worst President of last 100 years?

[PubliusInfinitum]

why is jfk never on this list......

but worst i lived through....carter......

biggest bonehead manuver.....nixion and clinton getting caught......

We only get 10 choices and I didn't think anyone would pick Kennedy as the worst in the last 100.

If one puts Reagan there and not Kennedy it shows an inherent bias by the orginal poster of the thread.

Granted, Kennedy had somewhat minimal actual legislative impact vs a two termer, but people so often forget that his polling numbers were in decline just prior to his death - he was not nearly so admired as people wish to believe. His death secured his place in America because of the tragedy of that event, and the marked downturn in American society in general - the remainder of the 60's were quite tumultous.

That being said, Kennedy was a military Hawk, and reduced taxes which set up the economic growth of the mid to late 1960s, so he showed potential.

Lastly, the Democrat Party of Kennedy is not the Democrat Party of today. I am convinced Kennedy would be quite shocked at the remnants of his party. By today's Democrat standards, Kennedy would be a conservative Democrat or a moderate Republican - certainly nothing like Obama's apparent agenda...

The closest Democrat politician alive today comparable to Jack Kennedy is Zell Miller... Kennedy was a rabid anti-Communist and would have absolutely no ideological kinship with the socialists running the Democrat Party today.

 

[Agnapostate]

FDR sucked massively from a historical standpoint and did massive damage to the nation, as did LBJ and Carter.

This isn't another repetition of the idiotic claim that the New Deal was "Keynesian," is it?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Well, just to be cruel, I'm gonna advance a direct and unabiguous challenge to you to DEFINE: "Neo-liberal Policies and to SPECIFY WHAT "REAGAN" Initiated policies you 'feel' falls under this absurdity.

Now understand I fully expect you to be wholly unable to support this and that is the reason for the challenge...

Now that doesn't mean that I don't expect you to try... only that like your contest of the assertion of President Hussein's Marxism, that you'll AGAIN end up proving yourself to be dead wrong and a fool in general.

Is that a joke, idiot? Your flagrant stupidity in regards to Obama's "Marxism" was so ridiculously pathetic...you didn't even know what crisis theory or efficiency wages were...you knew nothing of Marxian political economy.

There were significant declines in annual average growth rates of GDP per capita during the neoliberal era of the eighties and the early-to-mid 90's...not that you'd have any familiarity with relevant economic topics.

Ok... So you can't define neo-liberal

And you can't cite a SINGLE REAGAN INITIATED POLICY WHICH YOU CAN SHOW TO MEET YOUR FEELINGS REGARDING NEO-LIBERAL...

And you're completely ignorant of the rates of growth in Gross Domestic Product in the 1980s;

And you trying to qualify GDP growth through assigning a 'per capita' context... HYSTERICAL! Four of a KIND... Man that is almost PURE IDIOCY. Very impressive.


ROFLMNAO... Damn sis you are one pathetic tool.

Here's the link to this imbecile's last couple of FAILURES:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708 This wasn't just a failure, it was an EPIC FAILURE; a TOTAL ROUTE.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198 This was something well south of pathetic... but she begged me... and I can't resist a bitch that begs for it.

 

[Agnapostate]

Ok... So you can't define neo-liberal and you can't cite a SINGLE REAGAN INITIATED POLICY WHICH YOU CAN SHOW TO MEET YOUR FEELINGS REGARDING NEO-LIBERAL...

ROFLMNAO... Damn sis you are one pathetic tool.

Here's the link to this imbecile's last couple of EPIC FAILURES:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708 This wasn't just a failure, it was an EPIC FAILURE; a TOTAL ROUTE.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198 This was something well south of pathetic... but she begged me... and I can't resist a bitch that begs for it.

Are you really this stupid? Not only do you actually seem eager to flaunt your blatant ignorance of Marxian political economy, I just cited growth declines as a result of neoliberal policies.

