Full Version: Who is the best US President in recent decades?
Who is the best US President in recent decades?
Bill Clinton. He had his pipe blown right there in the White House.
Nixon.
yup clinton
QUOTE(kunomchu @ Aug 19 2006, 04:12 PM) 
Nixon.
Americans and the whole world have not even start to comprehend the full extent of the damages of Nixon's crimes.
In the end, we will realize that Nixon's biggest crime will turn out to be that he ended the Gold Standard in 1971 and blackmailed the whole world into accepting the US dollar as the "unbacked" reserve currency (or, rather, later backed by other nations' oil under the threat of arms) -- which is the root of most of the world's problems today.
QUOTE(geeodee @ Aug 19 2006, 11:42 AM)
Bill Clinton. He had his pipe blown right there in the White House.
Bill Clinton Legendary Pimp of The United States.
Bill Clinton.....got a blow job frm Moncia LaWinski <however u spell it>. Clinton all the way
Cliton. heh
Nixon hands down. The man beat the Soviet Union without ever having to go to war.
Reagan or Bush senior
Jimmy Carter.
Clinton. Farther back, FDR for sure.
QUOTE(rahul1000 @ Aug 20 2006, 01:42 PM)
Clinton. Farther back, FDR for sure.
yea FDR no dount
clinton by a thousand miles
Would five decades be considered recent?? If yes than Harry S. Truman.
Heres a quote from him:
You can see all his quotes in following: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/...y_s_truman.html
Info. on him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman and http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAtruman.htm
Heres a quote from him:
QUOTE
You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.
You can see all his quotes in following: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/...y_s_truman.html
Info. on him: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman and http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAtruman.htm
Theodore Roosevelt.
Bill Clinton, if it weren't for conservatives controlling Congress for part of his presidency, the legislation that he tried to pass but got shut down woulda made this country 10x better.
The only negative thing I would have to say about him is he let our military decay instead of revamping it for a smaller budget.
The only negative thing I would have to say about him is he let our military decay instead of revamping it for a smaller budget.
Truman gave the okay for the use of atomic weapons against japanese civilians and kicked off the cold war with the soviets and ignored vietnamese nationalist plea for independence. I'd hardly label him the best president.
Best President of the 20th century, FDR. Best recent president, Clinton. President to do the most damage in the past 100 years, GWB.
Best President of the 20th century, FDR. Best recent president, Clinton. President to do the most damage in the past 100 years, GWB.
Roosevelt.
Reagan, like it or not, he put the US back on top.
QUOTE(SoCal @ Aug 19 2006, 02:39 PM)
Who is the best US President in recent decades?
Abe Lincoln.
QUOTE(supersloth @ Aug 25 2006, 01:59 PM)
Reagan, like it or not, he put the US back on top.
People give Reagan too much credit.
The best US President
1, Clinton
2, FDR
3, JFK
The worst US president
1, George W Bush
2, Ronald Reagan
3. LBJ
1, Clinton
2, FDR
3, JFK
The worst US president
1, George W Bush
2, Ronald Reagan
3. LBJ
QUOTE(supersloth @ Aug 25 2006, 10:59 AM)
Reagan, like it or not, he put the US back on top.
The soviets were bound to collapse. Reagan only sped up the process by escalating the cold war by burning billions of dollars into things like star wars which wreaked havoc on the economy, which was later fixed by clinton. His legacy will be the recession he threw us into and the crime wave that followed. Thanks for nothing reagan. He should've stuck to being an actor.
R. Reagan 
QUOTE(thatsjustsick @ Aug 24 2006, 11:24 PM)
Truman gave the okay for the use of atomic weapons against japanese civilians and kicked off the cold war with the soviets and ignored vietnamese nationalist plea for independence. I'd hardly label him the best president.
Best President of the 20th century, FDR. Best recent president, Clinton. President to do the most damage in the past 100 years, GWB.
Truman spoke his mind and was closer in representing the common citizen. He wasn't of the rich upper class unlike many previous and future pres's. He went through hard times before being Pres.. He did what was right even though it was unpopular. Here is a photo of him in 1910 (he was 26 or 27):
Truman gave ok to drop them on Japan but after taking recommendations from a committee. They wanted to save US forces from the big losses of attacking japan. Pres. first job his to his nation. Should be noted that he was pressured by some in the US gov't. to drop them on China during the Korean war but he refused.
Has for the Russians, Truman tried to deal with Stalin. However, Stalin had plans of his own expanding into europe and elsewhere. Nato was started has a result. He poured money into help rebuild and or save Europe, Greece and Turkey from russian influence. Also, Berlin. When the russians cut off Berlin he sent airplanes to supply the city for one year. Unlike the previous Pres's., Truman knew that if the US followed an isolation policy that in the future the US would be drawn into another big war.
He desegregated the military. Pushed hard for civil rights even though it split his party during his re-election:
QUOTE
Truman had progressive views on civil rights and was a strong advocate of Humphrey's proposal. In a 1947 speech, Truman stated:
"Our immediate task is to remove the last remnants of the barriers which stand between millions of our citizens and their birthright. There is no justifiable reason for discrimination because of ancestry or religion or race or color."
"Our immediate task is to remove the last remnants of the barriers which stand between millions of our citizens and their birthright. There is no justifiable reason for discrimination because of ancestry or religion or race or color."
