By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Historians Release New Ranking of Presidents

Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
perculator said:
What people are forgeting about lincoln is the emancipation proclamation, which DID NOT only freed the slaves, not really, but kept Britain out of the war. With Britain in the war the south would of won. That is why Lincoln is credited for keeping the US together, not because he just sat back and ran the war.

I'm taking this into account.  I just think just about any president would of made the same move anyway though.

 



Around the Network
Strategyking92 on 17 February 2009
Kasz216 said:
perculator said:
What people are forgeting about lincoln is the emancipation proclamation, which DID NOT only freed the slaves, not really, but kept Britain out of the war. With Britain in the war the south would of won. That is why Lincoln is credited for keeping the US together, not because he just sat back and ran the war.

I'm taking this into account.  I just think just about any president would of made the same move anyway though.

 

 

well.. britain and the confderacy were on trading terms. So I guess they sort of helped the confederates. I mean, an ironclad (or was it just a ship?) sailed all the way to britain , then surrendered.



And that's the only thing I need is *this*. I don't need this or this. Just this PS4... And this gaming PC. - The PS4 and the Gaming PC and that's all I need... And this Xbox 360. - The PS4, the Gaming PC, and the Xbox 360, and that's all I need... And these PS3's. - The PS4, and these PS3's, and the Gaming PC, and the Xbox 360... And this Nintendo DS. - The PS4, this Xbox 360, and the Gaming PC, and the PS3's, and that's all *I* need. And that's *all* I need too. I don't need one other thing, not one... I need this. - The Gaming PC and PS4, and Xbox 360, and thePS3's . Well what are you looking at? What do you think I'm some kind of a jerk or something! - And this. That's all I need.

Obligatory dick measuring Gaming Laptop Specs: Sager NP8270-GTX: 17.3" FULL HD (1920X1080) LED Matte LC, nVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, Intel Core i7-4700MQ, 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3, 750GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200 RPM Hard Drive

Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
Strategyking92 said:
Kasz216 said:
perculator said:
What people are forgeting about lincoln is the emancipation proclamation, which DID NOT only freed the slaves, not really, but kept Britain out of the war. With Britain in the war the south would of won. That is why Lincoln is credited for keeping the US together, not because he just sat back and ran the war.

I'm taking this into account.  I just think just about any president would of made the same move anyway though.

 

 

well.. britain and the confderacy were on trading terms. So I guess they sort of helped the confederates. I mean, an ironclad (or was it just a ship?) sailed all the way to britain , then surrendered.

Which is why anyone would of made the move.

The confederacy had to be "punished" and by making the Civil War about slavery it kept Britain and France out.

It was an easy call.

 



akuma587 on 17 February 2009
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
I agree with Kasz that the ends don't justify the means. But comparing fighting WW2 to fighting the Civil War is an inappropriate comparison in many ways. The Constitution says that if the war is on American soil that the President has more leeway.

Article I - Section 9

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Last i saw the ruling on that was only Congress could suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus and that Lincoln violated the constitution when he did so.

Not that Lincoln and the court were on good terms.  Lincoln claiming the Supreme Court's mere existance violated the Constitution.

I mean your the law student... but I'd like to see the judgement otherwise if that has since been revised.

See Ex Parte Merryman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_merryman

Infact from what i can tell.  Congress being the only body that can suspend the writ is still the case.

Unfortunately I haven't had much Constitutional Law yet.  Otherwise I would help you fill in the details.  Suspending habeas corpus in modern times depends a lot on the status of the people who you are suspending habeas corpus for.

If they are a "lawful combatant", then it appears Congress is the only one who can suspend it.

If you are an "unlawful combatant" (the definition of which changes fairly often depending on what decade we are in) then the President can suspend habeas corpus for that person, but usually only for a short or depending on the circumstances reasonable period of time.