Moreover, trade liberalization promotes adverse socioeconomic impacts as long as heavily industrialized countries entice poorer and underdeveloped countries into remaining dependent on trade with them rather than utilizing their productive assets into forming a viable manufacturing and industrial sector of their own, much the same way that capitalism necessitates worker dependence on the wage provider, so that he may deprive them of the products of their labor.

I would recommend having a look at Ha Joon-Chang's Kicking Away the Ladder.

I'll detail Gini coefficient measurements of increasing inequality if you wish to persist with your idiocy.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Ok... So you can't define neo-liberal and you can't cite a SINGLE REAGAN INITIATED POLICY WHICH YOU CAN SHOW TO MEET YOUR FEELINGS REGARDING NEO-LIBERAL...

ROFLMNAO... Damn sis you are one pathetic tool.

Here's the link to this imbecile's last couple of EPIC FAILURES:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708 This wasn't just a failure, it was an EPIC FAILURE; a TOTAL ROUTE.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198 This was something well south of pathetic... but she begged me... and I can't resist a bitch that begs for it.

Are you really this stupid? Not only do you actually seem eager to flaunt your blatant ignorance of Marxian political economy, I just cited growth declines as a result of neoliberal policies.

NOooooooo Sis.. you didn't CITE anything but your opinion... I CHALLENGED YOU TO DEFINE 'NEO-LIBERAL' and to CORRELATE YOUR DEFINITION OF NEO-LIBERAL TO SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY...

A challenge which I stated would result in your failure, as failing seems to be your gift...

A Challenge which oddly enough YOU FAILED TO MEET.

Just as you failed to meet these:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708

But Ag... I pride myself on giving credit where credit is due... and it's clear to me that you're doing the very BEST YOU CAN! God bless Ya...

 

[Agnapostate]

NOooooooo Sis.. you didn't CITE anything but your opinion... I CHALLENGED YOU TO DEFINE 'NEO-LIBERAL' and to CORRELATE YOUR DEFINITION OF NEO-LIBERAL TO SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY...

A challenge which I stated would result in your failure, as failing seems to be your gift...

A Challenge which oddly enough YOU FAILED TO MEET.

Just as you failed to meet these:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708

But Ag... I pride myself on giving credit where credit is due... and it's clear to me that you're doing the very BEST YOU CAN! God bless Ya...

Your idiocy becomes particularly apparent here. I referenced GDP declines and repression of infant industries through trade liberalization as effects of neoliberal expansion...incidentally, all you did in those other threads was show your profound ignorance of Marxian political economy. As I said previously, you don't even know what crisis theory is.

 

[DavidS]

No one's said Obama, yet....

 

[Dr. T. Sanchez]

Jimmy Carter was a terrible President, and his political progeny (today's President) could very well exceed his detrimentalness. The USA survived the four years of that chump's "leadership", and will survive the next poor Presidency.

 

[Peejay]

The lack of a single vote for Warren Harding in this poll speaks volumes.

 

[garyd]

Carter Narrowly decision LBJ. As bad as the Great Society was Carter managed to not only make it worse but he shut down Drilling which gave us four dollar a gallon gas until the economy went bust proving to anyone with a brain that no gouging was going on, he could have kept the Ayahtollah's from seizing power in Iran but didn't Allowed Saddam Hussein to seize power, and in genearl in terms of Foreign policy made virtually everyone one else in the last hundred years look like a pure unadulterated genius. The only thing the man's done right is help build house for habitat for humanity.

 

[Peejay]

The only thing the man's done right is help build house for habitat for humanity.

And maybe the Nobel Prize thingy ?

Or do they just draw names from a hat for that ?

 

[elvis]

The only thing the man's done right is help build house for habitat for humanity.

And maybe the Nobel Prize thingy ?

Or do they just draw names from a hat for that ?

Considering Al Whore won it, you may be on to something here.

 

[Peejay]

No one voted for Nixon either ? Where the hell have I laned ?

