Libertarian Ranking of the Presidents - Page 9

Galileo Galilei · 12-30-2009, 03:04 PM

These "Libertarian" ratings should be re-named the Anarchy ratings.

According to these ratings, the first 7 presidents, the ones we consider Founding Fathers, were all below average, with 5 of them called failures. What a joke.

Let's look at these men:

George Washington

George Washington sacrificed most of his life for the American people. His actions as president are not that much different, just muuch less extreme than when he commanded the continental army. He sought advice of many great leaders before making decisions. He set a precedent that the Constitution was the supreme example of a limited democratic republic. There was very little corruption during his term and the Bill of Rights was ratified during his term. He made a few mistakes, but given the desperate times he lived in, they can be forgiven.

John Adams

Adams was less assertive than he should have been. But he put his foot down and averted war with France. The time of Adams was arguably the most chaotic period in our history under the Constitution. The quasi-war should be a +10, not a -10.

Thomas Jefferson

The ratings forget to mention the Lousiana Purchase, which put a great land mass under a limited Constitutional republic, rather than heathen pre-industrial anarchy of continuel civil war (The Indians had been fighting each other for thousands of years). The Lewis & Clark expedition was not mentioned either, which established friendly relations with the Indians and set a precedent for further trade with them. Jefferson also invited the leaders of may Indians tribes to the Capital. The Barabary wars were not started by Jefferson, they were started by anti-Libertarian bandits who had no reverance for property rights. The embargo act (actually pushed for by Madison) was a last ditch attempt to avoid war. Supposedly these ratings are anti-war. The embargo act should eb a +9, not a -9. The embargo act was also anti-empire, as it was aimed at a giant empire (Great Britian), so again these anarchy ratings are pro-empire.

James Madison

Madison is easily the most Libertarian president of all time for one simple reason; he is the only president to preserve the Constitution during a time of a major war. This alone makes him great. Madison set a precedent that prohibitied later presidents like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and LBJ from violating the Constitition. Because of James Madison, there is no plausible reason for ANY president to violate the Constitution EVER. If the Constitution can be followed to the letter during the greatest crisis in our history, when we were invaded by a giant empire, then it can easily be followed in peacetime and during a minor crisis.

The Madison ratings also have other gross errrors. It marks him down for creating the 2nd national bank. But Madison ended the first bank, so this should be a wash at worst. Actually, it is a plus, because the bank disappeared for 5 years, from 1811 to 1816. Also, Madison, on January 30, 1815 vetoed the 2nd national bank. This veto set a precedent (followed until 1913), of what attributes are permitable for a national bank.

Madison's veto established:

1) national banks must be temporary (violated by Fed of 1913)

2) national banks only permitable during a true national crisis, as defined by a period when the federal government does not have enough money to operate. But we have only had that happen twice; during the time of Wahington and the time fo the War of 1812. Ever since the Era of Good Feelings, the federal goverment has had plenty of money to operate, so under Madison's principles, no bank has been needed since. Jackson followed up on Madison's principle when he got rid of the bank for good in he 1830s.

(the reality is that the first national bank would never had been created had their not been an extreme real national crisis. Nor would the Founding Fathers today ever create a national bank)

3) no fiat currency (violated by Fed).

4) no banking secrecy (violated by Fed).

5) national banks must be partially publically owned [20%] (violated by Fed).

6) state banks allowed to operate independently/competition (violated by Fed).

7) corruption not tolerated in national bank. The national bank became corrupted much later under Biddle, another reason Jackson got rid of it, and another reason why national banks should always be temporary.

The ratings also mark Madison down for occupying Spanish Florida. But this land was now put under a limited democratic republic, rather than a corrput empire, so that was a good thing. The people living there also accepted it.

The Creek war was part of the War of 1812, and the Creeks were legitimate military targets, as they had allied with a corrupt empire. This is not a negative.

It also says that Madison started the War of 1812. This is false. Under the Constitution, the congress starts wars, and the president ends them. That is what happened. Madison pushed for peace negotiations from the beginning of the war. The war was started by the War Hawks, not Madison.

The War of 1812 was the shortest and had the least casualties of our major wars, due to James Madison.

The War also was a giant boom for free trade. Free trade is Libertarian, right? After the War, the Great Lakes, the Mississippi river, the Atlantic ocean, and the West Indies were open to free trade. That is what you fight for in a war, you fight for economic liberty.

Madison also ended the Barbary wars, so if Jefferson is marked down for stating them, then Madison should be rated up for ending them. But that is if you think these bogus ratings have any merit.