There is still a pretty big debate over how far exactly commander in cheif powers go.  So honestly the answer isn't even that clear.  When the commander in cheif is trying to invoke his commander in cheif powers during peacetime here in America, they are at their most limited.  He has a lot more flexibility abroad.  During wartime on American soil, he has a lot more flexibility.

So it appears at the time it didn't include suspending habeas corpus.  Once again though, it was during wartime on American soil.  Its not like they were ruling on a non-criminal domestic issue or something.  I don't really have a vested interest in whether Lincoln or Washington is ranked at number one.  I definitely think in spite of his faults Lincoln deserves to be in the top 5 though.  Show me one President that got anything done in office that doesn't have some dirty laundry and I'll be genuinely impressed.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
akuma587 said:
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
I agree with Kasz that the ends don't justify the means. But comparing fighting WW2 to fighting the Civil War is an inappropriate comparison in many ways. The Constitution says that if the war is on American soil that the President has more leeway.

Article I - Section 9

The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Last i saw the ruling on that was only Congress could suspend the Writ of Habeas Corpus and that Lincoln violated the constitution when he did so.

Not that Lincoln and the court were on good terms.  Lincoln claiming the Supreme Court's mere existance violated the Constitution.

I mean your the law student... but I'd like to see the judgement otherwise if that has since been revised.

See Ex Parte Merryman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_merryman

Infact from what i can tell.  Congress being the only body that can suspend the writ is still the case.

Unfortunately I haven't had much Constitutional Law yet.  Otherwise I would help you fill in the details.  Suspending habeas corpus in modern times depends a lot on the status of the people who you are suspending habeas corpus for.

If they are a "lawful combatant", then it appears Congress is the only one who can suspend it.

If you are an "unlawful combatant" (the definition of which changes fairly often depending on what decade we are in) then the President can suspend habeas corpus for that person, but usually only for a short or depending on the circumstances reasonable period of time.

There is still a pretty big debate over how far exactly commander in cheif powers go.  So honestly the answer isn't even that clear.  When the commander in cheif is trying to invoke his commander in cheif powers during peacetime here in America, they are at their most limited.  He has a lot more flexibility abroad.  During wartime on American soil, he has a lot more flexibility.

So it appears at the time it didn't include suspending habeas corpus.  Once again though, it was during wartime on American soil.  Its not like they were ruling on a non-criminal domestic issue or something.  I don't really have a vested interest in whether Lincoln or Washington is ranked at number one.  I definitely think in spite of his faults Lincoln deserves to be in the top 5 though.  Show me one President that got anything done in office that doesn't have some dirty laundry and I'll be genuinely impressed.

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 17 February 2009

Panama Canal?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
akuma587 said:
Panama Canal?


I thought Panama had a good reason to be seperated from Columbia honestly.

They peacefully wanted to leave like the other countries in gran columbia did... however were overthrown by the columbians.

It stayed that way largely due to US support. (Started by Polk.)

Panma getting it's own independence was actually fixing a past american wrong.  Though admittidly for a price.



akuma587 on 17 February 2009

I mean Teddy wasn't the one who totally screwed it up, so I don't hold it against him personally, but I think of nothing but bad things when it comes to the Panama Canal. Later Congressman were known to say, "We stole it fair and square," when there was a debate on whether or not to give it back. Black mark on our history if you ask me.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Kasz216 on 17 February 2009
akuma587 said:
I mean Teddy wasn't the one who totally screwed it up, so I don't hold it against him personally, but I think of nothing but bad things when it comes to the Panama Canal. Later Congressman were known to say, "We stole it fair and square," when there was a debate on whether or not to give it back. Black mark on our history if you ask me.

I still disagree.

I think the Blackmark in history was the years before it when we helped keep Panma down even though they wanted to be independent.

Which was a right they had afforded to them as seen by the other countries leaving Columbia.

Nobody even had a problem with the deal signed for the canal in Panama until after World War 2... because Panma started disliking us.



akuma587 on 17 February 2009

But its fair to blame people for the Community Reinvestment Act?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson