Three of the top five US Presidents were Dems.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.

After Lincoln, the academics rated George Washington, Franklin D.
Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman as the best leaders
overall. The same five received top spots in the 2000 survey, although
Washington and Franklin D. Roosevelt swapped spots this year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090215/ap_on_go_pr_wh/ranking_presidents

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> After Lincoln, the academics rated George Washington, Franklin D.
> Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman as the best leaders
> overall.

Academics aren't "rill amurricans". Most of em R traitors y'know. I learned
this by watching HBO's eye-opening documentary called "Right America". Turns
out when you get people like duh-Scottie to talk on camera, they're even
funnier than they are on Usenet.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 1:19*am, George M. Middius >
wrote:
> Shhhh! said:
>
> > After Lincoln, the academics rated George Washington, Franklin D.
> > Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt and Harry Truman as the best leaders
> > overall.
>
> Academics aren't "rill amurricans". Most of em R traitors y'know. I learned
> this by watching HBO's eye-opening documentary called "Right America". Turns
> out when you get people like duh-Scottie to talk on camera, they're even
> funnier than they are on Usenet.

I don't know how to tell Mr. Hoover that he didn't fare too well:

http://www.c-span.org/PresidentialSurvey/President/Herbert_Hoover.aspx

Gosh, I kind of like the guy but it appears that he sucked at almost
everything. Mr. President, what say you?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 3:49*am, wrote:
> On Feb 16, 11:11*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
>
> > wrote:
> > And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.
>
> *These people are ****heads.

Lincoln sure sucked, what with his holding the Union together and
freeing blacks.

It's OK, Bratzi. You can go back to worshipping at your Hitler shrine
now.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message


> And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.

Yeah a joke on ****R, 'cause its not true. ;-)

> After Lincoln,

"The first Republican president."

> the academics rated George Washington,

Federalist who opposed the "Democratic-Republican" or as it is now known,
the Democratic party.

> Franklin D. Roosevelt,

Democrat.

>Theodore Roosevelt

Republican, then Progressive (offshoot of Republican Party)

and Harry Truman

Democrat.

As usual, ****R can't even count to two. At his purported age, that might
indicate some kind of mental dysfunction.

The true count is two democrats, two for-sure republicans, and one who was
definitely not a member of the Democratic Party.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 12:08*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
> > And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.
>
> Yeah a joke on ****R, 'cause its not true. ;-)
>
> > After Lincoln,
>
> "The first Republican president."

bushie liked to say that too. LOL!

OK, if TR is a "republican" because his party was an "offshoot of the
republican party", then Lincoln was a Dem. It's possible that even an
insane person would be aware that the republican party was an offshoot
of the Democratic party.

That's your logic, GOIA. I'll expect your apology for your ergregious
error. LOL!

> > *the academics rated George Washington,
>
> Federalist who opposed the "Democratic-Republican" or as it is now known,
> the Democratic party.
>
> > Franklin D. Roosevelt,
>
> Democrat.
>
> >Theodore Roosevelt
>
> Republican, then Progressive (offshoot of Republican Party)
>
> *and Harry Truman
>
> Democrat.
>
> As usual, ****R can't even count to two. At his purported age, that might
> indicate some kind of mental dysfunction.

Hee hee. ;-)

> The true count is two democrats, two for-sure republicans, and one who was
> definitely not a member of the Democratic Party.

Um, GOIA, the "joke" was that in those days (1856-1860) the Democratic
party was more like the republicans are now, dum-dum.

Back then the Democrats were willing to allow slavery. More recently,
the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act.

Leave it to an insane person to not sense the "joke" and miss the
point entirely. Besides, according to your own logic, Lincoln *was* a
Democrat. Ooooooops! LOL!

[Jenn[_3_]]

In article
>,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" > wrote:

> On Feb 17, 12:08*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> > "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> > wrote in
> >
> > m
> >
> > > And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.
> >
> > Yeah a joke on ****R, 'cause its not true. ;-)
> >
> > > After Lincoln,
> >
> > "The first Republican president."
>
> bushie liked to say that too. LOL!
>
> OK, if TR is a "republican" because his party was an "offshoot of the
> republican party", then Lincoln was a Dem. It's possible that even an
> insane person would be aware that the republican party was an offshoot
> of the Democratic party.
>
> That's your logic, GOIA. I'll expect your apology for your ergregious
> error. LOL!
>
> > > *the academics rated George Washington,
> >
> > Federalist who opposed the "Democratic-Republican" or as it is now known,
> > the Democratic party.
> >
> > > Franklin D. Roosevelt,
> >
> > Democrat.
> >
> > >Theodore Roosevelt
> >
> > Republican, then Progressive (offshoot of Republican Party)
> >
> > *and Harry Truman
> >
> > Democrat.
> >
> > As usual, ****R can't even count to two. At his purported age, that might
> > indicate some kind of mental dysfunction.
>
> Hee hee. ;-)
>
> > The true count is two democrats, two for-sure republicans, and one who was
> > definitely not a member of the Democratic Party.
>
> Um, GOIA, the "joke" was that in those days (1856-1860) the Democratic
> party was more like the republicans are now, dum-dum.
>
> Back then the Democrats were willing to allow slavery. More recently,
> the Democrats passed the Civil Rights Act.
>
> Leave it to an insane person to not sense the "joke" and miss the
> point entirely. Besides, according to your own logic, Lincoln *was* a
> Democrat. Ooooooops! LOL!

