Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: robnhood who wrote (7144)	2/16/1998 8:25:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

>>What about Carter, I don't recall anyone bad mouthing him, and yet I feel the American Public dislike him. No accounting for people's tastes. Carter's problem was that he was incompetent and his policies left the U.S. economy in tatters and the country in a greatly weakened position internationally . In contrast, Clinton is corrupt but has been unable to have his policies implemented for the most part. Jimmy has been trying to rehabilitate himself ever since, but as an incompetent he cannot do that in the policy arena ala Nixon and instead inhabits the realm of "good works". Carter left office with the lowest public approval in U.S. history - 13%. By contrast, Nixon left office at twice that level - 26%. I guess Americans prefer the corrupt over the incompetent because the impact is greater felt. That's fitting in a sense, since Nixon did more to elect Carter - a mediocre governor of a backwards state - than anyone else. Also fitting is that there's a book just out detailing the U.S.'s 10 worst presidents and both Carter and Nixon make that cut. The historian notes that Carter, once elected, had no idea what he wanted to do, akin The Candidate. Btw, interesting aside: Carter made great PR impact at the start of his term by carrying his own valises. It has been since revealed that those bags were empty - a deception and an appropriate metaphor for the man.

To: robnhood who wrote (7144)	2/16/1998 8:33:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Respond to of 20981

Star-Spangled Men : America's Ten Worst Presidents by Nathan Miller List: $23.00 Our Price: $16.10 You Save: $6.90 (30%) Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days. Hardcover, 256 pages Published by Scribner Publication date: February 1998 Dimensions (in inches): 9.59 x 6.49 x 1 ISBN: 0684836106 (You can always remove it later...) Learn more about 1-ClickSM ordering Browse other Politics & Current Events titles. Reviews and Commentary for Star-Spangled Men : America's Ten Worst Presidents Have you read this book? Write an online review and share your thoughts with other readers. From Booklist , 01/01/98: Even readers who are not history buffs will be intrigued by this well-researched but breezy recap of the ill-fated presidencies of 10 men, some of whom come as usual suspects, others of whom will be surprises. Historian Miller, author of many U.S. histories, eliminates the short-termers (William Henry Harrison, Garfield, et al.) as having passed too quickly through the office to have effected any real good or damage. The earliest president discussed here is number 14, Franklin Pierce. More recent targets are Carter and Nixon, and, although Miller acknowledges the postpresidential rehabilitations of both, he feels their errors (Carter) and sins (Nixon) committed while in the Oval Office are too great to overcome.