• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

who is the worse president in our history?

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Agreed. Senor Chavez is a douche bag.
The sad part is if you lived in Venezuela and said that, then you'd probably be shot :p
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
easyt65 said:
Liberals want cheap gas and dependency on foreign oil cut; however, they don't want refineries in their back yards and no drilling because they preach that oil wells in Alaska will destroy all of Alaska and hurt the wildlife, which is a lie. Technology today makes the footprint of the operation very small, and animals actually gather around the pipeline in Alaska because it is ewarmer there.

Also, no Dem/Liberal has demanded that we start taking steps to get off oil ansd start finding alternatives because 1) politicians from both sides of the aisle have been getting oil money for their campaigns and 2) it cost a great deal of money, time, and effort to make the switch, which could affect the economy thus affecting votes for these politicians. Every decision is designed for 1 simple thing - what will keep ME IN POWER?
Wow that's funny because last I checked republicans control all three branches of government. By the way, I'd like a link that supports your claim that libs only think about power. Otherwise your just saying crappy conspiracy.

BTW Alaskan drilling would only decrease oil costs by about a penny according to recent studies, and not a drop of oil would reach us till 10 years so I guess it's a really logical idea.

" environmentalists point to Energy Department reports indicating that it would take a decade to start producing oil from ANWR, that peak production would not come until about 2025, and that even then the oil produced from the refuge would have a negligible impact on gasoline prices and oil imports."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...2005110301496.html?nav=rss_business/special/3
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
The sad part is if you lived in Venezuela and said that, then you'd probably be shot :p
Not really because then he wouldn't have won a majority (Unlike Bush) during his recent election, but whatever suits you semi-fascist cons I guess is better
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
CHE said:
Not really because then he wouldn't have won a majority (Unlike Bush) during his recent election, but whatever suits you semi-fascist cons I guess is better
Shot, 5 years in jail, whatever.

It's against the law to say that Chavez isn't running the government well, so you can really run against him. I wonder if that's how he got the majority...

Just because he's leftist doesn't mean he's good. Until you can figure out that not all things on the left are good, and all things on the right aren't bad, then your just a partisan idiot. Don't bother me.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
Shot, 5 years in jail, whatever.

It's against the law to say that Chavez isn't running the government well, so you can really run against him. I wonder if that's how he got the majority...

Just because he's leftist doesn't mean he's good. Until you can figure out that not all things on the left are good, and all things on the right aren't bad, then your just a partisan idiot. Don't bother me.
Right yeah I'd take a good look at yourself before you tell others to stop doing things. Otherwise you're a hypocrit.

BTW he had formidable opponents. Prima Justica A.D., and COPEI (The two major opposition parties) took part. Only the small parties that were pointless boycotted. They'd be the equivalent of the libertarian party or Green Party boycotting.

Also take a look at this article and see if he's the evil dictator that the right tries to portray him to be.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4461946.stm
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Che said:
Right yeah I'd take a good look at yourself before you tell others to stop doing things. Otherwise you're a hypocrit.
What do you mean?

Che said:
BTW he had formidable opponents. Prima Justica A.D., and COPEI (The two major opposition parties) took part. Only the small parties that were pointless boycotted. They'd be the equivalent of the libertarian party or Green Party boycotting.
Opposing parties are hindered by the government.

Che said:
Also take a look at this article and see if he's the evil dictator that the right tries to portray him to be.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4461946.stm
If he sells us cheap oil he can take away the freedom of the press? Is that a valid trade off? I find it ironic that you would use oil to justify Chavez's position, all when I'd thought you were a liberal.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
What do you mean?
I mean that you're a hypocrit because you'd follow any conservative no matter what he does. You'll stick by him weither he lies to your face about WMDs, or spies on your calls.


Opposing parties are hindered by the government.
bullshit. you just can't except the fact that "Senior Duche" is popular.

Besides Gore was cheated and hindered in 2000.



If he sells us cheap oil he can take away the freedom of the press? Is that a valid trade off? I find it ironic that you would use oil to justify Chavez's position, all when I'd thought you were a liberal.
At least he doesn't tap their phones and limit their civil rights with a patriot act. Besides, I never even mentioned the press. All I said was that it was a kind of nice thing to do, which you can't even except since you're partisan and think all things on the left are bad, and all things on the right are good.
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Che said:
I mean that you're a hypocrit because you'd follow any conservative no matter what he does. You'll stick by him weither he lies to your face about WMDs, or spies on your calls.
It is true that to follow a conservative completely would be partisan hypocrisy, and the same for a liberal. I am not traditionally conservative, I have some distinct liberal ideologies, I am merely conservative leaning, or more accurately: libertarian leaning.

