WORST President? (Poll 2/3)

[Kludge]

Bump

 

[Fox McCloud]

is there even a point to having a 3rd poll, Kludge? At this point, it's pretty clear that it'll be down to Lincoln, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson....with the others barely making a mark...I doubt the final poll would be much different.

*shrug*

 

[SeanEdwards]

Wilson, for all the harm he did while in office, and for making moronic, meddling, international do-gooderism a mainstream ideology. What an asshole. And he looked like a fuckwit in that stovepipe hat.

I want to dig up his bones and pee on them.

 

[JS4Pat]

Can someone elaborate on the hatred of Abe?

Led the country into one of its bloodiest wars in history and destroyed State's Rights.

We have never recovered...

Read "The Real Lincoln"

 

[Theocrat]

Look on the Bright Side

Wilson, for all the harm he did while in office, and for making moronic, meddling, international do-gooderism a mainstream ideology. What an asshole. And he looked like a fuckwit in that stovepipe hat.

I want to dig up his bones and pee on them.

At least he was a Presbyterian!

 

[ItsTime]

i said bush because i wanted to be trendy

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Both FDR and Abraham Lincoln saved the Union from crises.

is there even a point to having a 3rd poll, Kludge? At this point, it's pretty clear that it'll be down to Lincoln, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson....with the others barely making a mark...I doubt the final poll would be much different.

*shrug*

This thread deals more with how people feel about the presidents than what they think about them based on a criteria. In fact, just setting up a criteria for this thread would take a substantial essay in the OP.
In defining the American character, FDR and Abraham Lincoln fit in perfectly with the likes of Benjamin Franklin, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Mark Twain. Figure that Abraham Lincoln is the American equivalent of Mahatma Gandhi in India. He has become a central figure on the world stage in regards to the development of the Social Contract theory. Gandhi read him a lot.
FDR was at war with a Robber Baron caste system during the time economists believed in the economic theory of Social Darwinism. He challenged the economic crisis with governmental sponsored organizations of labor. This organizational effort was ultimately successful against Social Darwinism, the political philosophy of the day which believed that the government shouldn't interfere with the economy because in nature the stong survive and the weak perish.
So, both of these great American leaders helped save the Union from crises.

 

[AutoDas]

This thread deals more with how people feel about the presidents than what they think about them based on a criteria. In fact, just setting up a criteria for this thread would take a substantial essay in the OP.
In defining the American character, FDR and Abraham Lincoln fit in perfectly with the likes of Benjamin Franklin, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Mark Twain. Figure that Abraham Lincoln is the American equivalent of Mahatma Gandhi in India. He has become a central figure on the world stage in regards to the development of the Social Contract theory. Gandhi read him a lot.
FDR was at war with a Robber Baron caste system during the time economists believed in the economic theory of Social Darwinism. He challenged the economic crisis with governmental sponsored organizations of labor. This organizational effort was ultimately successful against Social Darwinism, the political philosophy of the day which believed that the government shouldn't interfere with the economy because in nature the stong survive and the weak perish.
So, both of these great American leaders helped save the Union from crises.

If it were decided that it is best to let the poor starve to death, it would not be a decision based on the science of evolution. The word "fittest" doesn't mean either strong or week. Sometimes the freak, the weak or the small are the only animals that can survive a change in the environment. Much the way the small mammals survived to over take the dinosaurs during a cataclysm that was believed to have happened some 60 million years ago.

You contradict yourself.

FDR and his New Dealers were the robber barons, Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller were the captains of industry.

 

[howmanysheepcanyouherd]

It was a toss up between wilson and FDR for me. I think the fact that Wilson is winning really shows that the RP people know their stuff.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Free the slave; bind the master.

You contradict yourself.

FDR and his New Dealers were the robber barons, Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller were the captains of industry.

When the Robber Barons were deployed to create industries, the government involved itself in the nation's economy by giving them huge amounts of resources. This economic policy by the government established a rich class.
It was during the Great Depression that the government changed its economic policy to one of non-involvement on the philosophy of Social Darwinism -- the strong thrive while the weak perish. It is during this time that a poor class was established.
This establishment of a rich and a poor class by the government violated the principles of positive government -- the kind of government which ideally sits all citizens at the dinner table together. In other words, these economic policies reestablished in the United States an economy which appeared much like the master/slave economies of the primitive tribal civilizations.
In order to challenge this new master class set up in the United States, FDR invested in the poor. This policy was later challenged in court. This investment wasn't challenged by corporations or companies, no; to the contrary, FDR's policy was challenged by a master class that was earlier established by the United State's government.
The ultimate civil purpose of the U.S. Constitution was and still is to abolish the primitive economic caste systems of old where masters and slaves functioned peacefully together. The economic policies established by the government before and during the Great Depression eroded our nation towards tyranny by reestablishing that kind of disparity.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

This isn't a matter of interpretation but a matter of being an American or not.

It was a toss up between wilson and FDR for me. I think the fact that Wilson is winning really shows that the RP people know their stuff.

