1 johnson got us into vietnam not to win but to test weapons. which is shy nixon had to go when he got us out of vietnam

2 i believe is at least a tie with clinton who only cared about clinton didn't care about the american people. whose in action brought about the need to go to war to start with.

he was also impeached by the house for lieing in court.

and you may have 3 and 4 backwards

It's an interesting list. I'm not familiar enough with your presidents of the 20th century to comment on your order, but I was surprised by the addition of Woodrow Wilson. Do you think it was his idealism that was the problem? He really seemed to have an obsession with his League of Nations.

If I was going to rank US presidents I would have put him on the positives, in terms of expanding US influence anyway. Nothing did more for American international power than getting involved in the world wars. It basically transplanted the old British empire into reasonably loyal satellites of US authority.

All lists are relative. Basically why most historians refuse to rank recent presidents as the tenure, right or wrong, is too fresh and therefore too prejudicial.

Going by some of the reasoning there, you'd have to move G.W. Bush down the list and put F.D.R. way up near the top of the list.

F.D.R. created most of the entitlements we have today, though they didn't start out as entitlements, they started as the big old safety net provided by society.  He created the precursor for that 'Great Society' that L.B.J. later brought upon us.

Given the lack of follow-thru on many ideas, and a lack of accomplishing things that were clearly going to be hard, but for which trial balloons were floated, quickly fell back to Earth and then pretty much never heard from again, I could buy G.W. Bush being on the list of the worst in our history.  Where exactly to put him though is a big question as there are plenty of others that could be on the list as well.

while I agree with your choices, I must say it is much to early for "history" to judge G>W>B>

The reason I wouldn't put FDR on the list is that the great depression was a perilous time for American democracy. The people wanted some hope. And his programs were fairly benign, they got corrupted later on.

Johnson, by contrast, had no rationale for his "great society" other than to buy votes IMO. 

GWB I suspect will definitely make it onto the list no matter how far away we look at it.

GWB I suspect will definitely make it onto the list no matter how far away we look at it.

Reply By: DraginolPosted: Friday, May 25, 2007

Not to be disagreeable, but history has a way of looking at things quite differently than it was at the times it happened.

Lindberg the WW1 ace had FDR's ear and was a Jew hater from the word go, he counciled FDR to stay out of it, as long it it was JEWS being killed, it was not until Hitler started consuming Europe that FDR saw trouble and it took the Japanese doing Pearl for America to finally get involved. Yet we see FDR as a Great President.

Given the modern standards that Bush is now being held to, few Presidents would have escaped impeachment, frankly.

*One name that leaps immediately to mind is Lincoln. Compared to Bush, Lincoln was incompetent as a commander-in-chief and his election was basically a death sentence for hundreds of thousands of Americans. It took the nation decades to recover, and Black Americans suffered for another hundred years. If anything he took a broken toaster apart, at horrible costs, and then left it to be put back together by other people.

*Another notable is Truman. He rode in on the coattails of Roosevelt, with zero foreign policy experience. He committed what are widely regarded to be the most heinous acts of inhumanity in the history of modern warfare (though I disagree there). As Zionist militants were killing British citizens in Palestine, he fought against a two-state solution and was key in pushing for the sad state of affairs that exists there to this day.

...and then there was Korea, the birth of the Vietnam conflict, McCarthyism on his watch, etc., etc. He set up "loyalty board" witchhunts looking for communists. He was a horror-show compared to Bush, and is often in historians' top ten list of presidents.


Direct quote:



Imagine Bush saying that out loud anywhere near a microphone, much less in a speech.

**God, I could go on forever. Basically you can walk through a timeline of US wars and look at how they were fought, if nothing else but Iraq is the question. Compared to about any other war Iraq is a walk in the park. And in terms of how we got into it, I'd reply "Remember the Maine!!" A boiler blows up on a boat and we invade another country...

George W. Bush does have an idealogy. It's called Religion. He has a set of advisors that he discusses everything with every week that are all evangelical ministers. He takes their advice over everyone else and that's why were in this mess.

It is religion that as got the US where it is, make no mistake. Iraq is another crusade, nothing more.

Oh and FDR? The man actually caused the worst stock market crash in history. (Yes, 1929 was not the worst, 1938 care of FDR was) The man intended, just like Hover to be his own version of Hitler for the United States. Thank god for a constitution otherwise the US would have had the same thing. The man was anything but benign, in fact he was one of the most dangerous men in history. The only difference is that the constitution prevented him from getting his way.