He also tried to push for the following:
QUOTE
The Fair Deal
After his successful election campaign, Truman set out to prove that New Deal liberalism was not yet dead in America. He proposed an ambitious legislative agenda that he dubbed the "Fair Deal." Although Truman had supported New Deal relief and reform, he also believed that newer reforms were needed to solve the nation's economic and social problems in the post-war era. He contended that his Fair Deal program would redistribute income among people of various classes--transfer money from the very rich to the very poor--and, in the process, assuage many of the nation's most pressing social problems. Truman's Fair Deal included six major federal initiatives:
* New civil rights legislation
* Federal housing programs
* Unemployment insurance benefits
* New tax cuts for the poor
* Federal funding for education
* A federal health care and health insurance program
In the end, Truman's attempt to introduce his Fair Deal was largely a failure. Few of his initiatives became law. Congress refused to create a national health care program, did little to reform education (with the exception of the G. I. Bill), extended unemployment benefits only slightly, and put off new civil rights legislation. Truman did convince Congress to pass a major housing initiative in 1949. Otherwise, however, the conservative political coalition blocked the President at every turn. While Truman's election in 1948 proved that liberalism was not yet dead, the country did seem to be moving further and further to the right politically.
After his successful election campaign, Truman set out to prove that New Deal liberalism was not yet dead in America. He proposed an ambitious legislative agenda that he dubbed the "Fair Deal." Although Truman had supported New Deal relief and reform, he also believed that newer reforms were needed to solve the nation's economic and social problems in the post-war era. He contended that his Fair Deal program would redistribute income among people of various classes--transfer money from the very rich to the very poor--and, in the process, assuage many of the nation's most pressing social problems. Truman's Fair Deal included six major federal initiatives:
* New civil rights legislation
* Federal housing programs
* Unemployment insurance benefits
* New tax cuts for the poor
* Federal funding for education
* A federal health care and health insurance program
In the end, Truman's attempt to introduce his Fair Deal was largely a failure. Few of his initiatives became law. Congress refused to create a national health care program, did little to reform education (with the exception of the G. I. Bill), extended unemployment benefits only slightly, and put off new civil rights legislation. Truman did convince Congress to pass a major housing initiative in 1949. Otherwise, however, the conservative political coalition blocked the President at every turn. While Truman's election in 1948 proved that liberalism was not yet dead, the country did seem to be moving further and further to the right politically.
Seems the US was in a mess after the war but Truman managed to somehow hold it together.
They made a movie on him. Seems when he left office he and his wife were dropped off at Union station where he was to take a train home. No guards or nothing. He was to ride on the train as if he was a regular customer. No special treatment and no reporters or anyone waiting to see him off.
QUOTE(ABC in NYC @ Aug 25 2006, 01:02 PM)
Abe Lincoln.
He's hardly recent
Clinton and George W Bush.
QUOTE(islander @ Aug 27 2006, 08:58 AM)
Truman gave ok to drop them on Japan but after taking recommendations from a committee. They wanted to save US forces from the big losses of attacking japan. Pres. first job his to his nation. Should be noted that he was pressured by some in the US gov't. to drop them on China during the Korean war but he refused.
Lies! Japan was already defeated militarily, but didn't want to surrender unconditionally. As the president, you have to take responsibility for your actions. He and he alone had the power to go on with the massacre or to stop it. He chose to massacre innocent civilians.
QUOTE
MacArthur biographer William Manchester has described MacArthur's reaction to the issuance by the Allies of the Potsdam Proclamation to Japan: "...the Potsdam declaration in July, demand[ed] that Japan surrender unconditionally or face 'prompt and utter destruction.' MacArthur was appalled. He knew that the Japanese would never renounce their emperor, and that without him an orderly transition to peace would be impossible anyhow, because his people would never submit to Allied occupation unless he ordered it. Ironically, when the surrender did come, it was conditional, and the condition was a continuation of the imperial reign. Had the General's advice been followed, the resort to atomic weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki might have been unnecessary."
--William Manchester, American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964, pg. 512--
-----
Norman Cousins was a consultant to General MacArthur during the American occupation of Japan. Cousins writes of his conversations with MacArthur, "MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed." He continues, "When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."
--Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65, 70-71--
--William Manchester, American Caesar: Douglas MacArthur 1880-1964, pg. 512--
-----
Norman Cousins was a consultant to General MacArthur during the American occupation of Japan. Cousins writes of his conversations with MacArthur, "MacArthur's views about the decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were starkly different from what the general public supposed." He continues, "When I asked General MacArthur about the decision to drop the bomb, I was surprised to learn he had not even been consulted. What, I asked, would his advice have been? He replied that he saw no military justification for the dropping of the bomb. The war might have ended weeks earlier, he said, if the United States had agreed, as it later did anyway, to the retention of the institution of the emperor."
--Norman Cousins, The Pathology of Power, pg. 65, 70-71--
Save americans from big losses? This is coming straight from MacArthur himself. Are you telling me you know more than MacArthur?
QUOTE
Unlike the previous Pres's., Truman knew that if the US followed an isolation policy that in the future the US would be drawn into another big war.
Many previous presidents didn't approve of the isolation policy but that didn't matter b/c it's exactly what the american public wanted. The american people didn't want to be involved in another world war after experiencing the first one. However, FDR aggravated japan by disrupting oil supply and japan retaliated since oil was crucial to it's victory in asia. Truman didn't go against public opinion about isolation b/c after world war II, the american public knew the disasters that could unfold from isolation and was against it. FDR should be credited for this. Not Truman.
William Jefferson Blythe III aka Bill Clinton.
QUOTE(han2 @ Aug 28 2006, 10:37 AM)
William Jefferson Blythe III aka Bill Clinton.
Please bring him back!
