Greatest President in American History?

124»

Comments

  • RW81233
    RW81233 Posts: 2,393
    RW81233 wrote:
    whygohome wrote:
    For more popular reading (read: non-academic books):
    Nickel and Dimed by I forgot
    Economic Apartheid in America by Collins and Yeskel
    The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly
  • Godfather.
    Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Isn't it funny that those that attack other people's choices never give any of their own?

    Thanks for your input though.

    some people are perfect examples of their own complaints..the world is a funny place Cency,good call.

    Godfather.
  • whygohome
    whygohome Posts: 2,305
    Godfather. wrote:
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Isn't it funny that those that attack other people's choices never give any of their own?

    Thanks for your input though.

    some people are perfect examples of their own complaints..the world is a funny place Cency,good call.

    Godfather.

    I don't know if my tone was "attacking." Being that I am in an environment where I see intelligent, academic discussions veer off into polemics (though rarely), I try to be above that, and instead engage in dialogue. I apologize if my tone came off in a negative manner. That aside, I do agree that you can admire aspects of people of their presidencies, but those three struck me as quite different in many instances. It is different than saying your favorite bands are Iron Maiden, A Tribe Called Quest, and John Denver, all of which are vastly different, but can still be appreciated as styles of music. In my mind those three men have more differences in ideologies than similarities, therefore making the grouping of the three of them paradoxical/contradictory.

    As far as my choice, I tend to like both Teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson. And yes, they have their differences, but I feel that they also share some similarities that I respect, the battle against the National Bank and the Trusts being one of them. I still do disagree, however, with their expansionist and militant traits. Also, it is difficult to answer the question due to historical context, e.g. Jackson's attitudes toward the Native Americans - how do we interpret that from our 2010 perspective? Lincoln deserves some respect as well.

    The OP posed a very difficult question.
  • whygohome
    whygohome Posts: 2,305
    RW81233 wrote:
    RW81233 wrote:
    whygohome wrote:
    For more popular reading (read: non-academic books):
    Nickel and Dimed by I forgot
    Economic Apartheid in America by Collins and Yeskel
    The Divine Right of Capital by Marjorie Kelly

    Thanks for the recommendations.
  • cincybearcat
    cincybearcat Posts: 16,895
    whygohome wrote:
    Godfather. wrote:
    cincybearcat wrote:
    Isn't it funny that those that attack other people's choices never give any of their own?

    Thanks for your input though.

    some people are perfect examples of their own complaints..the world is a funny place Cency,good call.

    Godfather.

    I don't know if my tone was "attacking." Being that I am in an environment where I see intelligent, academic discussions veer off into polemics (though rarely), I try to be above that, and instead engage in dialogue. I apologize if my tone came off in a negative manner. That aside, I do agree that you can admire aspects of people of their presidencies, but those three struck me as quite different in many instances. It is different than saying your favorite bands are Iron Maiden, A Tribe Called Quest, and John Denver, all of which are vastly different, but can still be appreciated as styles of music. In my mind those three men have more differences in ideologies than similarities, therefore making the grouping of the three of them paradoxical/contradictory.

    As far as my choice, I tend to like both Teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson. And yes, they have their differences, but I feel that they also share some similarities that I respect, the battle against the National Bank and the Trusts being one of them. I still do disagree, however, with their expansionist and militant traits. Also, it is difficult to answer the question due to historical context, e.g. Jackson's attitudes toward the Native Americans - how do we interpret that from our 2010 perspective? Lincoln deserves some respect as well.

    The OP posed a very difficult question.

    The way I see it is it was my opinion, so I think I'm probably right in who I picked as my choices.

    In fact, you make the case for me in your own post anyhow. Take the best of those 3 and you have a better president than combining any other 3 presidents. Well, at least I think you would. Plenty of cases could be made for other choices, and I won't take the time to try and shoot down someone else's opinion on their own favorites.
    hippiemom = goodness
  • whygohome
    whygohome Posts: 2,305
    cincybearcat wrote:
    whygohome wrote:
    cincybearcat wrote:

    I don't know if my tone was "attacking." Being that I am in an environment where I see intelligent, academic discussions veer off into polemics (though rarely), I try to be above that, and instead engage in dialogue. I apologize if my tone came off in a negative manner. That aside, I do agree that you can admire aspects of people of their presidencies, but those three struck me as quite different in many instances. It is different than saying your favorite bands are Iron Maiden, A Tribe Called Quest, and John Denver, all of which are vastly different, but can still be appreciated as styles of music. In my mind those three men have more differences in ideologies than similarities, therefore making the grouping of the three of them paradoxical/contradictory.

    As far as my choice, I tend to like both Teddy Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson. And yes, they have their differences, but I feel that they also share some similarities that I respect, the battle against the National Bank and the Trusts being one of them. I still do disagree, however, with their expansionist and militant traits. Also, it is difficult to answer the question due to historical context, e.g. Jackson's attitudes toward the Native Americans - how do we interpret that from our 2010 perspective? Lincoln deserves some respect as well.

    The OP posed a very difficult question.

    The way I see it is it was my opinion, so I think I'm probably right in who I picked as my choices.

    In fact, you make the case for me in your own post anyhow. Take the best of those 3 and you have a better president than combining any other 3 presidents. Well, at least I think you would. Plenty of cases could be made for other choices, and I won't take the time to try and shoot down someone else's opinion on their own favorites.

    Relax. If you read my post, you would see I wasn't being an asshole, and I was clarifying why. And your idea of combining 3 into 1 does not make sense. See the question posed by the OP.
    Again, relax and stop being so defensive. This is a Pearl jam Message Board, not an open debate at the UN.
  • Byrnzie
    Byrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Electric_Delta wrote:
    Didn't you once say you liked the leadership style of Hugo Chavez?

    You think Reagan can be compared to Hugo Chavez?

    Please elaborate.

Categories