 

[garyd]

He got His Noble prize for what precisely? Pissing on GWB longer and louder than anyone else? And more ignorantly as well. Given that in his case the peace prize was a break from recent tradition - it didn't go to a war mongering ass hat - one can't make any other assumption.

 

[elvis]

He got His Noble prize for what precisely? Pissing on GWB longer and louder than anyone else? And more ignorantly as well. Given that in his case the peace prize was a break from recent tradition - it didn't go to a war mongering ass hat - one can't make any other assumption.

are you talking about Carter or Whore?

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

NOooooooo Sis.. you didn't CITE anything but your opinion... I CHALLENGED YOU TO DEFINE 'NEO-LIBERAL' and to CORRELATE YOUR DEFINITION OF NEO-LIBERAL TO SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY...

A challenge which I stated would result in your failure, as failing seems to be your gift...

A Challenge which oddly enough YOU FAILED TO MEET.

Just as you failed to meet these:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-4.html#post1038708

But Ag... I pride myself on giving credit where credit is due... and it's clear to me that you're doing the very BEST YOU CAN! God bless Ya...

Your idiocy becomes particularly apparent here. I referenced GDP declines and repression of infant industries through trade liberalization as effects of neoliberal expansion...incidentally, all you did in those other threads was show your profound ignorance of Marxian political economy. As I said previously, you don't even know what crisis theory is.

No sis... you did that in the SECOND POST... AFTER YOU HAD ALREADY FAILED.

Secondly... in the second post after your FAILURE, you referenced your OPINION; an opinion of the BASELESS VARIETY... I.e.: 'Liberal trade policy" is NOT something which you've either defined NOR have you correlated that vague reference to ANY SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY INITIATIVE... WHICH YOU WERE DIRECTLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY CHALLENGED TO DO... a challenge which you've failed to meet; now beyond THAT: "GDP Declines?" Declines from when? What period are you contrasting the 80s against? Are you dropping the assinine 'per capita' qualification?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/politics/politics/politi...ml#post1038708

What I did in these posts was watch you advance EPIC FAILURES... Your argument realized a TOTAL ROUTE... You were utterly, thoroughly eviscerated; your entire argument discredited through it's entirety. That you fled the thread, under witness and now are desperately trying to deny your loss is the equivilent of President Hussein declaring victory over the American Army at the end of the Gulf War.

Classic delusion of the weak mind...

 

[Agnapostate]

Your idiocy becomes particularly apparent here. I referenced GDP declines and repression of infant industries through trade liberalization as effects of neoliberal expansion...incidentally, all you did in those other threads was show your profound ignorance of Marxian political economy. As I said previously, you don't even know what crisis theory is.

No sis... you did that in the SECOND POST... AFTER YOU HAD ALREADY FAILED.

Secondly... in the second post after your FAILURE, you referenced your OPINION; an opinion of the BASELESS VARIETY... I.e.: 'Liberal trade policy" is NOT something which you've either defined NOR have you correlated that vague reference to ANY SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY INITIATIVE... WHICH YOU WERE DIRECTLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY CHALLENGED TO DO... a challenge which you've failed to meet; now beyond THAT: "GDP Declines?" Declines from when? What period are you contrasting the 80s against? Are you dropping the assinine 'per capita' qualification?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/politics/politi...ml#post1038708

What I did in these posts was watch you advance EPIC FAILURES... TOTAL ROUTES... Utterly eviscerated your entire argument, from through it's entirety. That you fled the thread, under witness and now are desperately trying to deny your loss is the equivilent of President Hussein declaring victory over the American Army at the end of the Gulf War.

Classic delusion of the weak mind...[/QUOTE]

What a clownish buffoon you are...I've realized how you're able to claim victory. You post truckloads of obnoxious, inane bullshit until everyone's patience expires, and then declare yourself King of the Sandbox.

Loser.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Your idiocy becomes particularly apparent here. I referenced GDP declines and repression of infant industries through trade liberalization as effects of neoliberal expansion...incidentally, all you did in those other threads was show your profound ignorance of Marxian political economy. As I said previously, you don't even know what crisis theory is.