^for that to happen every1 in the US should vote for Hillary Clinton in the nxt election...
QUOTE(SoCal @ Aug 19 2006, 11:39 AM)
Who is the best US President in recent decades?
Nixon .
Thanks to him , today any Americans can go and have a picture taken by the Great Wall of China & go down in history ! Have to pay for airfare & hotels though .
Best president ever? Good ole ABE
Worst in last 50 years James Carter
Best in last 50 years? Ron Reagan.
Why Reagan? Because he dug us out of the hole Carter put us in, and he united his nation once again.
Most of you won't remember the 29% interest rates Carter created.
Or how Carter gave away anything and everything he could.
Reagan spent some serious cash on the Military thats true ,but much of what he spent was to repair the damage of Carter.
Clinton got much of the credit for Bush seniors work. Bill stepped in office as the economy was begining to grow. He actually did very little to stimulate the economy.
First act as president was ???? ans. Don't ask don't tell...
He did have personality tho. Europe liked him, and he did kiss europes booty on command.
He was great at not responding to terrorist attacks against Americans, and he was able to kiss Isreals @$$ with the best of them.
I will say this for him. He wasn't as afraid of Hillary as many have said.
Worst in last 50 years James Carter
Best in last 50 years? Ron Reagan.
Why Reagan? Because he dug us out of the hole Carter put us in, and he united his nation once again.
Most of you won't remember the 29% interest rates Carter created.
Or how Carter gave away anything and everything he could.
Reagan spent some serious cash on the Military thats true ,but much of what he spent was to repair the damage of Carter.
Clinton got much of the credit for Bush seniors work. Bill stepped in office as the economy was begining to grow. He actually did very little to stimulate the economy.
First act as president was ???? ans. Don't ask don't tell...
He did have personality tho. Europe liked him, and he did kiss europes booty on command.
He was great at not responding to terrorist attacks against Americans, and he was able to kiss Isreals @$$ with the best of them.
I will say this for him. He wasn't as afraid of Hillary as many have said.
Atleast you gave good reasons for picking Reagan. Most people say crap like "he ended the Cold War" or some other $hit.
QUOTE(tinman01 @ Aug 28 2006, 04:53 AM)
Best president ever? Good ole ABE
Worst in last 50 years James Carter
Best in last 50 years? Ron Reagan.
Why Reagan? Because he dug us out of the hole Carter put us in, and he united his nation once again.
Most of you won't remember the 29% interest rates Carter created.
Or how Carter gave away anything and everything he could.
Reagan spent some serious cash on the Military thats true ,but much of what he spent was to repair the damage of Carter.
Clinton got much of the credit for Bush seniors work. Bill stepped in office as the economy was begining to grow. He actually did very little to stimulate the economy.
First act as president was ???? ans. Don't ask don't tell...
He did have personality tho. Europe liked him, and he did kiss europes booty on command.
He was great at not responding to terrorist attacks against Americans, and he was able to kiss Isreals @$$ with the best of them.
I will say this for him. He wasn't as afraid of Hillary as many have said.
Reagan created the crime waves of the 80s thanks to his star wars program which kicked us into a recession. With republicans, there's no fiscal responsibility at all. Unemployment was extremely high. Poverty rates skyrocketed. Clinton made moves only republicans can dream of. He decreased the deficit which bush jr. burned away with stupid useless programs like missle defense that doesn't even work correctly. His interest rate hike also help us into a recession not seen since the great depression. He also scrapped gerald ford's move to integrate the metric system into the US and have us on board with the rest of the world. This later cost us billions when a rocket exploded due to the US having a different measuring system from the rest of the world. Reagan didn't know how to generate money, he only knew how to borrow money. Something clinton had to pay back during his two terms. Without reagan's national debt, who know's how far clinton could have taken this country. By 1988, the nations national debt reached 2.6 Trillion. We moved from being the largest creditor, to being the largest debtor.
In 1983 and again in 1984, Reagan claimed falsely that he filmed the Auschwitz death camps in person; he was in a film unit in Hollywood that processed raw footage for newsreels, but he was not in Europe during the war. He told Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir of Israel that he was at Auschwitz during a White House visit in 1983 and made an identical claim to Simon Wiesenthal and Rabbi Martin Hier of Los Angeles in 1984.
The soviets end was nearing and reagan only gave it a final boot. Reagan did not engineer the soviet collapse. However, I must give him credit for expediting the process. Nevertheless, he did fund al queda, a move that would come to bite us in the butt during 9/11 which cost over 3000 american deaths. He also funded the contras in nicaragua. How did reagan fund the contras? He sold cocaine to americans via the CIA. This makes him a supporter of terrorism. Reagan also supported the khmer rouge, cambodian insurgents who were responsible for 3 million cambodian deaths. Let's not forget his support of Saddam Hussien, a man who his predecessors later claimed to have committed genocide against the kurds and to have WMD capabilities. He went to embarass the american people by calling Princess Diana, Princess David.
The list goes on and on but I have to get back to work. Clinton, the greatest president in the last 50 years.
Ronald Reagan and then Current President Bush. Both amazing men with good moral values.
Clinton, the greatest president in the last 50 years.
Clinton?! ha ha, thats a joke right? Im sorry but the president should be a rold model, not some guy chasing itnerns around the white house for a BJ and then lie about it on the stand to the country. Plus he slowly made the recession that President Bush has been getting us out of since he started.
QUOTE(thatsjustsick @ Aug 28 2006, 02:33 PM)
Clinton, the greatest president in the last 50 years.
