While that is a contributing factor, it's by no means a "major cause" of the global financial crisis. Ultra low interest rate policies and negligent regulators, yes. But I fail to see how a distinctly American housing policy caused a global runup in housing prices. To say it's all one President's fault or another is pure politics, and not data driven analysis.

Not to derail this thread, of course.

It certainly was not entirely the fault of the Clinton administration, and I made no such claim. I was simply responding to the 'tip-top shape' comment by CaptainMattJ in stating that the Clinton administration is by no means free of blame for the current crisis.

*hat tip* Carry on then. :salute:

Funny you should mention that. I'm playing Hearts of Iron II right now as the USA and that's exactly whats going on. Its mid 1943 and I've occupied the Japanese home islands and Korea. Saved the Phillipines and are clearing out the islands in the Pacific. :hmmm:

The POTUS still does a radio address once a week.

:damn: I should since I went to Theodore Roosevelt elementary school (AKA School #43).

But everyone there incl. the teachers called the school "Teddy Roosevelt".

This may be surprising,but I'd have to say Nixon. Detente with China and the USSR. Ending the Vietnam War. Being one of the last Presidents that Israel actually listened to. And being what some Presidential Scholars consider to be the last true "liberal" President.

As for Watergate,I always considered that to be an overblown scandal. So Nixon is forced to resign because he refused to throw his aides under a bus over something they still can't prove that Nixon knew anything about. But then again,the Dems hated Nixon with a passion since he basically stole their platform and got the Repubs in congress to go along with it,where a Dem President would have failed to get Repub support.

Personally,I always felt that Robert F. Kennedy's illegal wiretaps while Attorney General was a lot worse than some second rate burglery. (Not to mention later scandals such as Iran-Contra and Whitewater)

Aaaaand, here we go again. There are a thousand reasons that can be discussed concerning that period, but an uninformed flat statement like that one is just looking for a fight. This is a thread about your favorites, not why someone was less than some people think he was.

If you want to start a Civil War thread, start one. Don't turn this into one by launching an attack on a president someone mentioned. That has happened too many times here.

Both Roosevelts are tied for me.

I was going to make a wager in the beginning as to how long it would take to get to this again. Every time we talk about US presidents it seems to go there.

attack? hows that an attack? i wasnt putting down lincoln. i merely stated an extra little fact about him. Lincoln was still a good president. better then most, in fact. But people shouldnt put him higher then he was. he was still a great president, but i thought some people should know that if they didnt already.

seems you took that the wrong way. it may have been strongly worded, sure, but not an attack.

I love how people blame everyone except the DIRECT assailant. go ahead and blame clinton for 9/11 and not the actual terrorists. You can argue "Well if clinton had been more aware (or BUSH mind you, who was in office for a full year by then) that we couldve prevented it" well guess what if the terrorists hadnt attacked, there wouldnt be 9/11. Blame the terrorists. Could there have been more security? yes. Was there any reason at the time to even THINK that something like that would happen on a random day in september? no.I dont know of ANY other case besides 9/11 where they hijack a plane and crash it into buildings. At least not on that scale. Why would they suspect that it would happen? They wouldve been alot more alert to suddam hussain Gasing us, but not 9/11.

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/6135/debtofhonor.jpg
^Published 1994

Tom Clancy for national security adviser! :yeah:

Strawman. No one has absolved Al Qaeda of the attacks. However, it is the duty of my government, it's security agencies and it's military, of whom the president is Commander in Chief, to think of the unthinkable and to prevent it from happening. The fact that the WTC was the target of a similar attack in 1993, however, provides more than a few clues as to the intention of the terrorists. If that is not enough for suspicion, then I do not know what would be.

Oh boy, you couldnt be more wrong about that
just watch these please, (and get ready to be angry)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsM3o...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aaf6NuKRHE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFhz4pYIGKg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QU_WD...eature=related

My apology then. We've had more than one 'President' thread turn into a major batlle over the civil war, and it usually started with someone 'explaining' why Lincoln was really the cause of all the country's woes. I agree he was an extreme politician and knew how to manipulate people to get what he wanted, but I also feel that what he wanted was for the best. This might give you some insight as to why I reacted the way I did.
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=171933