i’ve got the feeling that BS is anti-lincoln for a few other things he did…
hey, clinton was a playa! what are you, some kind of playa-hater?
Guinastasia wrote: “OH, and if we’re only going on one incident, though he was one of our Founding Fathers, John Adams has to be mentioned, if only for the blatantly unConstitutional and disgusting Alien and Sedition Act.”
I, too, might name The Adams Family,–but for much more than a single act. Adams and his fellow Federalists really wanted to replace the American view of a Union of Republics (–the several States–) with a Monarchy. “Pox Rot John Adams,” I say–for trying to destroy everything the Declaration and the Constitution hoped to build.
Oh the other hand, there is Andrew Johnson, 1865-1869: A very good candidate, indeed–for allowing the demobilization of the Army and the Navy instead of following through on Lincoln’s threat to the British government of the time; ordering the Army onto transports and Liberating England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales from the yoke of monarchist tyranny;–allowing them to join the benefits of American Republicanism, under Equality and Liberty. :mad: Ptah! The more I think about Johnson’s ineptitude and unwillingness to ACT, the more I think that the vote for worst President should be cast for Andrew Johnson.
Tracer, of course, is technically correct but wrong, wrong, wrong. Which State could have bought Louisianna without getting into a War with the other States? Talk about Power-grabbing! Empire-building!! Jefferson had no other choice but to buy Louisianna for the United States, legal or nay. 
You might be right, Red Menace. Perhaps General Washington, after having the British generals s**t in their britches at Yorktown, should have mobilized the Union to take the War home to the Enemy–and, by the way, Liberated England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland from the tyranny of Monarchy. He would have, at least, squelched the wannabe-king, John Adams, before he and his fellow federalists tried their best to undermine and destroy the Constitution. :mad: 
P.S. Furt is right: The OP plainly says, “Please don’t use presidents from the last 20 years.” (Ah, but would I like to mention “W.” for neglecting defence against impacting asteroids; Clinton for digging us into such a deep economic hole that we may never get out; Geo. the First for getting us into undeclared wars world-around; Carter for giving away the Panama Canal rather than trying to get Panama to join US as a State; etc. :eek: )
MGibson
Actually, it was my US History book, American History: A Survey by Alan Brinkley that suggested Harding was inducted into the KKK. Wilson may have sucked on civil rights, but I haven’t heard the KKK rumor with him, yet.
Actually, since Carter’s last day in office was in 1981, and that was 21 years ago, we can count him in! 
But excluding the last 20 years, I’d say Nixon, Harding, etc.
Andrew Jackson-the whole Trail of Tears thing-even though the Supreme Court even condemned it as illegal.
Oh, and what about Wilson? Probably one of the biggest racists ever to be in office?
(BTW, Carter may have been a naive bumbler, but he was a good man, and I’d vote for him again. Camp David, anyone?)
Re: Herbert Hoover (the GREATEST President in US history)
This is also the man who:
…put his life on the line saving the lives of little Chinese children during the Boxer Rebellion (as a civilian).
…organized an operation to help all Americans escape from Europe when WWI broke out, including those who were totally indigent.
…headed up operations which fed the people of Europe after WWI ended, thus preventing mass starvation. This included sending food to the Soviet Union despite the fact that this resulted in considerable criticism from some quarters.
…came to Trumans aid and again organized the feeding of Europe after WWII.
…when the Japanese were faced with mass starvation after WWII, who did MacArthur turn to for help? Thats right. Hoover!
A lot more people died at Waco than in the Bonus Marchers tragedy, but I’ve never heard even his enemies suggest that Clinton lacked human emotions.
You leave Herbert alone!!
I agree with you totaly, including your point that Nixon was not as he is put out to be.
Lincon was a tyrant. Sic sempar tyranus, does not mean patriots will rise up against tyrants, it means that every governmental leader will become a tyrant.
Originally posted by zigaretten:
inre HH
That, folks, would be the same MacArthur who threw himself wholeheartedly into eviction of the Bonus Marchers.