Clinton?! ha ha, thats a joke right? Im sorry but the president should be a rold model, not some guy chasing itnerns around the white house for a BJ and then lie about it on the stand to the country. Plus he slowly made the recession that President Bush has been getting us out of since he started.
QUOTE(thatsjustsick @ Aug 28 2006, 02:33 PM)
Reagan created the crime waves of the 80s thanks to his star wars program which kicked us into a recession. With republicans, there's no fiscal responsibility at all. Unemployment was extremely high. Poverty rates skyrocketed. Clinton made moves only republicans can dream of. He decreased the deficit which bush jr. burned away with stupid useless programs like missle defense that doesn't even work correctly. His interest rate hike also help us into a recession not seen since the great depression. He also scrapped gerald ford's move to integrate the metric system into the US and have us on board with the rest of the world. This later cost us billions when a rocket exploded due to the US having a different measuring system from the rest of the world. Reagan didn't know how to generate money, he only knew how to borrow money. Something clinton had to pay back during his two terms. Without reagan's national debt, who know's how far clinton could have taken this country. By 1988, the nations national debt reached 2.6 Trillion. We moved from being the largest creditor, to being the largest debtor.
In 1983 and again in 1984, Reagan claimed falsely that he filmed the Auschwitz death camps in person; he was in a film unit in Hollywood that processed raw footage for newsreels, but he was not in Europe during the war. He told Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir of Israel that he was at Auschwitz during a White House visit in 1983 and made an identical claim to Simon Wiesenthal and Rabbi Martin Hier of Los Angeles in 1984.
The soviets end was nearing and reagan only gave it a final boot. Reagan did not engineer the soviet collapse. However, I must give him credit for expediting the process. Nevertheless, he did fund al queda, a move that would come to bite us in the butt during 9/11 which cost over 3000 american deaths. He also funded the contras in nicaragua. How did reagan fund the contras? He sold cocaine to americans via the CIA. This makes him a supporter of terrorism. Reagan also supported the khmer rouge, cambodian insurgents who were responsible for 3 million cambodian deaths. Let's not forget his support of Saddam Hussien, a man who his predecessors later claimed to have committed genocide against the kurds and to have WMD capabilities. He went to embarass the american people by calling Princess Diana, Princess David.
The list goes on and on but I have to get back to work. Clinton, the greatest president in the last 50 years.
True much of Rons legacy is the debt. But much can be blamed on Carters down sizing of our military by 50% then spending the money on useless social programs and give aways. Unemployment??? Look back to Carter once again.
I liked Reagan because he walked the walk.
Clinton... How many Military careers did he and his henchmen end for the very thing he did in the Oval office???? Too many.... He is the great do as I say but not as I do prez. He gutted the CIA and it failed us as a result. He didn't mind terrorists killing americans but had no problem committing us to fight Europes issues. Somalia???? When our generals all but begged for armor and artillery Denied..... It would make him look to agressive. What did Billy do for education??? I can tell you My Autistic Daughter has many more options today than under clinton. More CEO's have been busted and brought down under GWB than by clinton &company. Look as far as I am concerned we havn't had a great prez in over 50 years. And FDR was a snake in the grass. That said he did create some really cool options to save us from welfare.
QUOTE(thatsjustsick @ Aug 28 2006, 02:29 AM)
Lies! Japan was already defeated militarily, but didn't want to surrender unconditionally. As the president, you have to take responsibility for your actions. He and he alone had the power to go on with the massacre or to stop it. He chose to massacre innocent civilians.
Save americans from big losses? This is coming straight from MacArthur himself. Are you telling me you know more than MacArthur?
Many previous presidents didn't approve of the isolation policy but that didn't matter b/c it's exactly what the american public wanted. The american people didn't want to be involved in another world war after experiencing the first one. However, FDR aggravated japan by disrupting oil supply and japan retaliated since oil was crucial to it's victory in asia. Truman didn't go against public opinion about isolation b/c after world war II, the american public knew the disasters that could unfold from isolation and was against it. FDR should be credited for this. Not Truman.
This is turning into "my pres. is better than your pres." post.
Below are the true facts:
QUOTE
But according to documents I have uncovered, a conference to discuss pre-invasion casualties was held at the White House on June 18, 1945, between President Truman and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. From the Pacific, Gen. Douglas MacArthur submitted rather optimistic casualty estimates. This caused Adm. William D. Leahy, Truman's military advisor, to take charge of the session. Based on the experience at Iwo Jima and Okinawa, Leahy predicted that in an invasion of Japan, 30% to 35% of U.S. soldiers would be killed or wounded during the first 30 days. Truman obviously understood what Leahy said. The president remarked that the invasion would create another Okinawa from one end of Japan to the other. The Joint Chiefs of Staff agreed.
Suddenly, and only after being advised about the buildup of Japanese forces and fortifications by Magic intelligence, MacArthur medical staff revised its pre-invasion needs for hospital beds upwards by 300%. MacArthur's chief surgeon, Brig. Gen. Guy Denit, estimated that a 120-day campaign to invade and occupy only the island of Kyushu would result in 395,000 casualties.
Suddenly, and only after being advised about the buildup of Japanese forces and fortifications by Magic intelligence, MacArthur medical staff revised its pre-invasion needs for hospital beds upwards by 300%. MacArthur's chief surgeon, Brig. Gen. Guy Denit, estimated that a 120-day campaign to invade and occupy only the island of Kyushu would result in 395,000 casualties.
QUOTE
The Magic Summaries further revealed that throughout June and July 1945, Japan's militarist leaders were adamantly determined that they would never surrender unconditionally to the British and the Americans.
