Worst leader in the world ever (vehicle, racist, water)

[nanannie]

Originally Posted by bale002

We're going off topic now, but, though I'm not sure whether Paul and/or Kucinek would turn the country around for the better, at the very least they would present real choice, whereas for sure Bushton/Clintbush are a continuation of each other, in terms both actual policy and whom they represent, whether GeorgeBillGeorgeJrHilary and maybe later Jeb.

The US ruling class is becoming a bit incestuous, a bit like others around the world, nuts!

Cant disagree

[hello-world]

Originally Posted by internat

That is why I'm afraid not more people will listen to what Ron Paul has to say. He appear too intellectual to a lot of people. I hope this will turn out to be wrong. I'm afraid USA will end up having another deceitful administration made up of people such as Donald Rumsfeld:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol4qL3HgM4w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0fArr1p_LQ

Those two videos are self-explanatory why we need to see a change.

take a look at ron paul's "political courage test" answers on http://www.votesmart.org/npat.php?can_id=296 . just out of curiosity, do you think that these are good things? e.g., he appears to support reducing the federal government to nil, and moving it all towards the states and maybe especially the individual. personally, i'm not sure the states or the individual will have the wherewithall to look out for themselves (i think of things like this, for example: http://www.cbpp.org/1-13-05sfp2.htm), much like many of us don't have the wherewithall to design and build and maintain our own power plant, or our own car, or our own medicine, ... SOME specialized expertise, including government, legislation, enforcement seems useful (so long as it's put to GOOD use and the people pay attention to whether it is and vote/lobby/act accordingly), doesn't it? in theory i think it's nice to think that people can most effectively work for themselves along some of these lines, but in practice it seems that people simply can't or won't be bothered to do what's best for themselves (e.g., they sometimes do things they later regret only because the consequences of their poorly informed or executed earlier actions rear their ugly heads), and wealth concentrates, and so the means to exert will and influence concentrates, and so it's not really everyone being "liberated" when left to "everyone for themselves", is it?

[cpg35223]

I think anybody who says Bush is one of the worst world leaders ever is really indulging in stupid hyperbole.

I don't think he's a very good president. But anybody who votes him even one of the worst leaders in the past century doesn't know very much history.

Actually, Europe seems to be the Gold medallist for cranking out awful leaders. It's really breathtaking: Tsar Nicholas, Kaiser Wilhelm II, King Leopold II, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Enver Hoxha, Franco, Caesescu, any of the Soviet Politburo, Milosevic, Putin, and the idiot who is currently running Belarus. And the hits keep coming.

Asia, of course, has Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot, both Kims, Ferdinand Marcos, Burmese Generals, the Shah, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Hafez Assad, and pretty much 90% of the Arab leadership.

Africa has Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, Nigerian Generals, among many others.

Bush doesn't even come close.

[RuralCoastalGuy]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

I think anybody who says Bush is one of the worst world leaders ever is really indulging in stupid hyperbole.

I don't think he's a very good president. But anybody who votes him even one of the worst leaders in the past century doesn't know very much history.

Actually, Europe seems to be the Gold medallist for cranking out awful leaders. It's really breathtaking: Tsar Nicholas, Kaiser Wilhelm II, King Leopold II, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Enver Hoxha, Franco, Caesescu, any of the Soviet Politburo, Milosevic, Putin, and the idiot who is currently running Belarus. And the hits keep coming.

Asia, of course, has Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot, both Kims, Ferdinand Marcos, Burmese Generals, the Shah, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Hafez Assad, and pretty much 90% of the Arab leadership.

Africa has Idi Amin, Robert Mugabe, Nigerian Generals, among many others.

Bush doesn't even come close.

EXCELLENT POST SIR!

Does this surprise you when there are more and more pseudo intellectuals who are led around by the nose rings by their liberal media. When I think of all the brave men and women who fought and died so that we, yes including the irreverent liberals, could voice such acidic opinions of our President. Of course, Al Queda, The Chinese Communists, The North Korean Communists and the Iranian Radical Muslims (just to name a few) must be tickled to death when they read all the crap against President Bush by Americans. And lest we forget just look at Central and South America to see how it is to live in a country where freedom doesn't exist.

Pardon me while I go throw up!!!

[northsider]

Originally Posted by cpg35223

. But anybody who votes him even one of the worst leaders in the past century doesn't know very much history.

If you really believe other, previous posters don't know much about world history why did you include that buffoon Wilhelm? He didn't want nor start WWI. And he abdicated before it ended.

So perhaps we have two buffoon 'leaders'. Bush and Wilhelm.

[cpg35223]

Originally Posted by northsider

If you really believe other, previous posters don't know much about world history why did you include that buffoon Wilhelm? He didn't want nor start WWI. And he abdicated before it ended.

So perhaps we have two buffoon 'leaders'. Bush and Wilhelm.

He was a buffoon with absolute control over a very powerful nation. Wilhelm II, with his aggressive pre-war moves, buildup of his navy (without a clear strategic need for it, and giving Austria Hungary carte blanche against Serbia, did more to create World War I than anyone.

[Finland Boy]

I'm sure that's Hitler!

[Dariusz]

1. Woodrow Wilson
2. George W. Bush

[holloway1010]

Stalin. .........

[RuralCoastalGuy]

Originally Posted by Timothylogan3

so who do you guys think is the worst leader in the world, regardless of time and country?

After reading much of the ignorant replies in this thread by my fellow Americans who think that trashing our President is "cool", "hip" or a way to show they are avant garde, I would take the comments posted by Europeans who have actually had to ( and still do) live under these worst of the worst, as having more of a factual base..

In America we have the luxury of being able to insult and degrade our Presidents and forget that you cannot do that in most countries in the world?

Try calling the Presidents of Iran, North Korea, Argentina, and many many others the names some have posted against our American Presidents and see how far you get.

My vote would go to Adolph Hitler, Josef Stalin, and Mau Tse Tung as the top three.

My two cents.