English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It sure seems that way. I've heard of some bad ones like Andrew Johnson but that was over a century ago. Even though Bill Clinton liked BJs (who can fault that?), he was much more articulate and was better with making international friends with other countries. America's foreign policy in the 90s seemed to go much more smoother and they seemed to be more well liked around the world since then. Also, the US dollar had rapidly declined since Bush had been in Office.

2007-08-21 12:26:39 · 41 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

41 answers

Its always seems that the Presidents who truly lead us through the difficult times and make the difficult choices are hated during their time in office but years from now are truly loved for what they had done.

Clinton will never be remembered except to say that while the state of the world was deteriorating with a growing threat of terrorism and problems with Saddam he did nothing. Then a few months after his departure we saw the culmination of his policy's, 9-11.

However, Bush will be remember as having seen the threat of terrorism and faced head on. True there have been miscalculations but he has moved us in a direction that will keep us safe for years to come. He will also be remembers as the president who saw some of the most deviating problems economically. (Clinton recession, 9-11, .com crash, energy issues) and pulled us through to new economic highs. It is for these reason Bush will be remembered for years to come. Just like another Republican president, Ronald Reagen for ending the Communist threat and pulling us out of the economic problems personified in the Carter administration.

Great Presidents make the tough choices and follow through even though those difficult choices may cause difficulties for the people of the day. Remember that next time you feel the need to ask another question like this.

2007-08-21 12:50:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 6

You don't seem to have a clue. It wasn't just his sex life and the fact he couldn't seem to do it anywhere but the Whitehouse or even that he lied about it. It's the 30+ people who had 'accidental' deaths in addition to the 12 body guards. It's the selling out of our country to China and all the illegal dealings he did in which all the records disapeared. It's the fact he did nothing to even try and stop terrorism even tho Americans were attacked around the world including the Trade center the first time.

2007-08-21 17:45:06 · answer #2 · answered by Brianne 7 · 1 1

I AGREE 150%... I've NEVER referred to him as President, because he is NOT PRESIDENT MATERIAL..... he nearly destroyed America, and now he's going to be PROSECUTED FOR MURDER! YEEHAW! MCCAIN and Obama are NOT President Material either... so I am writing in Hilary's name, when I vote in Nov.... Maybe we'll get enough write in votes, that she will WIN.... Hilary Would DO A FINE JOB!

2016-05-19 02:36:25 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0 0

Johnson got us bogged down in one screwed up war...........I thought that was pretty bad.

I didn't think another president would be dumb enough to do that again.

Bush has done that times two and he doesn't even have prior presidents to blame except by rewriting history of which some here have done.

Yes, Bush will go down in history as the worst, and unlike Johnson, who has another legacy of helping the people, Bush will also go down with the legacy of helping only the country club class at the expense of our treasury, our people and our way of life.

Peace

Jim

.

2007-08-21 12:48:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

My answer for this question was -

There is good and bad in all of us, doesn't matter what you do for a living. So although I may not agree with some of what he has done, it doesn't mean he is the worst.

I don't know that anyone else having become President at the same time, went through 9-11 wouldn't have had a very difficult time dealing with this all.

Just my personal opinion.

2007-08-21 13:23:24 · answer #5 · answered by ♥ ♥Be Happi♥ ♥ 6 · 2 1

Not by a long shot! What's more important, a smooth talker who does noting or someone who bumbles but acts? Why are you and your fellow Liberals so concerned with being liked? Could you be that naive to think we're going to be liked by everyone, always? Grow up!

We know you're hero, "Slick-Willie" is the poster boy for libs but he WAS a joke and an embarrassment as a president. He was caretaker of a great economy that he inherited from his predecessor. He had Osama Bin-Laden 3 times and failed to act. On at least one of those occasions he could not be reached because he was preparing himself for "Monica Gate." He was a true, modern Liberal-He never made a tough decision and he never made a stand! He took the stand, but never made a stand (except when he lied to the grand jury!) The only missiles Billy used with any intent was his own personal "heat-seeking moisture missile" that was a favorite on interns. Besides, how could he be bothered with OBL when he had to design his Library and strong-arm people for donations to build it?? Anyway, had Bill Clinton did what he was elected to do, OBL would be dead the World Trade Centers would still be standing!

And by the way, if you're from England or have family roots there, you guys should be real proud of the way you handled pre-war Nazi-Germany. Yup, you guys were so worried about Hitler liking you you were willing to do anything including giving sovereign countries away. You guys were right on the mark there! Well, partly because of the worlds inability to act over 20 million people died and I see you still haven't learned your lessons, have you??

2007-08-21 12:53:27 · answer #6 · answered by Is it Friday yet?? 4 · 1 4

The history of the U.S. is a lot longer than the sort time of your awareness. Just look at FDR, he imprisoned U.S. citizens of Japanese decent, took everything they owned and sent them to camps. How good is that? How about LBJ faking the attack at the Gulf of Tonkin that he used as an excuse to start the War in Vietnam. How about the Carter economy (oh wait, 18% T-Bills and 15% mortgages are great for the rich)? You can find numerous similar examples, but I'm sure Comedy Central doesn't mention this on their "news" shows.

2007-08-21 12:40:37 · answer #7 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 5 2

If he took us to the middle east for the wrong reason then yes. But I believe as many do that the middle east has long been the starting point of this war.
In the 80s "terrorists" bombed bars and military bases all over europe. In the 90s we went to an un-official war in yugoslavia. The destruction existed long before G.W. and others had a part. The "radical extremists" came from somewhere. As for the worst president, If the truth was to be told, does a president who takes us to war for what he believes is the right reason deserve that title. Or would it be someone else. Like our first president who owned (it is believed) 200 slaves. If bush is the worst we have had to date, I will hate to see what scumbag there is to come.

2007-08-21 12:39:48 · answer #8 · answered by friendly advice from maine 5 · 4 4

I agree, it seemed liek when Clintonw as in office everythign was so much smoother, and who cares if he got a ******** every president except Harry Truman cheated on their wives anyways, but it was alright for them? George Bush is an idiotic puppet anyway.

2007-08-21 12:57:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Our stock market is at record high levels. Unemployment is low.
How is our economy bad?
He doesn't believe in over governing everything that is a good thing.
He had to deal with terrorism because we did nothing under Clinton.
He has to stand on his own because our country has turned into a bunch of blithering cowards who understand nothing of what he is fighting for.
He isn't the worst President by a long shot.

2007-08-21 12:45:42 · answer #10 · answered by easyericlife 4 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers