Who is the Best US President: Wilson, FDR or Obama?

[saxitoxin]

- former Congressman Paul Findley (Republican - Illinois)
- former Congressman Col. Peter McCloskey (Republican - California); recipient of the Silver Star, Navy Cross & 2 Purple Hearts
- former Senator James Abourzek (Democrat - South Dakota)
- Dr. Edward Peck (former Deputy Director of Covert Intelligence Programs, U.S. State Department)
- Dr. Robert Keeley (former U.S. Ambassador to Greece)
- Dr. Phil Giraldi (former CIA Station Chief - Barcelona; national security correspondent for American Conservative Magazine)

I know it doesn't hold a candle to the somber, academic inquiry of HoneyTiger84, WikiMom2Boys and Freakzilla74 over at Wikipedia, but it's the best I could do.

Yup....
Paul Findlay... noted commie-lover, best known for successfully urging Congress to renege on its guarantees to Nationalist China and endorse the Communist regime. Big surprise to find him in Nasser's corner, lol.
Pete McCloskey... Holocaust Denier. We find a Holocaust Denier questioning Israel's right to exist? OMG, RU Serious?!?! I can't believe it!
James Abourezk... Point man for the Arab lobby in Congress.... 'nuff said.
Edward Peck... Nixon sycophant elevated to the Foreign Service, presumably for his devotion to shining Nixon's shoes with tongue.
Robert Keeley... Gerald Ford shoeshiner, but better known for his tireless toadying to the Islamist lobby, and more recently self-publishing three books that no legitimate publisher would touch.

Fine bunch of objective, non-aligned neutral voices there! ROTFLMAO!

I'll take my chances with Mamabear824 or any other random sampling of normal people.

A tale of two Republicans:

COL Pete McCloskey (Sycophant, Commie, Arab Lover, Shoeshiner) detailed his military exploits in The Taking of Hill 601, in which he recounts leading an infantry charge into a wall of Chinese machine gun fire.

Ronald Reagan (Hero, Titan, Colossus) detailed his military exploits in The Reagan Diaries, in which he recounts once being caught in traffic on Beverly Boulevard while driving to film a war bonds ad in West Hollywood.

I don't have a moment of hesitation standing on the side of the McCloskey-Republican version of the USS Liberty massacre over the Reagan-Republican fantasy.

A tale of two Republicans:

Ambassador Robert Keeley (Sycophant, Commie, Arab Lover, Shoeshiner) received undergraduate and graduate degrees from Princeton, commanded a cutter during the Battle of Inchon, served as ambassador to Greece, Zimbabwe and Mauritius under three presidents (after a career of foreign service postings in Mali and Congo), spent half-a-decade as president of the Middle East Institute and another half-a-decade as president of the Foreign Service Association.

Ambassador Dan Shapiro (Academic, Diplomat, Strategist)) worked as a valet/aide to a revolving door of congressmen, then as a lobbyist for the pharmaceuticals industry, then as a campaign worker for Barack Obama 2008, then as U.S. Ambassador to Israel (his first ever diplomatic assignment).

I don't have a moment of hesitation standing on the side of the Keeley-Republican version of the USS Liberty massacre over the Shapiro-Republican fantasy.

[Phatscotty]

Phatscotty I'm going to have to ask you not to try and derail this thread. Also if you can't watch a video, digest its point and then rephrase it in your own words, then don't bother posting your youtube links.


This thread is a no-troll zone.

I find it mildly funny that you let a whole page of discussion about the Liberty incident go by without comment, but a video about us presidents is trolling?

a video about the president which is in the poll....

[Iliad]

Phatscotty I'm going to have to ask you not to try and derail this thread. Also if you can't watch a video, digest its point and then rephrase it in your own words, then don't bother posting your youtube links.


This thread is a no-troll zone.

I find it mildly funny that you let a whole page of discussion about the Liberty incident go by without comment, but a video about us presidents is trolling?

Saxitoxin gonna sax.

Sorry Scotty, if you have an opinion on which of the three presidents has been the best I will need you to post and actually discuss it in your own words.

[Phatscotty]

Phatscotty I'm going to have to ask you not to try and derail this thread. Also if you can't watch a video, digest its point and then rephrase it in your own words, then don't bother posting your youtube links.


This thread is a no-troll zone.

I find it mildly funny that you let a whole page of discussion about the Liberty incident go by without comment, but a video about us presidents is trolling?

Saxitoxin gonna sax.

Sorry Scotty, if you have an opinion on which of the three presidents has been the best I will need you to post and actually discuss it in your own words.

