He's lived in Idaho for fifty years. Do you really think the one "filling station" felt the gas rationing?

Maybe, Goober or Gomer had their hours cut. But he has no idea what New York City looked like back then.

yeah, I remember he was bad, but, George W got us into those wars in the middle east, and it is a no- win situation.

so. I want to put him as the all time worst, although after the election of 2016, we could have another worst one. my confidence in presidents is -10.

If those airplanes crashed into your farm in Idaho and one of your grandchildren burned to fucking death, you'd be singing a different tune. Maybe next time, though. As politically correct as this administration is about Muslim Extremists, Idaho could be next. You really never know.

new York city? new York city? is that where marineland is? is there a statue in the water some where around there, that joe Namath built?

I think it was Y.A Tittle .

well, if Idaho could be next, I guess we will have to run into Canada, only 30 miles away. Hillary was never my senator, you can't say that.

Hey they hit the WTC. So what let that shit slide. We are letting it slide today how soon we fucking forget.

I hope they hit LA and Chicago and Utah next then see how fast I forget about that.

Remember the Bear game where they left YA a bloody mess.

You're right. As crazy as you are, you're right.

We're all Americans, and it's insulting to minimize that fact in people who live outside the Tri-State area. But there's no doubt that it's different for New York City residents. We were HERE that awful day and lived with the aftermath for months. I could see the smoldering for weeks from my back yard.

And you know that old theory about there being no more than seven degrees of separation between any two human beings? Well, if you lived in the City or the City's suburbs, there was never more than one or two degrees of separation between yourself and one of the 9/11 victims.

I'm sorry, but it does make a difference.

Couldn't even imagine what that had to be like for New Yorkers.

Actually the worst president in U.S. history is James Buchanan, the Democrat who preceded Abraham Lincoln. However, according to a Quinnipiac University survey, Barack Obama is the worst president since World War II.

Some civil libertarians used to rank George W. Bush as the one of the worst in that area, but by now most agree that Obama is far worse than Bush ever was. His use of drone strikes, using the IRS for political purposes, the many Justice Department abuses, using the NSA the monitor everything everyone does, unconstitutional executive orders and memos to override Congress, appeasing Iran while alienating Israel, supporting the overthrowing of Qaddafi in Libya that led to anarchy and ISIS taking it over (at least parts of it), the refusal to mention Islam or Muslims when talking about Islamic terrorism but instead an eagerness to bash Christians, bad decisions in Syria and Iraq that led to ISIS gaining control over much territory in both of those countries, failure to keep his promise to call the Armenian genocide a genocide instead of a massacre or atrocity, the taxpayer bailout of General Motors, sending weapons to the Mexican drug cartels, etc. Not to mention that under Obama the national debt has increased more that ALL PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS COMBINED -- and he hasn't even finished his second term!

good god!!! any more like him or bush and im driving 30 miles into Canada, thank god I live close to the border.

yeah foots, its got nothing to do with this thread, but, you new Yorkers booed him out of football!

Wow. I need to chime in to correct a detail in that post. Everything there is opinion and a person has a right to it. That is subjective stuff that we don't have all the facts on. The one thing there that is not a subjective opinion concerns the US debt.

The growth in the national debt since 2008 is largely because of Bush Jr, as per the Congressional Budget Office. The reason why is very simple.

Bush promulgated laws that perpetuated after he left office. Those laws had financial ramifications.

One was Medicare Part D. That is a blank cheque given from the federal government to pharmaceutical companies to write in whatever exorbitant number they can think of for the federal government to pay for patient medications. That costed the taxpayer and the Treasury Trillions. It has not been repealed.

Another was the Trillion dollar tax cut for the rich. That took Trillions out of the tax revenue inflow, and blew a big hole in the annual budget. Big shortfalls. It has not been repealed.

And lastly, the two wars costing Trillions of dollars each to finance. Barack Obama and the Democrats were able to wind one down. But both still cost a lot. One could argue that the unnecessary cost was Iraq, not Afghanistan. That stuff adds up. It costs Trillions, and no, you can't stop a war by just inaugurating a new President. It doesn't work that way. So to say in CAPS, that "Owe-bama is the most financially irresponsible spendaholic from the beginning of time"....is not right and not fair. If we give any shit whatsoever about our country, we should at least take the outright lies off the table and have an honest discussion.

His point on civil liberties is spot on.



If you are talking about Obama and the Democrats getting troops out of Iraq, that is not exactly true. Bush had them planned to leave 2011 before Obama took office

Right. Edward Snowden, regardless if you like the guy made a very solid point: why is a 29 year old NSA contractor, the NSA version of your office computer repair guy able to wiretap ANY citizen in America? That should scare the shit out of anyone but progress has been slow. Really it's a constitutional issue, but sadly the 4th Amendment isn't always sexy like the 1st and 2nd haha.

