Well I thought I was on topic, I did vote on the "other" list, and I voted for blood and guts G.W. Bush. My intensions were not to categorize G.W. as the "best US president to screw things up". And in another note, the US is not the CCP, at least not now, so my opinion is my freedom of speach right whether people likes it or not.
Firstly, apologies to JC. Caudillo, what part of "stay on topic" do you not understand? "Best US president to screw things up" is not on topic. Freedom of speech, as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, applies only where interaction between the government and it's citizens is concerned. As this is a privately owned forum, your "freedom of speech" to say what you please is given only at the largesse of the owner. Do we understand each other? I will not address this issue again.
Sex, politics, and religion Gets peoples blood pressure up everytime ! I voted for Reagan. He seemed to have the most common sense of alot of them.
My apologies to JC and all of you whom I offended for giving the impression that I was bashing Bush and categorizing him as the best president to date to screw things up.
So to back up my Lincoln as best president for the United States, I honestly feel that he was doing whatever was in his power to keep the union together which these days doesn't seem like such a bad thing. He also knew that the way things were going 'half slave and half free' wouldn't work (due to the actions and feelings of both north and south). He was also intelligent enough to remember that many people in the north would have opposed measures to free slaves and give more rights to blacks, using a combination of rhetoric and clever timing to pass legislation. This may prove controversial with the southrons on here but it's just my relatively uneducated opinion.
If it´s true that Ronad caused the collapse of the USSR by starting "the Star wars" which ended with the financial destruction of the mentioned country must say that was one massive invention although a very risky one. Like said "If"...
IMHO, the thing that keeps Lincoln out of the top spot is his suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1861.
You see I would agree, but the writ has been suspended quite a few times and you could argue that in the interests of winning the war it was justified (I wouldn't follow that line but it is an interesting debate). I guess every President has their faults and this is Abes. That said something that makes me laugh is when people talk about Washington freeing his slaves as though it was some great act of visionary kindness. When you consider that when he was 11 he inherited 10 slaves and had over 300 working on his land when he died, plus the fact that they were only freed after his death (well, some of them, others were inherited by his son) I can't help wondering quite how kind and visionary the decision was.
Think I'll give my 2 cents worth of approval to Teddy R. We could use a chap like him right now .........
Its usually easier to get a list of the worst Presidents than the best. While I'd say Washington was likely the best, here are a few of the worst: Warren Harding Ulysses S. Grant James Carter Woodrow Wilson
I'll go for JFK because he was the first US president not wearing a hat.... (No, just kidding...) I vote for FDR, a great man that led your country through difficult years. Talking about US presidents, I bought a CD from Encyclopædia Britannica last winter with presentations of all US presidents. It gives a very good briefing about the presidents for people not living in the US. Highly recommeded! RAM
The slavery discussion in the context of any reflection on Washington is not appropriate. He was born into a culture where slavery existed and if he was not ahead of his time, it should not detract from his presidency. For that matter, his leadership in the Revolution should not be used as a measure of his effectiveness as the president. That said, I do think Washington did more than set the tone of his office. He steadied a weak confederation and kept it together, balancing the interests of the Federalists while still keeping most of the Democratic-Republicans (other than Jefferson) engaged. The USA may have regardless of the effectiveness of any other president, but if Washington had failed, the USA would have failed. (My wife is more of a presidential scholar than I am and she agrees!)