Your statement displays a tremendous amount of hypocrisy. See how ya are?

And I already did say so in my own words. I pointed out that they are all the worst, and then I shared a professional opinion to back up my own worded original statement...........................

[Iliad]

Phatscotty I'm going to have to ask you not to try and derail this thread. Also if you can't watch a video, digest its point and then rephrase it in your own words, then don't bother posting your youtube links.


This thread is a no-troll zone.

I find it mildly funny that you let a whole page of discussion about the Liberty incident go by without comment, but a video about us presidents is trolling?

Saxitoxin gonna sax.

Sorry Scotty, if you have an opinion on which of the three presidents has been the best I will need you to post and actually discuss it in your own words.

Your statement displays a tremendous amount of hypocrisy. See how ya are?

And I already did say so in my own words. I pointed out that they are all the worst, and then I shared a professional opinion to back up my own worded original statement...........................

Your original worded statement was literally "they are the worst" and then a link to Dark Knight Rises bloopers. A real intellectual giant there.

you want to back up your opinion, well Scotty try to watch that video and then argue his/hers main points in your own words. Try to be able to form arguments in ways other than youtube links. If you're too fucking lazy to construct or at least paraphrase others argument then it seems like you're just trying to derail the threat and trolling.

[Phatscotty]

I can say them on my own just fine. I mean, are you seriously pretending like I am not about to say "Federal Reserve, Income tax, New Deal, programs to mainstream redistributing the wealth, the Great depression"

That was one heck of a challenge from an intellectual giant! whew!!!!

[Iliad]

I can say them on my own just fine. I mean, are you seriously pretending like I am not about to say "Federal Reserve, Income tax, New Deal, programs to mainstream redistributing the wealth, the Great depression"

That was one heck of a challenge from an intellectual giant! whew!!!!

Yeah you still actually failed to construct an actual argument about any of the Presidents.

If you have nothing to say I will have to ask you to post elsewhere and not clutter this discussion.

[GabonX]

Again, if Israel had attacked the USS Liberty knowing it was a US ship, what was their motive, and why did they admit to carrying out the attack instead of blaming it on the Egyptian forces?

Again - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=182445&start=30#p3985548.

Your source says that their have been 13 official inquiries into the incident, but that none of them are credible for some reason. It goes on Israel’s motive for launching the attack has never been determined with certainty while in reality it has, on 13 separate occasions, been determined that the motive was to attack a misidentified ship in a war zone.


It goes on to assert two possible conclusions. The first is that Israel intended to blame the attack on the Egyptians because it may have brought the US into the war. The second is that Israel wanted to block the ship from intercepting transmissions which may have damaged US-Israeli relations, so in an attempt to maintain friendly diplomatic relations the Israelis decided to attack an American ship and later fess up to it for some reason instead of blaming it on the Egyptians as they had planned.

Neither of the theories presented by your source explains why the Israelis would not have blamed the Egyptians for the attack as you claim it does.

- former Congressman Paul Findley (Republican - Illinois)
- former Congressman Col. Peter McCloskey (Republican - California); recipient of the Silver Star, Navy Cross & 2 Purple Hearts
- former Senator James Abourzek (Democrat - South Dakota)
- Dr. Edward Peck (former Deputy Director of Covert Intelligence Programs, U.S. State Department)
- Dr. Robert Keeley (former U.S. Ambassador to Greece)
- Dr. Phil Giraldi (former CIA Station Chief - Barcelona; national security correspondent for American Conservative Magazine)

I know it doesn't hold a candle to the somber, academic inquiry of HoneyTiger84, WikiMom2Boys and Freakzilla74 over at Wikipedia, but it's the best I could do.

Yup....
Paul Findlay... noted commie-lover, best known for successfully urging Congress to renege on its guarantees to Nationalist China and endorse the Communist regime. Big surprise to find him in Nasser's corner, lol.
Pete McCloskey... Holocaust Denier. We find a Holocaust Denier questioning Israel's right to exist? OMG, RU Serious?!?! I can't believe it!
James Abourezk... Point man for the Arab lobby in Congress.... 'nuff said.
Edward Peck... Nixon sycophant elevated to the Foreign Service, presumably for his devotion to shining Nixon's shoes with tongue.
Robert Keeley... Gerald Ford shoeshiner, but better known for his tireless toadying to the Islamist lobby, and more recently self-publishing three books that no legitimate publisher would touch.

Fine bunch of objective, non-aligned neutral voices there! ROTFLMAO!

I'll take my chances with Mamabear824 or any other random sampling of normal people.

