.
-You have no evidence to suggest he is not an American citizen. If there was any legitimate evidence, Obama would be impeached or stopped from running in the first place.
I don't believe Obama is the best president, but I also don't think he's the worst. I would like to remind you that the Ultimate Law says not to lie, which you blatantly did. :)
Money can make people look past anything sir.
You act as if politicians are truthful.
Are you implying that Obama has been able to payoff all everyone? I really hope not, because you seriously need help if you are. If he could payoff so many people, why does he face so much opposition from Congress, Fox news, ect.? This is just a ludicrous notion.
Quote from: ConanEdo on February 05, 2014, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: Ertai on February 05, 2014, 12:12:50 AM
So because of a spelling error, he isn't versed? Hahahahaha. How naive.
You post all the links you want, bud. If you a believe a word that comes out of that man's mouth, then you are obviously gullible.
And where do you get information? What's your trusted source?
What do I need a source for? Haha. I'm voicing my opinion.
Hey, you try staying awake for 36+ hours and tell me how your spelling fares! ;)
Parting thought, when I said he hasn't addressed Benghazi, I mean he hasn't properly faced the consequences that he should have for lying to the American people about knowing about what was happening, and refusing to let the troops provide reinforcements to the embassy while it was being attacked. He said there would be a trial held as well after the election. That hasn't happened yet though, and I still want to see justice.
Good night everybody, hopefully spell check hasn't changed what I meant to say, because at this point, I'm surprised I can see the keypad
Quote from: ConanEdo on February 05, 2014, 12:20:41 AM
Quote from: Ertai on February 05, 2014, 12:16:48 AM
Quote from: ConanEdo on February 05, 2014, 12:14:51 AM
Quote from: Ertai on February 05, 2014, 12:12:50 AM
So because of a spelling error, he isn't versed? Hahahahaha. How naive.
You post all the links you want, bud. If you a believe a word that comes out of that man's mouth, then you are obviously gullible.
And where do you get information? What's your trusted source?
What do I need a source for? Haha. I'm voicing my opinion.
My point is that you have accused him of lying, being socialist, and a few other things without anything to back it up. He's demonstratively not socialist, so I was curious as to where you got your information.
The past? Observing his actions? It's pretty obvious, sir.
I happen to have my BA in Sociology, and have learned well. Even to the untrained, government controlled economy and/or business is communism. Society run economy and/or business is socialism. He makes it to the point where people depend on government benefits to survive. Sounds like the aforementioned to me.
:D
If you would like to learn more, I would love to teach you.
Congratulations on having the most irrelevant degrees.
Regardless of how vague my answer was it was truth. Just because I don't feel like typing an essay on my phone, doesn't make it wrong.
Well I've had a good laugh. Have a good day.
Fixed.
Quote from: Ertai on February 04, 2014, 11:24:51 PM
This may sound extremely conservative, and in no means am I one. Nor am I a liberal, but I would say the best was Ronald Regan.
Worst would be Obama because he's spent so much of the country's money that we do not have for his so called "idea". Which has proven to be ineffective. He's a socialist/communist, which has proven to never work. And to those misguided youth who think they want a communist/socialist state, truly do not know what they are really about.
I'm gonna agree Ertai here on Reagan, and partially agree about Obama, he is not all bad, and we should respect him as our president, but he certainly has a fair share of failures, as anyone does. I don't have a least favorite president in all honesty, but I can truthfully say that I dislike Obama more than most other presidents. Not everything wrong with our economy is his fault, but he's not exactly the plunger to pull us out of the toilet, you know?
How about we avoid the personal attacks and stay on topic, hm?
Quote from: Gorzo on February 05, 2014, 02:06:18 AM
How about we avoid the personal attacks and stay on topic, hm?
After reading this entire thread, I agree.
Quote from: IceScythe on February 05, 2014, 02:08:23 AM
Quote from: Gorzo on February 05, 2014, 02:06:18 AM
How about we avoid the personal attacks and stay on topic, hm?
After reading this entire thread, I agree.
I like typing in different colors :P
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:21:53 PM
Quote from: Mishra, Artificer Extraordinaire on February 04, 2014, 11:18:28 PM
Quote from: Anoobass on February 04, 2014, 11:17:31 PM
I believe I named 3 things in the beginning of my post, maybe you jut skipped over them TL;DR style.
Obama is an American citizen...
Bet you believe he went to Columbia as well...
You realize if he wasn't an American citizen his credentials would have been checked before he ran and he would be taken out of he country?
I'm no birther, but between:
Benghazi
IRS
Obamacare
Fast and Furious
Garbage about gun control
If he were a republican, media would cover this term WAY differently
About the Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare"): The ACA forces health care companies to stop screwing over large swaths of the population who desperately need health care, including the disabled, diseased, and elderly, and it provides care for those who cannot afford it, including the homeless and unemployed. This stops millions of people from suffering or dying because they can't afford to go to the hospital. While it does force a very small portion of the population to switch over to a more expensive health care plan, those who are forced to switch are all young, healthy adults who are last in line for needing healthcare.
