Monday, January 19, 2009
Politics / Presidential Politics George W: How He Stacks Up Against the Worst Presidents
Posted by Matt Sullivan on Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 1:46 PM
James Buchanan:
The president preceding Abraham Lincoln espoused policies that exacerbated the divides between an already polarized nation. Elected in one of the most contentious elections in American history amid dubious terms, Bush's proclamation to lead as a uniter rang hollow as his faction of the Republican party exercised no qualms in steering political discourse away from policy and toward irrelevant wedge issues. To his credit, Bush did not hasten the coming of any civil wars--at least not domestically. Bush beats Buchanan
Ulysses S. Grant:
The scandal-spawning croneyism that defined Grant's administration distracted attention from much needed Southern reconstruction after the Civil War. The croneyism within the Bush administration led to attempts to politicize the Justice Department, de-legitimizing already questionable legal practices toward "enemy combatants." Grant pushed the strongest legislation in history up to his tenure in regards to African American human rights. Grant beats Bush.
Warren G. Harding:
The most infamous presidential scandal outside of Watergate occurred during the Harding Administration, but knowledge of the Teapot Dome scandal didn't surface until after the president's death. Essentially, one of Harding's cabinet members sold oil rights for land owned by the government for kickbacks. Similarly, questionable no-bid contracts in Iraq were awarded to Halliburton, a corporation for which Dick Cheney formerly worked. Harding was notorious for bad grammar and run-on sentences. The word "normalcy" exists in our lexicon because Harding didn't know to use the word normality. The word "Bushism" is synonymous with poor public speaking. Bush vs. Harding is a tie.
Richard Nixon:
Nixon's infamously closed-off White House domestically spied on citizens without warrants, conducted illegal deals with foreign leaders during the Vietnam War, and authorized the break-in of Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate office complex, to name just a handful of available scandals. The Bush White House has similarly cloaked the executive branch in attempts to control the knowledge behind the rationale to invade Iraq and information pertaining to detainee torture, eliminating and/or inhibiting constitutional checks and balances on the branch. Nixon opened diplomatic relations with Communist China, rallied the passage of the Equal Rights Act, accelerated the desegregation of schools, and implemented a successful economic program that controlled inflation during the earliest part of the '70s. Nixon beats Bush.
Of these four who usually fill the
bottom of historians' lists of presidents, Bush is at least
better than one of them. I didn't include Hoover because history
hasn't been particularly fair to him. Had FDR been president when the
depression hit, you likely would've wanted someone like Hoover to
elect.
But Bush's legacy will likely find more favorability among historians than those of Franklin Pierce, Millard Fillmore, and, by default, William Henry Harrison (Harrison died a month after his inauguration). For those keeping score, that ties George W. Bush for the fifth worst president in American history.
Comments (9)
Showing 1-9 of 9
What about Truman - remember something called the Vietnam war?
What about Clinton - one of the few presidents lucky enough to be impeached?
What about Carter - destroyed the economy and couldn't deal with the Iranian hostage situation.
like
dislike
"What about Truman - remember something called the Vietnam war?"
Truman had nothing to do with the Vietnam war. Truman was in office during Korea and the end of WWII.
The Vietnam War was an extension of the containment policies set forth by the Truman Administration, but yes, Kennedy's actions are the ones that directly involved the U.S. in Vietnam.
One should feel free to vilify Truman for dropping two atomic bombs on Japan.
Hey Phil,
Not only was George W. Bush the worst president in our country's history, he was also a piece of absolute human trash.
His ego and insecurities have lead the way to over 4,000 armed forces deaths, possibly hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi deaths, and a country in the midst of economic collapse.
You see, unlike some, I don't look at this man and see a really nice guy. What I see is a spoiled, arrogant, indifferent troll who can put on a pleasant facade to most, then turns around and stabs them when they're not looking.
Stubborness is not strength. Ignorance is not strength. Misdirected anger is not strength. This subhuman garbage doesn't deserve anyone's good graces.
I wonder if Dumbya will be most reviled by Republicans. Until 2000 or so, The GOP was the party of Ronald Reagan. Now, the Grand Old Party is the party of G. W. Bush and will be for years. Whether he was the cause or not, the US is in the poorest shape in living memory. The point was well made that the highly-vaunted GOP party discipline may have been too much for its own good. (Note to GOP: think Nazis, Bolsheviks, Thatcher.)
Where can the GOP go from here? It's hard to tell. I am a card-carrying liberal and proud of it, but without the Republicans as a counterpoise the democrats will make mistakes.
"Subhuman garbage--troll" Hansen? Oh my. That could even be construed as to be racist old boy.
I agree, Ole' G. W. is spoiled and arrogant. After all, what would one expect given his upbringing. But, he offed Saddam, who tried to off his daddy--something to be remarked upon. (Just ask anybdy-redneck or liberal- who watched as his sire endured deathly attack.)
However many thousand dead as a result of the action are nothing more than trivia to the ruling class: who by the way are responsible for halving the price of gasoline; one of whom is Barak, the anointed. And it remains to be seen what the consequences of the gatherings of rulers at 'the Grove,' Geneva, Stockholm, DC, or wherever become.
Whatever the outcome, of one thing we can be certain: we common folk will not be primary to their decision making. Power is what it is all about, Bubba. And to quote Josh Ewing: power is not given. You take it!
Now that President Bush will become officially 'former' a little after 12 noon today, I will answer the 'Was GW Bush the worst president' question with the 'Gore lost Tennessee in 2000' answer. He had his entire campaign headquarters in Nashville and, apparently, attempts were made to approach him personally with the news flash that the comically weak playboy Bush was kicking his a## in both the entire eastern section and rural areas of the state. He or his so-called 'brain' trust advisers chose to ignore or dismiss the warning, and we all know what happened on November 4 and thereafter.
In the end, to quote those well known group of social philosophers Fleetwood Mac, oh well.
Conslor, I'm not sure of what point you're trying to make. Bush wasn't bad because he beat Gore?
The point is that Gore was bad because he lost his home state and the electoral vote advantage that would have made him the 43rd President of the United States, regardless of the true vote tally in Florida. Even George McGovern won South Dakota in 1972. What makes it even worse is that he was warned of what was happening and still did little or nothing to prevent the outcome. What makes it even more worse is that Bush used his victory here and the Supremes' assistance with Florida to, oh well, we all know what happened....