I gotta go with Wilson. He set back all hope of civil rights for blacks at least forty or so years, and he remained the president despite the fact that he couldn’t even pronounce his own name after his stroke, through the machinations of his wife and staff.
Plus, I think he looks goony as all hell in his portrait at The Princeton Club.
Waste
Flick Lives!
While I disagree with your political opinions on the other points, this is simply a factual error. If it symptomatic of the “facts” on which you support your other conclusions, we could dismiss them, as well. Every major policy decision made from 1953 - 1960 was made by Ike, personally, usually at the advice of the counsellors he selected (among whom Nixon was not numbered). Nixon clearly had no part in the decisions regarding Korea, Lebanon, Egypt, Civil Rights enforcement in the South, the steel industry, labor laws, or monetary policies. Sitting in front of the Senate to break ties that never arise does not contribute to “running the country.”
And did you realize that that Constitution (which they chose to accept) eliminated any pretense that they were “independent” countries?
I’d vote against putting Hoover on the “worst” list. Most of the stuff that FDR tried in his few few months in office were extensions of projects that Hoover had initiated. Hoover was probably not the perfect man for the job at that period, but he was not the “worst” in any way.
The Bonus Army fiasco also has to be viewed in light of the perception of the day that they might, indeed, have attempted revolution. I disagree with the way they were broken up, but it still does not fall into any “worst” category.
As to Harding–good candidate for worst, but two reasons presented are not valid:
Harding was simply out of his league. He was a small town guy put in office as a puppet. He may (or may not) have joined the Klan, but if he did it was because in the 1920s the Klan was seen by many as a big patriotic social club. Harding actually reversed several of Wilson’s segregationist policies regarding the Federal government, saying they didn’t make sense.
It is also unlikely that he was personally involved in the Teapot Dome or other scandals. More likely was that he was simply not bright enough to see how he was being used.
This discussion, with all its nominations, brings to mind a saying; which, of course, can be viewed from either a positive or a negative perspective –
“People get the kind of government they deserve.”
So did Eisenhower and Patton. If you’re suggesting that MacArthur was unfit to command American forces in the pacific or to serve as Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in Japan, then your beef is with FDR and Truman, not Hoover (who, as a civilian in China attacked the American military authorities ruthlessly in order to secure the release of Chinese who had been erroneously imprisoned for spying and whose wife was not only the most attractive First Lady in American history but was probably the only First Lady to have ever carried a .38 caliber semiautomatic on a regular basis.)
I’d have to say Harding, an incompetent, corrupt fool, whose only good act in office was dying.
I have no high opinion of Lincoln, though I agree with opposing slavery, I do not agree with his raping of Federalism. I despise Johnson, whose not-so-Great-Society is still plaguing us today. Most of the 1870-1890s Republican presidents were pretty worthless, particularly the generals.
Carter was ineffective, but was in my opinion probably the best man we’ve had be president in at least a century. A class act through and through. Same with Harry Truman, though I don’t like the way he extended New Deal programs into semi-permanent entitlements (later made permanent by the likes of Johnson).
Ike never did much. Neither did Ford. Both kinda in over their heads.
According to Tip O’Neill*, Nixon was an extremely intelligent, clever, competant guy, who would have made an excellent president-had he not been so extremely paranoid and incredibly corrupt.
*Tip O’Neill-Man of the House: the Life and Political Memoirs of Thomas P. O’Neill. For those who aren’t aware, Tip O’Neill was a Rep from Massachusetts, who became Majority Leader and later Speaker of the House in the 1970s. He retired in 1986, and was Reagan’s main opponent, in the Democratic party in the 80s.
Originally posted by zigaretten
inre my tying of HH and DD through the Bonus Marcher debacle
Yes, and?