As for Wilson, you forgot the most evil thing he did. He created the federal reserve bank. As a result there was an artifical influx of cash into the economy that couldn't be sustained. The result was the roaring 20s and the 1929 stockmarket crash. Add in removing the gold standard for US currency and later Hover's blatant protectionism which essentially killed all trade with Europe (i.e. 2 days previous to the 1929 stock market crash he passed a 150% terrif on all trade with Europe which was the last nail in the coffin) and you have the dirty 1930s in full view. It happened for a reason, and it was Wilson and Hover that got us there and FDR that kept us there (oh and Kaynes, the most worshiped (and wrong) economist in history). 4 men that should be reviled throughout history but instead, two of them are thought of as two of the best presidents we've ever had, and Kaynes is "the man" when it comes to economics in our schools even to this day when his theories have all been proven wrong and to only have made any sense during the exception which was the 1930 unlike his assertion that the previous 150 years of history had been an exception and the 30s were the reality.

Hitler happened because of the policies of the United States more than anywhere else in the world (except perhaps Chamberland ignoring Churchill). Hitler would have happened here save for the founding fathers creating a constitution that proved up to the task and did what it set out to do: prevent men like Hover, Wilson and FDR from becoming tyrants.

Oh, and you forgot to place medicare at the feet of Johnson. Medicare is responsible for the horrible costs of medicine in the United States right now. It is a disaster and getting worse. Bush's inclusion of prescprition drugs means that within the next 15 years (this is from the chief actuary of the United States government) the United States will be bankrupt, just paying the interest on medicare. It has to be all but scraped otherwise with the baby boom retiring the United States will collapse. This isn't doomsaying, this is fact. It was Johnson that got it passed. Feel free to add Truman to the list of horrible presidents below Hover as #7 on your list who came up with the idea of Medicare and would have made it universal if given the chance.

Oh, and I'd add in terms of "strategery", both Lincoln and Truman were complete novices who had abysmal relationships with their military commanders. If I recall Lincoln went through at least 5 military commanders in a short time. One he fired for not slaughtering retreating troops.


Truman's adolescent relationship with McCarthur is legend. Imagine what a bobblehead McCarthur (dick though he was) would be for the anti-presidential media now. Imagine Bush getting caught writing something like this during wartime:



Like I said, I could go on forever, lol. I'll hush.

I find that statement interesting. HOw did America cause Hitler? I personally always laid that burden at the feet of europe, but specifically France and Britian more than any others.

Why do you call him McCarthur?

It was the United States that gave sanction to Hitler by supporting the war reparations, increasing terrifs on Germany (even more than what they did to the rest of Europe), by telling Europe that the United States didn't care what Hitler did, by essentially not only not condeming hatred of Jews but actually supporting it for all intents and purposes, by vetoing all motions in the League to do something about Hitler and by what was going on in the United States at the time politically. (Hover and FDR)

France and the rest of Europe had a part to play for sure. But like everything, the French had far less to do with it than their egos would lead them to believe. It was the United States that was the tipping point. Britian stood alone in condemnation (but with complete appathy) as the only nation actually against Hitler in the whole thing.

Oh, and lest us not forget that the war reparations were directly the result of the United States (especially) and France wanting to be paid back for all of the expense of fighting the war in the first place. The end result was a society ripe for a tyrant.

As for the comment about supporting Russia and Hitler whoever isn't winning at the moment. It was an apprepo statement considering that Russia and Germany at the time represented the greatest evil the world had ever known second only to the Roman Catholic Church.

If if only the United States would realize that the best way to deal with radical Islam is to kick up the Sunnis and Sheas and ensure that the civil war between them continues and spreads we could get the hell out of Iraq and let them fight amoung themselves and forget about the west entirely. We certainly don't need their oil anymore (60% as of this year comes from Canada)

Oh, and lest us not forget that the war reparations were directly the result of the United States (especially) and France wanting to be paid back for all of the expense of fighting the war in the first place. The end result was a society ripe for a tyrant.

This, I beleive, was the single biggest reason for it, but I place the blame more on France than any others.

But like everything, the French had far less to do with it than their egos would lead them to believe

Well, you cant argue that!

Thanks for your take on it.