Article also talks about secret Japanese-Russian negotiations to carve up Asia.
QUOTE
On July 25, Japanese Premier Kantaro Suzuki announced to the Japanese press that the Potsdnm declaration was to be Ignored." Meanwhile, the Magic Summaries revealed that Tokyo was demanding that Moscow accept a special envoy from Emperor Hirohito, presumably to cement the deal offering to divide Asia between Japan and Russia while Moscow brokered a Japanese surrender with the U.S. and Britain that would be acceptable to Tokyo.
This is what the Americans President Truman, Secretary of War Stimson and Gen. Marshall knew the day before the first atom bomb fell on Japan. Confronted by an enemy leadership that was self-deluded, neither prepared to surrender nor to negotiate seriously, the Americans decided that the only way to end the war quickly would be to use overwhelming force: nuclear weapons.
This is what the Americans President Truman, Secretary of War Stimson and Gen. Marshall knew the day before the first atom bomb fell on Japan. Confronted by an enemy leadership that was self-deluded, neither prepared to surrender nor to negotiate seriously, the Americans decided that the only way to end the war quickly would be to use overwhelming force: nuclear weapons.
Above quotes taken from following article title " Why Truman Bombed Hiroshima" - http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/hiroshima/ytruman.htm
Even the General own ppl. knew an all out attack on Japan using conventional means would be bad. UK. and China even approved of unconditional surrender.
More on the General:
QUOTE
Although General Douglas MacArthur was informed of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor nine hours before Japanese bombers struck at the Philippines, the commander of the United States Army and Air forces in the Philippines was paralysed by indecision and failed to bring his command to a state of readiness to meet the clear threat of a Japanese attack. His air power was destroyed on the ground by Japanese bombers. With no air support, the United States Asiatic Fleet was forced to withdraw from Philippine waters. The inexcusable neglect of his duty by MacArthur compromised the defence of the Philippines from the first day. His troops were left in a hopeless position without air or naval support. Although many would believe that he deserved to be court-martialled for grave neglect of duty, MacArthur was able to arrange for the President of the United States to transfer him to a new command in Australia before his exhausted and starving troops were forced to surrender to the Japanese. When safe in Australia with his staff officers, MacArthur refused to allow his abandoned troops to surrender, and ordered them to fight to the end. This section of the Pacific War web-site explains how a general, who many would view as unworthy, was able to assume control of Australia's defence in 1942.
QUOTE
Disgusted and disillusioned by MacArthur's absence from the front lines, the failure of promised relief, and MacArthur's retention of adequate food for himself and others on Corregidor, his starving troops on Bataan coined this derisive verse. The title "Dugout Doug" attached itself to MacArthur behind his back for the rest of the war.
Following is a jingle the troops sang:
QUOTE
Dugout Doug MacArthur lies ashakin' on the Rock
Safe from all the bombers and from any sudden shock
Dugout Doug is eating of the best food on Bataan
And his troops go starving on
Safe from all the bombers and from any sudden shock
Dugout Doug is eating of the best food on Bataan
And his troops go starving on
Can read real entire article at: http://www.users.bigpond.com/pacificwar/ga.../Philindex.html
The Truman Doctrine, Nato and plan to rebuild europe were Trumans and not the previous pres.. But yes the pres. before Truman wanted to get the US out of isolation even though most of the public was against it. But it was Truman who better accomplished it.
I think that distinction goes to Bill Clinton. It is clear when he is interviewed that he has some deep convictions that sometimes are overlooked because of his personal indiscretions. He left office with a budget surplus, with the stock market humming, even though Bush can hardly be blamed for its inevitable correction. Bush seems to be driven by a personal agenda that has hurt this country financially and is dangerous diplomatically. The reason I create the contrast is because these are the only two terms I've lived through in my adult life, and I much prefer the diplomacy of Clinton to the "bring 'em on" rhetoric espoused by the younger Bush.
QUOTE(Pauliek @ Aug 28 2006, 08:10 PM)
I think that distinction goes to Bill Clinton. It is clear when he is interviewed that he has some deep convictions that sometimes are overlooked because of his personal indiscretions. He left office with a budget surplus, with the stock market humming, even though Bush can hardly be blamed for its inevitable correction. Bush seems to be driven by a personal agenda that has hurt this country financially and is dangerous diplomatically. The reason I create the contrast is because these are the only two terms I've lived through in my adult life, and I much prefer the diplomacy of Clinton to the "bring 'em on" rhetoric espoused by the younger Bush.
I think Bills greatest talent was for making people like him. I hated is indescretions, hated how he treated those of us who serve, hated how he dealt with the military in general. But damn he made me like him when he gave a speech. Reagan had the same talent. GWB? his biggest short coming is he speaks like the average guy, In politics thats a handicap. That and he thinks everyone wants to be americanized. Some do but certainly not most.
Reagan helped the american people to love their country again. He made it okay to feel patriotic. After Vietnam and Carter many americans lost that love for country.( hated his wife) LOL even more than Bills.
QUOTE(tinman01 @ Aug 28 2006, 08:20 PM)
I think Bills greatest talent was for making people like him. I hated is indescretions, hated how he treated those of us who serve, hated how he dealt with the military in general. But damn he made me like him when he gave a speech. Reagan had the same talent. GWB? his biggest short coming is he speaks like the average guy, In politics thats a handicap. That and he thinks everyone wants to be americanized. Some do but certainly not most.
