BEST president in US history?

Ask the people of El Salvador what they think of President Reagan, whose only crime was to vote in a leftist leader in the 80's and had to suffer through the death squads because of it.

Yeah, Reagan is loved down there.

WTF wrote:

How the hell did Reagan make the list, and not Clinton ?!?
Reagan is the reason this country is in the financial crisis we're in!
Reaganomics sucked!!!
Bill Clinton may have been a poor excuse of a man of moral character, but he was the greatest president of my lifetime!!!

Big, Bad Billy and the 106th Congress enacted the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act(corporate welfare) on November 12, 1999. Thats what led to the '07 subprime mortgage crisis.

In other words...thank Bill for the economy, not Reagan. Under Reagan the dollar was strong. Thanks to Bill we'll probably hafta start using the Amero. Bill and Barack, actually; dont wanna take away credit from Barry.

Hiker2009 wrote:

<quoted text>
Technically, he did accept a salary. He asked that all of his expenses be paid for. Washington made out by doing it this way. His annual salary would have been $25,000, for a total of $200,000 for 8 years. The lowest estimate on his expenses over 8 years was $450,000.
Herbert Hoover declined a salary after the stock market crash and footed the bill for all White House expenses incurred by him (state dinners, etc). Him and his wife also donated millions to relief efforts and neither knew about the other's donations until the death of his wife in 1944, when he found out.

Hoover looks good in retrospect. I still woulda voted for Al Smith myself, though.

Lincoln, hands down.

JFK? hahahaha give me a break.

Thomas Jefferson is the best. Look at his quotes sometime and see how he predicted much of what is going on today.

Dr_Dirty wrote:

Lincoln, hands down.
JFK? hahahaha give me a break.

European people seem to like J.F. Kennedy. I don't know why. Probably because he was Catholic like most of them.
He did't finish his term and got killed by we don't know who. What exactly was great about him as a president. Nothing.

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>
European people seem to like J.F. Kennedy. I don't know why. Probably because he was Catholic like most of them.
He did't finish his term and got killed by we don't know who. What exactly was great about him as a president. Nothing.

Kennedy, like most democratic presidents, knew they way to a strong economy was to provide for a strong working class and not to over tax the lower income families. Conservatives have the ridiculous idea that reducing the tax rate on the wealthiest 10% of the country will somehow trickle down to the lower class and give them a better life. They forget to factor 'GREED' into that equation. That tax break money is never reinvested by the wealthist, but skimed off the top of their business profits and merely used to expand the economic gap between the classes. Clinton understood this delima as well and created one of the strongest lower-middle class economy this country has ever seen. Reagan and both Bushes did nothing to bridge the gap between economic classes in this country!

Class Act wrote:

<quoted text>
Kennedy, like most democratic presidents, knew they way to a strong economy was to provide for a strong working class and not to over tax the lower income families. Conservatives have the ridiculous idea that reducing the tax rate on the wealthiest 10% of the country will somehow trickle down to the lower class and give them a better life. They forget to factor 'GREED' into that equation. That tax break money is never reinvested by the wealthist, but skimed off the top of their business profits and merely used to expand the economic gap between the classes. Clinton understood this delima as well and created one of the strongest lower-middle class economy this country has ever seen. Reagan and both Bushes did nothing to bridge the gap between economic classes in this country!

So, your only measure of greatness is whether or not the prez could crate more wealth?

Just trying to figure you out here, pal.

create

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>
European people seem to like J.F. Kennedy. I don't know why. Probably because he was Catholic like most of them.
He did't finish his term and got killed by we don't know who. What exactly was great about him as a president. Nothing.

Because Europeans, and increasingly more Americans are socialist and prefer a government that's going to wipe their azzes from cradle to grave.

Dr_Dirty wrote:

<quoted text>
Because Europeans, and increasingly more Americans are socialist and prefer a government that's going to wipe their azzes from cradle to grave.

Socialism is not about taking care of people from cradle to grave. It is to make sure that help is provided to tbe needy. If some one is rich and doesn't need help the government couldn't care less.

Socialists in Europe in the early 19th century realized that people were not born equal in wealth and in health and these unfortunate people ( who can be our own children too ) should be provided for by the government. It s a noble thought.

There are people who were born millionaires just because they have rich parents like the Hiltons or the Gates. There are people who were born with infirmities or dirt poor just because it is like that. Taxing the rich a bit more and redistribute the nation's wealth more evenly is the job of the government.

