Best President

[TheFaithfulStone]

Originally Posted by Igby

catastrofuck.

Learn something new every day.

TFS

[eric l]

I'm not an American, so I preferred not to vote in this poll. But among the presidents listed, I might well have voted for Johnson, not because of his Vietnam record, but because of his role in the race to the moon.
I know that it was Kennedy who launched the chalenge, but NASA was very much Jonhson's work. That is why Houston became the Space Center, and that is also why the space program was hoodwinked as soon as Johnson was no longer in office.
And I do think that the space program meant as much or more for the progress of science and technology than any war could have done, and with much less suffering.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Igby

Heh, I thought this would be a Colbert Report type question - W.: Great President, or The Greatest President.

I voted Clinton, although the only president I can remember clearly is the current one. And he's, all things considered, pretty crap. I'm voting for Clinton simply because of his handling of the Israel/Palestinian conflict. He may not have succeeded, but I really respect his fervour.

If Kennedy hadn't been assassinated, the Vietnam war wouldn't have been such an enormous catastrofuck. Johnson was too keen to win and too convinced he could.

Perhaps, as some think he was assassinated because he was not going to escalate the US advisors' role into US ground troops. However, Kennedy was a "cold warrior", witness "The Bay of Pigs fiasco", "The Cuban Missile Crisis", and the "Assassination coup of the Diem Brothers". If I had to bet money on it I would bet on your interpretation.

[jackson33]

i find it interesting that so many relate success to the National Debt issue, when no one has mentioned how or why we have such the high debt we do have. in short you can blame Mr. Johnson, the War on Poverty and the efforts to increase spending toward what ever the intended end was. simply placed in order, there is no other element in US national spending policy with greater increases than social programs, bar none. ironically Mr. Clinton was given a Republican Congress and along with a mandate (so called) from a 93 election to curb these programs and did exactly that. there is no need to go into the business cycle which generated the tech boom, systems put into place by Reagan, which are on going to this day, to maintain a 20 year economic boom.

if a national debt, is really bad, lets look at Japan. their debt represents 130% of their annual GDP. the European Union and that of the US are about the same with 65% of both with each having about a 13 trillion dollar GDP. the entire world GDP is no more than 65 trillion. there are lots of people being ignored, whom are attempting nothing to put a lid on world terrorist or their activities. if you owe 40k, for your house and all debt, to compare with the US debt, which is deemed so terrible you need a 60k annual income. since the US has a 70%+ ownership of their homes, i suggest not many are doing as well as the US government, on this issue.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by jackson33

i find it interesting that so many relate success to the National Debt issue, when no one has mentioned how or why we have such the high debt we do have. in short you can blame Mr. Johnson, …

Can you support these and the other claims in your post with evidence?

Note that US financial data, and to a lesser extent that of other nations, is very well documented and made available to the public, so claims such as those you make, if true, should not be difficult to support.

Although unsupported claims are commonplace in persuasive political speech and writing, they are not permitted in discussions of history.

[HappytheStripper]

What happened to the choice for Abraham Lincoln or John Adams or Thomas Jefferson.. or wow the list goes on..

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by HappytheStripper

What happened to the choice for Abraham Lincoln or John Adams or Thomas Jefferson.. or wow the list goes on..

The pool was only for US presidents in the last 40 years.

It’s usually so difficult to compare leaders separated by long time periods that such comparisons are somewhat meaningless. Personally, I think that the Republic changed so profoundly in the early 20th century, particularly following the ratification of the 16th Amendment authorizing federal income tax (1913), and changes in military policies following WW I (1918), that comparisons of presidents on different sides of this period are like comparing apples and oranges.