Well, as I recall, I said nothing whatsoever about Allied forces, PTO, or Japan. Therefore, any beef that I may have is most assuredly not with FDR or HST. Nor, for that matter, did I impugn the name of HH in regards anything except the Bonus Marchers. Quite a feat for someone raised to believe strictly in the goodness of Saint Franklin Delano, and that the country went to hell in a truck once HH was elected. So read carefully next time.
and this:
I’m damned if I know what to say about. Are you capable of ascertaining the attractiveness of all first ladies? If so, what guidelines do you follow? I, for one, would be simply fascinated to know. And what does her possession of a firearm have to do with anything whatsoever?
Waste
Flick Lives!
Johnson - he was obscene plus Vietnam and I think he had something to do with JFKs assasination
Wilson - racist
Who the spic-n-span is Deedee?
**
Well, actually, that was my point as well.
I pointed out that, when MacArthur was faced with mass starvation in Japan and wasn’t receiving any support from the Truman administration, he turned to Herbert Hoover for assistance. This was clearly stated as a refutation to an earlier suggestion that Hoover lacked “human emotion.”
Your reply was that MacArthur was once involved in an incident where a marcher was killed. I could have replied “Yes, and?” but I chose instead to suggest that I thought that your answer was impertinent by implying that many people were involved in this incident. I’m afraid I thought all of that was obvious. My apologies.
I then began to speculate about why you would have interjected such an irrelevant comment into the discussion. The only explanation I could think of at that moment was that you must feel that it is somehow to Hoovers discredit that he would work with Gen. MacArthur. But, as I pointed out, Hoover was hardly responsible for MacArthur’s position as governor of Japan.
But perhaps I didn’t read carefully enough. Why exactly do you feel that Hoovers efforts to feed the starving millions in Japan were shameful and indicative of his lack of human emotion?
**
I’ m embarrassed to admit this was supposed to be humorous. But as long as you’ve got me started I’ll just point out that yes, I am capable of having an opinion on the attractiveness of all First Ladies and a great many other people as well. The criteria which I use is very similar to that which you used in stating “I think he looks goony as all hell in his portrait at The Princeton Club about Wilson.
As for the firearm, I mentioned it because of the great respect I have for Lou Henry as a result of her behavior during the Boxer Rebellion (amongst other things) where she nursed the sick and wounded, took command of troops and personally stood watch duty on a number of occasions.
Originally posted by zigaretten:
MacArthur, aka Dugout Doug.
Well, yes. It came from me and was therefore quite impertinent.
Concern yourself not. Particularly since I’ve already gone on record saying that I thought Wilson was the worst. Frankly, I don’t know that much about HH. I’ve been to his birthplace, and as I have already said, was raised to believe that he singlehandedly destroyed the “workin’ man” in the US. Fortunately, I know better than to believe everything my dear departed grandmama told me.
Because I’m a smart-ass. The one thing that my grandmama said that I took to heart was, “Go with your strengths.”
More to DD’s discredit that he so gleefully joined in the fray and lied about the marchers, actually.
See above.
'Scool. It’s been quite some time since I last posted, and have become rusty at picking up on the nuances that others inject into their posts.
All fine and good, but you went on record saying, “. . .whose wife was not only the most attractive First Lady in American history. . .” not what I would consider to be opinion, but what the hell.
And sometimes I don’t let people know that I’m joking. For that I apologize.
And now that this thread seems to be headed in a direction that the OP didn’t intend, I would like to ask that we end this silliness and allow others to post who they think was the worst president ever. Fair enough?
Waste
Flick Lives!
From what I saw on TLC, my vote goes for David Atchison. He slept through his entire presidency.
David Rice Atchison? LOL.
(For the uninformed, his claim to fame is being President for one day, as Zachary Taylor did not want to be sworn in on a Sunday. The legality of Atchison’s “Presidency” is a matter of debate, but it’s an interesting story nonetheless.)
Fair enough.
Ron
Robert Mugabe. Any arguments? I shall have to ask you step outside the internet…
Oh! You meant which US president has been the worst. Sorry. 
Anyway I reckon that as stoopid as some of the ones listed above have been all-in-all you guys have been lucky to have them instead of some of the pychos out there.