Reagan helped the american people to love their country again. He made it okay to feel patriotic. After Vietnam and Carter many americans lost that love for country.( hated his wife) LOL even more than Bills.
This is an interesting perspective. I'm not sure how I would feel if I had served in the military and felt that he had somehow shown neglect to America's finest. His indiscretions were far from trivial and difficult to ignore, but I found his activism to be genuine. I got the sense that this was a guy who was savvy in politics, but cared as much about the policies as he did about being elected. However, I might be wrong, since his detractors often portray him as a phony.
I think that Reagan was an interesting and great man. I didn't see eye to eye with him on economic policy; trickle down economics, but I think that he was a real leader. I was very young when he was president though, so I don't have as strong emotions about him as I should.
Hmm, I think people overplay the whole Monica Lewinsky thing, a more pressing issue is how he accepted money from Chinese spies and how he abandoned the American working class in persuate of free-trade.
QUOTE(jiggyiggy @ Aug 28 2006, 07:51 PM)
Hmm, I think people overplay the whole Monica Lewinsky thing, a more pressing issue is how he accepted money from Chinese spies and how he abandoned the American working class in persuate of free-trade.
Which Chinese spies are you talking about? Wen Ho Lee???
Isn't he the nuclear scientist dude? It's not him if he is.
QUOTE(tinman01 @ Aug 28 2006, 02:22 PM)
True much of Rons legacy is the debt. But much can be blamed on Carters down sizing of our military by 50% then spending the money on useless social programs and give aways. Unemployment??? Look back to Carter once again.
I liked Reagan because he walked the walk.
Clinton... How many Military careers did he and his henchmen end for the very thing he did in the Oval office???? Too many.... He is the great do as I say but not as I do prez. He gutted the CIA and it failed us as a result. He didn't mind terrorists killing americans but had no problem committing us to fight Europes issues. Somalia???? When our generals all but begged for armor and artillery Denied..... It would make him look to agressive. What did Billy do for education??? I can tell you My Autistic Daughter has many more options today than under clinton. More CEO's have been busted and brought down under GWB than by clinton &company. Look as far as I am concerned we havn't had a great prez in over 50 years. And FDR was a snake in the grass. That said he did create some really cool options to save us from welfare.
You have not disputed anything I've said in the third paragraph that I've written. Does that mean that you do not deny it? Can you honestly sit there and tell me what clinton did was far worst than what reagan did?
QUOTE(islander @ Aug 28 2006, 02:40 PM)
This is turning into "my pres. is better than your pres." post.
Below are the true facts:
Article also talks about secret Japanese-Russian negotiations to carve up Asia.
Above quotes taken from following article title " Why Truman Bombed Hiroshima" - http://www.centurychina.com/wiihist/hiroshima/ytruman.htm
Even the General own ppl. knew an all out attack on Japan using conventional means would be bad. UK. and China even approved of unconditional surrender.
More on the General:
Following is a jingle the troops sang:
Can read real entire article at: http://www.users.bigpond.com/pacificwar/ga.../Philindex.html
The Truman Doctrine, Nato and plan to rebuild europe were Trumans and not the previous pres.. But yes the pres. before Truman wanted to get the US out of isolation even though most of the public was against it. But it was Truman who better accomplished it.
Your article about the phillipines is in reference to 1942. Fact, the bomb was dropped in 1945. Your whole post is useless b/c it talks about a different time during the war. Here are some more notable people who were against the use of atomic weapons against civilians:
Dwight D. Eisenhower (a general during the war)
QUOTE
"...in [July] 1945... Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.
"During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..."
- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380
"During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..."
- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380
ADMIRAL WILLIAM D. LEAHY (chief of staff during the war)
QUOTE
"It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons.
"The lethal possibilities of atomic warfare in the future are frightening. My own feeling was that in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children."
- William Leahy, I Was There, pg. 441.
Hebert Hoover (former president during the war)
QUOTE
On May 28, 1945, Hoover visited President Truman and suggested a way to end the Pacific war quickly: "I am convinced that if you, as President, will make a shortwave broadcast to the people of Japan - tell them they can have their Emperor if they surrender, that it will not mean unconditional surrender except for the militarists - you'll get a peace in Japan - you'll have both wars over."
Richard Norton Smith, An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover, pg. 347.
On August 8, 1945, after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, Hoover wrote to Army and Navy Journal publisher Colonel John Callan O'Laughlin, "The use of the atomic bomb, with its indiscriminate killing of women and children, revolts my soul."
quoted from Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 635.
"...the Japanese were prepared to negotiate all the way from February 1945...up to and before the time the atomic bombs were dropped; ...if such leads had been followed up, there would have been no occasion to drop the [atomic] bombs."
- quoted by Barton Bernstein in Philip Nobile, ed., Judgment at the Smithsonian, pg. 142
Hoover biographer Richard Norton Smith has written: "Use of the bomb had besmirched America's reputation, he [Hoover] told friends. It ought to have been described in graphic terms before being flung out into the sky over Japan."
Richard Norton Smith, An Uncommon Man: The Triumph of Herbert Hoover, pg. 349-350.
In early May of 1946 Hoover met with General Douglas MacArthur. Hoover recorded in his diary, "I told MacArthur of my memorandum of mid-May 1945 to Truman, that peace could be had with Japan by which our major objectives would be accomplished. MacArthur said that was correct and that we would have avoided all of the losses, the Atomic bomb, and the entry of Russia into Manchuria."
Gar Alperovitz, The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb, pg. 350-351.