IMO his biggest mistake was Libya. On a personal level Obama called the Libya intervention a turd sandwhich but it doesn't undo the fact that he went along with a bad deal there. We have to disagree on Syria. There were absolutely no good options and Hilary is wrong about arming the moderate rebels, as much as it pains me to say it because Assad is a monster. In hindsight the Free Syrian ARmy was almost destined to be marginalized and even killed off by the better-funded (thanks to Saudis/Qatar/Turkey) extremist groups Al-Nusra and of course, ISIS. Even if bigger intervention could have turned the tide in the FSA's favor early on it's been well documented that Assad was purposefully releasing ISIS prisoners and only attacking the moderate (questionably) FSA. Why? Simple, it's a terrible thing but he knew someone would intervene if he let ISIS gain the upper ground. Meanwhile he stalls out the war barrelbombing as he pleases. Obama's Syria mistake was to draw a bullshit red line. That's it.

Once we get weaned off middle east oil and the middle east in general I'll be happy for the day a president finally calls out Saudi Arabia and the gulf states on their bullshit. Funding ISIS, whipping women. It's sad we have to call them our allies. Not like they've sent in ground troops yet when it's their countries being threatened.

Interesting that you don't include a single Obama created expense. Nothing about the Affordable Care Act, nothing about his foreign interventions, nothing about anything. So evidently you believe that Obama has not added a cent to increase the national debt. Is that part of an honest discussion?

Should be executed. But never getting to see his family again is a nice start.

I agree with alfa, the bush dog was the worst.

That's a strawman...he didn't say Obama hasn't added to the debt of course he has. I believe his argument is the continuation of Medicare Plan D is what's costing the country so much money. As for intervention, common sense dictates that two ground wars are more costly than a drone/airstrike program and overall he's cut the defense budget (which is a separate issue). Truthfully the trend shows government spending rising slightly since 2000, it's the nature of government to spend more and more. The question is what do you want our government to spend it on?

Snowden's biggest mistake was not being David Petraeus.

As we learned this week the more important you become, and the more responsibility you have to protect America and her secrets, the less likely you are to serve time just because you broke a few measly laws or violated your oath of service. Justice is served!

Somehow, disseminating classified material because you’re getting laid is a better excuse than because you believed you had a moral responsibility to do so.

good post, their crimes were the same, but,alas. no one high up in government is ever held accountable.

Historians who rank/rate all the presidents put Buchanan at the bottom. But, ranking/rating the postwar presidents is far more relevant today because they governed/govern in an era when the US was/is the top global economy, the most powerful nation--and the president had/has far more responsibilities than the prewar chief executives. It's a much tougher job.

The real damage to America is that, for the first time in the postwar era, we will have 16 straight years of the two worst presidents. The damage to the American Dream, to our standing in the world, to the integrity of our institutions--to the trust Americans used to have in their leaders--is going to be very hard to overcome.

There it is. This country will never be the same.

It's not a strawman since he wrote that Bush is largely responsible for growth of the national debt since he left office. Obama could have eliminated Medicare Part D and rolled it into the ACA during his first two years in office when the Democrats controlled the Senate, the House and the Presidency. When Medicare Part D was voted on in 2003 as part of the Medicare Modernization Act most Dems voted against it. Yet when they had the power to get rid of it they chose not to. Even when the GOP under Bush was trying to pass it, the more conservative Republicans and libertarians were against it as setting up another entitlement. If the Dems had tried to get rid of it during the 2009-2011 time period they would have had their support, but they chose not to. So when the majority of Dems voted against it in 2003, were they really voting against the act or against Bush? The fact that they didn't when they had the opportunity is telling. It's also telling that when they had a monopoly and could have passed a bill to bring down the national debt by removing a new entitlement they chose not to. That makes them not guiltless in being responsible for this part of the debt as some claim.

We oue over 18 trillion so far. Have you guys ever heard what Obama thinks of the US debt when it was 16 trillion only

Remember what Obama said about the National debt when he was running for the Presidency this guy truly is the mother of all liars.

Wouldn't it be great if we can run up insurmountable debt and never have to think about not being able to afford it.

Faith, I purposely left Obama out because I didn't want my reply to take on the flavor of "my president has a bigger dick than your president". But I'll address each point you mentioned as best I can...

The Affordable Care Act was originally forecasted to lower deficits for the foreseeable future. Now the Congressional Budget Office is saying that there have been so many delays in implementing it, and that the law has become so complex, that it's not possible at this time to say whether it will have a net positive or net negative effect on the annual budget.

Wars. The Obama administration, as well as the majority of the left and middle in politics, approves of American intervention in Afghanistan against terroristic elements. Therefore the costs of waging war in Afghanistan was and is considered to be a necessity.

TARP? The worldwide depression that was taking shape at the beginning of Obama's term in office needed drastic intervention. Right away the Obama administration bailed out the banks and automakers. The economy was in free fall when Obama took the reigns. I remember reading about thousands of layoffs per month. It is said that in late 2008, hundreds of thousands of people were being laid off....per month. If we listen to the rabid punditry, the lay offs stopped on their own and the Obama administration had nothing to do with it.

Why were the automakers bailed out? Because the big three automakers were said to represent about 3 million jobs. I remember it being said very precisely that if all three folded, 3 million jobs would be gone. Those probably represented auto industry jobs, as well as all of the jobs in the local economies where the automakers were headquartered and entrenched.

The bailouts costed money. Did the bailouts add to the deficit and debt, yeah probably. Were they necessary? Everyone involved in the decision making process across two presidential administrations seems to think so.

Good post.