Damn, forgot about the Japanese camps. **** him too, then.
I simply cannot see anything good about Reagan. Sure, he cut taxes, that's pretty much it. Iran Contra was a heinous criminal act. Not only did we sell arms to a sworn enemy with a godawful human rights record, we funded a bloody coup that resulted in what can only be called a massacre. On top of all that, a great deal of crack-cocaine in the US can be attributed to the CIA-Contra alliance. Not only was this hypocritical of Reagan, considering his war on drugs, it killed people. Lot's of people, not just directly through supporting the Contra wars, but through the heightened gang violence caused by the rise of drugs brought into the US. In my mind, Reagan is the worst kind of villain.
It is. My choice of Reagan is more of a personal thing, though. I hate him both as a man, and an elected official.
I don't attribute slavery as the cause of the war by any means, but the CSA is not blameless. They ****ed themselves when they laid siege to FT Sumter. Lincoln had no choice but to engage them militarily after that.
JFK really set the stage for Vietnam, and to be fair, a lot of those programs are rotten because they didn't go away once they were no longer needed because the people in charge of then have nothing else. LBJ was more of a nobody that really didn't do anything worthwhile. Kinda like Ford. Not really a huge asshole, but not worth mention for anything. Just "meh" at best.
The protestors were called the Bonus Army.
I have to disagree for reasons I've already stated. He caused some serious, and irreparable damages.
I'm not arguing pro, just stating there at least was a goal to it....albeit heavily ill advised.
Being an opinion poll I can respect all of the above. The Ft. Sumter issue was one of border issues, while it was a federal fort, it could be claimed as a tresspass after the secession, the CSA should have paid out for the north to leave, but then again with the tariff issue politically that was never gonna happen. Politicians are a stubborn and idiotic bunch after all.
FDR took the layup in my opinion. Without the secession option after the civil war the states pretty much became dependent on federal law, FDR realized he was holding office at a time that he could federalize powers with the right push. For that very reason I put Lincoln in the most anti-libertarian catagory, but it is close.
For cheap, obedient labor to replace disgruntled Whites in sweatshops--the Libertarian ideal of letting those on top make as much as they can trap others into working for, as long as they themselves aren't forced by those they exclude from having liberty. Emancipation parallels the mixed politics of today's illegal-alien discussion, with its Leftist multiculturalism being a smokescreen for the Libertarian idea of hiring whomever they want.
I mean what Libertarians are in reality, not its ideological cover story. These ideological preachings pacify people who think only in idealistic fuzziness, much like Communism and Christianity.
The South had slavery, the North had sweatshops. If you are concerned about class oppression, which Libertarians are in denial about, the North had no moral superiority. In fact, its leaders were morally inferior by not doing anything about their own kind of slavery. Instead, they launched a hypocritical crusade on the South. Also, Lincoln's policy of the Chickenhawk rich being able to buy their way out of the draft would have appealed to our real-life Libertarians.
I'm actually not, because the poor have the ability to not be poor in America. This isn't 19th century Russia, we don't have a caste system. You can be whatever the hell you want, as long as you actually try.
The Civil War wasn't fought over labor, it was fought to prevent a split in the Federal Union. Put down the Marx, and pick up a real book. Preferably, a history book. Hell, I'll give you mine when the semester is up, if you want it.
If you own a man's work, you own the man. Libertarians push this illusion about choice because they want to hide from themselves the reality that it's all about power.
Laissez-faire is a lazy fairy tale.
