• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Name the best US presidents, and the most over rated...

smiles828 said:
Waco, Ruby Ridge, Elian Gonzalas(sp?), not pushing the button on bin Laden. his administration did a lot of dispicable things.
Click to expand...

I did say relatively uneventful. In 30 years, most people will be unable to explain the significance Waco, Ruby Ridge, or Elian Gonzalas. People will still be able to identify the importance of Watergate, 9-11, and Vietnam. Compared to other presidents, Clinton's administration was pretty uneventful.
 
EA-1475 said:
I did say relatively uneventful. In 30 years, most people will be unable to explain the significance Waco, Ruby Ridge, or Elian Gonzalas. People will still be able to identify the importance of Watergate, 9-11, and Vietnam. Compared to other presidents, Clinton's administration was pretty uneventful.
Click to expand...

while i agree for the most part. those first three particular incidents are, in my opinion, the corner we turned to a police state. the .gov over stepped their bounds, by far.
 
For the people claiming Carter is underrated, I'm curious:

1) You dont have to tell your age, but were you alive when he was in office? (I know I know....people are naming Washington, Lincoln, etc. but Carter is on the fringe of this generation's sitting Presidents....which leads to my next question.)

2) Are you saying Carter is underrated because of what you read about him, what your parents tell you or because of his post POTUS work, i.e. Habitat for Humanity, undeserved Nobel prize, etc.?

My take is that he was not a good POTUS nor was he a horrible one. But the dubious Iran hostage situation definitely doomed him which makes me believe he would not have been a good crisis leader. And, similar to Bush Sr, the recession hurt him as well.
 
EA-1475 said:
Bill Clinton had a relatively uneventful presidency. He didn't do much but at the time not doing much was the best thing to do.
Click to expand...

His uneventful Presidency arguably led or at the very least contributed to what we are experiencing today. I won't agree with some in the media that he could have done more to prevent 9/11 or the housing bubble burst aka the current recession situation but...his hands definitely were in the cookie jar on those two problems.

The one situation I especially dislike him for is his (and Les Aspen's) handling of the Somalia situation, specifically when the Army Blackhawk was shot down in 1993. That should never have happened and as far as I am concerned, those soldiers' blood are on his hands.
 
The five greatest American presidents, in order of greatness, starting with the greatest:

G. Washington
T. Jefferson
J. Madison
J. Davis
R. Reagan

(You'll notice Lincoln is not on this list. He shouldn't be, he wasn't a great president.
A tragic man who found himself in horrendous circumstances, but not a great president. He ultimately presided over the destruction of the Union.)
 
2) Are you saying Carter is underrated because of what you read about him, what your parents tell you or because of his post POTUS work, i.e. Habitat for Humanity, undeserved Nobel prize, etc.?
Click to expand...

He told the country that they need to put on a sweater instead of wasting oil and he put solar panels on the White House....given the current reality of the global energy industry and the economic and environmental ramifications (increased risk from deep sea drilling) from that, had Carter's ideas been carried forward, America may not need to grovel to Middle Easterners every couple of quarters and still have an increasing middle class. Energy independence will make or break an economy and foreign policy.
 
Last edited:
beamers said:
He told the country that they need to put on a sweater instead of wasting oil and he put solar panels on the White House....given the current reality of the global energy industry and the economic and environmental ramifications (increased risk from deep sea drilling) from that, had Carter's ideas been carried forward, America may not need to grovel to Middle Easterners every couple of quarters and still have an increasing middle class. Energy independence will make or break an economy and its foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Where in the constitution does it say it is the job of the president to tell us what to wear?
 
squarerootof23 said:
Where in the constitution does it say it is the job of the president to tell us what to wear?
Click to expand...

I believe someone has missed the point.

Carter made a famous speech telling us that if we wanted to survive as a nation, we had to start living like the rest of the world, and instead of putting the heater in your home all the way up to 80, you should keep it at about 71 and wear an extra layer of clothes, and take some responsibility for yourselves instead of relying on the government and corporations to make your life as comfy as possible. His argument was that our way of life was unsustainable, and he was subject to ridicule for it up until about the time we found ourselves in the middle of Iraq for no fucking reason and our economy in collapse mode.

Now a lot of us are beginning to see that Carter was right, and perhaps we should have reelected him instead of putting a guy who plays a cowboy in the movies in office.
 
Where in the constitution does it say it is the job of the president to tell us what to wear?
Click to expand...

Is it against the constitution to give counsel to the people and show leadership?
It was advice on how to become energy independent, which if it had been achieved by now, America wouldn't be nearly as broke as what it is. As it turns out America's way of life IS negotiable, now who said the opposite?
 
He gave the advice because energy independence = growing middle class and successful foreign policy. (Brazil set out to become energy independent after the 70's oil shocks and they have achieved it and are progressing nicely).

All he did was give a suggestion, there was no legislation, you have made a mountain with some petroleum jelly.
If you want to be "more free to do and waste what you want" (paraphrasing) at the expense of your middle class and needing to placate Saudi Arabia and fight wars then have at it (it's what you got anyway, you are more "free" though).
 
Last edited:
Anyway - There are lots of other people in our society who can give us advice about being energy efficient. Why do we need to have the president do that? What's wrong with us, can't we govern ourselves?
Click to expand...
the private sector preferred more oil, rather than energy efficiency. so, in the end, we did govern ourselves... mistakenly. oops, carter was right, but that cost him his popularity because
oil-junky-fix%5B1%5D.gif


btw, i can't believe we're debating the constitutionality of whether a president can give energy efficiency fashion suggestions...
 
Well also most of renewable energy (like solar panels) use Neodymium & Dysprosium. Which ironically is largely found in China, and includes their "growth plan" (This is just the first website that popped up that talks a little about it) China Growth Plans & Supply. We're getting terrorist mind readers and China is getting Chongqing.
 
^All of those things could have been avoided by achieving energy independence, but how dare Carter give advice on how to achieve this, that would be unconstitutional, I'm free to think and do as I please. Well America did as it pleases and declared its way of life as not negotiable, so you got what Carter was trying to advise against....
 
Reagan is absolutely the most overrated President. That political cartoon posted in this thread is great and sums it up perfectly. The man accomplished absolutely nothing in my estimation to further the welfare of this country or the world for that matter, warmonger that he was.

However, more historically speaking, I think Lincoln is a good candidate for most overrated. True, under his command the Civil War was won by the Union, but most historical analyses I've read maintain that the Confederacy was always at a significant disadvantage from the get-go and only absolutely incompetent Union leadership could've really produced a Confederate victory (fortunately, Lincoln and especially Grant proved sufficiently competent). The enormous veneration of Lincoln is due more to his simply being the man at the top at the time rather than him actually being a great president.

I suppose we could say he was in the "right place at the right time," but that may seem odd given the context of the Civil War, no? 8)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top