Madison ended his second term as the most popular president ever in the history of the United States. He started the Era of Good Feelings and exterminated the big government Federalist Party that had pushed for the alien & sedition acts.

Jamse Monroe

Monroe is one of the most under-rated presidents. He mostly followed the examples of Jefferson and Madison. He did a good job as he was re-elected by unanimous vote of the states.

The Monroe doctine is anti-Libertarian? That's a good one. It recognized the Independence of Mexico from a corrupt empire (Spain), and declared free trade in the Western Hemispere.

John Quincy Adams

By today's standards, John Quincy would be one of the best presidents of all time. He followed Monroe's lead for the most part. He could have been a little more assertive, but was one of our best educated and enlightened scholars ever to occupy thr White House.

Andrew Jackson

After making a personal sneak visit to James Madison in the summer of 1832, Jackson decided to get rid of the national bank. Jackson erroneousely belived that Madison supported a national bank, but did not understand Madison's principles until after the meeting.

Jackson was president during a time hailed by de Tocheville as a time of "Jacksonian democracy", one fo the most glorious of all time for the liberty of the average person. While the rest of the world lived under corrupt empires and monarchs, people in American had liberty. The Era of Good Feelings and Jacksonian democracy led to the people of the rest of the world to throw off the yokes of their oppressors.

All 7 of the fisrt 7 presidents were great leaders, great Founding Fathers, and great Libertarians.

I would take any of them as president over whoever wrote up these stupid presidential ratings. The people who wrote these ratings did not live in the times of the Founding Fathers, and seem to have no understanding what things were like at that time. It is a lot easier today to defend liberty than 200 years ago when we were surrounded by enemies, had a small economy, no industrial revolution yet, and few lessons of history.

Today, we have the lesson of history, including the mistakes and successes, of the Founding Fathers to learn from. The Founding Fathers had to dig through erratic records of the ancient Greeks, Romans, the Bible, and the Enlightenment to make their theories. Now their theories have been tested for our benefit.

GunnyFreedom · 12-30-2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucjason

All of you dixie-land tyrants' talking points and qoute-mining has been thouroughly discussed and countered in prior threads. I am not going to waste my time trying to convince you people , and go in circles, any longer.

So , do me a favor . Kiss my ass , K ? You are a disgrace to liberty.

And you are clearly a racist, and a segregationist.

I, for one, believe that ALL humans are created equal, and along with Martin Luther King, I share his dream that one day all people will be judged according to the content of their character and NOT based on the color of their skin.

You, however, support a racist, and support the very policies that led to segregation. That is ABHORRENT. No racist or segregationist is a friend of liberty!

You call US disgraces to liberty because we believe that all people should be EQUAL? Because we believe that slavery should have been rightfully and peacefully ABOLISHED?

Well, I call YOU a disgrace to liberty because you are a racist and a segregationist!

I have, from day one on this board excoriated white supremacists and all other forms of collectivists. My very earliest knock-down drag-out arguments on this board were to send the stormfront nazis back to their mommas with their tails between their legs.

You, you Lincolnian-segregationist, are no better than the skinheads.

Derek Johnson · 12-30-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucjason

All of you dixie-land tyrants' talking points and qoute-mining has been thouroughly discussed and countered in prior threads. I am not going to waste my time trying to convince you people , and go in circles, any longer.

So , do me a favor . Kiss my ass , K ? You are a disgrace to liberty.

No thanks on the ass-kiss, I'll pass.

Dixie-land tyrants? I'm from Iowa.

Again, refute the charges instead of weaseling away. What's wrong?

It's you that is the liberty disgrace here, you and "honest" Abe.

The Deacon · 12-30-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by heavenlyboy34

lol @ the Lincoln sycophant. ^^

I didn't know that Rush Limbaugh had an account here.

Galileo Galilei · 12-31-2009, 09:57 AM

Galileo's Law:

"As a ronpaulforums discussion grows longer, the probability of a debate involving Lincoln approaches 1."

erowe1 · 12-31-2009, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei

Galileo's Law:

"As a ronpaulforums discussion grows longer, the probability of a debate involving Lincoln approaches 1."

That's really just a corollary to a mathematical truism that's so basic it's practically a tautology. As any thread in any forum about any topic grows longer, the likelihood of a debate involving any subject approaches 1.

LDA · 12-31-2009, 11:35 AM

I guess my problem with rankings in general is that the presidents everyone knows about are the ones that "did something." Of course, a president that acted as a true libertarian would only do what was allowed under the constitution, and would not be well known for much of anything.

If we paid attention to the constitution, we wouldn't need big, sweeping reforms and huge books of legislation. It'd be very cut and dry. We wouldn't need entire TV channels to keep track of what the government was doing. There's this expectation that the government should do something if anything goes wrong, but we know that isn't the case.

