Who Was Your Fav. President ...

I do believe that the sexual misadventures (or misadventures of any kind) of those in office are an issue today because we know about them up front -- we have 24 hour news now and nothing is left unsaid.

We didn't know about Roosevelt and Eisenhour until later (or at least that's my understanding).

 

Romans did not do much in the Christian realm either but they were the government. Clinton wasn't our Spiritual leader, he was a "Ceasar", of which the Lord Himself separated from Himself.
Truthfully, Bush has got me really fearful for this Country by the way he has govern. He has made the whole world mad at us with his "cowboy" style and that little laugh of his. If we make people so mad they want to behead us all we are in trouble for sure. Again, Clinton morally didn't do anything the rest didn't do if they got a chance. Laura hangs on to George too close for him to get a chance but still wouldn't be surprised.
You and I won't live probably until the true judgement comes out for Clinton but years from now if time last they will be judging them again like we are doing and Clinton will be on top.

 

Interestingly enough, I happen to agree fully with this. There is no 'morals clause', in the U.S. Constitution, and a definite declaration of the following

I might possibly agree with some of this, but excuse me- , what exactly are we (The USA mainly, but some others) supposed to have done to "make people so mad at us that they want to behead us all...", that led to the Embassy bombing in Beirut (Apr. 18, 1983; 63 dead); the bombing of two Military Barracks at the Beirut (Oct.23, 1983; 241 US Marines & 58 french paratroopers dead); Pan-Am Flight 103, bombed and crashes at Lockerbie (270 dead); the bombing of the WTC (6 dead; 1000+ injured); Khobar Towers (19 dead, hundreds wounded); the Embassy bombings (1998- 224 dead, 4000+ injured); the bombing of the USS Cole- (17 dead); the 9-11 attacks (nearly 3000 killed) all long before the Iraq War, that I presume you are referring to; and long before any of this and before I was even born, the attack on Pearl Harbor (2400+ dead, 1100 wounded); the torpedoing of the Luisitania (nearly 1200 killed) and that was before most of us were born; and the attacks on the USA that led to the war of 1812. All I can say is "We've been 'making people so mad at us that they want to kill us' for two centuries.

I disagree, here. With all respect, you didn't hear things like this about Jimmy Carter (He only 'lusted in his heart'.); you didn't hear this about Gerald Ford; you didn't hear this about Walter Mondale; you didn't hear this about Ronald Reagan; you didn't hear this about George H.W. Bush; you didn't hear this about Dan Quayle (Please, no jokes here! But I will allow a snicker or two.); you didn't hear this about Bob Dole; you didn't hear this about Al Gore. This would seem to be several who held or sought the office of President or Vice President who you did not hear any of this stuff about (regardless of which of these politicos I agree with and/or disagree with), so I disagree with the oft put forth 'smart remark' that "They all do it!", because "They all don't do it."

With some, as might have been said in the former Soviet Union- "Such things are not allowed, Comrade!":thumbsup: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

There were rumors about almost everyone of them. The one that really comes to mind is Hubert Humphrey who seemed to be "squeaky clean" but it came out about him running across the prostitutes red carpet in his birthday suit. What about Livingston who really came down hard on Clinton and him guilty of the same thing while he was accusing Clinton?

At least, we agree on most.

As far as making people mad, we invaded Iraq under a pretense.

 

As far as making others angry with Americans, it is not so much the deed, but the superior attitude that seems to prevail. I know, I know, it isn't really true and not all express it, but so many do.

For example, even on these forums, one would think that America was the only country losing men in Afghanistan. Canada has lost 5 men to American friendly fire alone. Canada is playing a major role in Afghanistan, but seldom gets any mention in American circles. This is part of that attitude thing.

Take the second great war. England and the Commonwealth troops had been actively engaged with the enemy for three years before the Yanks showed up in England to go on to "win the war". No wonder we said, "the yanks were over paid, over sexed and over here." Johnny come lately is what we thought.

I was generalizing when I said leaders were "all" guilty of the sex thing, but poor Mr. Clinton gets all the flack. I know all about the stories of Prince Charles' mucking about, but I would rather think about all the good he has done in rebuilding London, helping out in Wales during the mad cow crisis, and many other charitable events.

Even Mr. George Bush has gone out of his way lately to be friendly with Canada...he even knows where Ottawa is now. By the way, when he did visit, he said it was nice when Canadians waved to him.........and "they used all their fingers".

Cheers,

Jim

 

Yea, but you see, Jim---if it hadn't been for our Yanks----your commonwealth would have been

---spending Marks instead of Pounds

---driving on the right side of the road with steering wheels on the left side of the vehicle

Hitler had drawn a circle around all aeral maps of London-----No bombs dropped within so many meters of Westminister Abbey---his future headquarters!!!!!!

 

Sorry, not worth a response.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I stand corrected, Nixon ended the draft and started Vietnaminzation which brought our soldiers home.

