I've been so busy with this HillDog/Annie Oakley and Obama's Ivory tower comments... (oh, that's so deliciously full of irony and wit - maybe I can make it as an AP Writer someday?!) that I haven't been paying attention to everyone's favorite Lame Duck.US NEWS and World Report speculated that Bush isn't just doin' a heck of a job - he might even be one of the worst Presidents in our history.
"an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted by the History News Network. It found that 98 percent of them believe that Bush's presidency has been a failure, while only about 2 percent see it as a success. Not only that, more than 61 percent of the historians say the current presidency is the worst in American history."I disagree. There are PLENTY of WORSE Presidents out there.
Let's look at today's news (pops a window), where a certain former US President was refused protection for all the great work he did for their country? That's one hell of a fantastic legacy Mr. Carter!
"Speaking at an event organized by an Israeli financial newspaper, Carter said Monday that he wanted to become a “communicator” between Hamas and the U.S.Good old Jimmy Carter. He's meeting with and actively seeking the job as a mouthpiece of an organization that's mission statement is simply "KILL teh JEWS."
“I hope then the Israeli government will deign to meet with me — they have so far refused,” he said."
But given Jimmy and all his flaws, he's still no where NEAR the WORST President of all time.
No, the worst US President, of all time? That distinction should go to James Buchanan, Jr. Buchanan had a chance to stop the Civil War! Under his watch we had the Dred Scott Decision, Bleeding Kansas, a massive financial panic that makes today's little mortgage crisis look like a lost ATM card. He sent the Army to Utah to kill Brigham Young - but held them back when South Carolina seceded from the Union. He simply felt he didn't have the authority. Letting your country fall into a Civil War? Yeah, you're pretty much the worst President.
Number two on my list - and it was tough -Warren G. Harding. Teapot Dome, The Ohio Gang, possible ties to the Klan... all kinds of Fail there! Whew.Harding is reputed to have said: “I have no trouble with my enemies, but my damn friends, my God-damned friends… they’re the ones that keep me walking the floor nights!”
Number three? Who's the Imperialist who wished to take Cuba by force, and who's Secretary of War cabinet member - Jefferson Davis actively fugged up the Missouri Compromise forcing the dreaded Kansas-Nebraska Act? If you said dough faced Franklin Pierce, you're right! You may have recognized the name Jefferson Davis as the future President of the Confederacy?
Four on my list - Richard Milhous Nixon. Where do you start with old "Tricky Dick"? Operation Menu- which was the bombing of Cambodia? Watergate? Impeachment? Resignation? Spiro Agnew? Expanding the reach of the Federal government? Instituting 55 miles per hour? Crippling NASA's Moon Base plans? His anti-Semite views, his enemies list... or all of the above?Five - Andrew Johnson. Failed Reconstruction policies, and not one but TWO impeachment attempts. Johnson was a poor politician who could not build coalitions and was doomed to fail. He is saved only by "Seward's Folly" or "Seward's Icebox" AKA "Icebergia" since it proved to be full of oil and polar bears.
Six - US Grant. As a General, he saved the Union. As President, corruption, scandals and lies - not by him, per say - but by the people he hired to advise him. Like the failures of Pierce, Grant surrounded himself with people he didn't know - and people who took great advantage of their positions. The Gold speculation scandal known as Black Friday, The Whiskey Ring the Sanborn Incident, General Order No. 11, among just the first few that come to mind. What keeps Grant from being higher on the list of worst is that he kept the US out of foreign wars and actually helped broker peace on a few of those foreign wars. Oh, and the S? Totally made up.
Seven - Herbert Hoover. Hoover promised: "We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land." Within months, the Stock Market Crash of 1929. Ooops. Hoover agreed to one of the largest tax increases in American history. The Revenue Act of 1932. He taxed the shiznit out of everybody. Other electoral liabilities were Hoover's lack of charisma in relating to voters, and his poor skills in working with politicians. That's a fail.
Eight - I could say William Henry Harrison - mostly because he died right after coming into office -- but how much damage can one cause when you're only around for 31 days after oath of office? His death caused a Constitutional Crisis.... and John Tyler didn't do much to stop it. Among his many nicknames, "His Accidency" pretty much sums up the thoughts of the day. Tyler was also has the distinction of being our first President to considered for impeachment for a veto... and he Vetoed EVERYTHING. He also annexed the Republic of Texas -- which depending on how you feel about this -- could raise or lower his ranking.
Nine - Tough one. Millard Fillmore - who was the second President to take over since Zack Taylor died in office. Fillmore signed the Fugitive Slave Act, which basically destroyed the Whig party. Took down his party with that one.Yeah, you're a pretty bad politician when you take out your party. Not just out of power -- but from existence.
Ten - James Garfield? Being named after an unfunny lasagna eating cat isn't enough to be named on this list. Being assassinated after only 6 months and a couple days in office also isn't enough to be put on the list. It was his Vice President, Chester A. Arthur who should take number 10. Upon entering the presidency, he believed that the only way to garner the nation's approval was to be independent. Well, you can imagine how popular that was - he pissed off EVERYBODY. He did such a poor job, he lost the Republican party's nomination - and then they lost to Grover. Grover Cleveland - not the Muppet... that would be humiliating.Hey, what about : Gerald Ford or Jimmy Carter? - while both equally terrible - didn't let the country fall into a Civil War or create a Constitutional Crisis. Bill Clinton? It's been said that he's tarnishing his Presidential legacy while on the campaign trail for Hillary. What legacy? The one where he lied about beejays and being soft on Arab terrorists while being hard as nails with domestic ones (Waco, Texas)? (not Ruby Ridge - that was George H. Bush* Thanks anonymous caller!)
Perhaps worst post-Presidential legacy could be a new list?
Jimmy, I think you're leading the pack!
UPDATE: 2.15.09: (the New! Historians picks)
I liked your evaluation of the nations worst presidents. I myself would have include Andrew Jackson (Trail of Tear: American Genocide). However, I do not agree with your last statement. Jimmy Carter has done a lot of good for not only the nation, but the world since leaving office. So he talked to a few crazies. What harm came out of that?
ReplyDeleteHow can I believe your rankings when you can't get your facts straight? You credit/blame the shootout at Ruby Ridge on Bill Clinton. I would love to know how Bill Clinton had any involvement in Ruby Ridge one way or the other, when the events there started in August of 1992, and Bill Clinton didn't assume office until January 20, 1993?
ReplyDeleteWonderful! Whenever people talk about (insert name of current president at any time) being the 'worst', I always pull out my historian hat. I usually rank Pierce #1, but Buchanan works well, too.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the true mark of a presidency is not even able to be evaluated until at least 50 years past, and preferably close to a hundred. Already, Kennedy's 'golden Camelot' image is becoming tarnished by those not deifying him because he was assassinated. And historians are looking more closely at 4 timer Roosevelt. In the harsh light of hindsight, even Washington is less a paragon.
So, immense kudos to you for saying what I've often said in conversation.
There's all kinds of errors! