Will Mr. Obama Go Down In History As The Worst

[JerryNumbers]

Will Mr. Obama go down in history as the worst president in the last 100 years?

[John81]

No. The fact he won two terms as president and he's the first black president will both work to keep that from happening.

[Arbo]

Yes, and someon else agrees:

 

Edited December 22, 2013 by Arbo

[John81]

Also, unless the economy takes a dive before he leaves office there will be many giving him the credit for ending "the Bush Great Recession" with some even claiming he saved America from another Great Depression.

 

Carter probably doesn't have to worry about losing his status to this guy.

[Arbo]

One word:  Obamacare.

[beameup]

It's sad that the only alternative was John McCain...

[JerryNumbers]

One word:  Obamacare.

 

One word:  Obamacare.

 

 

Your correct, the big lie will ruin him, "You can keep your insurance," many of those that voted for him lost their insurance, plus their insurance rates went way up.

 

Is President Obama 'too big to jail?'

[ThePilgrim]

I beg to differ with you guys.  History written in the next few years is not really history.  Real history is to be written hundreds or thousands of years after an event has passed.  Obama will be a short paragraph in a short chapter on the short history of a short lived empire called the United States of America.  Obama and all other would be important persons are only tiny blips in the great scheme of things.  It is you and I the so-called little people that lift these people up to be something they are not, "important".  It's to bad that we get so excited that we we lift them up on pedestals of fame or infamy because they have not really earned it.

 

The really important thing is to be written in The Lambs Book of Life not in a history book which will perish in a great book burning one day.

 

God bless,

Larry

Edited December 22, 2013 by pilgrim1938

[Arbo]

I beg to differ with you guys.  History written in the next few years is not really history.  Real history is to be written hundreds or thousands of years after an event has passed.

I'd disagree. History is subject to revision regardless of the passage of time. Look at the number of books published on ancient Rome.

[Arbo]

The really important thing is to be written in The Lambs Book of Life not in a history book which will perish in a great book burning one day.

I do not disagree about being in the Book, but I do believe that having an understanding of history is important.

(I don't mean to seem like I am needling you, I just wanted to respond to two points. ) Edited December 22, 2013 by Arbo

[ThePilgrim]

Having read a lot of and understanding history is why I say what I do.  All history books are subject to revision over time that is a fact.  All history is written by human beings and is subject to their state of mind and points of view at the time of it's writing.  As a matter of fact the reading of history books is also subject to man's whim.  What history books do people choose to read or not read for instance.  One can only understand the flow of history the ups and downs of empires and civilizations and the general causes of such.  One cannot know from history the minutae of events and the absolute truth about the persons involved.

 

One can know for instance that a people or a nation will become great at one time and collapse at another into unimportance - like the great empires in the past and knowing this can extrapolate that this will happen to the American empire.  One can see that great empires tend to become arrogant, self important, filled with hubris, and over extend themselves, leading to their final collapse.  It is inevitable, it always happens.

 

Most certainly one can learn from history, especialy when the history is written in the Holy Bible.  Then we know it is true and not just some vain imaginings of some opinionated historian.

 

God bless,

Larry

[Arbo]

Pilgrim, spot on. Agree wholeheartedly.

I have always thought it a pity that American students are not taught history, both world and especially American, as a priority of their education.

[ThePilgrim]

 I never finished highschool and everything I learned of history I learned by first checking books out of libraries and then in better times being able to buy books.  I have always loved history and by the time I was 40 had learned to love the Bible - the Holy Spirit taught me that.  God blessed me in that I did not go to college until I was 50 years old.  I had to take American history as one of the required classes and I aced it but (praise god) I had loved and studied history before I took the class.  What a farce that was.  I am not certain it is a good idea for young people to be taught history in our education system as it is now.  The books used and the teachers involved twist it into something a true student of history would never recognize. 

 

Though I studied history for 20 years before I believed the Bible it would be best if young people learned the Bible first.  An understanding of history, as taught by the Holy Spirit, will enable the student to diferentiate the wheat from the chaff in history books.  If the the people in a history book don't fit God's view of the human condition it ain't true.  If the events  in a history book don't fit God's view of the way things happened it ain't true.

 

Excuse my use of the word ain't . . . . I never finished highschool english.

 

God bless,

Larry

Edited December 22, 2013 by pilgrim1938

[Arbo]

I never finished highschool and everything I learned of history I learned by first checking books out of libraries and then in better times being able to buy books.  I have always loved history and by the time I was 40 had learned to love the Bible - the Holy Spirit taught me that.  God blessed me in that I did not go to college until I was 50 years old.  I had to take American history as one of the required classes and I aced it but (praise god) I had loved and studied history before I took the class.  What a farce that was.  I am not certain it is a good idea for young people to be taught history in our education system as it is now.  The books used and the teachers involved twist it into something a true student of history would never recognize. 
 
Though I studied history for 20 years before I believed the Bible it would be best if young people learned the Bible first.  An understanding of history, as taught by the Holy Spirit, will enable the student to diferentiate the wheat from the chaff in history books.  If the the people in a history book don't fit God's view of the human condition it ain't true.  If the events  in a history book don't fit God's view of the way things happened it ain't true.
 
Excuse my use of the word ain't . . . . I never finished highschool english.
 
God bless,
Larry

'Tis better to be well read than well educated.

[DaveW]

History.......

Is different for you than is it for me.

WW2 for instance looks different - the Aussies actually saved the day you know, not you Yanks!

Seriously though, Japan's version of WW2 is different to both of ours, as is Russia's version also.

To the original question - bland and bald facts - Nixon got kicked out - assuming OB doesn't, that will forever suggest Nixon was worse because as pilgrim said, people don't tend to look at details.

Won't matter to most about policies.