 

Hey----you're the one who insulted the American GI presense there!!

The UK was within 3 days of lowering the Union Jack and raising a bright, clean white flag----when Hilter called his Luftwaffe home!!!

 

Fun Fact: Calvin Coolidge, a president of few words, was so famous for saying so little that a White House dinner guest made a bet that she could get the president to say more than two words. She told the president of her wager. His reply: "You lose."

 

Another Coolidge story: He was presiding over the Senate when a couple of senators got into it. One senator got angry enough to, shall we say, tell the other where he could go straight to...

The senator went up to Coolidge and said, "Did you hear what he said to me?"
Coolidge waited a moment, looked up, and replied, "Well, I've looked through the rule book. You don't have to go."

 

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Ed

 

Best: Theodore Roosevelt, epitomizing what the term "environmentalist" should mean, instead of kissing trees and alligators.

Worst: U.S. Grant, a drunk boob who made appointments based entirely on friendships.

 

President Lincoln . . . under severe conditions he continued to soldier on and lead the country through some of our darkest days.

FDR . . . Did a great job getting out of the way of the generals . . .

Under severe criticism he soldiers on and leads the country through some of our darkest days. . . Sounds like President Bush may or may not make that mark . . . I guess that will depend upon the historian.

A couple others have done extremely well as well . . .

 

George Washington: He indeed had a herculean task of leading our rag-tag Army against one of the greatest military powers ever; AND then the only man capable of leading this new Nation. He was an amazing man and did all with great dignity; but gave the credit to God.

Ronald Reagan:He restored dignity and pride in America after many years of heartaches and the worst president ever. It was uplifting and comforting to have a president end addresses by asking God to continue to Bless us! It only takes listening to one or any of his speeches to realize how much he was loved, is missed, and needed!


God blessed both with INTEGRITY, FORTITUDE, AND GRACE: :applause: :applause: :applause:

God Bless.

 

Since I've only been alive for Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr., I would vote Reagan as my favorite with Clinton and Carter tied for worst. I can't believe Bush gets slammed the way he does, while the oil wasn't any cheaper under Carter.

 

You notice how the prices drop as we get close to the elections?

I don't slam Bush for oil prices...I slam him for being the worst and most incompetent man to occupy the oval office.

 

More incompetent than JFK (who nearly got us blown up twice in 1000 days), Carter (who could not get it that the Soviets were bad guys), or Woodrow Wilson (whose foreign policy created the mess we are now dealing with)? Surely you jest. Bush has one big problem, which is shared by most of the serious Democrats who oppose him and also by most leading Republicans, that is, he thinks American-style democracy is possible in all places. The truth is that it is not possible in most of the world.

We had to write Japan's new constitution and stand over the Germans writing theirs after WW2, and we had to park armies in Japan and Germany (they are still there) to get those nations onto the path of democracy, rule of law, minority rights, etc., and they started out 'way ahead of where the Iraqis are ever going to be.

It took the English nearly a thousand years of trial and error to move democracy to where it was in 1689 with the English Bill of Rights (which reads a lot like our bill of rights, by the way), and our unique version of it developed slowly from 1620-1787 and has continued to evolve since then. It is illogical and futile for anyone to believe that American style democracy can be transplanted and thrive in less than two generations; and if Islam does not have a Reformation, two generations won't do it.

This does not make Bush II a bad president or a bad man--he simply believes the misconceptions that most of the politicians in the US and too many of the people hold.

It was right to invade Iraq and topple Saddam. But we should have kicked in the door, won the war, shot Saddam, and turned the whole thing over to one of his generals. It would have been a dictatorship, but perhaps we could have picked one which was not a paranoid sociopath. However, Bush and his men had been believing their speeches. These very competent men are sadly mistaken about this one basic issue. Far too few Americans have any understanding of Realpolitik, and this is a prime example. The media makes it worse, highlighting each election as if it was a vote for an American-style government--the truth is far more complex, and in all of the Middle East (secularist, Army-dominated Turkey being the exception) we have one of the worst possible environments for any Western-style governance.

Bush may leave office as Truman did, unpopular and unmissed, but like Truman time will treat him well, unlike Clinton and Carter.

Overall, Reagan is #1, but on this issue, it is Bush senior who had the insight from his years of diplomatic experience to know better than to take down the Iraqi regime in 1991--a decision he was widely condemned for over the next few years (full disclosure, I criticized him for that decision in several newspaper columns), but he was right.

The problem with the Democrats is that they are so morally bankrupt that they have no good alternatives to GOP leadership. They are so sold out to Gay organizations, feminists, and every other kind of nut that a national candidate of theirs cannot have positive moral convictions. I do not believe that anyone of prominence in the Democratic Party has any shred of integrity on any issue.

Very sad.

 

Tell Folley that!!!