Worst Americans Options

[*kryogenix*]

Who do you believe are the worst Americans of all time?

Be prepared to defend your choices! I'm expecting a lot of "George W. Bush for being a stupid dum dum head," so make sure you can stay and defend your choices.

This is not a concrete list (actually, I'm going to pick some controversial figures for the sake of debate) but here, in no particular order:

FDR- For pretty much becoming a dictator during WWII, not to mention mishandling it.
Nathan Bedford Forrest- For starting the KKK.
Joe McCarthy- For his overzealous crusade against Communism.
U.S. Grant- For being a terribly ineffective president, especially after the Civil War.
Robert McNamara- For mishandling the Vietnam War.
Malcolm X- For undoing what MLK JR III did by supporting violent miltantism.

I can't think of any more bad Americans at the moment, but I'll let you guys have a go.

[illumineering]

Are you wanting us to focus on individuals as opposed to groups/organizations such as the KKK or Aryan Nation?

[*kryogenix*]

Are you wanting us to focus on individuals as opposed to groups/organizations such as the KKK or Aryan Nation?

Individual people.

[*RiC3xBoy*]

I think Nathan Bedford Forrest is. Racism seems to be one crucial problems this country has(along with others). If the KKK were never to be formed, I believe there would be mroe unity.

[hi-C]

Malcolm X- For undoing what MLK JR III did by supporting violent miltantism.

See, I'd agree with you, to a certain extent. Towards the end of his life, around the time he took his Hajj, he his beliefs changed a lot. He was no longer an angry Black boy, he was a mature Black man.

[Ington]

Michael Moore. He pretty much shaped modern liberalism into a philosophy of anti-American hate.

[aznxdreamer]

im not sure what to think about michael moore.

[*kryogenix*]

Michael Moore. He pretty much shaped modern liberalism into a philosophy of anti-American hate.

Hmm. I dislike Michael Moore but he didn't make my list for a reason. He doesn't have as much power as the people on my list had. Although, his documentary was pretty influential to some people. But still, misleading people didn't directly lead to deaths (I hope).

See, I'd agree with you, to a certain extent.  Towards the end of his life, around the time he took his Hajj, he his beliefs changed a lot.  He was no longer an angry Black boy, he was a mature Black man.

I understand his belief in Islam changed him. But he didn't really undo what he started. Same thing with Nathan Bedford Forrest. When he got older, he tried to disband the KKK, but the genie was already out of the bottle.

[aznxdreamer]

acutally, i like michael moore. he's very opinionated.

[*mipadi*]

But still, misleading people didn't directly lead to deaths (I hope).

Unlike *cough* George Bush *cough*.

[illumineering]

Michael Moore. He pretty much shaped modern liberalism into a philosophy of anti-American hate.

Call me slow, but I think foreign policy and the current "War on Terror" do more to create hatred than a documentary film. Care to offer anything to substantiate your opinion?

I find it rather interesting that you are choosing a person who expresses a political perspective over the likes of Aldrich Ames, Ted Kaczynski, Charles Manson, Tim McVeigh or even Lee Harvey Oswald.

[sadolakced acid]

we never hear about the worst americans.

i'm going to say abraham lincoln and andrew jackson.

both men disregarded civil liberties.

[*kryogenix*]

Unlike *cough* George Bush *cough*.

I worded it that way to get these responses.

How much of this is his fault? Usually when the intelligence agencies of the United States, Britain and Russia tell you that Saddam has WMDs, you'd take them seriously.

As far as I know, invading Iraq was not done in bad intention or irresponsibility. Bush thought that he was doing the right thing (as did mostly everyone in the house).

McCarthy, arguably, was doing the right thing by attempting to reveal communists, but he was doing it just to make himself look good at the expense of others.

Moore knows he's misleading people, but doesn't feel like he's doing anything wrong because most of what he says are not outright lies.

But the person I think who is the true villian of modern liberalism is Howard Dean. Unlike Moore, he actually has power. He called the Republican party a party of white Christians, even though he himself (and pretty much the majority of the US) is white Christian.

[illumineering]

Chief Justice Roger Taney for his decision in Dred Scott v. Sanford.

[*mipadi*]

As far as I know, invading Iraq was not done in bad intention or irresponsibility. Bush thought that he was doing the right thing (as did mostly everyone in the house).

Ah, but merely thinking one is doing the right thing does not make it just. Michael Moore probably thinks he is doing the right thing, too, but as you pointed out, he's still...well, an a-hole, to be frank. But if you think Michael Moore is bad for misleading the American public, certainly Bush should be held accountable as well. He misled the American public about Iraq's WMD programs, even though many intelligence officials and members of his own administration warned that the intelligence was faulty.

Even if you let him get away with that, certainly his abuses of American civil rights (especially with the reason NSA wiretapping scandal) put him up at least into the realm of worst presidents. He's done more to hinder the American way of life than the terrorists ever have, as well as hindering our reputation abroad. I'm disgusted when I open the newspaper and not only see articles of the illegal detention and torture of "enemy combatants," but listening to Bush condone and actually encourage such abuses. I'm disgusted when I read that Bush continually circumvents the Senate, judicial system, and American law in order to achieve his own ends.

The reason I can agree with Michael Moore being an idiot is because he has done a lot to hinder his cause. Fahrenheit 9/11 bared some ugly truths about our government and our war on terror--many truths were presented in the film, but Michael Moore exaggerated enough truths or misled some American audiences enough that he's opened up the entire documentary to be labeled as propaganda. Unfortunately, he's made it easy for conservatives to right it off as junk; but what is hard for a lot of conservatives to admit is that there is some truth to many of Moore's statements.

[*not_your_average*]

the worst americans:
woodrow wilson: he refused to give women the right to vote for an extremely long time. many look at him as a champion of women's rights. bull. the only reason he gave in to the nineteenth amendment is because his approval ratings were going down the drain and FDR was starting to gain popularity.

george w. bush: the exact same reasons as michael. i really do agree with him wholeheartedly. gold stars for mipadi!

michael moore: okay, i'll admit, i liked fahrenheit 9/11. however, he has taken liberalism to the extreme and made every single liberal in the US look like a bunch of conspiracy nuts planning to assassinate the president.

[Dragonfly_babe]

EEK! I feel dumb reading this because I don't know some of the stuff u guys r talking about but I don't like bush because he's just a puppet not using his own words or speeches and feeding the public garbage!

[ComradeRed]

I agree, except:

Nathan Bedford Forrest- For starting the KKK.

Nathan Bedford gets a lot of crap that he probably doesn't deserve. For one, when he "started" the KKK all it did was ride around town and play pranks. It was basically a social club for Tennessee elite. When the KKK became militant and started lynching black people, Forrest not only resigned but he publicly denounced it. Blaming Forrest for the KKK's militancy is like blaming Marx for the Gulags.

U.S. Grant- For being a terribly ineffective president, especially after the Civil War.

We've had a LOT worse than Grant.

I can't think of any more bad Americans at the moment, but I'll let you guys have a go.

Oh come on, out of hundreds of millions of Americans, five is all you can think of?

[Mulder]

Woodrow Wilson - for denying woman's suffrage for so long.

Franklin Pierce - for being inactive in a time of great turmoil between the North and the South.

Thomas Jefferson -.. well, hes up there. he was a hypocrite. he proclaimed that all men were created equal and continued to own slaves.

Benedict Arnold - he was a traitor.

Andrew Jackson - for his cruel treatment of Native Americans (the trail of tears), as well as sometimes disregarding laws to pursue his own personal goals.

[ComradeRed]

Franklin Pierce gets too much crap too; by the 1850s, inaction was probably the best that anyone could have done. It's like the Cold War--you want a leader who will try to preserve the Status Quo, not someone who will take an aggressive, activist stance and lead to nuclear war (the election of 1964). Lincoln ran an activist campaign and guess what? Civil War broke out.

[Mulder]

Franklin Pierce gets too much crap too; by the 1850s, inaction was probably the best that anyone could have done. It's like the Cold War--you want a leader who will try to preserve the Status Quo, not someone who will take an aggressive, activist stance and lead to nuclear war (the election of 1964). Lincoln ran an activist campaign and guess what? Civil War broke out.

the civil war was inevitable. if there had been no civil war than the country would have divided into 2 separate nations. the south was being too demanding. someone had to take an agressive stance on the matter.