Albert Einstein
QUOTE
Einstein was not directly involved in the Manhattan Project (which developed the atomic bomb). In 1905, as part of his Special Theory of Relativity, he made the intriguing point that a relatively large amount of energy was contained in and could be released from a relatively small amount of matter. This became best known by the equation E=mc2. The atomic bomb was not based upon this theory but clearly illustrated it.
In 1939 Einstein signed a letter to President Roosevelt that was drafted by the scientist Leo Szilard. Received by FDR in October of that year, the letter from Einstein called for and sparked the beginning of U.S. government support for a program to build an atomic bomb, lest the Nazis build one first.
Einstein did not speak publicly on the atomic bombing of Japan until a year afterward. A short article on the front page of the New York Times contained his view:
"Prof. Albert Einstein... said that he was sure that President Roosevelt would have forbidden the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had he been alive and that it was probably carried out to end the Pacific war before Russia could participate."
Einstein Deplores Use of Atom Bomb, New York Times, 8/19/46, pg. 1.
Regarding the 1939 letter to Roosevelt, his biographer, Ronald Clark, has noted:
"As far as his own life was concerned, one thing seemed quite clear. 'I made one great mistake in my life,' he said to Linus Pauling, who spent an hour with him on the morning of November 11, 1954, '...when I signed the letter to President Roosevelt recommending that atom bombs be made; but there was some justification - the danger that the Germans would make them.'".
Ronald Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times, pg. 620.
Trust me... i have more, from top government officials. Just exactly who is this committee you speak of? Who were the members? Or did you just make this up?
QUOTE(jiggyiggy @ Aug 28 2006, 10:48 PM)
Isn't he the nuclear scientist dude? It's not him if he is.
Yup, Wen Ho Lee was proven innocent, there was no evidence of Clinton selling nuke secrets to the scary RED CHINA...maybe these alleged Chinese spies were created in the Republican witch hunt Committee, AKA the Cox report.
QUOTE
People give Reagan too much credit.
Reagan was definitely not as inept as Bush but surely overrated by nationalistic Republicans. Here is an article about the real Reagan legacy.
The Real Reagan Legacy
Debunking Myths About Reagan
by Mike Hersh
March 19, 2002 (Political Sanity/APJP) -- Let's begin our examination of the real Reagan Legacy by taking a look at myth number one: Democrats dominated Congress all through Reagan's terms, and called all his budgets Dead On Arrival.
That's numerically and historically false. Reagan's people shoved his program through the Congress during the early Reagan years. James A. Baker, David Stockman and other Reaganites ran roughshod over Tip O'Neill and the divided Democrats in the House and Senate, and won every critical vote. This is because of the GOP majority in the Senate and the GOP-"Boll Weevil" (or "Dixiecrat") coalition in the House. Phil Gramm was a House Democrat at the time, and he even sponsored the most important Reagan budgets.
Only after the huge Reagan recession -- made worse by utterly failed Reagan "Voodoo Economics" - did Democrats regain some control in Congress. They halted some Reagan initiatives, but couldn't do much on their own. That was a time of gridlock.
Six years into Reagan's presidency, Democrats retook the Senate, and began to reverse some of Reagan's horrendous policies. By that time, Reaganomics had "accomplished" quite a bit: doubled the national debt, caused the S&L crisis, and nearly wrecked the financial system.
Which brings us to myth number two: Jimmy Carter wrecked the economy, and Reagan's bold tax cuts saved it.
This is utterly absurd. Economic growth indices -- GDP, jobs, revenues -- were all positive when Carter left office. All plunged after Reagan policies took effect.
Reagan didn't cure inflation, the main economic problem during the Carter years. Carter's Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker tried when he raised interest rates. That's the opposite of what Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan has done to keep inflation low.
Carter's policies and people fought inflation, but maintained real growth. On the other hand, Reagan's policies helped cause the worst recession since the Great Depression: two bleak years with nearly double-digit unemployment! Reaganomics failed in less than a year, and it took an entire second year for the economy to recover from the failure.
Carter didn't cause the inflation problem, but his tough policies and smart personnel solved it. Unfortunately for Carter, it took too long for the good results to kick in. Not only didn't Reagan help whip inflation, he actually opposed the Volcker policies!
Another major myth: Reagan cut taxes on all Americans, and that led to a great expansion.
Here's the truth: the total federal tax burden increased during the Reagan years, and most Americans paid more in taxes after Reagan than before. The "Reagan Recovery" was unremarkable. It looks great only contrasted against the dismal Reagan Recession -- but it had nothing to do with Supply Side voodoo.
With a red ink explosion -- $300 BILLION deficits looming as far as the eye could see -- GOP Senators, notably including Bob Dole, led the way on tax hikes. The economy enjoyed its recovery only after total tax increases larger than the total tax cuts were implemented. Most importantly, average annual GDP growth during the Reagan 80s was lower than during the Clinton 90s or the JFK-LBJ 60s!
Enough about the economy. Here's the biggest myth of them all: Ronald Reagan won the "Cold War".
In reality, Reagan did nothing to bring down the Soviet Union.
By 1980, the Soviet Union was trying to cut its own defense spending. Reagan made it harder for them to do so. In fact, Reagan increased the possibility of a nuclear war because he was -- frankly, and sadly -- senile. He thought we could actually recall submarine-launched nuclear missiles (talk about a Reagan myth), and bullied the Soviets to highest alert several times.
Critically, Reagan never even tried to bring down the Soviet Union.
Wasteful overspending on defense didn't end the Soviet Union. In fact, it played into the hands of authoritarian "Communist" hard-liners in the Kremlin. Reagan thought the Soviet Union was more powerful than we were. He was trying to close what he called "the window of vulnerability."
