Worst President of US

Just trying to determine if the phrase was intended as applicable to yourself or to society as a whole. I'm quite happy with both who I am and what I have. The Bushmen in Africa were quite happy with who they were and what they had, but modern society was not. N!xau, the bushman in "The Gods Must be Crazy", just tossed his earnings to the wind when paid as he had no use for currency. From what you display it would appear that the more you see someone has the more it degrades your opinion of them, while they may be perfectly happy with both who they are and what they have. In what way do you find it necessary for change to occur for someone to become a "better" person? Obviously your phrase is directed at some distinct portion of the population, the wealthiest, I would presume?

 

Still not even in the ballpark.

The phrase “True riches are who you are not what you have!” has nothing to do with how much or little you have. You say that somehow this phrase means that “the more you see someone has the more it degrades your opinion of them”, how do you figure? The phrase indicates that what a person has, whether much or little has nothing to with the richness of that person, since what a person has does not make the person, how can having a lot degrade my opinion of them?

“Change“? What is it about the phrase “True riches are who you are not what you have!” do you think indicates the need for change? It is merely a statement of what I consider to be a fact, that someone can use as they choose. If they feel after reading it they need to change, then sure change but if after reading it, you feel good to go, then fine no change is needed.

“Obviously your phrase is directed at some distinct portion of the population, the wealthiest, I would presume?” Why in the world would you presume that? It is only directed toward the wealthiest if they have substituted things for a well lived life.
It could be directed as well to the poorest, if they feel their life is worthless because they don’t have a lot of things.

It is life and what you do with it that is valuable, not how much or little you have.

 

In this form I am quite in agreement.

 

What's wrong with the other form? The other form says the same thing but is more succinct.

 

I find the latter less open to misinterpretation. Most often rich is applied to material wealth, while value applies more broadly. I value friends, intelligence, etc.

 

You're right about the Iraq war, but Bush had no way of knowing about or preventing the Al Quaeda action. The Iraq war may be thought of as part of Bush's mis-directed response to Al Quaeda. With regard to "the un-patriot act the biggest sell out of freedoms in American history", I'm not sure what you're referring to. Guantanamo, torture, and detention without trial? That's definitely a serious issue.
As for the economic collapse, I think only a few of the money managers of the top saw it coming. They probably didn't want to start sowing gloom and doom rumours, because particularly in the stock market, these are self fulfilling prophesies that make matters worse. Bush can't be blamed for this, though. I hear that he gave tax breaks to the rich, like Reagan, but I don't know the details.

 

The economic collapse was a result of a lack of oversight and transparency in the finance sector, typical of republican administrations. The S&L scandal of the '80's under the Reagan administration is another good example of why no one in their right mind should vote republican, but some people never learn.

 

i don't think its possible for a poll to have enough options to name all of the worst ones.

sure the bushwacker is on the short list, but so is andrew jackson and even village burner washington. along with isenhour, raygun, coolage, tyler, a whole raft of bloody bastards.

 

1. George W. Bush
2. Ronald Reagan
3. Richard Nixon

 

That's my list, too, except I think that Nixon was even worse than Reagan, because he destroyed an entire generation's trust in government.

 

Valid point but... how much value do you give trust when it turns out that trust will be taken advantage of? Perhaps Nixon actually did us a favor by robbing of the very innocence that would have otherwise provided cover for worse deeds by an institution that is in my opinion a criminal organization. A figurehead who was so blatant in his missteps that he inspired a higher level of vigilance actually brought something good to the picture- conceding the fact that it was unintentional.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I must say that that is a very twisted and cynical argument.

Remember when JFK in his Inaugural Address said, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."? Well, at that time, that was an extremely inspiring thing to hear and it led to many good things for America. After Nixon, such a statement would fall flat and cynicism and distrust has been the dominant feeling in this country ever since.

 

I appreciate what you're saying and you make a very good point... you're certainly not incorrect...

My cynicism runs to the core here with the United States government together with a general population that has been so profoundly desensitized to scandal that at a time when we're being blatantly robbed to furnish monetary rescue to entities that took down the world economy under the guise of "bailout" and deficits of biblical proportions are appearing to sit on the shoulders of generations to come, we're as a whole more concerned with what the hell is on television... and I just furnished contradiction to my own point... but at the time we were paying attention and had a chance, albeit a very small one, to make substantive changes; we took a small step but seemed to set the precedent of simply electing new people who are groomed not only by partisan platforms but by corporate interests, and expecting them to make changes that addressed our needs. The problem is human greed... no seasoned politician is in government for the purpose of serving people, they are in for ego (power) and more importantly GREED.

The entire system has degenerated to a point where a "good" president would be entirely ineffective... an ethical senator or representative completely ineffectual in making changes. The system runs on money... watch the money and you know where the real power is. Rating presidents who are forced to operate in such a profoundly corrupt (and corrupting) environment in my opinion diverts from the more important point that the United States government needs a forcible overhaul.

A modernized and cynical take on JFK:
"Ask not what your country is about to do to you, ask what you about to do to your country"

The people need to start seriously looking at the United States government as an enemy combatant.

 

Good point. Dubya did his part to make us lose trust in government. The crazy thing is the bush administration went so far over the line with their destructive policies that the Obama administration seems virtuous by comparison, yet single payer health care is off the table, we still have a presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the theives on wall street continue bilking us for billions to subsidize their incompetence, it's outrageous.

The United States government indeed needs an overhaul, starting with campaign finance and lobbying reform. In a real democracy, those with the most money shouldn't have any more influence than the rest of us.

 

Yes, I think about this stuff a lot. But even after all the shit I've seen go down, I'm still not nearly as cynical as you. Our U. S. Constitution is under attack but it is still respected by enough people to allow our system to right itself. Mainly I think we need an Amendment that makes it clear that money is not speech. In other words, we need effective campaign finance reform.

 

Sorry, slipped. My post was directed towards stinkfoot.

 

In my opinion, our last great President was JFK. Ever since then we've been on a downward spiral.

 

I put Other, cause Obama ain't on the list.

 

What the U.S. needs is not structural change, it needs an intelligent population not a bunch of dumb shits like many who post on this forum. In fact a large part of the general public is dumber than a substantial portion of individuals who do post here. What is discouraging is that non-Americans seem as dumb as Americans.

 

This.