Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well actually, I should have said the end result was great for the religious theocracy that controls Iran. Removing Hussein gave them much more power in the Middle East region. Everyone from Israel to the Arab Gulf states to Egypt are all worried about Iran at this point, and our invasion of Iraq played a big role in that... That's W's legacy.
Well actually, I should have said the end result was great for the religious theocracy that controls Iran. Removing Hussein gave them much more power in the Middle East region. Everyone from Israel to the Arab Gulf states to Egypt are all worried about Iran at this point, and our invasion of Iraq played a big role in that... That's W's legacy.
Well there was an axis of evil. Now it's a couple of marginalized states against the world.
Reagan was pretty dismal and a big spender. He was even dismal as a governor here in CA. And before that he was dismal as a B movie actor. Sort of like Arnold (luckily the latter couldn't run for Presidency)
Reagan was pretty dismal and a big spender. He was even dismal as a governor here in CA. And before that he was dismal as a B movie actor. Sort of like Arnold (luckily the latter couldn't run for Presidency)
Presidents don't spend - Congress does. Please, study civics 101.
How can Obama be "ranked?" We still have to see what else he does to damage the country... we already know that he is outspending even G.W. Bush.
great point. I have been wondering the same thing: any poll that is ranking him now is a phony as they come. I don't mean the polls that ask the voters what they think of him at this time.
Reagan was pretty dismal and a big spender. He was even dismal as a governor here in CA. And before that he was dismal as a B movie actor. Sort of like Arnold (luckily the latter couldn't run for Presidency)
as an actor, yes, as a governor, if he was so bad why was he one of the post popular governors in the history of the state? There is more to being a good versus back governor or Pres than spending. Did you consider why he spent or can you tell us how many governors ever actually gave money back to the residence of the state. I am not talking about tax cuts either.
This is an attempt to quantify a question of value. What qualities you value in a president are going to make all the difference.
My ten worst are the ten worst warmongers: Jackson, Polk, Lincoln, T. Roosevelt, Wilson, F.D. Roosevelt, L.B. Johnson, Nixon, and both Bushes.
Nixon did end the Vietnam War, but on the same terms he sabotaged in 1968, and he regarded himself as privileged royalty, not a public servant.
Lincoln may have had good intentions but thanks to him we had to keep the South.
I agree that this was a collosal error. We should've separated from the South to prevent the collosal vile ignorance that defined their culture from spilling over into the rest of the nation. We as a nation have been suffering ever since. Lincoln ended slavery and this I commend him for. Some of the others on the list allowed it to exist, and they certainly belong on any list of worst presidents.
I also agree about those damn Bushes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
