Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

In terms of respect for following the Constitution, that is:

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/14/steve ... port-card/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course if you're one of those people who thinks we SHOULD constantly depart from what the Constitution actually says and how each part was understood when it was ratified then you'd probably rate him #1.

One thing's for sure: He has no respect for the Constitution itself. He made that clear long before he was elected. To him the Constitution is something that has to be overcome and "re-interpreted" in order to allow for the kind of "progress" he wants.

From http://www.aei.org/article/the-politica ... -to-obama/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

Prior to the 20th century, all of our presidents spoke often about the Constitution and their constitutional duty. But starting with Woodrow Wilson, president spoke of the Constitution less and less, with some of them actively undermining constitutional restraints on government power, and with others actively mis-educating Americans about the Constitution. In the Politically Incorrect Guide to the Presidents, From Wilson to Obama, Steven Hayward revives the original standards of the Founding for judging our presidents. In assigning letter grades to modern presidents, Hayward discusses how future presidents should begin taking seriously their oath of office to “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution.

with some of them actively undermining constitutional restraints on government power

Kind of like Bush declaring war on a sovereign nation without the vote of Congress? What about the Patriot Act?

The title of this thread should be "Conservative has biased, negative opinions of Democratic Presidents." His list is a farce.

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:

with some of them actively undermining constitutional restraints on government power

Kind of like Bush declaring war on a sovereign nation without the vote of Congress? What about the Patriot Act?

The title of this thread should be "Conservative has biased, negative opinions of Democratic Presidents." His list is a farce.

Congress did vote to fund the war. That is as much an indictment of Congress as it is of Bush, but it wasn't unconstitutional.

Much of the Patriot Act was authored by the DOJ during the Clinton administration and implemented by Bush and a Democrat Congress.

The broad point of the article seems to be that the Constitution matters less and less as time goes on. It's hard to argue against that point.

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:

with some of them actively undermining constitutional restraints on government power

Kind of like Bush declaring war on a sovereign nation without the vote of Congress? What about the Patriot Act?

The title of this thread should be "Conservative has biased, negative opinions of Democratic Presidents." His list is a farce.

Knee jerk reply without the benefit of actual knowledge of the subject.

15 yards and loss of down.

Both the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War were legitimate under the War Powers Act, which has been widely accepted as Constitutional (by proxy, in that it has not been challenged.... Generally speaking, the WPA gets its legitimacy from the fact that acts of war require Congressional approval/authorization, which is tantamount to a declaration of war.

If you want a better example of an act of war which was in violation of the WPA, look no further than Libya.


Sent from my iPad using one stinky pinky.

Both the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War were legitimate under the War Powers Act, which has been widely accepted as Constitutional (by proxy, in that it has not been challenged.... Generally speaking, the WPA gets its legitimacy from the fact that acts of war require Congressional approval/authorization, which is tantamount to a declaration of war.

I kind of agree with him in that I think that if we really followed the Constitution as it was written and understood when that part was ratified Congress would have to actually declare war each time. But it's kind of like...who HASN'T violated that clause?

Bush did Iraq and Afghanistan. Clinton did Bosnia. Bush the Elder did Iraq. Reagan did Panama. I guess maybe Jimmy Carter didn't do one. Can't remember. Ford maybe not either. But Vietnam and Korea were both bogus.

So it's not like if you are ranking Presidents based on following the Constitution that Bush the Younger is going to lose a lot of ground by doing what he did with Iraq and Afghanistan.

-


Gallup Poll

Bronco wrote:-


Gallup Poll

I had an interesting conversation last week with one of my colleagues in the political section here about Richard Nixon. The gist of the conversation was that if you took away the paranoia, Nixon was one of the smartest, most politically astute presidents we have had this century. I wont go into specifics, as that would be a thread all in itself, but it was a very interesting discussion. It was even more interesting for the fact that my colleague making the assertion is a Clinton liberal.

Carter invaded Iran...to rescue the American hostages they took. The move failed, and the hostages were released soon after the inauguration of Reagan. Reagan's campaign colluded with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the inauguration to ensure the election by making Carter look bad.