Galileo Galilei · 12-31-2009, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by erowe1

That's really just a corollary to a mathematical truism that's so basic it's practically a tautology. As any thread in any forum about any topic grows longer, the likelihood of a debate involving any subject approaches 1.

That's not true. An infinite limit can have a finite value.

Bucjason · 01-04-2010, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galileo Galilei

James Madison

Madison is easily the most Libertarian president of all time for one simple reason; he is the only president to preserve the Constitution during a time of a major war. This alone makes him great. Madison set a precedent that prohibitied later presidents like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and LBJ from violating the Constitition. Because of James Madison, there is no plausible reason for ANY president to violate the Constitution EVER. If the Constitution can be followed to the letter during the greatest crisis in our history, when we were invaded by a giant empire, then it can easily be followed in peacetime and during a minor crisis.

The Madison ratings also have other gross errrors. It marks him down for creating the 2nd national bank. But Madison ended the first bank, so this should be a wash at worst. Actually, it is a plus, because the bank disappeared for 5 years, from 1811 to 1816. Also, Madison, on January 30, 1815 vetoed the 2nd national bank. This veto set a precedent (followed until 1913), of what attributes are permitable for a national bank.

Madison was also a strong federalist who wanted a poweful central government .

In the Virginia ratification debates , he even argued against a bill of rights . He was the main reason Patrick Henry's bill of rights , which was much more thorough and specific than the one we have today , was shot down. The reason our constitution has failed us today , is becuase people like Madison insisted on pushing for an imperfect document , and then trying to amend it AFTER the fact...which of course left all kinds of loopholes for the annexing of Liberty. Madison's greatest flaw is that he assumed virtuous men would always be in charge in a Republic ( not the case) , and that our rights would always be "implied".

He gets very few Libertarian kudo's in my book...

dr. hfn · 01-04-2010, 10:35 AM

bump!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-30-2009, 03:04 PM	#81
Galileo Galilei Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Middleton, WI Posts: 2,687	These "Libertarian" ratings should be re-named the Anarchy ratings. According to these ratings, the first 7 presidents, the ones we consider Founding Fathers, were all below average, with 5 of them called failures. What a joke. Let's look at these men: George Washington George Washington sacrificed most of his life for the American people. His actions as president are not that much different, just muuch less extreme than when he commanded the continental army. He sought advice of many great leaders before making decisions. He set a precedent that the Constitution was the supreme example of a limited democratic republic. There was very little corruption during his term and the Bill of Rights was ratified during his term. He made a few mistakes, but given the desperate times he lived in, they can be forgiven. John Adams Adams was less assertive than he should have been. But he put his foot down and averted war with France. The time of Adams was arguably the most chaotic period in our history under the Constitution. The quasi-war should be a +10, not a -10. Thomas Jefferson The ratings forget to mention the Lousiana Purchase, which put a great land mass under a limited Constitutional republic, rather than heathen pre-industrial anarchy of continuel civil war (The Indians had been fighting each other for thousands of years). The Lewis & Clark expedition was not mentioned either, which established friendly relations with the Indians and set a precedent for further trade with them. Jefferson also invited the leaders of may Indians tribes to the Capital. The Barabary wars were not started by Jefferson, they were started by anti-Libertarian bandits who had no reverance for property rights. The embargo act (actually pushed for by Madison) was a last ditch attempt to avoid war. Supposedly these ratings are anti-war. The embargo act should eb a +9, not a -9. The embargo act was also anti-empire, as it was aimed at a giant empire (Great Britian), so again these anarchy ratings are pro-empire. James Madison Madison is easily the most Libertarian president of all time for one simple reason; he is the only president to preserve the Constitution during a time of a major war. This alone makes him great. Madison set a precedent that prohibitied later presidents like Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, and LBJ from violating the Constitition. Because of James Madison, there is no plausible reason for ANY president to violate the Constitution EVER. If the Constitution can be followed to the letter during the greatest crisis in our history, when we were invaded by a giant empire, then it can easily be followed in peacetime and during a minor crisis. The Madison ratings also have other gross errrors. It marks him down for creating the 2nd national bank. But Madison ended the first bank, so this should be a wash at worst. Actually, it is a plus, because the bank disappeared for 5 years, from 1811 to 1816. Also, Madison, on January 30, 1815 vetoed the 2nd national bank. This veto set a precedent (followed until 1913), of what attributes are permitable for a national bank. Madison's veto established: 1) national banks must be temporary (violated by Fed of 1913) 2) national banks only permitable during a true national crisis, as defined by a period when the federal government does not have enough money to operate. But we have only had that happen twice; during the time of Wahington and the time fo the War of 1812. Ever since the Era of Good Feelings, the federal goverment has had plenty of money to operate, so under Madison's principles, no bank has been needed since. Jackson followed up on Madison's principle when he got rid of the bank for good in he 1830s. (the reality is that the first national bank would never had been created had their not been an extreme real national crisis. Nor would the Founding Fathers today ever create a national bank) 3) no fiat currency (violated by Fed). 4) no banking secrecy (violated by Fed). 5) national banks must be partially publically owned [20%] (violated by Fed). 6) state banks allowed to operate independently/competition (violated by Fed). 7) corruption not tolerated in national bank. The national bank became corrupted much later under Biddle, another reason Jackson got rid of it, and another reason why national banks should always be temporary. The ratings also mark Madison down for occupying Spanish Florida. But this land was now put under a limited democratic republic, rather than a corrput empire, so that was a good thing. The people living there also accepted it. The Creek war was part of the War of 1812, and the Creeks were legitimate military targets, as they had allied with a corrupt empire. This is not a negative. It also says that Madison started the War of 1812. This is false. Under the Constitution, the congress starts wars, and the president ends them. That is what happened. Madison pushed for peace negotiations from the beginning of the war. The war was started by the War Hawks, not Madison. The War of 1812 was the shortest and had the least casualties of our major wars, due to James Madison. The War also was a giant boom for free trade. Free trade is Libertarian, right? After the War, the Great Lakes, the Mississippi river, the Atlantic ocean, and the West Indies were open to free trade. That is what you fight for in a war, you fight for economic liberty. Madison also ended the Barbary wars, so if Jefferson is marked down for stating them, then Madison should be rated up for ending them. But that is if you think these bogus ratings have any merit. Madison ended his second term as the most popular president ever in the history of the United States. He started the Era of Good Feelings and exterminated the big government Federalist Party that had pushed for the alien & sedition acts. Jamse Monroe Monroe is one of the most under-rated presidents. He mostly followed the examples of Jefferson and Madison. He did a good job as he was re-elected by unanimous vote of the states. The Monroe doctine is anti-Libertarian? That's a good one. It recognized the Independence of Mexico from a corrupt empire (Spain), and declared free trade in the Western Hemispere. John Quincy Adams By today's standards, John Quincy would be one of the best presidents of all time. He followed Monroe's lead for the most part. He could have been a little more assertive, but was one of our best educated and enlightened scholars ever to occupy thr White House. Andrew Jackson After making a personal sneak visit to James Madison in the summer of 1832, Jackson decided to get rid of the national bank. Jackson erroneousely belived that Madison supported a national bank, but did not understand Madison's principles until after the meeting. Jackson was president during a time hailed by de Tocheville as a time of "Jacksonian democracy", one fo the most glorious of all time for the liberty of the average person. While the rest of the world lived under corrupt empires and monarchs, people in American had liberty. The Era of Good Feelings and Jacksonian democracy led to the people of the rest of the world to throw off the yokes of their oppressors. All 7 of the fisrt 7 presidents were great leaders, great Founding Fathers, and great Libertarians. I would take any of them as president over whoever wrote up these stupid presidential ratings. The people who wrote these ratings did not live in the times of the Founding Fathers, and seem to have no understanding what things were like at that time. It is a lot easier today to defend liberty than 200 years ago when we were surrounded by enemies, had a small economy, no industrial revolution yet, and few lessons of history. Today, we have the lesson of history, including the mistakes and successes, of the Founding Fathers to learn from. The Founding Fathers had to dig through erratic records of the ancient Greeks, Romans, the Bible, and the Enlightenment to make their theories. Now their theories have been tested for our benefit.

12-31-2009, 09:57 AM	#85
Galileo Galilei Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Middleton, WI Posts: 2,687	Galileo's Law: "As a ronpaulforums discussion grows longer, the probability of a debate involving Lincoln approaches 1."

12-31-2009, 11:35 AM	#87
LDA Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 183	I guess my problem with rankings in general is that the presidents everyone knows about are the ones that "did something." Of course, a president that acted as a true libertarian would only do what was allowed under the constitution, and would not be well known for much of anything. If we paid attention to the constitution, we wouldn't need big, sweeping reforms and huge books of legislation. It'd be very cut and dry. We wouldn't need entire TV channels to keep track of what the government was doing. There's this expectation that the government should do something if anything goes wrong, but we know that isn't the case.

01-04-2010, 10:35 AM	#90
dr. hfn Senior Member Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 5,319	bump!