Best/Worst Presidents

[Direckshun]

I've been watching the History Channel a lot this week on their special highlighting all 47 Presidents we've had. It calls itself the "ultimate guide" to the Presidents, but it's mostly a great primer on all the Presidents.

Anyway, it's been a while since we've done this.

But who are the best 5 Presidents in American history in your opinion, and who were 5 of the worst? Do your best to explain.

Also, where would you place our most recent Presidents (because why not): Obama, Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter

[RNR]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

It was also a view held by people all over the country. Denoting only southern slave-holders is naive and dishonest.

No shit, to imply as much is being disingenuous or misinformed. Lincoln and Reagan are the two presidents who have been greatly reinvented through revisionist history~

[Garcia Bronco]

Originally Posted by La literatura

Oh sure, some people agreed with southern, former slave holders in 1866 who weren't southern, former slave holders in 1866. In fact, some still do -- like DementedLogic.

What is your point?

That your statement in the original post I quoted from you is not entirely true.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by frazod

Were you wanting to blame Bush?

Well, if we're just shouting out random bits of nonsense, sure.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by Garcia Bronco

That your statement in the original post I quoted from you is not entirely true.

Well, you're wrong. It is entirely true. Southern, former slave-holders in 1866 saw Lincoln as a tyrant.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by frazod

Were you wanting to blame Bush?

The civil war rebellion was in full motion. You can blame the previous presidents that punted on the issue for years. It depends on what your perspective of "terrible things" is. we also killed lots of nazis to take hitler out of power. Had Lincoln not assumed control of the union and done everything he could to squash the rebellion, it would have set the stage for a divided north and south, continuing conflict between the two sides, and the allowance for the south to continue the disgusting practice of slavery.

What other option was there but war?

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

No shit, to imply as much is being disingenuous or misinformed. Lincoln and Reagan are the two presidents who have been greatly reinvented through revisionist history~

What's the real history on Lincoln?

[frazod]

Originally Posted by La literatura

Well, if we're just shouting out random bits of nonsense, sure.

So you don't think the Civil War was the most destructive war in American History? Really?

[RNR]

Originally Posted by La literatura

What's the real history on Lincoln?

Great Donger impersonation Jensen~

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by frazod

So you don't think the Civil War was the most destructive war in American History? Really?

I didn't think I had to spell this stuff out to you, but I don't think you play around by feigning ignorance. So, here it is: citing the Civil War as a reason why Lincoln did terrible things is ridiculous.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by RedNeckRaider

Great Donger impersonation Jensen~

I didn't think you could go down that road. Probably heard it from somewhere and now you just pass it off as if you actually know what you're talking about.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The civil war rebellion was in full motion. You can blame the previous presidents that punted on the issue for years. It depends on what your perspective of "terrible things" is. we also killed lots of nazis to take hitler out of power. Had Lincoln not assumed control of the union and done everything he could to squash the rebellion, it would have set the stage for a divided north and south, continuing conflict between the two sides, and the allowance for the south to continue the disgusting practice of slavery.

What other option was there but war?

The industrial revolution would have ended slavery just as certainly as the war did, only without half a million casualties.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by La literatura

I didn't think I had to spell this stuff out to you, but I don't think you play around by feigning ignorance. So, here it is: citing the Civil War as a reason why Lincoln did terrible things is ridiculous.

Agreed. It doesn't make sense.

What was the other option? Doing nothing and allowing the south to secede from the union? Negotiating a compromise that would allow the continued disgusting practice of slavery? Or negotiating a compromise that would have created a strained relationship between north and south that would have created years of future conflict? It's hard to argue he did terrible things when, in spite of the massive casualties, his decisions ended up leading to one unified union and the end of slavery in both the north and the south. None of that would have been achieved without a war of devastating proportions.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by La literatura

I didn't think I had to spell this stuff out to you, but I don't think you play around by feigning ignorance. So, here it is: citing the Civil War as a reason why Lincoln did terrible things is ridiculous.

You really don't want to go here with me, sonny. I don't get my American history from revisionist dumb**** liberals or the movies.

[La literatura]

Originally Posted by frazod

The industrial revolution would have ended slavery just as certainly as the war did, only without half a million casualties.

Jesus, this is BEP bullshit.

[frazod]

Originally Posted by La literatura

Jesus, this is BEP bullshit.

You tell me, would you rather have to feed and house 100 slaves, or own one ****ing tractor?