clibinarius Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 QUOTE (clibinarius @ Aug 11 2009, 04:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>He inspired people to die in Vietnam and kill the leadership of South Vietnam...Let me be very clear here: The US supported the coup that led to Diem's death and the ensuing political chaos in South Vietnam. This was a larger escalation than any president up to that point and might be the one event that turned Vietnam into such a quagmire. This was also the point where the US servicemen actually started to face bad casualties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Kennedy was a great person because even though he was born to a very wealthy family he knew not everybody had that opportunity. His passion was helping the less fortunate and dicriminated. Even his sister that died today spent a lot of time and money helping people. The Special Olympics, homeless, etc. lost a person that put her money and herself where her mouth was. Talking about "compassionate conservatism" never helped anybody except an idiot to get elected and we all know who he helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaia.plateau Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 04:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Kennedy was a great person because even though he was born to a very wealthy family he knew not everybody had that opportunity. His passion was helping the less fortunate and dicriminated.Gonna need some more arguments on this one Scalli Otherwise we'll have to take a trip around North America to all the high end colleges and give certifications of greatness to every ennui-riddled douche with a rubber bracelet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyj316 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Aug 11 2009, 03:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 04:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Kennedy was a great person because even though he was born to a very wealthy family he knew not everybody had that opportunity. His passion was helping the less fortunate and dicriminated.Gonna need some more arguments on this one Scalli Otherwise we'll have to take a trip around North America to all the high end colleges and give certifications of greatness to every ennui-riddled douche with a rubber bracelet.I lolled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Aug 11 2009, 05:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 04:25 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Kennedy was a great person because even though he was born to a very wealthy family he knew not everybody had that opportunity. His passion was helping the less fortunate and dicriminated.Gonna need some more arguments on this one Scalli Otherwise we'll have to take a trip around North America to all the high end colleges and give certifications of greatness to every ennui-riddled douche with a rubber bracelet.Kennedy pushed for civil rights and even though he was assasinated before the bill was passed I'd really love to see "your argument" against that claim. Civil rights was political suicide to democrats to the point when LBJ signed the bill he said he just handed the south to the republicans for the next 50 years and he was deadnuts on. Kennedy used executive orders to push civil rights, not exactly popular but "some of us" believe that was the right thing to do. So exactly what is your argument against that?Get out your popcorn Tiny because this argument ain't over.Maybe good ol' Gaia can explain why someone did the things that Kennedy did instead of kicking back on the family yacht and living off his familys wealth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Here is a list of the executive orders and proclamations by Kennedy. 1961Executive Orders10914 - Providing for an Expanded Program of Food Distribution to Needy Families 10915 - Amending Prior Executive Orders to Provide for the Responsibilities of the Director of the Food For Peace Program 10916 - Inspection of Income, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on Government Operations 10917 - Abolishing Certain Committees on Government Organization and Management Improvement 10918 - Establishing the President's Advisory Committee on Labor Management Policy 10919 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Pan American World Airways, Inc., and Certain of Its Employees 10920 - Revoking Executive Order No. 10700 of February 25, 1957, as Amended 10921 - Establishing A Commission to Inquire into a Controversy between Certain Air Carriers and Certain of their Employees 10922 - Amending Executive Order of February 21, l961, Establishing a Commission to Inquire into a Controversy between Certain Air Carriers and Certain of their Employees 10923 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the Northwest Airlines, Inc., and Certain of its Employees 10924 - Establishment and Administration of the Peace Corps in the Department of State 10925 - Establishing the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity 10926 - Amending Executive Order No. 10919, February 17, 1961, to Extend the Time within which the Board created therein, to Investigate a dispute between Pan American World Airways, Inc., and Certain of its Employees, shall report its findings to the President 10927 - Abolishing the President's Committee on Fund-Raising within the Federal Service and Providing for the Conduct of Fund-Raising Activities 10928 - Abolishing the Committee on Government Activities Affecting Prices and Goods 10929 - Establishing a Commission to Inquire into a Controversy between Certain Carriers and Certain of their Employees 10930 - Abolishing the Government Patents Board and Providing for the Performance of its Functions 10931 - Amendment of Section 1 of Executive Order No. 10673, establishing the President's Council on Youth Fitness 10932 - Modifying the Exterior Boundaries of Certain National Forests in Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, and Wisconsin 10933 - Amending Executive Order No. 10923, February 24, 1961, to Extend the Time within which the board created therein, to Investigate disputes between Northwest Airlines Inc., and Certain of its Employees, shall report its findings to the President 10934 - Establishing the Administrative Conference of the United States 10935 - Inspection of Income, Excess Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Committee on Un-American Activities, House of Representatives 10936 - Reports of Identical Bids 10937 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10472, Establishing the National Agricultural Advisory Commission 10938 - Establishing the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board 10939 - To Provide a Guide on Ethical Standards to Government Officials 10940 - Establishing the President's Committee on Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Crime 10941 - Designation of Certain Officers to Act as Secretary of the Treasury 10942 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10849, establishing a Seal for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 10943 - Designating the Coffee Study Group as a Public International Organization entitled to enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities 10944 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company and other Carriers and Certain of their Employees 10945 - Administration of the Export Control Act of 1949 10946 - Establishing a Program for Resolving Labor disputes at Missile and Space Sites 10947 - Inspection of Income, Excess Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the House Committee on Public Works 10948 - Establishing a Commission to Inquire into a Controversy between Certain Carriers represented by the New York Harbor Carriers' Conference Committee and Certain of their Employees 10949 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute Affecting the Maritime Industry of the United States 10950 - Designating the Secretary of the Interior as the Representative of the President to approve Selections by the State of Alaska of Public Lands lying north and west of the National Defense Withdrawal line 10951 - Amending Executive Order No. 10949, June 26, 1961, to Extend the Time within which the Board of Inquiry Created therein, to Inquire into the Issues Involved in a Labor dispute affecting the Maritime Industry, shall Report to the President 10952 - Assigning Civil Defense Responsibilities to the Secretary of Defense and others 10953 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines) and Certain of its Employees 10954 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10906, Authorizing Inspection of Certain Tax Returns 10955 - Administration of Assistance in the Development of Latin America and in the Reconstruction of Chile 10956 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10841, Relating to International Cooperation under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended 10957 - Assigning Authority with Respect to Ordering Persons and Units in the Ready Reserve to Active Duty and with Respect to the Extension of Enlistments and other Periods of Service in the Armed Forces 10958 - Delegating Functions Respecting Civil Defense Stockpiles of Medical Supplies and Equipment and Food 10959 - Authorizing the Appointment of Mr. Maurice L. Kowal to a Competitive Position without regard to the Civil Service Rules and Regulations 10960 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10530, Providing for the Performance of Certain Functions Vested in or Subject to the Approval of the President 10961 - Providing Procedures for the Award of the National Medal of Science 10962 - Inspection of Tax Returns by the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations 10963 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the Pullman Company and the Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul, Pacific Railroad Company and Certain of their Employees 10964 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10501, Entitled "Safeguarding Official Information in the Interests of the Defense of the United States" 10965 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Trans World Airlines, Inc., and Certain of its Employees 10966 - Inspection of Income, Excess Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives 10967 - Administration of Palmyra Island 10968 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10858, Relating to the President's Committee for Traffic Safety 10969 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Reading Company and Certain of its Employees 10970 - Delegating Certain Authority of the President to Establish Maximum Per-Diem Rates for Government Personnel in Travel Status 10971 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between Trans World Airlines, Inc., and Certain of its Employees 10972 - Administration of the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as Amended 10973 - Administration of Foreign Assistance and Related Functions 10974 - Establishing the President's Commission on Campaign Costs 10975 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between Pan American World Airways, Inc. and Certain of its Employees 10976 - Suspension of the Eight-hour Law as to Laborers and Mechanics employed by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 10977 - Establishing the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal 10978 - Establishing Presidential Awards for Significant Contributions to the Export Expansion