This was sheer idiocy.
No general in our military would trade our armed forces for theirs. If it were to happen, none of the Soviet military command would turn down that deal. We had better systems, better troops, and better morale.
Here's the truth: we'd already won the Cold War before Reagan took office. All Reagan needed to do was continue the tried-and-true containment policies Harry S. Truman began and all subsequent presidents employed. The Soviet Union was Collapsing from within. The CIA actually told this to Reagan as he took office.
Here's an example: the Soviet Union military couldn't deal with a weak state on its own border, the poor, undermanned Afghanistan. Most of the Soviets' military might had to make sure its "allies" in the Warsaw Pact and subjects along the South Asian front didn't revolt. Even Richard Nixon told Reagan he could balance the budget with big defense cuts.
Reagan ignored this, and wrecked our budget.
We didn't have to increase weapons spending, but Reagan didn't care. He ran away from summits with the dying old-guard Soviets, and the new-style "glasnost" leadership of Mikhail Gorbachev baffled the witless Reagan and his closed-minded extremist advisors.
Maggie Thatcher finally cajoled the Gipper into meeting Gorby, and Gorby cleaned Reagan's clock. Reagan's hard-right "handlers" nearly had to drag Reagan out of the room before he signed away our entire nuclear deterrent. Reagan -- and the planet -- was lucky Gorbachev sought genuine and stable peace. Had Yuri Andropov's health held, Reagan's "jokes" and gaffes might have caused World War III.
Eventually Reagan even gave Gorbachev his seal of approval. Visiting Moscow before the August Coup, Reagan said the Soviet Union was no longer the "Evil Empire." He predicted his friend Gorbachev would lead the Soviet Union for many years to come.
As usual, Reagan was wrong. A few months later, disgruntled military officers kidnapped Gorbachev, throwing him out of power forever. Reagan remained disengaged: nothing he did caused the coup, and nothing he did made the Soviet military support Boris Yeltsin over their superiors.
We're all fortunate things happened as they did -- but once again, Reagan did nothing to make this fluke more likely.
All this is vintage Reagan. Reagan took credit for others' hard word and hard choices, and blamed them for his failures. Reagan even blamed Jimmy Carter for Reagan's foolish, fatal, and reckless decision to leave 243 Marines stationed in Beirut, helpless and unguarded.
Reagan hired over 100 crooks to run our government, and broke several laws himself. His policies were almost uniformly self-defeating, wrong-headed, immoral and unfair.
Reagan was an actor playing the part of the president. He was style over substance; lucky, not good.
And once the myths are stripped from the "legacy", the truth becomes obvious: Reagan was by far the most overrated man in American history.
QUOTE(SoCal @ Aug 19 2006, 11:39 AM)
Who is the best US President in recent decades?
Four decades from 1968 to 2008
The clan of crooks :
1968 - 1972 , 1972 - 1976 : Nixon , Ford .
1980 - 1984 , 1984 - 1988 : Reagan
1988 - 1992 : Bush , his dad .
2000 - 2004 , 2004 - 2008 : Bush , his son .
So for the last 4 decades the only good presidents are :
1976 - 1980 : Carter
1992 - 1996, 1996 - 2000 : Clinton
I like how obviously parisan "articles" are cited as if they were proven facts.
Quick question:
Which brings us to myth number two: Jimmy Carter wrecked the economy, and Reagan's bold tax cuts saved it.
This is utterly absurd. Economic growth indices -- GDP, jobs, revenues -- were all positive when Carter left office. All plunged after Reagan policies took effect.
Reagan didn't cure inflation, the main economic problem during the Carter years. Carter's Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker tried when he raised interest rates. That's the opposite of what Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan has done to keep inflation low.
Carter's policies and people fought inflation, but maintained real growth. On the other hand, Reagan's policies helped cause the worst recession since the Great Depression: two bleak years with nearly double-digit unemployment! Reaganomics failed in less than a year, and it took an entire second year for the economy to recover from the failure.
Carter didn't cause the inflation problem, but his tough policies and smart personnel solved it. Unfortunately for Carter, it took too long for the good results to kick in. Not only didn't Reagan help whip inflation, he actually opposed the Volcker policies!
When you mix fiscal and monetary policies, why assign Carter credit for both, but not blame for both, while taking credit away from Reagan for both, yet blaming Reagan for both?
Quick question:
QUOTE(Hawaii @ Aug 29 2006, 02:36 AM)
Which brings us to myth number two: Jimmy Carter wrecked the economy, and Reagan's bold tax cuts saved it.
This is utterly absurd. Economic growth indices -- GDP, jobs, revenues -- were all positive when Carter left office. All plunged after Reagan policies took effect.
Reagan didn't cure inflation, the main economic problem during the Carter years. Carter's Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker tried when he raised interest rates. That's the opposite of what Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan has done to keep inflation low.
Carter's policies and people fought inflation, but maintained real growth. On the other hand, Reagan's policies helped cause the worst recession since the Great Depression: two bleak years with nearly double-digit unemployment! Reaganomics failed in less than a year, and it took an entire second year for the economy to recover from the failure.
Carter didn't cause the inflation problem, but his tough policies and smart personnel solved it. Unfortunately for Carter, it took too long for the good results to kick in. Not only didn't Reagan help whip inflation, he actually opposed the Volcker policies!
When you mix fiscal and monetary policies, why assign Carter credit for both, but not blame for both, while taking credit away from Reagan for both, yet blaming Reagan for both?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.