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.
I think 50 years from now Bush won't be viewed quite so badly after he is not viewed through such partisan lenses. Bush actually attempted to rein in Freddie and Fannie before the crisis but Congress wouldn't have it. Obama was able to take out Bin Laden but that wouldn't have been possible had it not been for the policies put in place by Bush. Obama is really still up in the air. He has severely mishandled the economy in his first term leading to a stagnant recovery, but if things turn around in his second term he could be view more favorably. Unfortunately his policies of increased regulations on businesses and higher taxes will only further hurt the economy rather than help it.
not really, Wilson was my choice too, and I do not listen to Glen Beck.
Wilson kicked off the federal income tax and the war on drugs (Harrison act). Up to then coca and opium both had been sold legally. A lot of the impetus was racism. Wilson, like most progressives of the time, was overtly racist, and segregated the fed work force including the military. He didn't exactly invent the US as world police concept but he definitely moved it forward by getting us into WWII. After Wilson we were in the age of American Empire.
I think 50 years from now Bush won't be viewed quite so badly after he is not viewed through such partisan lenses. Bush actually attempted to rein in Freddie and Fannie before the crisis but Congress wouldn't have it. Obama was able to take out Bin Laden but that wouldn't have been possible had it not been for the policies put in place by Bush. Obama is really still up in the air. He has severely mishandled the economy in his first term leading to a stagnant recovery, but if things turn around in his second term he could be view more favorably. Unfortunately his policies of increased regulations on businesses and higher taxes will only further hurt the economy rather than help it.
I have to agree this may be true, but as you note, only history can tell. Partisan views often change over time. Hoover's efforts to deal with the depression would be considered downright socialist today.
Actually, I'm familiar with the Wilson administration. I'm also familiar with the nature of history, and the reality that the Presidency "most like a dictator" isn't something you can "look up", because it's not a fact but an arguable question. And, really, it's an absurd comparison. No American President has been any 'close' to being a dictator than a fish is 'close' to being a spider. That said, I'm not surprised to see that you've read it somewhere, and thus concluded that it is as indisputable and absolute a fact as 7 being a prime number.
It is also amusing to note that you get your 'history' from Johan Goldberg. Who is your source for 'science'? Bill O'Reilly?
James Buchanan. This should be obvious, he did nothing while the south seceded. The south had previously made several threats to secede before like during the Nullification crisis, but swift presidential action quashed it. Buchanan let the situation devolve into the creation of the Confederacy and full blown civil war.
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.