Program 10979 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10717, establishing the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service 10980 - Establishing the President's Commission on the Status of Women 10981 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary 10982 - Administration of the Act of September 26, 1961, relating to Evacuation Payments, Assignments, Allotments, and other Matters 10983 - Designating the Caribbean Organization as a Public International Organization entitled to enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities 1962 - Executive Orders10984 - Amending the Selective Service Regulations 10985 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10501, Relating to Safeguarding Official Information in the Interests of the Defense of the United States 10986 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10898, establishing the Interdepartmental Highway Safety Board 10987 - Agency Systems for Appeals from Adverse Actions 10988 - Employee-Management Cooperation in the Federal Service 10989 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10168, of October 11, 1950, as amended, Prescribing Regulations relating to the Right of Enlisted Members of the Uniformed Services to Additional Pay for Sea and Foreign Duty 10990 - Re-establishing the Federal Safety Council 10991 - Making a Change with Respect to the Membership of the Commission established by Executive Order No. 10929, relating to a Controversy between Certain Carriers and Certain of their Employees 10992 - Redefining the Boundaries of the Caribbean National Forest -- Puerto Rico 10993 - Consolidating the Hiawatha and Marquette National Forests (Michigan) and Correcting the Land Descriptions of Nebraska National Forest (Nebraska) and Wasatch National Forest (Utah) 10994 - President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped (The) 10995 - Assigning Telecommunications Management Functions 10996 - Promulgating Regulations concerning Withholding of Compensation of Civilian Employees of the National Guard for State and State-sponsored Employee Retirement, Disability, or Death Benefits programs 10997 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of the Interior 10998 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of Agriculture 10999 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of Commerce 11000 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of Labor 11001 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare 11002 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Postmaster General 11003 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency 11004 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Housing and Home Finance Administrator 11005 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Interstate Commerce Commission 11006 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between Eastern Airlines, Inc. and Certain of its Employees 11007 - Prescribing Regulations for the Formation and Use of Advisory Committees 11008 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate dispute between the Akron & Barberton Belt Railroad Company and other Carriers and Certain of their Employees 11009 - Amending the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1951, to Implement Section 923a of Title 10, United States Code, relating to Prosecution of Bad Check Offenses 11010 - Amending Executive Order No. 10713, Relating to the Administration of the Ryukyu Islands 11011 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Trans World Airlines, Inc., and Certain of its Employees 11012 - Providing for the Performance of Certain Functions under Sections 1 (a) and 1 ( of the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946 11013 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute Affecting the Maritime Industry of the United States 11014 - Delegating to the Secretary of Commerce Functions with Respect to the Participation of the United States in the New York World's Fair 11015 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the Chicago and North Western Railway Company, the Former Chicago, St.Paul, Minneapolis and Omaha Railway Company, now a part of the Chicago and North Western Railway Company by Merger, and Certain of their Employees 11016 - Authorizing Award of the Purple Heart 11017 - Providing for Coordination with Respect to Outdoor Recreation Resources and Establishing the Recreation Advisory Council 11018 - Increasing from Three to Four the Number of Vice Chairmen of the President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped 11019 - Amending Executive Order No. 10873 to provide for an Exception to the Inter-American Development Bank's Immunity from Suit specified in the International Organizations Immunities Act 11020 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on Armed Services 11021 - Administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands by the Secretary of the Interior 11022 - Establishing the President's Council on Aging 11023 - Providing for the Performance by the Secretary of Commerce of Certain Functions relating to the Coast and Geodetic Survey 11024 - Exemption of Alan T. Waterman from Compulsory Retirement for Age 11025 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute affecting the Aircraft Industry of the United States 11026 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 11025, creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute affecting the Aircraft Industry of the United States 11027 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the New York Central Railroad Company System and the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad Company and Certain of their Employees 11028 - Transferring Lands between the Clark and Mark Twain National Forests (Missouri) and Adding Certain Lands to the Hiawatha National Forest (Michigan) 11029 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 11025, creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute affecting the Aircraft Industry of the United States 11030 - Preparation, Presentation, Filing, and Publication of Executive Orders and Proclamations 11031 - Quetico-Superior Committee 11032 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 5952 of November 23, 1932, as Amended, Prescribing the Army Ration 11033 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the American Airlines, Inc., and Certain of its Employees 11034 - Administration of the Mutual Educational and Cultural Exchange Act of 1961 11035 - Management of Federal Office Space 11036 - Administration of the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act of 1954, as Amended 11037 - Amendment of Section 12 of Executive Order No. 6260 of August 28, 1933, as Amended 11038 - Continuing in Effect Executive Order No. 10945 of May 24, 1961, relating to the Administration of the Export Control Act of 1949, as Amended 11039 - Extension of the President's Commission on Campaign Costs 11040 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate dispute between the Belt Railway Company of Chicago and Certain of its Employees 11041 - Continuance and Administration of the Peace Corps in the Department of State 11042 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Southern Pacific Company (Pacific Lines) and Certain of its Employees 11043 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate dispute between The Pan American World Airways, Inc. and Certain of its Employees 11044 - Interagency Coordination of Arms Control and Disarmament Matters 11045 - Discontinuing the Guam Island Naval Defensive Sea Area and Guam Island Naval Airspace Reservation 11046 - Authorizing Award of the Bronze Star Medal 11047 - Delegating Certain Authority to the Secretary of Defense and the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Agency 11048 - Administration of Wake Island and Midway Island 11049 - Providing for the Carrying Out of the Public Works Acceleration Act 11050 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the REA Express and Certain of its Employees 11051 - Prescribing Responsibilities of the Office of Emergency Planning in the Executive Office of the President 11052 - Cotton Textiles and Cotton Textile Products 11053 - Providing Assistance for the Removal of Unlawful Obstructions of Justice in the State of Mississippi 11054 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on Certain Labor disputes affecting the Maritime Industry of the United States 11055 - Inspection of Income Tax Returns by the House Select Committee of Small Business 11056 - Assigning to the Civil Service Commission Certain Authority with Respect to Federal Salaries 11057 - Authorization for the Communication of Restricted Data by the Department of State 11058 - Assigning Authority with respect to Ordering Persons and Units in the Ready Reserve to Active Duty and with respect to Extension of Enlistments and other Periods of Service in the Armed Forces 11059 - Designating Public International Organizations entitled to enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities 11060 - Prescribing Certain Regulations and Delegating to the Attorney General Certain Authority of the President to Prescribe other Regulations relating to the Recovery from Tortiously Liable Third Persons of the cost of Hospital and Medical Care and Treatment furnished by the United States 11061 - Mrs. Anna Eleanor Roosevelt 11062 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10480, Relating to the Administration of the Defense Mobilization Program, so as to designate the Department of Defense as a Loan Guaranteeing Agency 11063 - Equal Opportunity in Housing 11064 - Excusing Federal Employees from Duty on December 24, 1962 11065 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 11066 - Including certain Tracts of Land in the Cherokee and Jefferson National Forests, in Tennessee and Virginia 11067 - Including certain Tracts of Land in the Nantahala and Cherokee National Forests, respectively 11068 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute affecting the Ballistics Missile, Space Vehicle and Military Aircraft Industry 11069 - Amending Executive Order No. 11017 so as to Designate the Secretary of Commerce as a member of the Recreation Advisory Council 11070 - Amendment of the List of Communicable Diseases contained in Executive Order No. 9708 of March 26, 1946, as amended by Executive Order No. 10532 of May 28, 1954 11071 - Designation of Certain Foreign Countries as Economically Less Developed Countries for Purposes of the Revenue Act of 1962 11072 - Extending the Exterior Boundaries of the Superior National Forest in Minnesota and the Clark National Forest in Missouri --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Presidential Proclamationsp3447 - Embargo on trade with Cuba p3497 - Obstruction of justice in the State of Mississippi p3504 - Interdiction of the delivery of offensive weapons to Cuba p3507 - Terminating authority granted and orders issued in Proc. No. 3504 1963 - Executive Orders11073 - Providing for Federal Salary Administration 11074 - Establishing the President's Council on Physical Fitness 11075 - Administration of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 11076 - Establishing the President's Advisory Commission on Narcotic and Drug Abuse 11077 - Administration of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 11078 - Creating a Board of Inquiry to Report on a Labor dispute Affecting the Ballistics Missile, Space Vehicle and Military Aircraft Industry 11079 - Providing for the Prescribing of