Who do you think was the last honest, decent President of the United States?

Login or register to post comments Last Post 11233 reads   17 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 17 total)
  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 03:20pm

    #1

    krogoth

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 512

    count placeholder0

    Who do you think was the last honest, decent President of the United States?

Who do you think was the last honest, decent President in the US?-

Please give a brief description on why you think this president was decent by accomplishments or actions they took.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 05:18pm

    #2

    brandenism

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 14 2008

    Posts: 18

    count placeholder0

    Re: Who do you think was the last honest, decent President of th

I would say Teddy Roosevelt personally for a couple things..

 

He actually advocated health care for everyone, broke up monopolies because of their inherent corruption, although he did negotiate control of the Panama Canal which was a pretty crap deal for them.

 

Maybe Andrew Jackson because of his abolishment of the central bank at the time and his quote made about them:

“The bold efforts the present bank has made to control theGovernment… are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American peopleshould they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution, or theestablishment of another like it.” Andrew Jackson

 

I think being opposed to a national bank was pretty significant.  Plenty of presidents did good things, but I pretty much discount every president since the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913 because I believe it has created many problems and contribued to a polarizing distribution of wealth.

Then again, I majored in business–not history.

 😀 

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 06:15pm

    #3
    asragov

    asragov

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 1

    count placeholder0

    Truman

Truman managed the transition of a war economy back to a civilian economy, no mean feat.

He also dealt with the use of the atomic bomb on Japan, recognition of Israel and Pakistan, the Berlin airlift, civil rights, a new PRC, and McCarthy.

Today’s presidents seem so small in comparison …

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 08:56pm

    #4

    JMCSwan

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 19 2008

    Posts: 18

    count placeholder0

    Honest, decent President of the United States??? Hmmmm…

 Frankly,

I don’t think many people REALLY WANT AN HONEST PRESIDENT…

 They only want an ‘honest’ and ‘ethical’ President, who says what they want to hear; not one who challenges them to really grow and be citizens of a REpublic.

Most citizens want to be citizens of a ‘democracy’ and most citizens don’t know THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘DEMOCRACY’.

DEMOCKERY: a small group or class of oligarchs…., who provide them with either a corporate and/or individual welfare BIG BROTHER STATE…..

Now take for example Barry Goldwater; think about why he said any of the following:

The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.

You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.

A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests," I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.  

If everybody in this town connected with politics had to leave town because of chasing women and drinking, you would have no government.

It’s a great country, where anybody can grow up to be president… except me.

It’s political Daddyism and it’s as old as demagogues and despotism.

Unlike nearly every other politician who ever lived, anywhere in the world, Barry Goldwater always said exactly what was on his mind. He spared his listeners nothing.
Lloyd Grove inThe Washington Post (30 May 1998)  

JMCSwan

But I imagine JFK’s quotes on Secret Societies being the real controlling forces behind the Presidency, may come close; and it certainly came at a price…

 

 

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 09:44pm

    #5

    mainecooncat

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 08 2008

    Posts: 155

    count placeholder0

    Surely that’s impossible

Well, by definition a US president cannot be honest or decent simply because of the multi-headed beast of an apparatus that they are at the helm of. The US military and economic juggernaut are essentially tools of oppression.

But how about Carter for one reason alone. That he told Americans that they couldn’t consume endlessly with no regard to the environment, future generations, or their own integrity. He really sounded the alarm about what I guess you could call pre-Peak Oil.

I always get a kick out of "quality of life" advocates who excoriate Carter for his "put on a sweater" comment. I imagine the aggrieved party bellowing, "I am an American who takes what he wants when he wants it. If I’m cold I want more oil pumped half-way around the world to the furnace in my basement, so I can wear a t-shirt and shorts with the thermostat on 72 in the middle of January."

Putting on more clothing when one is cold. Real radical notion.

 

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 10:36pm

    #6

    Ray Hewitt

    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 05 2008

    Posts: 277

    count placeholder0

    Who do you think was the last honest, decent President of the US

There aren’t any. Period!!!

Every one, more or less, contributed to the expansion of the crime syndicate otherwise known as the government of the USA. It lived off of the productive sector like a parasite, until it sucked all the blood out of it. Now as it’s fighting for its life, it’s going to bring everything down with it.

  • Sun, Oct 19, 2008 - 10:54pm

    #7
    Roysyl

    Roysyl

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 21 2008

    Posts: 1

    count placeholder0

    Re: Who do you think was the last honest, decent President .

I think Carter was the last honest, decent President. The fact that he was not allowed to speak at Obamas corination because of his politically incorrect, but true, comments about Isreal says it all. 

  • Mon, Oct 20, 2008 - 12:46am

    #8

    tom.

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 18 2008

    Posts: 197

    count placeholder0

    Honesty and decency

It’s impossible to transfer honesty and decency to past presidents, because there was not enough information, except from bias historians.

I will say Andrew Jackson cared more about the path of the country than any other.

The one who would have been the most honest as well as most decent would have been Ron Paul.

  • Mon, Oct 20, 2008 - 04:41am

    #9
    Pandabonium

    Pandabonium

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Aug 30 2008

    Posts: 42

    count placeholder0

    Re: Who do you think was the last honest, decent Pres?

I don’t know about honest or decent, but I like the Presidency of  William Henry Harrison – he caught cold at his inaugeration and died of pneumonia one month after taking office, before he could do any harm.

 

 

  • Mon, Oct 20, 2008 - 02:35pm

    #11

    rlee

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 18 2008

    Posts: 105

    count placeholder0

    Re: Who do you think was the last honest, decent President .