While it is the lawyers who know their legal stuff, I'm a client. My forefathers didn't intend that I live as a bound client to legal tyrnny but as a free citizen ruled by a Constitutional government. As a citizen I don't need a lawyer to interpret the civil purpose in the Constitution because such truths are "self evident" in that they have been "unalienably" imprinted on the souls of every human being.
So, according to the founding fathers, one either has to agree with their declaration, a proclamation which can't be misunderstood or misinterpreted, or he or she isn't an American.
While legal precedents can be misinterpreted, the civil purpose is undeniable.

 

[AutoDas]

You are getting your antebellum South confused with the industrial revolution. It is not slavery to work for a wage.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Free the slave; bind the master.

You are getting your antebellum South confused with the industrial revolution. It is not slavery to work for a wage.

There exists a "self evident" truth in the Constitution which is undeniable to both liberal and conservative American alike. This truth reduces itself to a degree that is it indelibly imprinted as "unalienable" onto every soul. So, according to our founding fathers, the conscience of all human beings know certain truths.

 

[MS0453]

This thread deals more with how people feel about the presidents than what they think about them based on a criteria. In fact, just setting up a criteria for this thread would take a substantial essay in the OP.
In defining the American character, FDR and Abraham Lincoln fit in perfectly with the likes of Benjamin Franklin, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Mark Twain. Figure that Abraham Lincoln is the American equivalent of Mahatma Gandhi in India. He has become a central figure on the world stage in regards to the development of the Social Contract theory. Gandhi read him a lot.
FDR was at war with a Robber Baron caste system during the time economists believed in the economic theory of Social Darwinism. He challenged the economic crisis with governmental sponsored organizations of labor. This organizational effort was ultimately successful against Social Darwinism, the political philosophy of the day which believed that the government shouldn't interfere with the economy because in nature the stong survive and the weak perish.
So, both of these great American leaders helped save the Union from crises.

They may have "saved" the "union", but they completely squashed out American liberties in the process. And if Lincoln and Roosevelt contributed to the American Character, that would probably explain the pitiful state America finds itself in today.


Besides, your history is completely invented. FDR fought the economists? Who do you think constructed the New Deal? The intellectuals of course! The man admittedly never read a book on economics. I would highly suggest losing the romanticism.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Free the slave; bind the master.

They may have "saved" the "union", but they completely squashed out American liberties in the process. And if Lincoln and Roosevelt contributed to the American Character, that would probably explain the pitiful state America finds itself in today.

The purpose of establishing revolutions and movements where blood is sacrificed and our Constitutional government is reestablished respectively, is to define the American character. In his Gettisburg address, Abraham Lincoln consecrated the blood shed in the civil war to the founding fathers and the Declaration of Independence.
Likewise, Ralph Waldo Emerson, the father of the American movement called transcendentalism, helped reestablish the distinct culture of what it was to be an American citizen as defined in the Declaration of Independence. Before that time, Americans had fallen into a stupor where they reverted bacl to living more like Europeans.
Finally, Martin Luther King established that it is UnAmerican to be hateful. This distinct insight into the American culture is all we need to take from the civil rights movement while such a claim can be substantiated extensively from quotes made by the founding fathers.

Besides, your history is completely invented. FDR fought the economists? Who do you think constructed the New Deal? The intellectuals of course! The man admittedly never read a book on economics. I would highly suggest losing the romanticism.

The Constitution had a civil purpose. That purpose took up the primitive economy in regards to the old caste system which had masters ruling over slaves versus the more modern economy which was based on the theory of positive government. As the master and slave did not share authority in the primitive caste systems, the civil purpose of positive government is to ideally sit every face at the dinner table. A person's face represents authority.
If the civil purpose of our Constitution isn't to rid our nation consistantly of its natural tendencies to erode back to the tyrannies of the past caste systems, then what good is it?

 

[AutoDas]

Are you sure you're in the right place? I've seen constitutionalists before, but you take it to a socialist level like Gravel that I don't want to see.
The Constitution is a social contract between its people represented through the states to the federal government. Its role in society is to protect life, liberty, and property. Does it make you feel good when you say that the government is supposed to seat everyone at the table? I don't want to sit at the same table as those people. Once see a parasite like that, you know it's true what Hitler remarked that the swine eat the flesh of their own.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Free the slave; bind the master.

Are you sure you're in the right place? I've seen constitutionalists before, but you take it to a socialist level like Gravel that I don't want to see.

I am part of a bi-partisan movement to reestablish and reconsecrate the Constitutional government of the United States. This bi-partisan movement is made up of liberals, communists, lesbians, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, whites, catholics, Jews, women, atheists, scythians, Protestants, Insurance companies, militants, nuns, ex-Green Berets, politicians, lawyers, oil company executives, heterosexuals, feminists and lumberjacks.
Why are you afraid of the word socialist? Hatred is the greatest threat against the United States today, not liberalism, Marxism, socialism, or communism.

The Constitution is a social contract between its people represented through the states to the federal government. Its role in society is to protect life, liberty, and property. Does it make you feel good when you say that the government is supposed to seat everyone at the table? I don't want to sit at the same table as those people. Once see a parasite like that, you know it's true what Hitler remarked that the swine eat the flesh of their own.

Once again, I'm only a political scientist who likes to fish. I am not a lawyer which means I don't know anything about the secondary legal precedents outside of the Constitution. This ample amount of free time allows me to actually talk about fishing while I am fishing.