Regulations under which members of the Armed Forces and others may accept Fellowships, Scholarships, or Grants 11080 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profit, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 11081 - Amending the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1951, to Implement Section 815 of Title 10, United States Code, relating to Nonjudicial Punishment 11082 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Senate Committee on Government Operations 11083 - Inspection of Income, Excess-Profits, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives 11084 - Amending Executive Order No. 10995, Relating to Telecommunications 11085 - Presidential Medal of Freedom (The) 11086 - Amendment of Executive Order 10587 relating to the Administration of Section 32(h) of the Trading with the Enemy Act 11087 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of State 11088 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Secretary of the Treasury 11089 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Atomic Energy Commission 11090 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Civil Aeronautics Board 11091 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Civil Service Commission 11092 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Federal Communications Commission 11093 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Administrator of General Services 11094 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, the Farm Credit Administration, the Export-Import Bank of Washington, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Administrator of the Small Business Administration, the Administrator of Veterans Affairs 11095 - Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Federal Power Commission, the Director of the National Science Foundation 11096 - Establishing a Seal for the United States Civil Service Commission 11097 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10501, as Amended, relating to Authority for the Original Classification of Defense Information and Material 11098 - Amending the Selective Service Regulations 11099 - Inspection of Income, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the House Committee on Public Works 11100 - Establishing the President's Commission on Registration and Voting Participation 11101 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the Carriers Represented by the Eastern, Western, and Southeastern Carrier's Conference Committees and Certain of their Employees 11102 - Inspection of Returns by Possessions of the United States 11103 - Providing for the Appointment of Former Peace Corps Volunteers to the Civilian Career Services 11104 - U.S.S. Thresher 11105 - Transferring to the Housing and Home Finance Administrator certain Functions of the Atomic Energy Commission under the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955 11106 - Providing for the Administration of the Trade Agreements Program and related matters 11107 - Administration of Alaska Railroads 11108 - Delegating Authority under the International Wheat Agreement Act of 1949, as Amended, to the Secretary of Agriculture 11109 - Inspection of Income, Estate, and Gift Tax Returns by the Committee of Un- American Activities, House of Representatives 11110 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10289, as Amended, relating to the Performance of Certain Functions Affecting the Department of the Treasury 11111 - Providing Assistance for the Removal of Obstructions of Justice and Suppression of Unlawful Combinations within the State of Alabama 11112 - Establishing the President's Advisory Council on the Arts 11113 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 11075, as amended, Relating to the Administration of the Trade Agreements Program 11114 - Extending the Authority of the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity 11115 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate disputes between the Pullman Company, the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad Company, the New York Central System, and the Soo Line Railroad Company and Certain of their Employees 11116 - Prescribing Rates of Charges for Certain Hospitalization and Dispensary Services and Delegating Authority to Prescribe such Rates 11117 - Establishing an Interagency Committee on International Athletics 11118 - Providing Assistance for Removal of Unlawful Obstructions of Justice in the State of Alabama 11119 - Amending the Selective Service Regulations 11120 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10152, relating to Incentive Pay for Hazardous Duty, Executive Order No. 10168, relating to Pay for Sea Duty and Duty at Certain Places and Executive Order No. 10204, relating to Basic Allowances for Quarters 11121 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the United Air Lines, Inc. And Certain of its Employees 11122 - Establishing the Rural Development Committee 11123 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10853, relating to Various Allowances to Certain Government Personnel on Foreign Duty 11124 - Enlarging the Membership of the President's Advisory Council on the Arts 11125 - Delegating Authority of the President under Sections 205 and 208 of Title 18 of the United States Code, relating to Conflicts of Interest 11126 - Establishing a Committee and a Council relating to the Status of Women 11127 - Creating an Emergency Board to Investigate a dispute between the Florida East Coast Railway Company and Certain of its Employees Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 June 11, 1963Kennedy sends Alabama National Guard to admit two black students to University of Alabama as ordered by the court. Democrat Governor George Wallace was standing on the steps vowing to keep them out until the Guard rounded the corner June 22, 1963President proposes most sweeping Civil Rights legislation in history to give all Americans equal opportunity in education, employment, public accommodations, voting and access to Federal programs.November 21, 1963 (the day before he died)President asks economic advisers to prepare "War on Poverty" program for 1964.War on what? Poverty? Hmmmm, there's my arguments for now. But I do have more..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaia.plateau Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Atta boy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Aug 11 2009, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Atta boy!That was mean Gaia! you were jerkin my chain! The top 3 people I would have like to have been able to meet is JFK, Nikola Tesla, and Einstein. I really think all wanted to make the world better and did in different ways. All of them were very compassionate and selfless... well JFK not so much when it came to women but everybody has flaws Tesla fascinates me most though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 08:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>June 11, 1963Kennedy sends Alabama National Guard to admit two black students to University of Alabama as ordered by the court. Democrat Governor George Wallace was standing on the steps vowing to keep them out until the Guard rounded the corner June 22, 1963President proposes most sweeping Civil Rights legislation in history to give all Americans equal opportunity in education, employment, public accommodations, voting and access to Federal programs.November 21, 1963 (the day before he died)President asks economic advisers to prepare "War on Poverty" program for 1964.War on what? Poverty? Hmmmm, there's my arguments for now. But I do have more.....JFK didn't pass any of that legislation and didn't even try to move it for five months. He was too busy authorizing a coup in South Vietnam that was ill conceived. As far as "War on Poverty" one could consider Bush's proclamations on Social Security and all sorts of reforms a method of creating more sustainability without increasing tax burdens...but since you're clearly a hardcore Democrat, you think Bush is evil by default instead of just looking over his record. The same applies to Kennedy. As far as the national guard is concerned, Eisenhower didn't help establish this precident in 1957. Nope, purely a Kennedy invention, because everyone knows Republicans never cared about civil rights. I'm not a Republican at all, mind you, I actually LEAN towards the Democrats. But lord, prefering one party doesn't mean you have to ignore reality and history.You know, I could go on and on. I sort of got annoyed at your mentioning Republicans. Now, contrary to what you might think, I'm no conservative. For instance, I don't like Bush: I think sons of multi-millionaire patricians who institute a system of cronyism who claim populism but never pass any reforms they promised, even if the promises should be considered bad or good, supply siders who badly mismanage an economy into a horrible hole (Taking peacetime surplusses and what seemed to be a balance budget and creating the current problems), who start wars without planning ahead...I don't think they're good presidents. That includes Kennedy, who not only did those sorts of things, but he APPOINTED HIS DAMN BROTHER ATTORNEY GENERAL. But you don't care, because you think RFK was good, right? Nevermind he ran against LBJ, who passed the legislation that JFK couldn't pass, who actually made something of the "War on poverty" thing JFK used as an election slogan, and tried to clean up the mess Kennedy made authorizing the Coup in South Vietnam which caused the war to get out of control and cause immense human suffering. No, you think he was a great president and you can't be convinced otherwise because he extended programs Eisenhower did, and didn't screw anything up. Oh no, the Berlin Wall-where an occupying Power pretty much solidified Eastern Europe and everyone knew what was going on-he couldn't even look good as a result of the conference. Nor could he do anything right about Cuba, except get Democrats reelected in 1962 by not allowing the public to know that conflict was diffused by betraying the Turks (and that decision was CONSCIOUSLY made to protect JFK's standing to not appear weak-as he had in 1961-on the Soviets). And LBJ was the one to pass the legislation that we all like so much at the end of the day-how would you feel being reminded that the Great Society failed to get funding thanks to JFK's taxcut to the wealthy?How's this for a reelection slogan: Kennedy '64: Because schools, hospitals, roads, a balanced budget, a lack of a Vietnam War, diplomatic strength, and honest elections are all bad things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaia.plateau Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 Haha, I think you understood me Scalli my good man I'm not trying to tear down Kennedy, I just said that your initial argument for why he was 'great' was flimsy.I'm an objective internationalist... and since every single US president since the second world war except for Ford has started an illegal war, from my position he was the only good one (Obama still has a ways to go, so I'm reserving judgment). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Svaals Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE (gaia.plateau @ Aug 11 2009, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Atta boy!That was mean Gaia! you were jerkin my chain! The top 3 people I would have like to have been able to meet is JFK, Nikola Tesla, and Einstein. I really think all wanted to make the world better and did in different ways. All of them were very compassionate and selfless... well JFK not so much when it came to women but everybody has flaws Tesla fascinates me most though.That is almost the same as my list. Just replace JFK with Louis Pasteur! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 QUOTE (clibinarius @ Aug 11 2009, 10:40 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 11 2009, 08:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>June 11, 1963Kennedy sends Alabama National Guard to admit two black students to University of Alabama as ordered by the court. Democrat Governor George Wallace was standing on the steps vowing to keep them out until the Guard rounded the corner June 22, 1963President proposes most sweeping Civil Rights legislation in history to give all Americans equal opportunity in education, employment, public accommodations, voting and access to Federal programs.November 21, 1963 (the day before he died)President asks economic advisers to prepare "War on Poverty" program for 1964.War on what? Poverty? Hmmmm, there's my arguments for now. But I do have more.....JFK didn't pass any of that legislation and didn't even try to move it for five months. He was too busy authorizing a coup in South Vietnam that was ill conceived. As far as "War on Poverty" one could consider Bush's proclamations on Social Security and all sorts of reforms a method of creating more sustainability without increasing tax burdens...but since you're clearly a hardcore Democrat, you think Bush is evil by default instead of just looking over his record. The same applies to Kennedy. As far as the national guard is concerned, Eisenhower didn't help establish this precident in 1957. Nope, purely a Kennedy invention, because everyone knows Republicans never cared about civil rights. I'm not a Republican at all, mind you, I actually LEAN towards the Democrats. But lord, prefering one party doesn't mean you have to ignore reality and history.You know, I could go on and on. I sort of got annoyed at your mentioning Republicans. Now, contrary to what you might think, I'm no conservative. For instance, I don't like Bush: I think sons of multi-millionaire patricians who institute a system of cronyism who claim populism but never pass any reforms they promised, even if the promises should be considered bad or good, supply siders who badly mismanage an economy into a horrible hole (Taking peacetime surplusses and what seemed to be a balance budget and creating the current problems), who start wars without planning ahead...I don't think they're good presidents. That includes Kennedy, who not only did those sorts of things, but he APPOINTED HIS DAMN BROTHER ATTORNEY GENERAL. But you don't care, because you think RFK was good, right? Nevermind he ran against LBJ, who passed the legislation that JFK couldn't pass, who actually made something of the "War on poverty" thing JFK used as an election slogan, and tried to clean up the mess Kennedy made authorizing the Coup in South Vietnam which caused the war to get out of control and cause immense human suffering. No, you think he was a great president and you can't be convinced otherwise because he extended programs Eisenhower did, and didn't screw anything up. Oh no, the Berlin Wall-where an occupying Power pretty much solidified Eastern Europe and everyone knew what was going on-he couldn't even look good as a result of the conference. Nor could he do anything right about Cuba, except get Democrats reelected in 1962 by not allowing the public to know that conflict was diffused by betraying the Turks (and that decision was CONSCIOUSLY made to protect JFK's standing to not appear weak-as he had in 1961-on the Soviets). And LBJ was the one to pass the legislation that we all like so much at the end of the day-how would you feel being reminded that the Great Society failed to get funding thanks to JFK's taxcut to the wealthy?How's this for a reelection slogan: Kennedy '64: Because schools, hospitals, roads, a balanced budget, a lack of a Vietnam War, diplomatic strength, and honest elections are all bad things.I stand by every word I said. You say he appointed his own brother attorney general as though he did not have to go through senate confirmation? You would be wrong on thinking I feel the same about Robert as John. Robert worked under senator Joe McCarthy, the scabby drunkard republican that brought us McCarthyism. Robert was more power hungry from what I can tell and there was never an excuse for his part in McCarthyism as there was no excuse for anyone. Roy Cohn went on to be McCarthy's main henchman later and claimed to be a democrat. But he went on to advising repubs like Nixon and Reagan and not many democrats regarded him as a democrat.My main point is Kennedy went against a large part of his own party as well as LBJ followed through with it unlike the repubs that never in history did something of that magnitude because it was the right thing to do such as civil rights.The most a president can do is sign executive orders and the bills that are given them. Bush's proclamations about Social Security? Are you talking about "privatizing" and "investing" it into the stock market? your right I don't see that in any way but him making another cash cow for his friends. You right about me not liking the republican party but it does not mean I like all the ones that claim to be democrats by a long shot.They signed onto the war in Iraq in fear of being called unpatriotic. Notice Bush put that on the table just before the 2002 elections. The repubs still ran ads calling them unpatriotic, just google Max Cleland. So FUCK the republican party.They want to cow down to Rush Limpdick and now their acting like a bunch of spastics at town hall meetings. The don't give a shit about right or wrong and they never have. But they had help from democrats including RFK during the McCarthy era. The difference between Ike and JFK on using the National Guard was that Ike was not bucking his own party. He had no political risk. McCarthy only lost his support when he made the mistake of saying there were communist in the defense department. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 12, 2009 Share Posted August 12, 2009 (edited) Did you hear me praising what the GOP did to Cleland once? Did you hear me praise Rush? I didn't say privatizing Social Security was good at all. I'm saying that was something Bush promised and put forth like Kennedy did to a lot of things. Furthermore, the Democratic Party has consistently allowed Kennedies to work their way up through the process-the Kennedy brand name in fact weakened the hell out of NYS over the senator fiasco. Of course, they're not alone in this nepotism. Gore's old man voted against civil rights consistently. As far as the Republicans are concerned, two words: Bush family. There are other prominent families there-be it the Rocks (though the senator from WV is actually a Democrat, that family is GOP all the way). Senate confirmations be damned as a cause of legitimacy, very few people seem to actually ever get rejected.So fine, we'll say MAYBE Kennedy had the best interests in his heart. I don't see why that can't be said about Bush. Doesn't make Bush a good president.But you'd be more cynical about Bush, and in my opinion with good reason. I mean, for god's sakes, JFK allowed the nonsense around him to go on-let alone participate in mafia sponsored orgies in Cuba-and this all not even questioned in the mainstream anymore. To quote Steve Bridges-the tree don't fall far from the nuts. Appointing shady people, doing business with the mafia, being that close to RFK-at best, Kennedy was naive and incompetent to these things. At worst, he was an active participant. In any event, its not a good portrait.And don't feed me the line "Democrats may be bad, but Republicans are worse"-whenever Ann Coulter is accused of doing something bad, she might admit its bad, but always point to how "liberals" do things worse-intellectually its the same thing. A man who commits murder and is before a judge can't use a "Why am I on trial when OJ killed two people and is off the hook?" as an excuse for his actions. I'm not disputing that Republicans have done a lot of bad. But to somehow say that means the Democrats-let alone JFK, who was an EXTREMELY flawed man by all accounts-off the hook is just absurd. JFK was a good looking man who played well on TV and had some ideals attached to his name. Its a shame, I guess for me, that I would've supported Nixon in that election, because Nixon didn't win by vote rigging, have as extensive mafia connections, and most importantly, DIDN'T WIN ON DEMAGAGING THE SOVIET MISSILE GAP. Which, militarily speaking, was complete rubbish, anyway.Furthermore, I haven't seen too many Republicans wanting to abolish the CRA64. Saying that the Democrats are better on civil rights to me is BS and I point to the Bush presidency on this one: did he pass any gay marriage bans? Fire gay employees? Support any repeals of civil rights legislation? Hmm...you know, the GOP talked big on the gay issue, but it doesn't seem that they actually were willing to change the status quo, which makes them guilty of demagaging the issue.California: Republican stronghold, bans gay marriage. Iowa, Democratic stronghold, supports it.How's this: Rather than looking what the firebreathers say who have no power except to make stupid people angry such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, why don't you actually look objectively at the facts?This isn't to say the Republicans are better. They've been actively screwing up the country since 1995 for the post-cold war period. But if you're defending the Democrats' record by pointing to the GOP, then I think you're in trouble.And I stand by what I say and go a step further. I see no real difference between George W. Bush and JFK, and I believe 1968 politically was just as troubled as the current time. The fact is, JFK took a country in good shape and left it in shambles in the spiritual time he would've been in office, and George W. Bush took a country in mediocre, overvalued shape and left it on the brink of catastrophe when he left office. Why is support for coups, supply side economics, illegal wiretaps, election rigging, exploiting foreign policy for midterm elections, talking about "rights" for an election only OK for JFK but not for George W. Bush?I repeat:Kennedy '64: Because schools, hospitals, roads, a balanced budget, a lack of a Vietnam War, diplomatic strength, and honest elections are all bad things. Edited August 12, 2009 by clibinarius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Did you hear me praising what the GOP did to Cleland once? Did you hear me praise Rush? no, but you took issue with me having issues with republicans and those were just some of the reasons why I didn't say privatizing Social Security was good at all. I'm saying that was something Bush promised and put forth like Kennedy did to a lot of things. I pointed out what he actually proposed and that was privatization and betting it on the stock market, hardly good alternatives Furthermore, the Democratic Party has consistently allowed Kennedies to work their way up through the process-the Kennedy brand name in fact weakened the hell out of NYS over the senator fiasco. Of course, they're not alone in this nepotism. as long as they're qualified is what counts Gore's old man voted against civil rights consistently. Gore's old man was a southern democrat. Remember the part about LBJ saying they would lose the south to the republicans and