You, however, are a classic liberal through and through. I can pretty much know how you will respond to anything, classic liberals and conservatives are very predictable, and have what I (and seemingly you) would call partisan hypocrisy.

Che said:
bullshit. you just can't except the fact that "Senior Duche" is popular.
When did I say that?

Che said:
Besides Gore was cheated and hindered in 2000.
Maybe so, but probably not. Why is it hard seeing that happen in Venezuela?

Che said:
At least he doesn't tap their phones and limit their civil rights with a patriot act. Besides, I never even mentioned the press. All I said was that it was a kind of nice thing to do, which you can't even except since you're partisan and think all things on the left are bad, and all things on the right are good.
There are things on the right and the left that are bad.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
[/QUOTE]You, however, are a classic liberal through and through. I can pretty much know how you will respond to anything, classic liberals and conservatives are very predictable, and have what I (and seemingly you) would call partisan hypocrisy.[/QUOTE]

You are just as predictable as me. The left will always stick with the left. The right will always stick with the right. I admit that I tend to be partisan on alot of issues. The thing is that you are usually just as partisan as me so calling me partisan is worthless.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
Che said:
I mean that you're a hypocrit because you'd follow any conservative no matter what he does. You'll stick by him weither he lies to your face about WMDs, or spies on your calls.

bullshit. you just can't except the fact that "Senior Duche" is popular.

Besides Gore was cheated and hindered in 2000.

At least he doesn't tap their phones and limit their civil rights with a patriot act. Besides, I never even mentioned the press. All I said was that it was a kind of nice thing to do, which you can't even except since you're partisan and think all things on the left are bad, and all things on the right are good.
When you say "you're a hypocrite" you bordering on the wrong side of the name calling line. You'd be on safer ground if you stated something like "I believe your posts is hypocritical because..."

Also, how do you know "Senior D" doesn't tap phones etc...? Or are you saying he just doesn't do with the PA?
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Che said:
You are just as predictable as me. The left will always stick with the left. The right will always stick with the right. I admit that I tend to be partisan on alot of issues. The thing is that you are usually just as partisan as me so calling me partisan is worthless.
Partisan? On which side?? I would seem rightist to you, but to those on the right I'm sure I seem a bit leftist. I don't think anyone on this site is quite as partisan as you are.
 
T

The Real McCoy

Che said:
At least he doesn't tap their phones and limit their civil rights with a patriot act.
What makes the patriot act so much worse than Venezuela's civil liberties?

http://hrw.org/doc?t=americas&c=venezu


Che said:
Besides, I never even mentioned the press. All I said was that it was a kind of nice thing to do, which you can't even except since you're partisan and think all things on the left are bad, and all things on the right are good.
And you aren't? When have you ever supported any stance of the right?
 

mpg

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2005
Messages
7,795
Reaction score
1,784
Location
Milford, CT
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Unless you're a major student of US history, it's hard to say who the worst president in US history is. It could be one of the more obscure presidents. The worst president in my lifetime (born 1960) is Clinton. His policies were mediocre, but his corruption was light years beyond any other president in recent history. For policy alone, I'd say that Carter was the worst. He didn't understand The Cold War.
 

Jim

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2006
Messages
72
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
This one is easy: Jimmy Carter. Agents of a foreign government invaded US property, kidnapped and held US citizens hostage and he did nothing effective to counter the move.

It is no mystery why the Iranians let the hostages go the very day Reagan come into office.

I love seeing him on the news as it reminds voters of what Democrats are all about.
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Jim said:
This one is easy: Jimmy Carter. Agents of a foreign government invaded US property, kidnapped and held US citizens hostage and he did nothing effective to counter the move.
Carter = Camp David accords = peace between Egypt and Israel = Good.

It redeems a lot of his mistakes.
 

Vandeervecken

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2005
Messages
744
Reaction score
1
Location
Midland MI USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
-Demosthenes- said:
Carter = Camp David accords = peace between Egypt and Israel = Good.

It redeems a lot of his mistakes.

An excellent point. A peace I might add that has maintained to this day.
 

BodiSatva

The Bodhisattva
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
49
Location
Bodega Bay, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Harding was not responsible for the Great Depression...
WWI and the issues with supply and demand couple with buying off credit were.

Hoover's policies of "Rugged Individualism" were the wrong policies at the wrong time.

