Someone tell me how Obama is worse than presidents who put American citizens in concentration camps?
I really dont take that as an insult .... so thanks I guess ?
Spoken like a 1980's era lefty.
The Federal Government likes to name their laws in a way that conveys the opposite meaning of what they actually accomplish. NAFTA brought "Free Trade" the same way the Patriot Act was patriotic.
Trade that is subject to thousands of pages of regulations is not "free". It is regulated trade, and not in our favor. NAFTA gave away powers of Congress to international bodies and created international courts that would trump even our Supreme Court. It was a big step forward for globalism and weakened the United States. Ross Perot was correct when he said that NAFTA would cause a "giant sucking sound" of American jobs being sent overseas. Twenty years later it is hard to argue with that.
He was also faced with a pretty big disaster and though we all "think" the war was based mainly on economic issues, let us not forget that he was the first if not the only man to fight a war to free men of a different race from slavery in his own country. No kudos for that?
Since I live today, however, Obama has to hold the top spot. No one in recent times has shown more disregard for the Constitution or liberty than he has. (At least since Lincoln).
Was 2000 A.D. -> 2008 A.D. so long ago that you've forgotten Bush v2.0? Each president in this thread's poll put tools upon the presidential-abuses workbench. Bush v2.0 probably created as many tools as anyone else. You're getting upset with Obama because he's less deceitful about picking them up & using them. Your anger should be directed toward those who created the tools. It looks like 2012 will be another year where we vote between two guys who want to add more tools to the bench, regardless of D® or R® faction alignment. Statists are statists
Isn't that a bit like being angry toward guns instead of the person who pulls the trigger? ...hmmm?
Your analogy isn't even remotely accurate. Are you saying that the executive needs ever-increasing power to trample freedoms...for self-defense?
As has been said here before, the North did not enter a war to abolish slavery, but the South started a war to keep it. There is no historically accurate reason to believe anything else.Despite my ancestors sacrifices I can't help but look back and say there is no way I could support Lincoln or his war. I could not support slavery (which is only part of the issue of the Civil War and not the ENTIRE issue as certain people would have it) but I could not support the heavy-handed authoritarianism of Lincoln at all. So Lincoln is high on my list of poor (read criminal) Presidents.
As has been said here before, the North did not enter a war to abolish slavery, but the South started a war to keep it. There is no historically accurate reason to believe anything else.
As has been said here before, the North did not enter a war to abolish slavery, but the South started a war to keep it. There is no historically accurate reason to believe anything else.