Wallace being a "fellow" democrat that had the Alabama National Guard sent after his ass" As far as the Republicans are concerned, two words: Bush family. There are other prominent families there-be it the Rocks (though the senator from WV is actually a Democrat, that family is GOP all the way). Senate confirmations be damned as a cause of legitimacy, very few people seem to actually ever get rejected.So fine, we'll say MAYBE Kennedy had the best interests in his heart. I don't see why that can't be said about Bush. Doesn't make Bush a good president. I fail to see where Bush had our best interests at heart. Was it when he said "you're either with us or against us" or letting his administration out CIA agents or lying us into a trillion dollar war? Vietnam was a chess game between the U.S. and Russia but they were overthrowing countries. What year was it Russia invaded Afghanistan? So it's not like the Russians were not an aggressor. Iraq wasn't doing shit. N. Korea was a bigger threat than them. But you'd be more cynical about Bush, and in my opinion with good reason. I mean, for god's sakes, JFK allowed the nonsense around him to go on-let alone participate in mafia sponsored orgies in Cuba-and this all not even questioned in the mainstream anymore. To quote Steve Bridges-the tree don't fall far from the nuts. Appointing shady people, doing business with the mafia, being that close to RFK-at best, Kennedy was naive and incompetent to these things. At worst, he was an active participant. In any event, its not a good portrait. you went too many ways there ? And don't feed me the line "Democrats may be bad, but Republicans are worse"-whenever Ann Coulter is accused of doing something bad, she might admit its bad, but always point to how "liberals" do things worse-intellectually its the same thing. A man who commits murder and is before a judge can't use a "Why am I on trial when OJ killed two people and is off the hook?" as an excuse for his actions. I'm not disputing that Republicans have done a lot of bad. But to somehow say that means the Democrats-let alone JFK, who was an EXTREMELY flawed man by all accounts-off the hook is just absurd. JFK was a good looking man who played well on TV and had some ideals attached to his name. Its a shame, I guess for me, that I would've supported Nixon in that election, because Nixon didn't win by vote rigging, have as extensive mafia connections, and most importantly, DIDN'T WIN ON DEMAGAGING THE SOVIET MISSILE GAP. Which, militarily speaking, was complete rubbish, anyway. the enemy of my enemy is my friend Actually no, but the lesser of two evils when there are only two viable options are still the best option. Any party other than the Nazi party would've been better in Germany during Hitlers reign. The party can make all the difference in the "world". I think as a whole the parties differ in that repubs are out to help the rich get richer and as they showed us in the McCarthy Era, Watergate, and Dubya they are willing to do anything. Furthermore, I haven't seen too many Republicans wanting to abolish the CRA64. Saying that the Democrats are better on civil rights to me is BS and I point to the Bush presidency on this one: did he pass any gay marriage bans? Fire gay employees? Support any repeals of civil rights legislation? Hmm...you know, the GOP talked big on the gay issue, but it doesn't seem that they actually were willing to change the status quo, which makes them guilty of demagaging the issue. they don't really give a shit about those issues. They just pander to their radicals to get votes. Other than getting into the Terry Shiavo fiasco the repubs didn't do much of snything that would not either gain them more power or dereg their business buddies California: Republican stronghold, bans gay marriage. Iowa, Democratic stronghold, supports it. that is what happens when one side of an issue is more wound up and show up to vote for or against it. It is especially true with off year and special elections. How's this: Rather than looking what the firebreathers say who have no power except to make stupid people angry such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, why don't you actually look objectively at the facts? the problem with that theory is that the republican party stand aside and let Limpdick be their voice and as long as they let him I think he is their leader and should be addressed This isn't to say the Republicans are better. They've been actively screwing up the country since 1995 for the post-cold war period. But if you're defending the Democrats' record by pointing to the GOP, then I think you're in trouble. The democrats major flaw to me in history was being on the wrong side of history with civil rights. But they ridded themselves of it for the most part. And I stand by what I say and go a step further. I see no real difference between George W. Bush and JFK, and I believe 1968 politically was just as troubled as the current time. The fact is, JFK took a country in good shape and left it in shambles in the spiritual time he would've been in office, and George W. Bush took a country in mediocre, overvalued shape and left it on the brink of catastrophe when he left office. Why is support for coups, supply side economics, illegal wiretaps, election rigging, exploiting foreign policy for midterm elections, talking about "rights" for an election only OK for JFK but not for George W. Bush?I repeat:Kennedy '64: Because schools, hospitals, roads, a balanced budget, a lack of a Vietnam War, diplomatic strength, and honest elections are all bad things.[/quote]???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 QuoteI didn't say privatizing Social Security was good at all. I'm saying that was something Bush promised and put forth like Kennedy did to a lot of things. I pointed out what he actually proposed and that was privatization and betting it on the stock market, hardly good alternatives End quoteThe point here is that saying you want to do something doesn't mean you're serious about passing it or you have that ability._QuoteFurthermore, the Democratic Party has consistently allowed Kennedies to work their way up through the process-the Kennedy brand name in fact weakened the hell out of NYS over the senator fiasco. Of course, they're not alone in this nepotism. as long as they're qualified is what counts End quoteShe wasn't qualified..._QuoteGore's old man voted against civil rights consistently. Gore's old man was a southern democrat. Remember the part about LBJ saying they would lose the south to the republicans and Wallace being a "fellow" democrat that had the Alabama National Guard sent after his ass" End QuoteYes, and that part of the Democratic Party is somewhat legitimized. Even Wallace accepted some of the CRA after it became law. Byrd's still in the party. Liberal? Really? Enough said in my opinion..._QuoteAs far as the Republicans are concerned, two words: Bush family. There are other prominent families there-be it the Rocks (though the senator from WV is actually a Democrat, that family is GOP all the way). Senate confirmations be damned as a cause of legitimacy, very few people seem to actually ever get rejected.So fine, we'll say MAYBE Kennedy had the best interests in his heart. I don't see why that can't be said about Bush. Doesn't make Bush a good president. I fail to see where Bush had our best interests at heart. Was it when he said "you're either with us or against us" or letting his administration out CIA agents or lying us into a trillion dollar war? Vietnam was a chess game between the U.S. and Russia but they were overthrowing countries. What year was it Russia invaded Afghanistan? So it's not like the Russians were not an aggressor. Iraq wasn't doing shit. N. Korea was a bigger threat than them. End QuoteYou mean the same way Kennedy allowed CIA agents to lie about Vietnam and overthrow Diem? The fact that Iraq is a chess game between the US and Iran? I won't disagree North Korea is a bigger threat (I don't even believe Iraq was a threat). The point is, JFK's folly was a HELL OF A LOT WORSE THAN IRAQ. I think there is no doubt that the US has competition with Iran. Whatever the political ramifications of that are up in the air, but I think its pretty obvious based on rhetoric, and clashing interests._ QuoteBut you'd be more cynical about Bush, and in my opinion with good reason. I mean, for god's sakes, JFK allowed the nonsense around him to go on-let alone participate in mafia sponsored orgies in Cuba-and this all not even questioned in the mainstream anymore. To quote Steve Bridges-the tree don't fall far from the nuts. Appointing shady people, doing business with the mafia, being that close to RFK-at best, Kennedy was naive and incompetent to these things. At worst, he was an active participant. In any event, its not a good portrait. you went too many ways there ? End QuoteJFK literally slept with the mob. Either he was absolutely corrupt or incredibly naive. Read about his exploits from Cuba some day. _QuoteAnd don't feed me the line "Democrats may be bad, but Republicans are worse"-whenever Ann Coulter is accused of doing something bad, she might admit its bad, but always point to how "liberals" do things worse-intellectually its the same thing. A man who commits murder and is before a judge can't use a "Why am I on trial when OJ killed two people and is off the hook?" as an excuse for his actions. I'm not disputing that Republicans have done a lot of bad. But to somehow say that means the Democrats-let alone JFK, who was an EXTREMELY flawed man by all accounts-off the hook is just absurd. JFK was a good looking man who played well on TV and had some ideals attached to his name. Its a shame, I guess for me, that I would've supported Nixon in that election, because Nixon didn't win by vote rigging, have as extensive mafia connections, and most importantly, DIDN'T WIN ON DEMAGAGING THE SOVIET MISSILE GAP. Which, militarily speaking, was complete rubbish, anyway. the enemy of my enemy is my friend Actually no, but the lesser of two evils when there are only two viable options are still the best option. Any party other than the Nazi party would've been better in Germany during Hitlers reign. The party can make all the difference in the "world". I think as a whole the parties differ in that repubs are out to help the rich get richer and as they showed us in the McCarthy Era, Watergate, and Dubya they are willing to do anything. End QuoteMaybe the Democrats are better. But...that doesn't mean they shouldn't be held accountable. Everyone should be held accountable...there's a fear of voters of holding their party accountable because the other party might win the election. That's a common theme for both Republican voters AND Democratic voters. People should be willing to fire the incompetent. I'd rather an honest Republican than a dishonest Democrat and an honest Democrat than a dishonest Republican. Not everyone out there who's a Republican wants the rich to get richer-particularly those poor Republicans-and not every Democrat wants to prevent selling out to the rich; the tax rate is RADICALLY under what it was before 1964, and the Democrats have no really reversed that trend. Clinton sort of did-he raised the tax rate to just below 40%, but when you compare that to the fact it was 91% under Ike and the country only got stronger, and that when Reagan lowered it to 29% the deficit exploded, there was no reason not to put it back to the 1982 tax cut rate-50%. The Democrats also wrote the tax cut in a bipartisan effort for the later Reagan tax cut (It was proposed by Geppie and had a bubble rate, where the class under the top bracket paid LESS percentage than the two brackets below it...). They never seriously tried to repeal it._QuoteFurthermore, I haven't seen too many Republicans wanting to abolish the CRA64. Saying that the Democrats are better on civil rights to me is BS and I point to the Bush presidency on this one: did he pass any gay marriage bans? Fire gay employees? Support any repeals of civil rights legislation? Hmm...you know, the GOP talked big on the gay issue, but it doesn't seem that they actually were willing to change the status quo, which makes them guilty of demagaging the issue. they don't really give a shit about those issues. They just pander to their radicals to get votes. Other than getting into the Terry Shiavo fiasco the repubs didn't do much of snything that would not either gain them more power or dereg their business buddies End QuoteMaybe so. But it indicates on civil rights, the GOP is not at all as regressive as thought, and to paint them as such is as dishonest as the Republicans trying to paint themselves as such._QuoteCalifornia: Republican stronghold, bans gay marriage. Iowa, Democratic stronghold, supports it. that is what happens when one side of an issue is more wound up and show up to vote for or against it. It is especially true with off year and special elections. End QuoteSo...Obama lost California? Cause last I checked he pocketed those 55...that in fact was the same day Obama was elected president. So that means a lot of Obama voters voted against gay marriage..._QuoteHow's this: Rather than looking what the firebreathers say who have no power except to make stupid people angry such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, why don't you actually look objectively at the facts? the problem with that theory is that the republican party stand aside and let Limpdick be their voice and as long as they let him I think he is their leader and should be addressed End QuoteI don't think the GOP stood aside as much as they are so badly beaten that no one stood up to him, and its very possible he might be leading the party. After the election I spoke to a high ranking Bush administration official and made a few jokes about the election. Let's just say when I said the word schism and he interrupted me to seriously say "Schism...yeah, that's a good word for it." The point is, no one's really running the Republican Party at the moment, so the loudest voices are kind of providing momentum. If Rush is actually running the party, it will crash and burn, so I don't see why you'd have much of a problem with that..._ QuoteThis isn't to say the Republicans are better. They've been actively screwing up the country since 1995 for the post-cold war period. But if you're defending the Democrats' record by pointing to the GOP, then I think you're in trouble. The democrats major flaw to me in history was being on the wrong side of history with civil rights. But they ridded themselves of it for the most part. End QuoteWell, LBJ passed it, as well as his Voting Rights Act. Nixon was the last president to seriously talk about universal healthcare, and at least pursued a policy of detente. Its notable that a Democrat invaded Korea, and Vietnam under heavily false pretenses, and another one intervened in Serbia. Democrats are certainly not the party of peace, and as shown, have been quite the party of tax cuts to the rich. When you add in Clinton's support of NAFTA, support for deregulation of everything, failure to pass healthcare reform in a Democratic House, hell, failure to do anything liberal except a token tax increase on the rich which, I'll give him credit for, actually worked...you basically get a president that...was a conservative who wanted to balance the budget. I don't see how Clinton was a liberal._QuoteAnd I stand by what I say and go a step further. I see no real difference between George W. Bush and JFK, and I believe 1968 politically was just as troubled as the current time. The fact is, JFK took a country in good shape and left it in shambles in the spiritual time he would've been in office, and George W. Bush took a country in mediocre, overvalued shape and left it on the brink of catastrophe when he left office. Why is support for coups, supply side economics, illegal wiretaps, election rigging, exploiting foreign policy for midterm elections, talking about "rights" for an election only OK for JFK but not for George W. Bush?I repeat:Kennedy '64: Because schools, hospitals, roads, a balanced budget, a lack of a Vietnam War, diplomatic strength, and honest elections are all bad things.????End QuoteOh, you didn't know? JFK's solution to the Cuban Missile Crisis was that we'd pull missiles out of Turkey. What's wrong with that? It was agreed 6 months after the crisis to not effect the election of 1962. Since part of the agreement was to not publicize that part of the agreement, it also led to the ouster of Khrushchev, whom was better towards the west than Stalin before him or Brezhnev after him.The first major bill passed after JFK's death-and his pet project-was the tax cut. The first major thing Bush tried to do was his tax cuts in a budget reconciliation.JFK's last major act as president was to authorize the toppling of the Diem regime, which led to the execution of Diem and the destabilization of Vietnam, and bogged the US down in that war.These policies led to dramatic civil unrest not just in the US but abroad, and to say there was no civil strife in the late 1960s is just a joke.Oh yes, you have the wiretapping of MLK which JFK authorized. Then you have the election controversy of 1960 that Nixon didn't want to look too much after, partially because he was personally friends with Kennedy and decided to run again in 1968 (as Pat Buchanan recalled after leaving the Reagan administration). JFK's electoral tactics arguably led to Nixon's paranoia and Watergate (its unfair to blame JFK though for Nixon, but, Nixon was cheated in 1960).In the meantime, no one disputes Clinton's economy was bubbled up-the bubble lasted so long though people thought the overvaluations were the norm, and didn't realize that they were based on deregulation and debt. Since 2001, we've been running a Keynsian economy to delay these recessions, and its at the point where no debt can really be refinanced without government intervention, and all governments are also going broke. Greenspan gave his famous speech about the overvaluation of the stock market in the mid to late 90s: Clinton never corrected this problem. Bush went ahead and made the problem much worse as when the recession hit, he lowered interest rates more when they should have gone up. One can't really blame Clinton for the economic mess now since Bush had 8 years to correct it and made the problems worse, but one should rightfully point to the fact that Clinton's prosperity was sort of a sham based on deregulation euphoria at first. One could point to the deregulations passed by the Clinton administration as causing short term prosperity, and Bush's refusal to allow that nasty recession which nearly turned deflationary back in 2002 to today's problems.Let me clarify: Clinton didn't cause the current malaise. Bush's refusal to accept reality to get reelected in 2004 did. Bush had a chance to fix this, but it would've been a political nightmare, so he didn't. But people still think what went on with Clinton was the norm, and we still have yet to face a genuine bear market-even with the stock market declines-to reflect reality. The economy hasn't improved that much since 1987, and when you give more realistic values of the DOW to reflect historical averages-it should currently be well under 4000, or it means its gained in value much more than the rest of the economy. People got so used to that bull market, they think that 9000 is still low, without realizing how high it is.If that sounds too pessimistic, all I can say is: Take a good look at the Japanese stock market in the last 30 years, as well as Iceland, and explain to me why neither case can happen here.Furthermore, the Eisenhower administration build more roads than any previous president, as well as schools and hospitals. Kennedy stagnated or reversed this trend. Hence why I give that Kennedy slogan. When you factor in the result of the Cuban Missile Crisis, which was just as bad as Bush making the 2002 midterm about Iraq (actually, worse, since JFK actively betrayed an ally by unilaterally removing weapons from its country without consultation for a vote whereas Bush didn't break any promises) you can see where my slogan comes from.If you don't want to believe this, just do the research on your own. Read about the Berlin Conference, read about the Cuban Missile Crisis results, read about Diem and Vietnam (which was a fucked up policy to begin with), read more about the Cuban Missile Crisis, read about Kennedy's actions visiting Cuba, read about the Mafia's political game in the 1960 election, read about the illegal wiretaps Hoover pressured Kennedy into doing (and this is a very generous way to put it), read about the tax cuts, read about the Eisenhower internal improvements (remember, Kennedy supporters refer to him as a do-nothing president, who pursued a policy of detente, built roads, schools, hospitals, pushed for a cease-fire with China over Korea, supported civil rights bills...), read about Kennedy's personal decisions about the Cuban embargo (not signing the law until he got his personal shipment of 2000 Havana cigars first...)...Its very very difficult to defend these things. I have to ask; are you honestly not aware of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyj316 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 I thought about throwing a gallon of gasoline on this fire... but rather than trolling, or making arguments to deaf ears... I think I'll sit here and just facepalm, shrug, then go back to whatever it was I was doing...Though, I will add this... Even if a president makes a decision that is un-popular (i.e. veto), congress still can overturn the veto and even tell the president to GTFO...For shits and grins, let me break down every president since FDR (i.e. the start of term limits) by party, years in office, number of overrides, and percentage of their vetoes to be overridden...FDR - D - 12 - 9 - 1%Truman - D - 8 - 12 - 5%Ike - R - 8 - 2 - 1%JFK - D - 2 - 0 - 0%LBJ - D - 6 - 0 - 0%Nixon - R - 5 - 7 - 16%Ford - R - 3 - 12 - 18%Carter - D - 4 - 2 - 6%Regan - R - 8 - 9 - 12%HW Bush - R - 4 - 1 - 2%Clinton - D - 8 - 2 - 5%W Bush - R - 8 - 4 - 33%Obama - D - 1 - 0 - 0%Republican vetoes overridden - 35Democrat vetoes overridden - 25Republican years in office - 36Democrat years in office - 40Republican vetoes overridden / year - ~.97Democrat vetoes overridden / year - ~.63Now, by the looks of it, arguably the four least liked presidents of the past century (Nixon, Ford, Regan, and W Bush) account for the highest number/percentages of overturned vetoes... That actually says a lot... I could go further back if you'd like.... though I would have to account for the whig part and the paradigm shift of the parties if I go too far back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (tinyj316 @ Aug 13 2009, 12:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>I thought about throwing a gallon of gasoline on this fire... but rather than trolling, or making arguments to deaf ears... I think I'll sit here and just facepalm, shrug, then