TL;DR: Obamacare stops a lot of people from suffering or dying at the expense of a few people paying slightly more.
Quote from: Taysby on February 05, 2014, 05:36:51 PM
More people lose coverage than the people who get coverage. ObamaCare causes job losses. It forces people who have no reason to need to pay more, to pay an insane amount.
Where did you get this from? Please give a credible citation. Here is my source: http://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts/timeline/timeline-text.html
My goodness, whether you're an Obama supporter or not, you can't seriously consider his proposed limitations on assault weapons to be a threat to the second amendment! He wasn't actually trying to take guns away altogether... Am I missing something here?
I don't know enough about each president in history to have formed a valid opinion on this topic so I will pass on answering the OP.
This blew up fast :-\
Quote from: CbStrad on February 05, 2014, 07:52:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 05, 2014, 06:22:50 PM
What Obama calls an "assult weapon" is completely stupid. I agree that fully auto guns should be banned, be he calls anything with (I'm not up to date on assult weapon lingo) a pistol grip, a barrel cooler, clip with more than 10 bullets, muzzle break (I think) etc an assult rifle. The thing he wants to ban just makes the shooter more accurate and able to defend their family. Lots of my guns have those things but they aren't assult rifles. The whole "ban assult rifles" thing is complete stupidity, because it's just a step in the direction of banning all guns. It won't reduce gun violence. None of the things he proposes would reduce the ability of shooters to kill lots of people.
If you make owning guns a criminal act, only the criminals will own guns.
That's not good.
Quote from: Ertai on February 05, 2014, 07:53:51 PM
Quote from: CbStrad on February 05, 2014, 07:52:31 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 05, 2014, 06:22:50 PM
What Obama calls an "assult weapon" is completely stupid. I agree that fully auto guns should be banned, be he calls anything with (I'm not up to date on assult weapon lingo) a pistol grip, a barrel cooler, clip with more than 10 bullets, muzzle break (I think) etc an assult rifle. The thing he wants to ban just makes the shooter more accurate and able to defend their family. Lots of my guns have those things but they aren't assult rifles. The whole "ban assult rifles" thing is complete stupidity, because it's just a step in the direction of banning all guns. It won't reduce gun violence. None of the things he proposes would reduce the ability of shooters to kill lots of people.
If you make owning guns a criminal act, only the criminals will own guns.
That's not good.
It works in many other modern countries.
Quote from: abstractApathist on February 04, 2014, 10:50:31 PM
Worst: Andrew Jackson. He did some messed up things to Native Americans, disobeyed the Supreme Court when they ordered him to stop, and wrecked the economy.
He did some nasty stuff, but I wouldn't say he was the worst. Jackson called for eliminating the electoral college as well as democratizing federal office holding. He also dismantled the second national bank. Not all jeffersonian ideals are for me, but there are a few I like.
I've only lived through a couple presidents and I can't say they are the best. My favorite is Lincoln. It's sad it took 16 presidents to realize "all men are created equal" wasn't true.
I really like Teddy Roosevelt since he was an industrious safari hunting president. Closest thing we will get to Chuck Norris as president
Slick Willy is also a favorite of mine.
Least favorite: Nixon - a scamming politician who got exposed
Millard Fillmore: Scum scum scum: signed into law the "fugitive slave act" after wiping a presidential cabinet after President Taylor died.
Get on with it
Quote from: Taysby on February 05, 2014, 11:50:59 PM
I finally watched the vid (my ap gov teacher who keeps up on stuff told me that so I trusted him) and both fox and the other side are wrong. It doesn't cause job losses, it just causes people to not want to work. However, it doesn't make them dependent, and it's not enough to stop them from working. It also doesn't help the vast majority of people like its supposed to. Really, it only helps single moms (most of the time that was just a bad decision on her point (DONT YELL AT ME FOR THAT! I know there will always be exceptions) and elderly who can't afford healthcare (who should have just planned better for retirement). It does cause a dependency on the government which is bad. Take the Indians for example. They are a prime example of people who are dependent on the gov and what happens to them.
How does this make people not want to work? "Oh I can finally get enough coverage that I'm not at risk of dying to anything worse than a common cold, sounds like a good time to quit my job." While the government did have to intervene, the alternative was to let health care companies screw over the disabled and poor. Also, don't even act like Native Americans that are dependent on the American government are there by choice: white settlers stole their land, forced them into labor camps, and massacred them in droves.
Free healthcare is in no way an incentive to not work: it doesn't stop you from starving (and neither do food stamps very well) and most jobs must now provide health care anyway. If the unemployed have free health care, it means they will be healthy enough to continue searching for a job, not that they'll no longer have to work.
Quote from: Taysby on February 06, 2014, 05:05:08 PM
If be increasing your salary 5 g's by taking another job would make you lose healthcare, your healthcare is making you not want to work.
And why is healthcare a "right" that everyone should have? Where in the constitution does it say it's the government's responsibility to keep everyone healthy?
