Top Ten Presidents

[JSojourner]

1.  Franklin Roosevelt
2.  Abe Lincoln
3.  Theodore Roosevelt
4.  George Washington
5.  Ike
6.  James Polk
7.  Chester Arthur
8.  Harry Truman
9.  Bill Clinton
10.  Grover Cleveland

[JSojourner]

I think its funny that so many people, who call George W. Bush a terrible President, in part because of his "illegal war" think that Polk belongs anywhere near the Top 10.

That's one of the reasons I think Polk sucks.

[JSojourner]

How could anyone put LBJ? He was a monster.

Oh yes, passing Civil Rights. What a shame

Congress passed Civil Rights. Kennedy could've and would've. And as if that outclasses any of his atrocities.

Wilson "passed" women's suffrage. Is he a great president?

I hate arguing with immature and ignorant libs who blindly support anyone with a D behind their name.

Well, there's a point I think both sides miss.

First, Johnson certainly did preside over one of the most unjust, unecessary and horrific American wars.  It is fair to point out that our involvement in SE Asia began under Eisenhower.  But Johnson, once sworn in, did a 180 from the direction Kennedy was moving -- getting us out of Vietnam.  (Read JFK And Vietnam for a thorough assessment of this.

Johnson's blind anti-Communism deluded him.  So you will find, in this liberal, a sharp critic of the Johnson foreign policy.  I don't think it can be condemned strongly enough, at least with regard to Southeast Asia.

But Lief's point about Civil Rights is quite apt.  Johnson did not just sign the Civil Rights Act into law.  He fought for it.  He cajoled, browbeat, prodded and begged key lawmakers in both parties to get behind it.  This was a man convinced to his very bones of the need for added protections for people of color.  Kennedy did not embrace Civil Rights with anything resembling the enthusiasm or passion of LBJ.  This is probably because he believed we weren't ready.  Or perhaps, as some Kennedy critics have suggested, because he was just too much the blue blood.  I don't know.

But while Wilson may have grudgingly signed Suffrage, Johnson made Civil Rights a cornerstone of his administration.  And then went on to reflect his concern for Civil Rights with his economic policy.

So take the man for what he was...on both counts. 

[JSojourner]

How could anyone put LBJ? He was a monster.

Oh yes, passing Civil Rights. What a shame

Congress passed Civil Rights. Kennedy could've and would've. And as if that outclasses any of his atrocities.

Wilson "passed" women's suffrage. Is he a great president?

I hate arguing with immature and ignorant libs who blindly support anyone with a D behind their name.

Well, there's a point I think both sides miss.

First, Johnson certainly did preside over one of the most unjust, unecessary and horrific American wars.  It is fair to point out that our involvement in SE Asia began under Eisenhower.  But Johnson, once sworn in, did a 180 from the direction Kennedy was moving -- getting us out of Vietnam.  (Read JFK And Vietnam for a thorough assessment of this.

Johnson's blind anti-Communism deluded him.  So you will find, in this liberal, a sharp critic of the Johnson foreign policy.  I don't think it can be condemned strongly enough, at least with regard to Southeast Asia.

But Lief's point about Civil Rights is quite apt.  Johnson did not just sign the Civil Rights Act into law.  He fought for it.  He cajoled, browbeat, prodded and begged key lawmakers in both parties to get behind it.  This was a man convinced to his very bones of the need for added protections for people of color.  Kennedy did not embrace Civil Rights with anything resembling the enthusiasm or passion of LBJ.  This is probably because he believed we weren't ready.  Or perhaps, as some Kennedy critics have suggested, because he was just too much the blue blood.  I don't know.

But while Wilson may have grudgingly signed Suffrage, Johnson made Civil Rights a cornerstone of his administration.  And then went on to reflect his concern for Civil Rights with his economic policy.

So take the man for what he was...on both counts. 

Anyone who can go from 1964 to unable to win their own parties nomination obviously did some very bad things throughout their term.

The only bad thing he did was Vietnam.  But it was enough of a boner to cost him any chance at re-election.

[JSojourner]

Congress passed Civil Rights. Kennedy could've and would've. And as if that outclasses any of his atrocities.

Wilson "passed" women's suffrage. Is he a great president?

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed in the form it did without LBJ.  He was the only President skilled enough to ensure that it was not watered down to a meaningless bill.

And yes, Wilson was a great President.

Disagree on Wilson but you're right about LBJ.  Kennedy was not as committed to Civil Rights as Johnson, or as his brother became.

[JSojourner]

Kennedy was not as committed to Civil Rights as Johnson, or as his brother became.

To me, it's more about the fact that LBJ was the most skilled politician we've ever had.  Kennedy was committed, but he just would not have been able to do what LBJ did.  See what Johnson was able to do with Everett Dirksen; JFK would've been unable to do that.

"The treatment".  Oh, to be a fly on the wall and watch Johnson work his magic.