go back to whatever it was I was doing...Though, I will add this... Even if a president makes a decision that is un-popular (i.e. veto), congress still can overturn the veto and even tell the president to GTFO...For shits and grins, let me break down every president since FDR (i.e. the start of term limits) by party, years in office, number of overrides, and percentage of their vetoes to be overridden...FDR - D - 12 - 9 - 1%Truman - D - 8 - 12 - 5%Ike - R - 8 - 2 - 1%JFK - D - 2 - 0 - 0%LBJ - D - 6 - 0 - 0%Nixon - R - 5 - 7 - 16%Ford - R - 3 - 12 - 18%Carter - D - 4 - 2 - 6%Regan - R - 8 - 9 - 12%HW Bush - R - 4 - 1 - 2%Clinton - D - 8 - 2 - 5%W Bush - R - 8 - 4 - 33%Obama - D - 1 - 0 - 0%Republican vetoes overridden - 35Democrat vetoes overridden - 25Republican years in office - 36Democrat years in office - 40Republican vetoes overridden / year - ~.97Democrat vetoes overridden / year - ~.63Now, by the looks of it, arguably the four least liked presidents of the past century (Nixon, Ford, Regan, and W Bush) account for the highest number/percentages of overturned vetoes... That actually says a lot... I could go further back if you'd like.... though I would have to account for the whig part and the paradigm shift of the parties if I go too far back.Carter wasn't well liked, for starters, and lost to Reagan by a mile. And LBJ didn't even run for a second term. So I think calling them the "Four least liked presidents" is inaccurate-for one thing, three of them were reelected. Two of them were reelected by large margins; few presidents are well liked when they leave office. W. Bush once had a fantastically high approval rating. But, even then, there's no relationship between approval rating and good leadership. I believe Truman's was low, yet historians generally rate him as very good. Eisenhower's was high, and I've yet to encounter anyone saying he was bad (at worst, a do-nothing, which ignores the internal improvements; then again, those things are relatively boring). Clinton's approval rating at times was sky high, but opinions from historians of his presidency are still rather muddy. George H. W. Bush had a high rating, and then asked "What recession?"-so popular he lost his election.Furthermore, I'd say this means rather little. Nixon had a democratic house and senate I believe, was a moderate and had to deal with both liberal and conservative opposition in his own party, but I'd have to look that up. Of course they'd overwrite his vetoes. Same with Ford.With Bush, I'm not aware of him using a veto once when Republicans held congress.Importantly, I'm not sure what the suggestion is here. "Popular decision?"-Congress isn't popular, and I don't remember any time in my lifetime they have been. If congress voted a "free money for everyone" decision, it'd probably be popular; that doesn't make it good. Edited August 13, 2009 by clibinarius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinyj316 Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Just because they were re-elected doesn't mean that they were well liked... it just means that the other option was worse than the guy already in office... Carter was a well liked president... Regan was just liked more... When dealing with "wars" republicans tend to get more votes than democrats... if you remember, the cold war was just gearing up at that time.Bush's approval rating was only high because of the immediate aftermath of 9/11... nobody wants to be attacked, and when we were attacked, everyone wanted the SOBs that did it to pay... but then once we started fighting a war that was an apparent carry over from daddy's presidency.... people got pissed...and it was too little too late... As far as Ike goes, he was a do-nothing as far as public perception is concerned...I agree that nobody gives a damn about internal improvements... I didn't say he wasn't well liked, so I don't know why you brought him up...Clinton is still considered to be a great president... historians are muddy on the issue because his legacy was marred by the incompetence of the Bush regime, and the fact that he's still alive... very rarely do historians write good history when the person being written about is still alive...H.W Bush was a dolt... You can't tell people to ignore the 500 pound gorilla in the corner when its running toward you, and still hope to get elected... but he wasn't a bad president... his son was far worse... Nixon was a liar, a cheat, and uber paranoid... He only got re-elected because the public wasn't aware of what he was doing until it was too late... that's why he was a terrible presidentYou're right, when the party in control over congress is the same as the president in power, you don't get a lot of vetoes... BUT... presidential vetoes are unpopular with ANY congress... Presidents have vetoed their own party plenty of times, and it normally ends with the president being overruled.I use the term Popular Decision when relating to congress... a popular decision would be one that garners a passing vote...while an unpopular decision is a veto by the president, or the inability to overturn a veto... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 QUOTE (tinyj316 @ Aug 13 2009, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Just because they were re-elected doesn't mean that they were well liked... it just means that the other option was worse than the guy already in office... Carter was a well liked president... Regan was just liked more... When dealing with "wars" republicans tend to get more votes than democrats... if you remember, the cold war was just gearing up at that time.Bush's approval rating was only high because of the immediate aftermath of 9/11... nobody wants to be attacked, and when we were attacked, everyone wanted the SOBs that did it to pay... but then once we started fighting a war that was an apparent carry over from daddy's presidency.... people got pissed...and it was too little too late... As far as Ike goes, he was a do-nothing as far as public perception is concerned...I agree that nobody gives a damn about internal improvements... I didn't say he wasn't well liked, so I don't know why you brought him up...Clinton is still considered to be a great president... historians are muddy on the issue because his legacy was marred by the incompetence of the Bush regime, and the fact that he's still alive... very rarely do historians write good history when the person being written about is still alive...H.W Bush was a dolt... You can't tell people to ignore the 500 pound gorilla in the corner when its running toward you, and still hope to get elected... but he wasn't a bad president... his son was far worse... Nixon was a liar, a cheat, and uber paranoid... He only got re-elected because the public wasn't aware of what he was doing until it was too late... that's why he was a terrible presidentYou're right, when the party in control over congress is the same as the president in power, you don't get a lot of vetoes... BUT... presidential vetoes are unpopular with ANY congress... Presidents have vetoed their own party plenty of times, and it normally ends with the president being overruled.I use the term Popular Decision when relating to congress... a popular decision would be one that garners a passing vote...while an unpopular decision is a veto by the president, or the inability to overturn a veto...I have to disagree with your statement on Carter v. Reagan; Carter was and still is hated as a president, though he might be personally popular. He lost overwhelmingly, and Mondale lost overwhelmingly in 1984. A popular president should not lose as much as Carter did. At best, he was seen as incredibly incompetent-not popular-and I don't know too many Democrats who think he's a shining success.You're right that Bush's approval rating was only high because 9/11. But the point is he was at one point popular, so to call him that unpopular is just the current moment speaking. Honestly, I think he'll be as popular as Warren Harding and Herbert Hoover combined in the end...but that's another story.I brought up Ike to demonstrate that high approval ratings might mean a good president, mostly to show there is no correlation between being a good president and approval ratings-it was to contrast him with Truman and Clinton. I don't think Clinton was a good president, and not because he's still alive: Rather, I think there was a lot of deception on the state of the union in the Clinton administration...because Bush refused to let reality set in, not only did the unrealistic and certainly unsustainable "growth" under Clinton become both expected and demanded, but was actually made a lot worse, since Bush's political survival was based on keeping Clinton bubbles going. That's the real problem I have with Clinton's legacy; yes, Bush made things a hell of a lot worse, but the Clinton legacy isn't as good as people make it out to be. I tend to think of Clinton as an average president, because while he was "adequate" on a lot of things, he failed on NAFTA (unpopular in the US and Canada), Walmart (unpopular in the US and Canada) and deregulation (US financial rules are unpopular with nearly everyone now). That Clinton made steps to balance the budget and make American sustainable-even if it was based on invalid models-is far more admirable than what Reagan, George W. and Obama have thus far attempted. Clinton will probably be one of those presidents who are debated 200 years from now; people still debate whether or not JQ Adams was a great president or horrible. The answer is probably neither...To say Nixon was a terrible president, blanketly, is a bit too far. Nixon certainly broke the law and deserved to go to jail, and that can't be justified with the ends justifying the means. He was also a racist. But he wasn't the first president to break the law since Eisenhower (see: JFK) regarding elections. Nor was he the first to abuse his power and probably impeachable (see: JFK) since the time he was vice president. He carpet bombed Cambodia and stepped up the war in Vietnam, and at best only allowed the conditions for Pinochet to come to power in Chile (Ignoring the fact Allende was utterly incompetent himself...). He did, however, gain the US enormous prestiege in diplomatic relations regarding Vietnam (though he was too vain to get the treaty that nearly saved the south), was able to get detente with the Soviets and Chinese. I don't think his great successes-and greater failures-should be discounted.But he was immensely unpopular when he left office. He was very popular before he was caught, though. As far as what Kennedy did, it was at least identical, if not worse, and the public still isn't outrageously aware of it. That its debatable still while the numbers are unrealistic in some areas-that's just absurd. JFK to me was a lot like Nixon, except without any successes. Hence why I like Johnson so much-a president that is STILL not particularly popular, but who got the jobs done without playing too paranoid/mafia dishonest to win (I have no doubt LBJ didn't play clean, but it was nowhere near as bad as the boys who played before and after him...