SuperHornet wrote:Carter invaded Iran...to rescue the American hostages they took. The move failed, and the hostages were released soon after the inauguration of Reagan. Reagan's campaign colluded with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the inauguration to ensure the election by making Carter look bad.

Ok, expandspanos.

CID1990 wrote: The gist of the conversation was that if you took away the paranoia, Nixon was one of the smartest, most politically astute presidents we have had this century.

I agree. But, the was paranoia rampant and unchecked, so it's all moot. One of the dumbest, and least politically astute presidents we've had this century.

AZGrizFan wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:Carter invaded Iran...to rescue the American hostages they took. The move failed, and the hostages were released soon after the inauguration of Reagan. Reagan's campaign colluded with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the inauguration to ensure the election by making Carter look bad.

Ok, expandspanos.

The Iranians released the hostages because they realized that RR would fry their sorry azzes if they didn't! No more, no less.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

CID1990 wrote: The gist of the conversation was that if you took away the paranoia, Nixon was one of the smartest, most politically astute presidents we have had this century.

I agree. But, the was paranoia rampant and unchecked, so it's all moot. One of the dumbest, and least politically astute presidents we've had this century.

Simplistic, and not true.

Nixon's paranoia created Watergate, nothing more. In terms of foreign policy, no other US president could carry Nixon's jock. A modern day analogy to the opening of China would be Obama's Egypt speech actually fomenting peace in the Middle East.

Don't believe the movies, kid. I don't put Nixon at the top of my own list, but he is damn sure well ahead of the current failure we have. Think Carter, only more Pollyanna-ish.

CID1990 wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
I agree. But, the was paranoia rampant and unchecked, so it's all moot. One of the dumbest, and least politically astute presidents we've had this century.

Simplistic, and not true.

Nixon's paranoia created Watergate, nothing more. In terms of foreign policy, no other US president could carry Nixon's jock. A modern day analogy to the opening of China would be Obama's Egypt speech actually fomenting peace in the Middle East.

Don't believe the movies, kid. I don't put Nixon at the top of my own list, but he is damn sure well ahead of the current failure we have. Think Carter, only more Pollyanna-ish.

I agree on Nixon. If you haven't already, watch the movie "Frost Nixon", it is absolutely outstanding. A great read from that era that deals with Nixon quite a bit is Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail in 1971". Thompson interviewed Nixon and they got along famously well because they both loved football. That's probably also when Thompson and Pat Buchanon became friends - Buchanon was one of many who wrote a very endearing eulogy for Thompson in Rolling Stone.

In fact, a couple of Nixon's speech writers, Buchanon and Ben Stein are two of Kalm's all time favorite conks.

BTW, Nixon would be to the left of Obama.

Ivytalk wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:

Ok, expandspanos.

The Iranians released the hostages because they realized that RR would fry their sorry azzes if they didn't! No more, no less.

They were released at the exact same moment Reagan was being sworn in. Conspiracy theory? Sure. But less of a stretch than Obama being a mulsim socialist hell bent on destroying the free market and taking away our fishing rights.

kalm wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Simplistic, and not true.

Nixon's paranoia created Watergate, nothing more. In terms of foreign policy, no other US president could carry Nixon's jock. A modern day analogy to the opening of China would be Obama's Egypt speech actually fomenting peace in the Middle East.

Don't believe the movies, kid. I don't put Nixon at the top of my own list, but he is damn sure well ahead of the current failure we have. Think Carter, only more Pollyanna-ish.

I agree on Nixon. If you haven't already, watch the movie "Frost Nixon", it is absolutely outstanding. A great read from that era that deals with Nixon quite a bit is Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail in 1971". Thompson interviewed Nixon and they got along famously well because they both loved football. That's probably also when Thompson and Pat Buchanon became friends - Buchanon was one of many who wrote a very endearing eulogy for Thompson in Rolling Stone.

In fact, a couple of Nixon's speech writers, Buchanon and Ben Stein are two of Kalm's all time favorite conks.

BTW, Nixon would be to the left of Obama.