[jackson33]

in a discussion of "Best of over past 40 years" and the connection of national debts, you have to include the single WOP, which happens to be 42 years old, founded by the first mentioned and built on by the Congress over that period.

for a fine description of *War on Poverty* try Encyclopedia of the American History- War on poverty..

you will find this program in many ways changed the policy of a good many programs that were in effect and added several additional programs. google, war on poverty cost, and you will see figures from 6 to 9 trillion dollars. social security cost have risen proportionately as this War, changed the nature and intent of the SS program itself. i do not think these cost are related to the exact debt, but they have certainly maintained the same trend.

to the thread itself; constitutionally, No US President has the authority to obtain funds for any purpose, write a check or alter where funds are spent.
the idea Clinton did this or that Bush did that are founded of biased political conception of what a president is capable of. the appropriate approach would have to include the Congress of 64-66 or 68 and Johnson did something. you will find Congress was under Democrat control (in this case) from Johnson to the second Congress of Clinton. much of what is being said was or given credit for are very complex, give and takes by the two branches of government that are involved.

as for world economies and debt, tax increases and so on, my GUESS is you will find similar social programs are involved. in most countries to begin with, there is very little to no military expense, certainly on a comparative US expense. if you like google World National Debt and find anything i have mentioned.

as for a comparison of Presidents over time, i disagree that they cannot be for changes in policy. the people, that achieve the post, for the most part have been dedicated, loyal and honorable people. Washington to Bush II, have in each their own way honored the office, admittedly from the time they enter the oval office. all well read historians and had the ability to pick people that presented their views. their is not ONE, i could find reasons to think were mis-lead or wrong on some issues. however each seemed to lead and represent their party and my people in times they were chosen to do so...

lets make another thing quite clear. opening up opportunities to woman, later to other minority groups has made the US all it is today. i credit much of this to the current standard of livings enjoyed by our citizens today. these things happened well before WOP. i will argue the WOP was and continues to be a disaster, ill advise and certainly unwarranted set of programs to deny dignity which had been earned by those intended to help. expectation w/o efforts are not conducive to responsibility or personal achievement, which are part, if not the entire human and certainly American spirit.

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by jackson33

i will argue the WOP was and continues to be a disaster, ill advise and certainly unwarranted set of programs to deny dignity which had been earned by those intended to help. expectation w/o efforts are not conducive to responsibility or personal achievement, which are part, if not the entire human and certainly American spirit.

You should note though that the "denial of dignity" argument is equally effective in arguing against *any* charity being given out from any source whether it is governmental or private...I consider it specious as it completely denies the downside cost in both monetary and "dignity" terms of the cruelty of poverty. Its justifiable if you are a pure Social Darwinist of course, but its equivalent to saying "compassion is a weakness and should be stamped out at all costs." Not very "Christian" in my book.

Compassionate moderate,
Buffy

[jackson33]

Buffy; i suffer from the same compassion most in the US do. personally its hard to go through a day and question why some things couldn't be different.
we are for whatever reason, endowed with wealth, opportunity and encouragement form many angles, toward the concept we can do anything we desire in our lifetime. then we have an entity, government welfare, that tells us simultaneous that if we drive an old car, live in public housing have a certain number of kids, don't marry or attempt to achieve that we will take care of you. someplace in the mix i have to consider the lost dignity to accept or participate in the idea. many folks i have know, generally women would prefer to work, or do what most do but can't justify the efforts. this tells me something, maybe not dignity, has been lost in my version of the American dream.

compassion, then may be a weakness in the sense to feel less guilty of what government can do to control so many, is overlooked for the sake of involvement or being accused of immoral or the lack of some emotion. in reality i shouldn't care. many people have played away their life w/o being responsible for anything, other than keeping the proper appearance for the weekly trip to a home by some case worker. this worker gone, the man of the house pops in for lunch and life goes on, the party starting at 8 or so each night.

it was compassion that gave 9-11 victims, or those that lost real loved one a million or so dollars and no telling what all else. the fact is however, on that same day another 6000 people died in the US, most unexpectedly and each is a story with some to large degrees of tragedy. i might point out to the folks involved in the 6000 for that day or those of the 6000 on any other day felt no less griefe than does any one regardless of cause. if i or you feel the million dollars was owed or due (even for the reasons done), are we then showing a lack of compassion for the rest, or are we simply ignoring the issue.