[Comptine]

I strongly disagree with your opinion that FDR was one of the worst Americans. True, his internment of the Japanese Americans was terrible but so is Bush's violation of human rights. FDR did the best one could during such a large scale war. He made mistakes but he didn't mishandle at all. Mishandling is Johnson or Nixon. FDR was able to help the country through a Derpression along with a World War on two fronts. If you think he was a tyrant because of his four terms, then you don't understand the mentality of a country during war. They want security and stability. They would not risk it by changing leaders, changing methods and ideals. Another way to judge if a president mishandled a situation, you should look to the people. FDR had overwhelming support (along with opposition as with any leader) and people had faith in him. Many people agreed Nixon mishandled his presidency. How? Because he's simply one of the most hated presidents. The people weren't happy.

Worst Americans:

Timothy McVeigh: Domestic terrorism. Although it existed for far longer, McVeigh really did reintroduce this fear back into America. Not to mention that he killed many people.

Joseph McCarthy - Promoted propoganda and the Red Scare. Violated rights. A radical.

[sadolakced acid]

Thomas Jefferson -.. well, hes up there. he was a hypocrite. he proclaimed that all men were created equal and continued to own slaves.

the life of a slave in the hands of a kind master was much better than that of a freed slave.

if jefferson had fred his slaves, no doubt they would have been mistreated in the north, or re-enslaved in the south.

Benedict Arnold - he was a traitor.

benedict arnold was the best general we had in the revolutionary war. He was continually slighted and not promoted. When he won battles, other generals took the credit. he had an ego problem- and yet General Washington had to publicly censure him infront of his troops.

yes, he sold out. he gave away plans to west point. he became a british general. but anyone would have done the same.

Andrew Jackson - for his cruel treatment of Native Americans (the trail of tears), as well as sometimes disregarding laws to pursue his own personal goals.

andrew jackson believed he was protecting the native americans by sending them out of the reach of whites. Whites were corrupting the indians, thought jackson.

and the trail of tears did help the indians last longer.

[ComradeRed]

the civil war was inevitable. if there had been no civil war than the country would have divided into 2 separate nations. the south was being too demanding. someone had to take an agressive stance on the matter.

Hardly. The South was demanding that states in the West vote on whether they wanted slavery--was that being "too demanding" (furthermore, the South's OWN Constitution prohibited the importation of slaves so the South was not bent on expanding slavery to any considerable extent outside of New Mexico and Arizona)? An aggressive stance led to the bloodiest war in US History--whereas almost every other nation in the Americas saw slavery come to a natural end by the late 1880s (Brazil being the last nation) without fighting a bloody war (Haiti is the only one I can think of where slavery was ended by war). Clearly, the Civil War was not needed and only resulted from the South's perception that Lincoln would be overly aggressive and disrupt the status quo. Under Pierce, there were four years of relative calm and peace which is more than I can say for most presidents, so while he wasn't one of the greatest presidents ever, he nonetheless does get too much crap. Even if the country divided into 2 separate nations, historically speaking, it would not have mattered at all. The South was economically unimportant to the North until the 1980s and 90s with the booms in NC, GA, TX, and FL, and would not have seriously hampered our ability to defeat either the Nazis or the Soviets.

Besides, Pierce had the brilliant idea of buying Cuba--that would have appeased the South since it would have restored the Senate balance, and moreover it would have saved us so much trouble later on (no Castro, no missile crisis, etc.)

[Ington]

Call me slow, but I think foreign policy and the current "War on Terror" do more to create hatred than a documentary film.  Care to offer anything to substantiate your opinion? 

I find it rather interesting that you are choosing a person who expresses a political perspective over the likes of Aldrich Ames, Ted Kaczynski, Charles Manson, Tim McVeigh or even Lee Harvey Oswald.

1. He's the first person who popped into my head.
2. The documentary got him attention. People listen to him now.
3. I have different opinions than you. If I wanted to, I can pick Martha Stewart. You have no right implying to me that I have the wrong opinion.