WORST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY

Kalona News ^ | Feb 15, 2004 | Ethel Bontrager

[11th_VA]

The following appeared in the Durham, N.C., local paper as a letter to the editor on Feb. 15, 2004.

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war. They complain about his prosecution of it. One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S. history. Let's clear up one point: We didn't start the war on terror. Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11!

Let's look at the "worst" president and mismanagement claims:

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea. North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,333 per year.

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962. Vietnam never attacked us. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5800 per year.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent. Bosnia never attacked us. He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled Al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran and North Korea without firing a shot and captured a terrorist who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people. We lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year. Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history? Think about it!

Submitted by Ethel Bontrager

[MeekOneGOP]

Good post !

[wideminded]

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did.

Actually Germany declared war on the United States after we declared war on Japan.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.

Actually the Korean War began when North Korean troops under Kim Il Sung invaded South Korea. The US got involved because it was our policy to contain communism. This was the "Truman doctrine".

[11th_VA]

P.S. Are you Ron?

Nope - I just came across this ....

[Shooter 2.5]

The dems are accusing Bush for the overthrow of Aristide so he might as well take credit for that one too.

Especially since the people are dancing in the streets.

[Blue Collar Christian]

I second the Jimmy Carter vote, and he's still making a mess of things.

[Carry_Okie]

1. I'm not comforable calling our illegal alien problem "the Latin American threat," I call it an illegal alien problem.

Man did you miss that. I was talking about China in Panama, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Lula in Brazil, FARC in Colombia... that Latin American threat, communist nations that mean us harm and are acting to inflict it. IMO, you can add Mexico to that list, but the mechanics are not analogous to a comparison between Bush and Reagan.

2. Reagan invaded Grenada, much to his credit (and allowed defenseless members of our armed forces to be murdered in Lebanon, in a bad case of UN cooperation). Bush 43, well you know about what he's been doing militarily, and it's been more of an investment than going to the Berlin wall with a microphone.

Getting Pershing missiles into Germany was no mean feat. I don't suppose you knew that the Russian military even had new street signs for West German cities already printed. Then there was the Russian naval buildup. Reagan brought down that empire without firing a shot. The key was decontrol of oil prices. The man understood strategy in a multi-faceted way that has yet to be appreciated, again, especially considering that he had a hostile congress.

3. Bush and Senate Republicans have had their hands significantly and constitutionally tied, in overcomming unprecedented and atrocious Democrat obstruction.

Bull. The Senate Republicans raised the white flag, else that filibuster would be running 24/7 for a year now. Had he chosen that fight, the Slave Party thugs would have had to cave on any number of issues. Bush has yet to veto a single bill.

[dfwgator]

By far LBJ was the worst, got us into Vietnam and the disastrous Great Society, did more damage to this country than even Bubba.

[unspun]

Man did you miss that. I was talking about China in Panama, Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, Lula in Brazil, FARC in Colombia... that Latin American threat, communist nations that mean us harm and are acting to inflict it. IMO, you can add Mexico to that list, but the mechanics are not analogous to a comparison between Bush and Reagan.

Thanks for making your communication clear, C_O.

Bull. The Senate Republicans raised the white flag, else that filibuster would be running 24/7 for a year now. Had he chosen that fight, the Slave Party thugs would have had to cave on any number of issues. Bush has yet to veto a single bill.

If I find the article about this, I hope to remember to ping you to it.

[unspun]

Bull. The Senate Republicans raised the white flag, else that filibuster would be running 24/7 for a year now. Had he chosen that fight, the Slave Party thugs would have had to cave on any number of issues. Bush has yet to veto a single bill.

From:
Why Frist and all won't go 24/7 (Vanity)
vanity | 8/4/03 | votelife

2. To go 24/7 from what I've read is MUCH harder on the Repubs than the Dems. Basically, only one Dem would have to be there (they could rotate) while all the Repubs or 50 I guess would have to be there. I'm not exactly sure on the particulars of this, perhaps other Freepers could back me up, but generally, this is tougher on the Repubs than the Dems.

[Carry_Okie]

Dem would have to be there (they could rotate) while all the Repubs or 50 I guess would have to be there

Nonsense. They would have to be on call in case there was a move but that doesn't mean that they couldn't sleep or eat. The issue is that important because it comes down to who controls the Senate on a whole raft of issues.

Even if the case is as you suggest, so what?

[unspun]

...on call in case there was a move...

How about if there were movements every say, 30 minutes. What would happen then?

[Check_Your_Premises]

by "dead weight loss" do you mean the use of money spent by the government? Or do you mean the debt the government incurs by spending what it doesn't have?

When the government spends money (even money it doesn't have) it does grow the economy. Things are still being bought and sold. Money is still exchanging hands.

The problem of the government spending money is that it is often done for political reasons instead of economic reasons. This causes resources to be allocated inefficiently. Is this the dead weight you speak of?

When (rational) private entities spend money it is done for economic reasons. This causes resources to be allocated most efficiently.

The more efficiently resources are allocated translates to a better overall standard of living. Incidentally, this is why outsourcing isn't the bogeyman so many think, it is merely allocating resources more efficiently. You may have to get a different/less paying job but everything will be far cheaper. Your salary/cost of living ratio will ultimately be less.

[Dr.Deth]

As for the worst President in history, my votes goes to Jimmy Carter!

Your votes??? That's a Democratic thing to say!

[justshutupandtakeit]

No need to warn me about Libs but thanks for the thought.

[Non-Sequitur]

FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us: Japan did. From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost, an average of 112,500 per year.

Yo, Ethel. Read your history. FDR didn't declare war on Germany, Germany declared war on us.

[justshutupandtakeit]

I don't think Reagan should be faulted for his nominees (or any president actually) since he had to get them through RAT controlled Senates. Besides Republicans tend to nominate people who do not follow a party line, unlike RATS, and actually make up their OWN minds. This sometimes produces decisions we don't like but that is the price of integrity and independence. Concepts foreign to our enemy.

Independence was foremost on the Founders' minds when the Judiciary was discussed and established at the convention. It might also be recalled how Jefferson repeatedly appointed Justices who were inevitably won over to Marshall's line of thinking. This drove him crazy. Hehehehe.

[Carry_Okie]

Who cares? That's the job and this is a political war for this nation's long term survival. If Frist and crew don't take the Slave Party on directly they won't have the power to govern, as they were ELECTED to do. If they don't want the job, I am certain replacements can be found.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The DemocRAT Insurrection was provoked entirely by the RATS. Lincoln had nothing to do with it merely forced by these traitors to live up to his oath to preserve and protect the Constitution and Union.

He would not have even been elected had the Slaver RATS been smart enough to unite around one RAT candidate rather than run three. What idiots. Traitorous idiots.

Obviously Lincoln was one of the two greatest presidents the United States of America ever had. Facing down the RATs of his day (North and South) was one of the greatest achievements history records. Defeat of the DemocRAT Insurrection, despite the RAT treason at his back, was absolutely necessary for the survival of the USA and the idea of freedom.

Unfortunately he wasn't around to totally destroy the RAT political power in the South after the Insurrection. By doing so he would have saved the region from another century of RAT terror and tyranny.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is a very dumb article. Not worthy of being posted here.

[Zebra]

Worst President--not even close: Carter. Not only incompetent, but surrounded by incompetent advisers. He promoted good intentions over good policy/results. Somehow, some way, I still think we are paying for his Presidency.

Worst person ever to occupy the White House? Not even close--Bill Clinton. Selfish and debauched, he debased the White House with his corruption and personal shortcomings.