Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Bush or Nixon?

When my dad pulled me out of the high school play (I was set to be Tommy Djilas in The Music Man) during my senior year, I thought it was the worst thing in the world, ever

I don't know, man. Who knows the heights to which you might have risen, what joy you might have brought to the world, when you might have been linked to Scarlet Johansson? (Not that your life's work has been in any way shabby to now, either.)

I think Carter set a new standard. Clinton and Bush have both worked (together, even!) on projects and have become friends (not really relevant, but I still think it's cool). The wielding of their influence on causes important to them personally is really cool. I hope future Presidents take note.

Agreed, most heartily.

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

Here's some of Bush's press conference from yesterday - www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/12/bush.press.conference
His statements are insipid. He inherited a recession and leaving on one? Wrong on both counts!
Also trying to staunchly defend his abhorant inactions during Katrina?!

And here's how Bush lovers are trying to make him out - www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1096125/posts Cal Poly's list is pathetic.

[Vanguard]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

At least Carter got us Ted Koppel and Nightline

By Carter's term, Iran was a no-win situation for any US President. The damage was already done by Operation Ajax spearheaded by President Eisenhower. The Iranian people wouldn't have been able to trust the American government, and the former would unfortunately be swayed by radical clerics who made not-so-radical idealistic promises before they inevitably took power.

[scrivener]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

By Carter's term, Iran was a no-win situation for any US President. The damage was already done by Operation Ajax spearheaded by President Eisenhower. The Iranian people wouldn't have been able to trust the American government, and the former would unfortunately be swayed by radical clerics who made not-so-radical idealistic promises before they inevitably took power.

I don't know anything about this (I'll look it up later), but are you saying that by 1976, we shouldn't have had diplomatic ties with Iran so that the Americans at the embassy never would have been taken hostage? This may be true, but the fact is that the hostages were taken during Carter's term and they were captive for 444 days. Whether this was an ineffective or effective resolution (after all, it didn't turn into war) I guess is up for debate, but if it was a no-win situation, it's still the biggest issue, I think, in evaluating the Carter Presidency.

[Kalihiboy]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

I think you have to look at the whole picture when evaluating Presidents, though major events during their term or terms seem to overshadow an entire four or eight year run. Example, Nixon will forever be linked to Watergate, but his foreign policy is looked upon in a much better light. His swift downfall from winning a huge landslide and less than 2 years he was out of office will mostly be remembered when it comes to him. Don't forget he spent 14 out of 16 years in the White House and not all politicians have been able to serve full terms as VP and be elected to two terms as well.

Also, Carter and Ford became good friends after their 1976 election.

Check the numbers but I believe Clinton would have defeated Senior Bush in 1992 even without Perot being a factor if you take him out of the equation altogether.

Aj

[Kaonohi]

Re: Worst president - Johnson or Clinton?

Why focus on those Nixon and Bush II? Why compare a 10-year war (Nam) to a six-year war (Iraq/Afghan)? Apples and oranges.

Instead, lets see if we have had ANY good presidents since WWII....

Truman? Got us involved in the Korean War (successful?), but did start some important social and economic programs.

Eisenhower? Not bad. Warned us about the military-industrial complex. Did he do anything else?

Kennedy? Despite his semi-sainthood status, it was he who first committed troops to VietNam, and many other things have come out about his activities during his tenure that cast a shadow on his presidency. He brought us closer to the brink of nuclear war than any president before or since, and initiated our current imperialistic trend.

Johnson? A better candidate for "worst president." He escalated and perpetuated the Vietnam war against popular and expert opinion ('withdrawal' is not MANLY!). Remember, "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?"

Nixon. Despite the fact he was a crook, he WAS the one who got us OUT of Vietnam, a war he inherited from the Democrats.

Ford. Pardoned Nixon.... But did a lot to help the country heal from Vietnam.

Carter. Poor guy. Iran hostage crisis, attack aquatic killer rabbits (must gave been Usagi Yojimbo), viewed as ineffectual. Did make some economic progress, but dramatic inflation during his tenure brought us into a mild recession.

Reagan. An object lesson in why not to elect actors to public office.

Bush I. Protected Kuwait from Iraq invasion, and came home. A freebee? Didn't we ask oil-rich Kuwait for compensation?

Clinton. Passed the ineffectual, so-called "assault-weapons ban," which did nothing to deter crime, but raised the "big brother" effect of our government. Proved that 'presidential' and 'moral' are antonyms.

Bush II. I guess he had something to prove to daddy... He was pretty bad, but I don't think it's his fault. Sure, he's incompetent, but it may be due to birth defects. At least we got to experience a president as dumb as he looks. Illegal invasion of Iraq, passage of 'Campaign Finance Reform,' which did little to reform campaign finances, but did put a gag on the First Amendment, preventing 'issue organizations' (the people we hire to keep us informed about candidates political leanings) from talking to us about candidates immediately (60-90 days) before elections. So, we have to ask ourselves: "Why did we elect him to a second term?" Be careful when you point a finger, for you have three pointing back at you.