It's true that one cannot really equate the Dems or Repubs of back then
with those of today. If one thinks in terms of liberal and conservative
(in today's terms), Washington was a conservative, Lincoln a liberal,
Adams a conservative, TR a liberal, FDR a liberal, Truman an interesting
MOR.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
wrote in message

> On Feb 17, 12:08 pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
>> wrote in
>>
>>
>>> And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.
>>
>> Yeah a joke on ****R, 'cause its not true. ;-)

>>> After Lincoln,

>> "The first Republican president."

> OK, if TR is a "republican" because his party was an
> "offshoot of the
> republican party", then Lincoln was a Dem.


Bad logic. The offshoot co-existed with and competed with the Democratic
party, so it was *not* the Democratic party.

<snip remaining nonsense>

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" > wrote in message


> It's true that one cannot really equate the Dems or
> Repubs of back then with those of today.

True.

However, that sheds no light on ****R's OP false claim.

> If one thinks
> in terms of liberal and conservative (in today's terms),
> Washington was a conservative,

Or a liberal because he was a revolutionary.

> Lincoln a liberal,

Or a conservative because he favored preserving the Union.

> Adams a conservative,

Or a liberal because he favored a government bank

> TR a liberal,

Or a conservative because he favored conservation.

> FDR a liberal,

I'll grant you that one.

> Truman an interesting MOR.

That one, too.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 12:34*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> wrote in
>
> > On Feb 17, 12:08 pm, "Arny Krueger" >
> > wrote:
> >> "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" >
> >> wrote in
> >>
>
> >>> And not a republican in the bunch. LoL.
>
> >> Yeah a joke on ****R, 'cause its not true. ;-)
> >>> After Lincoln,
> >> "The first Republican president."
> > OK, if TR is a "republican" because his party was an
> > "offshoot of the
> > republican party", then Lincoln was a Dem.
>
> Bad logic. The offshoot co-existed with and competed with the Democratic
> party, so it was *not* the Democratic party.

It also competed with the republicans, Oh, Insane One. LOL!

> <snip remaining nonsense>

Reagan was a Dem too.

That is using *your* logic, GOIA. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 1:02*pm, ScottW > wrote:
> On Feb 17, 9:33*am, Jenn > wrote:

> > It's true that one cannot really equate the Dems or Repubs of back then
> > with those of today. '
>
> No evidence you're sensing the "joke".
>
> Are you insane? Or are ssshhhtards jokes really that bad?

No, she got it. Why are you so confused?

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

> > Are you insane? Or are ssshhhtards jokes really that bad?
>
> No, she got it. Why are you so confused?

ROWF! <grrrr....>

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 2:36*pm, wrote:

> *Lincoln and Grant were admirable men, Lee and Stonewall Jackson even
> more so. The real lessons of the US Civil War are not yet well
> understood, 150+ years later. I guess WWII has another century to
> mature to understanding too.

You apparently believe you understand them both.

Bratzi, I was wrong. You *do* have a sense of humor. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Feb 17, 12:38*pm, "Arny Krueger" > wrote:
> "Jenn" > wrote in message

> > It's true that one cannot really equate the Dems or
> > Repubs of back then with those of today.
>
> True.
>
> However, that sheds no light on ****R's OP false claim.

Which was true even according to your own logic, but whatever. LOL!

> > If one thinks
> > in terms of liberal and conservative (in today's terms),
> > Washington was a conservative,
>
> Or a liberal because he was a revolutionary.

In today's terms the republicans are the "conservatives" but are the
radicals.

Thanks for admitting that Jenn is smarter than you are.

> > Lincoln a liberal,
>
> Or a conservative because he favored preserving the Union.

That is irrelevant, as the President is sworn to protect the
Constitution just like us military officers.

> > Adams a conservative,
>
> Or a liberal because he favored a government bank

Or just smart.

> > TR a liberal,
>
> Or a conservative because he favored conservation.

Duh. That's the liberals today. Just ask 2pid "I can't eat everything
I want" Imbecile.

> > FDR a liberal,
>
> I'll grant you that one.
>
> > Truman an interesting MOR.
>
> That one, too.

And GOIA once again admits that Jenn is smarter than he is.

What did we learn? That Jenn cannot be GOIA's sockpuppet. LOL!