<p>when people say this are they aware that he was Democractically elected? of course he should be president!! whats the point otherwise?</p>
<p>Could you please cite someone who has said Barrack Obama shouldn't be president?</p>
<p>Ya, Barrack Obama will be one of the best leaders America has ever known. Mark My Words.</p>
<p>I believe you are referencing the people who say that Barack Obama is not an American citizen. The Supreme Court, however, says there is no evidence to substantiate this claim. I believe that this is just a pathetic backlash from Republicans who are sour about the results of the election. Unfortunately, the Republicans weren't able to steal this election this time. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You may end up eating those words...</p>
<p>Yea he definitely shouldn't be presdient, thats a horrible job. President on the other hand is a good job.</p>
<p>coming from an anarchist...</p>
<p>I believe that Obama will go down as a terrible president, simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Or maybe the right place at the wrong time. Either way, whoever got elected this time around was pretty much destined to be screwed, the way I see it.</p>
<p>^
Well, I'm sure people said that about Lincoln when he walked into a nation the brink of collapse.</p>
<p>I'm sure people said that about FDR when he walked in on an economy that had collapsed.</p>
<p>Great people rise to great occasions. Only time will tell.</p>
<p>Haha, Lincoln and FDR are definitely among the two worst presidents ever elected.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Haha, Lincoln and FDR are definitely among the two worst presidents ever elected.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Want some attention?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
Haha, Lincoln and FDR are definitely among the two worst presidents ever elected.
Want some attention?
[/quote]
Not from you. Read any history?</p>
<p>lincoln and fdr ruled they are on mt rushmore for a reason!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Haha, Lincoln and FDR are definitely among the two worst presidents ever elected.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Um, you are joking, right?</p>
<p>Lincoln did kind of decide to f the constitution</p>
<p>FDR certainly decided to F the constitution, but Lincoln not so much</p>
<p>
[quote]
Not from you. Read any history?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh my God. Iloveagoodbrew was serious. I thought that was a joke.</p>
<p>Much like Republicans are doing today, FDR, an advocate of free markets, recognized they had failed and needed to be shored up. There's no capitalists in a crisis. </p>
<p>FDR is widely praised for having saved our free market economy. Lincoln is widely praised for having saved our nation from falling apart.</p>
<p>^FDR made the great depression worse.</p>
<p>Lincoln set the precedent for unconstitutional abuse of federal powers (income tax, suspension of heabeus corpus).</p>
<p>FDR was never an advocate of freemarkets. Oh, I suppose Lenin was a 'moderate', right? Lets see, the government gets in bed and sets up lending companies. They fail. Ahhh, must be the free markets. </p>
<p>whatever.</p>
<p>Oh, I see. You're just a radical libertarian ideologue.</p>
<p>Well, the real world is a little more complicated than that.</p>
<p>The question is not whether FDR's actions extended the depression, but whether the economy would have survived inaction. Same questions are being asked today. Both sides have valid arguments. SStabilizing the working class in a crisis may have negative side effects, but it does not a bad president make.</p>
<p>radical-yes
libertarian-no
ideologue-hell no</p>
<p>Thinking that the new deal was a bad idea is not radical at all, nor is it necessarily libertarian. The point is, nobody knows whether it had an overall good or bad effect, but he DID violate the constitution in some ways and greatly expand the role of the federal government, and this extended well beyond just the depression. You don't have to be a libertarian to have a problem with this.</p>