You hit on a good point there. One of Nixon's greatest strengths (which is one factor that made him such a good foreign policy president) was his ability to find common ground with people, no matter who they were. Mao, Thompson, two people who could not have been more diametrically different from him politically and ideologically, yet Nixon was able to find a baseline from which they could achieve common respect. A lot of people attribute Nixon's foreign policy successes to Kissinger, but Kissinger was only the facilitator. Nixon both conceived and sealed the deals.

kalm wrote:

Ivytalk wrote:

The Iranians released the hostages because they realized that RR would fry their sorry azzes if they didn't! No more, no less.

They were released at the exact same moment Reagan was being sworn in. Conspiracy theory? Sure. But less of a stretch than Obama being a mulsim socialist hell bent on destroying the free market and taking away our fishing rights.

What is a "mulsim"? Anything like a " muslin"?

Ah yes, the Constitution. This must have been how it went down with the Bible a couple hundred years after it was written.........a bunch of power grabbers must have sensed that if they could enshrine a document in Godliness........they would keep and expand their power over the minions. Very soon, I expect to hear from some some whacked out Republican that the Constitution was written by the hand of God, and that the story about the men that wrote it was all a vast liberal conspiracy.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

CID1990 wrote: The gist of the conversation was that if you took away the paranoia, Nixon was one of the smartest, most politically astute presidents we have had this century.

I agree. But, the was paranoia rampant and unchecked, so it's all moot. One of the dumbest, and least politically astute presidents we've had this century.

Go back to school, Jelly. You know not what you speak.

If you study Nixon's political life, he was rock solid until he ran against JFK. The slim margin of victory (0.2%) was overplayed by the media, and he subsequently became the media's whipping boy. It was this media assault which was largely responsible for his regaining a majority public support and subsequently elevating him to the White House. Nixon was a leader, not a politician, and didn't graciously weather the media assault of his integrity.

If you contrast Nixon with other Presidents since Wilson, few can compare with Nixon's balanced legacy of accomplishments including civil rights, environmental, economic, and most notable, foreign policy. His accomplishments to advance nuclear non-proliferation as well as opening communications and even trade with our nation's sworn adversaries, is unrivaled over the past century.

GWB will easily go down as a bottom five all time president. I'm completely ashamed that I voted for him in 2000. Comparing Obama's disregard of the Constitution to Bush/Cheney's is laughable.

-
We will finally be learning more about this president and when it's all said and done in a few years he will be rated below Nixon and the evil Bush in future presidential polls

Bronco wrote:-
We will finally be learning more about this president and when it's all said and done in a few years he will be rated below Nixon and the evil Bush in future presidential polls

You've taken one too many hits to the melon and one too many hits off the..., time to take a break...

93henfan wrote:GWB will easily go down as a bottom five all time president. I'm completely ashamed that I voted for him in 2000. Comparing Obama's disregard of the Constitution to Bush/Cheney's is laughable.

Sure thing, Jelly.

GWB wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed, but clearly was the better of the available candidates:

A Liar



A Traitor

travelinman67 wrote:
A Traitor

How the fuck does believing the troops should have been brought home from Vietnam make someone a traitor? Especially a fucking VETERAN of that war?

I assume you've never spoken out against any US military intervention before? I couldn't search your posts and find you saying similar things about Libya or Afghanistan?

polsongrizz wrote:

Bronco wrote:-
We will finally be learning more about this president and when it's all said and done in a few years he will be rated below Nixon and the evil Bush in future presidential polls

You've taken one too many hits to the melon and one too many hits off the..., time to take a break...

Other than killing a couple of muslim terrorists, every other policy or action carried out by Obama has left our country in a worse condition than when he took office.

Bronco's correct. His legacy will make Bush's pale in comparison.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

travelinman67 wrote:
A Traitor

How the fuck does believing the troops should have been brought home from Vietnam make someone a traitor? Especially a fucking VETERAN of that war?

I assume you've never spoken out against any US military intervention before? I couldn't search your posts and find you saying similar things about Libya or Afghanistan?

Search away, Traitor supporter.