Why didn't we elect Kerry? The public saw him as worse than Bush - pretty bad! He was perceived as a liar and a phony.

I also think there's a message here for Mr. Obama: "Don't rile the NRA!"

[Ron Whitfield]

Re: Worst president - Johnson or Clinton?

Why didn't we elect Kerry? The public saw him as worse than Bush - pretty bad! He was perceived as a liar and a phony.

Also -
1) Didn't campaign strongly/effectively enuf.
2) Feckless AWOL media.
3) UnAmerican swiftboaters, that had too many stoopids in blind agreement, listening to Rush.
4) Not enuf attention payed to the realities of Bush and Cheney, ie., a country in denial.

[Vanguard]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

I don't know anything about this (I'll look it up later), but are you saying that by 1976, we shouldn't have had diplomatic ties with Iran so that the Americans at the embassy never would have been taken hostage? This may be true, but the fact is that the hostages were taken during Carter's term and they were captive for 444 days. Whether this was an ineffective or effective resolution (after all, it didn't turn into war) I guess is up for debate, but if it was a no-win situation, it's still the biggest issue, I think, in evaluating the Carter Presidency.

There was no reasonable foresight to suggest that breaking diplomatic ties by 1976 (1977? Gerald Ford was President in 1976) would be prudent, nor was there any indication taken seriously that there would be a successful Iranian revolution until it was upon them.

It seemed the only significant, history-changing choice Carter had at his disposal was whether or not the United States would again intervene in the shah's removal from power. I believe the reasons for intervening in 1953 were not legitimate, so I still do not see a legitimate reason for hypothetically supporting the Shah's dictatorship in 1979.

Eisenhower and Kermit Roosevelt's use of the US embassy for nefarious purposes in 1953 didn't make Carter's negotiations any easier, nor did they inspire any trust or confidence in the USA. Based on this, I believe Carter simply did not have enough to work with in order to release the hostages in a significantly faster time.

[Kaonohi]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

Nixon prolongued the war to end it right before reelection, abandoned our allies and illegaly expanded into Laos and Cambodia.

Wrong on that one.

Remember, we ended the war via the Paris Peace talks. Nixon tried for YEARS to get all concerned to the table: The Vietnamese argued about the shape of the table, the size, the position of the seating, who would be allowed to attend, etc., stalling all the way. The North refused to participate, so Nixon ordered increased bombing of the North until they capitulated. To the South he said: "Be there, or be summarily abandoned." So they came. We owe Nixon for getting us out of Vietnam. Too bad he was a crook.

Nixon was not the one to order troops into Laos and Cambodia, Johnson was. I know, because I was there when it happened. My squad relieved another squad from my unit, attached to a larger 4th Division contingent, which had just crossed the border from Cambodia into Laos, and we continued far into Laos, for about a week. This was in November of 1968. Nixon was just honest about it when he went after NVA in Cambodia and Laos, Johnson did the same thing and lied about it.

[TuNnL]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

Bush was by far the worst president ever. The kind of leader who destroys empires ... maybe Saddam wasn't such a bad guy after all. However bad he was, he was certainly a strong natural counterbalance to Iran, and a secularist opponent of the Sunnis, who did 9-11. The decision to attack Iraq was just another disasterous Bush decision.

I’m glad someone on this board can put things in perspective. The Vietnam War, for all its death and carnage, is for all intents an purposes, over. What many Dubya supporters don’t understand is, war in the Middle East was raging non-stop for a thousand years before U.S. troops ever stepped foot there. The last time the Western world fought a declared war there, it lasted nearly two centuries, and we lost! Clearly, John McCain had this in mind, when he made this statement.

Ultimately, it’s mindblowing that in this day and age, an American president would be stupid enough to get us involved there. What ever happened to going after the terrorist who actually attacked us? Oh yeah, Bush "doesn’t know where he is and doesn’t spend that much time on him."

Considering Al-Qaeda has continued to attack targets worldwide since 9/11, emboldening new terrorist groups, perhaps Barack Obama might give him a little more thought.

[Mahi Waina]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

We owe Nixon for getting us out of Vietnam.

I get it.... 'Peace with Honor'

[Ron Whitfield]

Revising history?

Bush in listing a brief number of his presidential regrets yesterday, had not finding WMDs in Iraq as one...

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Worst president - Johnson or Clinton?

Eisenhower? Not bad. Warned us about the military-industrial complex. Did he do anything else?

Instigated the interstate highway system. High value to a lot of mainland folks - source of some big pork for O`ahu.

[Walkoff Balk]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

It ain't over for George W. yet? There's still about a week for him to perform a miracle. He could complete a Hail Mary for a game winning TD.

[escondido100]

Re: Worst president - Bush or Nixon?

http://ollysonions.blogspot.com/2008...h-in-iraq.htmli have kept quiet on this topic until now because i had no real proof, but i found some that i thought i would share. indeed they have found wmd in iraq as late as last month. so lets put this to rest once and for all.