My list...

There are so many faults with so many of them, but...

1. G.W.
2. Carter
3. LBJ
4. Nixon
 

tumbleweed

Active member
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
341
Reaction score
130
Location
Maine
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
The current George Bush will go down as the worst president this country has ever seen. There aren't even any close second choices. The guy is an idiot.
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Vandeervecken said:
An excellent point. A peace I might add that has maintained to this day.
The Camp David accords are usually over looked by conservatives, they think it some how takes away from Reagan.

BodiSatva said:
There are so many faults with so many of them, but...

1. G.W.
2. Carter
3. LBJ
4. Nixon
G.W. - Where is the retrospect?

Carter - Another one of these.

LBJ - Why? How is he worse than a Gilded age president? How is he worse than Buckhannon?

Nixon - Watergate?

The current George Bush will go down as the worst president this country has ever seen. There aren't even any close second choices. The guy is an idiot.
Possibly, but again we can't know that. No retrospect.
 

BodiSatva

The Bodhisattva
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
49
Location
Bodega Bay, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Retrospect is irrelevant if one has balanced insight and logic.

Not doing anything is different than doing something that negatively impacts the nation that you are serving to such a degree as to be considered bad. Hoover did little to help the Depression, and what he did do he did too late, so that is not bad. LBJ secretly stepped up the Vietnam War against much advice, propelling us into more horror.

Nixon continued this coupled with illegal bombing campaigns, lying to Congress and WaterGate, assassination of President of Chile in 1970; orders invasion of Cambodia without congressional approval then stops it when caught, and more. Carter for his stupid handling of the oil embargo, ghostwriting a speech for Arafat in 1990 (Carter and his pro-Arab sympathies! Arafat readily used and practically invented the new terrorist suicide bomber – and they give that piece of garbage a Noble Peace Prize!) Haha…cutting counter terrorism funding, the Iran hostage situation, even though Reagan undermined his efforts with the Hostages for arms deal and then later showed his quality with the Iran/Contra fiasco…YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY ALL SUCK!!

Clinton is the shmuck that had us high-tail it out of Somalia with our tail between our legs and by Bin Laden’s own words, he knew then and there that he could and would defeat the US if he could make the citizens in-fight about the spilling of blood. It gets tough and the US bails out. The Muslims had just finished eight years of hell against the Soviets and we bail with a couple dozen dead due to a couple days fighting. Clinton made us look pathetic and HE is more responsible than any other for our current issues with Islam. Add in Whitewater…Bastard!

GW…Able Danger, Bush/Bin Laden/oil/money connections, invading Iraq (this was not needed for a successful campaign against terrorism, as most agree), the nations borders pertaining to immigration, selling out education, creating the largest deficit in history…where does it end.

Of course Harding had Teapot Dome, William McKinley gets us involved in Span-American War (of which we utterly destroy the Spaniards), Ulysses S. Grant: Crédit Mobilier & the Whiskey Ring, all the Presidents and their affairs!

Jeez, respect our leaders? Follow them? What a joke. Confucian values are non-existent today, save a few that are continually overlooked. Instead, we get idiots like Sen. Feinstein and her trial lawyer husband and their conflict of interest for the public good being associated with the investment firm the Carlyle Group…it goes on and on…I’m done.
 

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by -Demosthenes-
Carter = Camp David accords = peace between Egypt and Israel = Good.

It redeems a lot of his mistakes.
Here's the Bush version of negociating peace.

 

fooligan

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Location
G.R. MI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Natch.

Here's the Clinton version of negotiating peace:

 

fooligan

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2006
Messages
170
Reaction score
0
Location
G.R. MI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"who is the worse president in our history?"

BTW, I want this poster impeached. From everything, forever.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
tumbleweed said:
The current George Bush will go down as the worst president this country has ever seen. There aren't even any close second choices. The guy is an idiot.
So you believe that a president of the US can be an idiot? Because he isn't articulate in his speeches all the time he's inept and a blithering idiot? I don't equate being articulate with intelligence.

I don't understand where this logic comes from. As an American I find it insulting that people actually believe a president can be an idiot. Even if you don't agree with the man, that doesn't make him an idiot.
 

-Demosthenes-

Internet Revolutionist
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
919
Reaction score
7
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
BodiSatva said:
Retrospect is irrelevant if one has balanced insight and logic.
And thus you have exposed yourself as historically illiterate.

Billo_Really said:
Here's the Bush version of negociating peace.
Yeah?
 
Top Bottom