The US declaration of Independence says that "men are created equal..." but in fact they are not created equal...
Quote...
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. &#8212; That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.....unquote

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>
Socialism is not about taking care of people from cradle to grave. It is to make sure that help is provided to tbe needy. If some one is rich and doesn't need help the government couldn't care less.

Sure in the ideal world that's all it is, but increasingly more and more people are on the public dole in some form or another for the sole reason because they can be, not through any real need.

This is bad socialism and what the US is turning into at an ever increasing and alarming rate.

George W. Bush.you will say the same in about 2 more years.

Dr_Dirty wrote:

JFK? hahahaha give me a break.

He did a great job handling the Cuban Missile Crisis. We could have faced nuclear war-in fact, that we didnt face nuclear war was amazing. He deserves all of the credit he gets for how he handled that situation.

The BEST President in U.S. History is Sarah Palin, elected November, 2012 !!!

edited

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>
Socialism is not about taking care of people from cradle to grave. It is to make sure that help is provided to tbe needy. If some one is rich and doesn't need help the government couldn't care less.

Please define "needy." And your last sentence in the above paragraph makes no sense or point.

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>Socialists ...realized that people were not born equal in wealth and in health and these unfortunate people should be provided for by the government. It's a noble thought.

It is thought to be "noble" by those who have no initiative or sense of personal responsibility. Many of the wealthiest people in history were born dirt poor - it was their own drive that created their wealth. No government is an independently wealthy entity - gov't money comes from taxation; taxes are paid by working or independently wealthy citizens; therefore, any money possessed by any gov't belongs to the governed. What *reason* indicates to you that money TAKEN from those who earn it or are independently wealthy be GIVEN to those "not born equal in wealth and in health?" Shouldn't the able-bodied work and provide for themselves AND for their family members who are less healthy?

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>There are people who were born millionaires just because they have rich parents like the Hiltons or the Gates. There are people who were born with infirmities or dirt poor just because it is like that. Taxing the rich a bit more and redistribute the nation's wealth more evenly is the job of the government.

There are "people who were born millionaires" because they had ancestors who WORKED for that money. There are people born "dirt poor" because they had no such ancestors. Please expound on why you believe it is fair to take money away from those with a drive to succeed and give it to those who are content to do nothing for themselves.

The job of any gov't is to protect Country and citizens - not to play the part of Robin Hood.

Valkyrian Ride wrote:

The BEST President in U.S. History is Sarah Palin, elected November, 2012 !!!

You're a f*cking idiot! But then, everyone already know that now dont they?

edited

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>The US declaration of Independence says that "men are created equal..." but in fact they are not created equal.

Please prove your statement. Do not include the mentally infirm in your rebuttal. Please prove that one person born with full mental abilities is not equal to any other person born with full mental abilities.

The Examiner wrote:

<quoted text>"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

Translated for those who seem unable to comprehend it: Any IDIOT can see the truth of this: all able-bodied persons enter this world in the same way and with the same abilities. By virtue of being born, each person has the right to a life not held back because of their parents (as in "peasant vs royalty") and that their life is not dictated at the whim of a Monarch or Dictator; they are born free and should remain free so long as they are law-abiding; and each one has the RIGHT to work toward that which will make THEM, individually, happy with their life. And, to make SURE that happens, those people are hereby creating a government made up of such people to ensure no Monarchy or Dictatorship removes these rights - and those we chose to fill those positions in government will be closely watched.

"Pursuit" ... as in "to persue" ... "endeavor to achieve" ... "WORK to obtain." It is NOT "happiness" to which anyone has a right. It is the PURSUIT of such happiness to which everyone is entitled simply by being born.

No where does that document state that those who are too lazy or irresponsible to achieve comfort for themselves are entitled to the earnings of those who work for what they have.

Your entire posts reeks of a socialist Canadian who has never obtained a thing for yourself by your own efforts, but who fully believes you are entitled to a portion of the earnings of your fellow countrymen simply because you were BORN.

Please do not attempt to determine the intent of OUR Declaration of Independence.

Captain O wrote:

Best president ever:
Franklin D. Roosevelt.

What exactly did FDR do? We are seeing that his New Deal did not get us out of the depression and that he may have known about Pearl Harbor but opted against warning our forces out there.

Ronald Reagan in my lifetime gets my vote.