Some interesting facts about your pick – not a slam on you, just some information:

By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:20

Jimmy Carterbecame our 39th president at the young age of 52. He was a one-term governorfrom Plains, GA, where he managed the family peanut farm and taught Sundayschool.

He was also agraduate of the Naval Academy and served sevenyears in the Navy, leaving as a lieutenant, which is hardly a stellar recordbut more typical of lackluster performance in the military.

He came to powerin the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the resignation of President Nixon. Thepublic wanted change and someone new, and Carter was an ambitious, hands-onpolitician who promised better days. As good as his intentions were, however,the things he tried were not successful. In fact, he created far more seriousproblems than he ever solved.

The centerpiece ofCarter’s foreign policy was human rights, and he did achieve one noble success;a peace treaty between Egypt’s Anwar Sadat andIsrael’s Menachem Begin.

Unfortunately,that later led to Sadat’s assassination at the hands of Muslim radicals.

Many people feltCarter was a good man who worked hard and meant well. But he was naive andincompetent in handling the enormous burdens and complex challenges of beingpresident.

He wronglybelieved Americans had an "inordinate fear of communism," so he liftedtravel bans to Cuba, North Vietnam and Cambodia and pardoneddraft evaders. He also stopped B-1 bomber production and gave away ourstrategically located Panama Canal.

His most damagingmiscalculation was the withdrawal of U.S. support for theShah of Iran, a strong and longtime military ally. Carter objected to theShah’s alleged mistreatment of imprisoned Soviet spies who were working tooverthrow Iran’s government. Hethought the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini, being a religious man, would make afairer leader.

Having lost U.S. support, the Shahwas overthrown, the Ayatollah returned, Iran was declared anIslamic nation and Palestinian hit men were hired to eliminate opposition.

The Ayatollah thenintroduced the idea of suicide bombers to the Palestine LiberationOrganization, paying $35,000 to PLO families whose young people were brainwashedto kill as many Israelis as possible by blowing themselves up in crowdedshopping areas.

Next, theAyatollah used Iran’s oil wealth tocreate, train and finance a new terrorist organization, Hezbollah, which laterwould attack Israel in 2006.

In November 1979,Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Iranians stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took 52Americans hostage for 444 days.

Not until sixmonths into the ordeal did Carter attempt a rescue. But the mission, using justsix Navy helicopters, was poorly executed. Three of the copters were disabledor lost in sandstorms. (Pilots weren’t allowed to meet with weather forecastersbecause someone in authority worried about security.) Five airmen and threeMarines lost their lives.

So, due to overconfidence,inexperience and poor judgment, Carter undermined and lost a strong ally, Iran, that todayaggressively threatens the U.S., Israel and the rest ofthe world with nuclear weapons.

But that’s notall.

After Carter metfor the first time with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev, the USSR promptly invaded Afghanistan. Carter, ever thenaive appeaser, was shocked. "I can’t believe the Russians lied tome," he said.

The invasionattracted a 23-year-old Saudi named Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan to recruit Muslimfighters and raise money for an anti-Soviet jihad. Part of that groupeventually became al-Qaida, a terrorist organization that would declare war on America several timesbetween 1996 and 1998 before attacking us on 9/11, killing more Americans thanthe Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

On Carter’s watch,the Soviet Union went on an unrestrained rampage in which it tookover not only Afghanistan, but also Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Cambodia, Mozambique, Grenada and Nicaragua.

In spite of this,Carter’s last defense budget proposed spending 45% below pre-Vietnam levels forfighter aircraft, 75% for ships, 83% for attack submarines and 90% forhelicopters.

Years later, as acivilian, Carter negotiated a peace agreement with North Korea to keep thatcommunist country from developing nuclear weapons. He also convinced PresidentClinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to go along with it. But thesigned piece of paper proved worthless. The North Koreans deceived Carter andinstead used our money, incentives and technical equipment to build nuclearweapons and pose the threat we face today.

Thus did Carterunwittingly become our Neville Chamberlain, creating with his well-intended butinept, unrealistic and gullible actions the very conditions that led to thethree most dangerous security threats we face today: Iran, al-Qaida and North Korea.

On the domesticside, Carter gave us inflation of 15%, the highest in 34 years; interest ratesof 21%, the highest in 115 years; and a severe energy crisis with lines aroundthe block at gas stations nationwide.

In 1977, Carter,along with a Democrat Congress, created a worthy project with noble intentionsthe Community Reinvestment Act. Over strong industry objections, it mandatedthat all banks meet the credit needs of their entire communities.

In 1995, PresidentClinton imposed even stronger regulations and performance tests that coercedbanks to substantially increase loans to low-income, poverty-area borrowers orface fines or possible restrictions on expansion.  These revisions allowed for securitization ofCRA loans containing subprime mortgages.

By 1997, goodloans were bundled with poor ones and sold as prime packages to institutions hereand abroad. That shifted risk from the loan originators, freeing banks to beginpyramiding and make more of these profitable subprime products.

Under two young,well-intended presidents, therefore, big-government plans and mandates played asignificant role in the current subprime mortgage mess and its catastrophicconsequences for the U.S. and internationaleconomies.

Hardest-hit by themortgage foreclosures have been the citizens that Democrats always claim tohelp most-inner-city residents who fell victim to low or no down paymentschemes, unexpected adjustable rates, deceptive loan applications and commission-hungrysalespeople.

Now we have tobail out at huge cost Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the very agencies that weresupposed to stabilize the system. In time, this should improve the situation. 

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 17 total)

Login or Register to post comments