The final state of the union

I'd say 2/10. George Bush is a bad president and everything, but we can't give him ALL the credit for the terrible condition of our country. It's easy to point our finger and place the blame on one person, but don't forget about senators and representatives and lawmakers and his cabinet and of course, Mr. Dick (vampire) Cheney.

 

hmm.......i'd rate him a ......1/10

Some of his reqaction to some of our troubles were veryt slow or horrible. After Hurrican Katrina, he waited about 1 week to send Fema in! After 9/11 i think he tried to help to a limit...he could have gone BEYOND that limit to help more....i mean, my state had to send fire trucks and police there! Also, I think 2008 will be a good year! GO HILARY! Iw atched the state of the Union last night and like everyone was asleep by the time it ended(including me)! This is off topic but u guys do know Dick Cheyney's daughter is a lesbian. OOh and this WAR!! OMG, i wish i lived in the UK...my brother will be heading off soon....=/. I dont like my brother or bush, they ahve the same attitude! but i do love my brother!!! Off topic again!!! ugg!! The Cabinet too needs a wack upside the head like Cheyney, Rice, and Bush himself!

 

I would give him a 2/10. His tax-cuts were a nice idea... but kind of nullified by the huge Iraq War spending. It will take a while to recover from his presidency. He has been secretive and essentially lied to the American public. He has done a terrible job at upholding the values and demands of those he serves. I don't know if the others would have been better, but I should think that just about anyone could do a slightly better job than Bush has...

I have to disagree about these few names. Yeah, some of their methods were not-so-great, but their other achievements and overall positive impacts on American history were enormous. Jackson ushered in a new age of popular democracy and firmly held the country together even during divisive issues like nullification. He put the country back on track with hard currency to help end the huge over-speculation and economic disaster in the west. He had an agenda, and basically achieved it. Yeah, the trail of tears wasn't something to be proud of, but that doesn't make Jackson a bad president.

Polk, again, like Jackson, was a man with an purpose. He came into office with an agenda of accomplishing four main things, among them the acquisition of Oregon and Texas. He achieved all of them by the end of his 1 term, and presided over one of the largest (if not the largest) periods of expansion in American history. Yeah, he declared war with Mexico, but at that point it was fairly unavoidable. Tyler had already annexed Texas and Mexico considered it a state in revolt. It was only a matter of time until the two came to blows over the issue. And again, you're overlooking a lot of the better details of his campaign. He originally went into office on the platform of gaining all of Oregon up to the 54th parallel, which was then disputed with the British. While in office, he acquired everything south of the 49th parallel in order to AVOID a war with the British. He sacrificed something to avoid a conflict and acquire more territory peacefully. On top of that, he lowered the tariff and established a long lasting treasury system. Definitely NOT a bad president.

McKinley I disagree with for a different reason. Yes, the imperialism and beginnings of the American empire that occurred during his presidency were definitely not the greatest for the country. Yes, our war with the Spanish was somewhat unnecessary, as was the acquisition of the Philippines and Puerto Rico. But, McKinley was following the will of the people. You make it seem like he had a personal grudge to settle here. He didn't start the war because someone called him a sissy (aka. the Dupuy de Lome note) or because of yellow journalism - those things provoked the public who demanded war. The president's duty is to uphold the will of people (at least in my eyes). He should serve the constitution and the people he represents - and at that point they were screaming for war. He, personally, being the economist that he was, was against it (as were some of his influential advisers, namely Mark Hanna). On top of his less-than-great acquisitions, he also presided over a term of economic improvement, helping to establish/maintain the gold standard and protect the American dollar. So, yeah, some things he did was bad. But he's hardly worse than Bush.

 

I give him a 1.5

i could talk about what a shitty president he is all day long.

 

ha, now hes giving money to the public to stimulate the economy

 

Not to mention the "Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Bill".

 

Hmm, lets see:

He put the country in one of the worst deficits it has ever seen.

He started an oil war in Iraq, claiming they had WMDs, and that Saddam was working with terrorists. (They were wrong on both counts.)

He passed the No Child Left Behind Act, a horrible act which is currently a big part of the erosion which is eating away at US education.

He passed the Patriot Act, destroying our rights to privacy.

He is an IDIOT! Google "Bush idiot quotes", and you'll see what I mean. He can't spell for Christ's sake!

And that reminds me... HE'S A FUNDIE!

I'll let you guess how I would rate him on the fucking 1-10 scale.

 

Not as bad as Van Buren though, lets not forget him. But ya, bad.