Ok I will chime in for the health care debate. Me being a person who is lucky enough to have good healthcare before and still now. I think it is a good idea to help with the healthcare. The problem already existed with free healthcare. If you have no insurance and you are in an emergency you go to an emergency room and they cannot refuse you. So if you have no money and cannot pay the bill guess who pays the bill. All the other people who go to that hospital. Now they are trying to force everyone to have a healthcare plan for two reasons. 1. To help subsidize healthcare. The healthy help pay for the sick. 2. Preventive health services. It's a lot cheaper to go for check ups and stay healthy then it is to go to the emergency room. What I have heard is that for ever $100 it would cost at a regular doctors office it will cost a $1,000 at an emergency room.
Sidebar. You want to help get rid of the free healthcare make business offer their employees healthcare.
Fair enough, I'm still putting Fillmore as worse: "hey guys lets return all of the freed slaves...."
The Obama administration has actually looked at the numbers and determined that all job loses due to Obamacare is because of a decrease in the labor force's willingness to work, not business's demand for workers. This does not impact unemployment because unemployment is the percent of people who are willing to work, but cannot find a job.
Quote from: Taysby on February 06, 2014, 06:03:41 PM
Bottom line for me, I don't believe it's governments role to offer healthcare. They manage to break everything they try to run and everything they do have adverse side affects they didn't intend.
I would say that the convenience of the healthy and those who can already afford healthcare does not outweigh the right to life and happiness of the disabled and poor (who many healthcare companies would refuse to help).
Quote from: abstractApathist on February 06, 2014, 07:52:20 PM
Quote from: Taysby on February 06, 2014, 06:03:41 PM
Bottom line for me, I don't believe it's governments role to offer healthcare. They manage to break everything they try to run and everything they do have adverse side affects they didn't intend.
I would say that the convenience of the healthy and those who can already afford healthcare does not outweigh the right to life and happiness of the disabled and poor (who many healthcare companies would refuse to help).
I agree with this, and would +1 if I could; I've already +1'ed you today :P
Quote from: abstractApathist on February 06, 2014, 03:21:30 PM
Free healthcare is in no way an incentive to not work: it doesn't stop you from starving (and neither do food stamps very well) and most jobs must now provide health care anyway. If the unemployed have free health care, it means they will be healthy enough to continue searching for a job, not that they'll no longer have to work.
While you're intentions might be good, I find your argument flawed. Have you ever lived in a city? I have for quite some time. There are plenty of people young enough and fit for work but don't and live off food stamps, etc. I would see it every day. I'm not biased. Just what it was. Health care is not why people will or won't work.
Most people don't need health insurance until they are older or in certain circumstances. That's why the new system needs young people to support the older generations and those who need health care for emergencies or health problems.
Unfortunately most government programs are broken. They may have good ideas just never implemented or enforced as they should do to human nature, poor planning, cost, etc...
Quote from: NyghtHawk on February 06, 2014, 09:45:37 PM
Quote from: abstractApathist on February 06, 2014, 03:21:30 PM
Free healthcare is in no way an incentive to not work: it doesn't stop you from starving (and neither do food stamps very well) and most jobs must now provide health care anyway. If the unemployed have free health care, it means they will be healthy enough to continue searching for a job, not that they'll no longer have to work.
While you're intentions might be good, I find your argument flawed. Have you ever lived in a city? I have for quite some time. There are plenty of people young enough and fit for work but don't and live off food stamps, etc. I would see it every day. I'm not biased. Just what it was. Health care is not why people will or won't work.
Most people don't need health insurance until they are older or in certain circumstances. That's why the new system needs young people to support the older generations and those who need health care for emergencies or health problems.
Unfortunately most government programs are broken. They may have good ideas just never implemented or enforced as they should do to human nature, poor planning, cost, etc...
Very few people live on food stamps alone (20% of its users), and it is not enough to live well on (although I'm not saying it should be raised).
http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-snap-challenge-the-claim-that-food-stamp-recipients-get-by-on-450-a-day/2013/06/19/110f6b14-d925-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_blog.html
Quote from: Taysby on February 06, 2014, 09:56:38 PM
You say that the government should steal and make life miserable for people who have done nothing wrong? Most (I know there are genuine exceptions but this is the vast majority) people who need the healthcare have smoked, drank, and done several other things to hurt their health, and are currently on welfare spending the money on drugs and cigarettes.
It sounds like you are for a socialist type government where the gov takes care of everyone's needs, and makes it so everyone makes the same (stealing from the rich who worked hard for their money and give it to lazy bum holes)
The idea that the people this law helps are mostly leeches is entirely untrue. Those who have disabilities and other preexisting conditions were being unfairly denied coverage, something which the ACA puts a stop to. Also, you have to apply for health care: they don't just give it out to random people on the street.
About socialism: if you think socialism is where the government redistributes everything, then you're thinking of communism. Part of socialism is where the government regulates things like health care and hospitals so greedy companies can't just screw over the needy. It isn't a bad thing in moderation, and is part of many successful European governments.