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scalliwag Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 ^ anyone that would even consider claiming Nixon was a better president than JFK is not even worth arguing with. The son-of-a-bitch had Daniel Ellsworth psychiatrist office firebombed to cover up a break-in. Even if he didn't order it is anyone stupid enough to think he did not know about it and who did it? His group of cronies like G.Gordon Liddy were nothing but a bunch of criminals. He had a lot of liberal social policies but he was an evil piece of shit. He was 100% into it for the power. His smear campaigns from his earliest positions were always calling his opponents "communist sympathizers". Nobody has to do any of your "homework" projects to dismiss that as a crock of shit. You even tried to justify his reason for being paranoid. Because he had an election stolen from him? If that was true he needed to get the hell over it just like repubs thought so about Bush v. Gore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 (edited) QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 14 2009, 08:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>^ anyone that would even consider claiming Nixon was a better president than JFK is not even worth arguing with. The son-of-a-bitch had Daniel Ellsworth psychiatrist office firebombed to cover up a break-in. Even if he didn't order it is anyone stupid enough to think he did not know about it and who did it? His group of cronies like G.Gordon Liddy were nothing but a bunch of criminals. He had a lot of liberal social policies but he was an evil piece of shit. He was 100% into it for the power. His smear campaigns from his earliest positions were always calling his opponents "communist sympathizers". Nobody has to do any of your "homework" projects to dismiss that as a crock of shit. You even tried to justify his reason for being paranoid. Because he had an election stolen from him? If that was true he needed to get the hell over it just like repubs thought so about Bush v. Gore.I think Nixon was a better president. But Firebombing an office? Really? That's the worst thing you can think of? Cause...Nixon firebombed a country [Cambodia]...I sort of think that's more of a crime, even if its not illegal per se.Then again, nice way to ignore my point of Cuba. A place Kennedy had orgies and took many many drugs. A place Kennedy was dedicated to overthrow, and staged a coup-maybe it was Eisenhower's plan, BUT JFK COULD'VE STOPPED IT. Also, Eisenhower's plan called for the USAF. If JFK wasn't willing to carry out the plan, he should've scuttled it.Now, of course, this led to the Cuba missile crisis, as well as Kennedy's EMBARRASSING performance over Berlin. So what makes this worse than Nixon's paranoia? THE FACT JFK UNILATERALLY PULLED MISSILES OUT OF TURKEY WITHOUT CONSULTING THEIR GOVERNMENT, THEN KEEPING IT SECRET TO WIN A MIDTERM ELECTION. The USSR did NOT publicize that part of the agreement. HOW ON EARTH IS USING MAFIA MUSCLE TO WIN (if not outright stealing) an election not worse than what Nixon did, especially if you know ANYTHING about how the mafia intimidates? HOW ON EARTH IS THAT WORSE THAN UNILATERALLY BETRAYING A COUNTRY TO WIN A MIDTERM AND KEEPING THIS A SECRET?My god. JFK lied to win the election of 1962, a bigger lie than any Bush ever did. OK, so I can't prove firebombings. I never praise or like Castro, but have you read about JFK's policies towards Cuba? Are you that out to lunch? Why is it OK to attempt to assassinate the leader of the country-resulting in death, war and more death-and when Nixon proposes burning down an office to steal documents-which won't result in death or war, though is dangerous and illegal...it makes him the worst person ever on the face of the earth?This is NOT a justification of Nixon. You won't find anything positive in this statement or account of Nixon. In fact, its outright bringing up criminal activity, and treating Nixon as a criminal. I've brought up the far bigger crime that Nixon did than anything you've been willing to say.Mind you, comparing JFK to Nixon and saying JFK was a better president is like saying JFK is better than arguably the worst president in history. Congrats. If you're right, that still means JFK is probably a horrible president. I mean, did you hear me saying "I like the decision of Bush v. Gore"-aside from its implications, the precident of "This is a special case and shouldn't be used as a precident for future elections" shows the hypocrisy of the situation-did you hear me saying that?Are you that much of a democrat that you think the Democratic party is ONLY good, and has brought us a repeal of supply side economics, universal healthcare for all, hell, used the SEC to go after people on wall street that broke laws, end warrantless wiretapping, launched one investigation of ANYTHING political or economic from the last 20 years, end corruption in the US, or pass any legislation that's a permanent fix to ANYTHING?When Clinton became president, you still had regulation on financials that worked, you had an opportunity to fix healthcare, repeal don't ask-don't tell, not pass NAFTA, not have his wife on the board of Walmart...and what did he do?Under Clinton, AIG grew out of control, no healthcare reform was passed, no military reform was passed (though he did antagonize them), wars that didn't effect America started (air strikes of Serbia, more bombs in Iraq than during the George H. W. Bush administration...), Walmart grew out of control, and nearly every financial deregulation that set the stage for the bubbles under Bush occurred and were finalized as Clinton left office. NAFTA was also passed. Once again: Bush made a crisis a lot worse by keeping this system bubbling for 6 years after it should've crashed. But the Democrats have consistently sucked. To say the Republicans are worse is sort of like saying "I like taking general fish oil more than cod liver oil because it tastes better."Mind you, the way things are going, I'm probably going to vote Democrat in 2010. But that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it. Anyone being happy about voting Democrat in the next election (or Republican, for that matter) needs to stop drinking the kool-aid or get off the prozac, or whatever the heck they're on. The same applies to Nixon/JFK. JFK is only a good president if you ignore FDR, Truman, LBJ and Eisenhower, or a great president if you ignore Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Monroe, Theodore Roosevelt...right there I've named nine presidents, all of whom are better presidents than JFK (and I think most historians would agree with that as long as they aren't in the JFK cult), all of whom are relatively non-partisan in the modern day (Hence why I didn't choose Reagan or Clinton, partially cause I don't care for either, partially because they're too partisan in the modern day). We've had 43 presidents in history, not counting the impossible to judge at the moment 44th president. I doubt you know the record of all the other presidents (I would rate Wilson as a great "failed" president, for one, and I think Taft got the shaft and was probably a very underrated president that TR arrogantly decided to submarine)-I doubt you even know too much specifically about Monroe, but I might be wrong there-so I think its fair to assume that JFK isn't even in the top 25% of presidents of the country. Was JFK better than McKinley even?You're right, its not worth arguing with me, because I'm arguing that JFK was a shitty president, and you know...anyone who dares actually examine his record isn't worth arguing with. We must all bow down to JFK, the president with the fictional life before the cameras, who did NOTHING in terms of getting ANYTHING done that was good except the peace corps...and say, as we're aroused by his memory "Wasn't he SOOOOOOOOO much better than that Nixon fella?" Edited August 15, 2009 by clibinarius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (Scalliwag @ Aug 14 2009, 08:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>^ anyone that would even consider claiming Nixon was a better president than JFK is not even worth arguing with. The son-of-a-bitch had Daniel Ellsworth psychiatrist office firebombed to cover up a break-in. Even if he didn't order it is anyone stupid enough to think he did not know about it and who did it? His group of cronies like G.Gordon Liddy were nothing but a bunch of criminals. He had a lot of liberal social policies but he was an evil piece of shit. He was 100% into it for the power. His smear campaigns from his earliest positions were always calling his opponents "communist sympathizers". Nobody has to do any of your "homework" projects to dismiss that as a crock of shit. You even tried to justify his reason for being paranoid. Because he had an election stolen from him? If that was true he needed to get the hell over it just like repubs thought so about Bush v. Gore.Oh, before I forget, didn't JFK's special advisor get his start working for a guy named Joe McCarthey? And why exactly did JFK want to be president? So his father would get more power? And why did the Kennedy machine pull those strings so well? Out of the goodness of their hearts? Nevermind that the Kennedy fortune was made all on illegal activities, from liquor smuggling to mass speculation and insider trading, or his family's apologizing for Hitler, wishing the US supported Hitler against what JFK's daddy called the "twin evils of communism and Judaism." JFK won by "We've fallen behind the Soviets! We've fallen behind the Soviets! CLOSE THE FICTIONAL MISSILE GAP THAT I'm DEMAGAGING! NIXON MADE US FALL BEHIND THE SOVIETS!"Please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clibinarius Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 Don't want to reply once again, but if you're wondering why I can say Nixon was arguably the worst US president in one statement and "to say terrible is wrong" is because I don't know what to think about Nixon. He did some horrible things, but he also did some very good things that only Nixon could do (go to China). Nixon's extremely difficult to evaluate, unless you just want to ignore the presidency itself and focus on his personal life (which seems no better than JFK's).At least Nixon wasn't sleeping with East German spies while he was president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted August 15, 2009 Share Posted August 15, 2009 QUOTE (clibinarius @ Aug 14 2009, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Don't want to reply once again, but if you're wondering why I can say Nixon was arguably the worst US president in one statement and "to say terrible is wrong" is because I don't know what to think about Nixon. He did some horrible things, but he also did some very good things that only Nixon could do (go to China). Nixon's extremely difficult to evaluate, unless you just want to ignore the presidency itself and focus on his personal life (which seems no better than JFK's).At least Nixon wasn't sleeping with East German spies while he was president.Good grief, where are you getting your misinformation? Really, I want you to quote your sources - chapter and verse because you are laboring under beliefs I have heard from no one else. You state JFK wax in the pockets of the Mafia, and yet they have been consistently accused of being involved in his asssination because of his determination to dismantle the organization. So was he their best buddy as you claim or bitter enemy? So show me your sources and your evidence to support your assertions. I'll warn you in advance, don't quote popular literature. As an artist and writer, nothing I will ever produce will be untained by my personal beliefs and neither will anything produced by anyone else. All that we are permeates our work. So show me the evidence - not the opinion.'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now