I try not to get bogged down in the ad-hominem attacks as the arguments fail to hold up to scrutiny on their own merits, but I appreciate you pointing this out. It's no surprise that Saxi Toxin's sources are written by people with a record of antisemitism as his entire narrative on the issue is fundamentally anti-Semitic.

His knee jerk reaction to anyone who voices support of Israel is that they must be a Jewish theocratic radical, or that they've been strong armed by some kind of international Jewish Zionist mafia.

Basically he relishes the opportunity to root out Jews and Jewish/Zionist conspiracy.

He maintains that Palestinians have the right to attack civilians and that Israeli's don't have the right to defend themselves. Sometimes he maintains that Israeli's have nothing to fear from external threats and others he relishes the fact that their extermination is nigh.

Basically, any position which is anti Israel he supports even when they openly contradict each other.

[Phatscotty]

I can say them on my own just fine. I mean, are you seriously pretending like I am not about to say "Federal Reserve, Income tax, New Deal, programs to mainstream redistributing the wealth, the Great depression"

That was one heck of a challenge from an intellectual giant! whew!!!!

Yeah you still actually failed to construct an actual argument about any of the Presidents.

If you have nothing to say I will have to ask you to post elsewhere and not clutter this discussion.

The argument is they all severely violated the constitution. FDR stole Ameircan citizen's gold and their savings (true mark of a tyrant). Woodrow Wilson turned over America's sovereignty to a central bank boarded by foreigners and initiated the destruction of the American currency.

[GabonX]

It's called progress Scott...

Get with it

[saxitoxin]

Again, if Israel had attacked the USS Liberty knowing it was a US ship, what was their motive, and why did they admit to carrying out the attack instead of blaming it on the Egyptian forces?

Again - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=182445&start=30#p3985548.

Your source says that their have been 13 official inquiries into the incident, but that none of them are credible for some reason. It goes on Israel’s motive for launching the attack has never been determined with certainty while in reality it has, on 13 separate occasions, been determined that the motive was to attack a misidentified ship in a war zone.

It goes on to assert two possible conclusions. The first is that Israel intended to blame the attack on the Egyptians because it may have brought the US into the war. The second is that Israel wanted to block the ship from intercepting transmissions which may have damaged US-Israeli relations, so in an attempt to maintain friendly diplomatic relations the Israelis decided to attack an American ship and later fess up to it for some reason instead of blaming it on the Egyptians as they had planned.

Neither of the theories presented by your source explains why the Israelis would not have blamed the Egyptians for the attack as you claim it does.

The Egyptian Air Force had been destroyed 24 hours into the conflict during the treacherous Israeli Pearl Harbor-style attack on Egyptian bases, a fact about which the Israelis and Israeli-lovers endlessly crow. It would have been hard to blame a non-existent air force. That was so obvious it probably didn't require explanation.

Next?

I try not to get bogged down in the ad-hominem attacks as the arguments fail to hold up to scrutiny on their own merits, but I appreciate you pointing this out. It's no surprise that Saxi Toxin's sources are written by people with a record of antisemitism as his entire narrative on the issue is fundamentally anti-Semitic.

His knee jerk reaction to anyone who voices support of Israel is that they must be a Jewish theocratic radical, or that they've been strong armed by some kind of international Jewish Zionist mafia.

Basically he relishes the opportunity to root out Jews and Jewish/Zionist conspiracy.

He maintains that Palestinians have the right to attack civilians and that Israeli's don't have the right to defend themselves. Sometimes he maintains that Israeli's have nothing to fear from external threats and others he relishes the fact that their extermination is nigh.

Basically, any position which is anti Israel he supports even when they openly contradict each other.

I've never used the word "Jew" or "Jewish" anywhere in this thread. Only you have.

But no matter, the forces of history are becoming too incredible for Israel to hold out against. And now the kind of person you despise most - an American combat veteran, Republican, successful businessman, and non-career politician - Chuck Hagel may get the Secretary of Defense. He's not the silver bullet but, if he gets confirmed, would be one more chip at a wall being furiously disassembled.

On the more routine front, yesterday, as happens every 6 months like clockwork, another morbidly obese Israeli cabinet minister has been indicted for corruption. As decorated U.S. combat veteran and former CIA station chief Dr. Phil Giraldi said, "Israel is ... literally the world's largest criminal cartel" -

Israel's Justice Ministry said on Thursday it would charge [Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman over alleged irregularities tied to the promotion of an Israeli diplomat who had leaked him privileged information about a police probe into his activities.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/ ... me=topNews

The Israeli Police are probably all anti-Semitic, of course. LOL