No sis... you did that in the SECOND POST... AFTER YOU HAD ALREADY FAILED.

Secondly... in the second post after your FAILURE, you referenced your OPINION; an opinion of the BASELESS VARIETY... I.e.: 'Liberal trade policy" is NOT something which you've either defined NOR have you correlated that vague reference to ANY SPECIFIC REAGAN POLICY INITIATIVE... WHICH YOU WERE DIRECTLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY CHALLENGED TO DO... a challenge which you've failed to meet; now beyond THAT: "GDP Declines?" Declines from when? What period are you contrasting the 80s against? Are you dropping the assinine 'per capita' qualification?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus.html#post1033198

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/politics/politics/politics/politi...ml#post1038708

What I did in these posts was watch you advance EPIC FAILURES... TOTAL ROUTES... Utterly eviscerated your entire argument, from through it's entirety. That you fled the thread, under witness and now are desperately trying to deny your loss is the equivilent of President Hussein declaring victory over the American Army at the end of the Gulf War.

Classic delusion of the weak mind...

What a clownish buffoon you are...I've realized how you're able to claim victory. You post truckloads of obnoxious, inane bullshit until everyone's patience expires, and then declare yourself King of the Sandbox.

Loser.

Oh I hear ya... and you're ability to make assertions and then RUSH to prove yourself incapable of supporting them; only to show up somewhere else and claim ya did, is astounding.

Here're a couple of classic examples of where you failed to support your assertions:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/68889-obama-as-a-marxist-post1038456.html#post1038456

http://www.usmessageboard.com/the-flame-zone/69101-to-pubertus-post1033198.html#post1033198

It's the working definition of a psychotic...

 

[DiamondDave]

Demand fell and the Alaska pipe came on line. Iran went kaput with production and OPEC production fell over all. The result was a surplus and cuts in production.

All that doesn't change the fact that Carter was the man who told the nation we must reduce our dependance on foreign oil. Same thing we're being told now, 30 years later.

Any fucking moron could tell that dependence of foreign oil was not a positive thing... but with all the talk, Carter actually did WORSE in terms of current term actions of energy need.. He was bound and determined to push towards alternatives, yet knew that by a technological standpoint it was not feasible whatsoever..

he is too easily credited with a drop in foreign oil imports, without taking into consideration the overall situation at the time...

The bozo failed in every aspect of leadership during his term as prez.. and whether he was a nice guy or had good intentions at heart, does not detract from that.. It's like pipe dreaming, while the castle falls down around you

Well Jesus Christ man, if something isn't currently feasible from a technological standpoint, lets just give up.

Here's what W. had to say in 2005:

"This is a problem that's been a long time in coming. We haven't had an energy policy in this country."

That's exactly what I've been saying to the American people -- 10 years ago if we'd had an energy strategy, we would be able to diversify away from foreign dependence. And -- but we haven't done that. And now we find ourselves in the fix we're in."

Ahem....George, you might want to read this: American Experience | Jimmy Carter | Primary Sources

All this pissing and moaning about energy and foreign oil dependence. The guy had a plan 30 years ago. Now here we are 30 years later with damn near every politician out there presenting the same damned plan and no one with the nuts to give the man any credit. He wasn't the best president ever but the most honest in my lifetime and the best vision for putting the country on track for the long run. I know, I know, you want it now. Good luck.

Ahem...

You don't sink money from a down economy and an indebted government into 30 year pipe dreams... and you certainly don't put all your eggs into that basket...

Besides that it is not government's job to force that and research that or fund all of that research on their own... if there is business and a profit there, companies will go in that direction

The guy had a plan... the plan fucking sucked... as did the rest of his decisions and his entire Presidency


We would have been better off with a rabid gibbon than Carter

 

[007]

The worst President in the last 100 years WILL be obama. He has an excellent start.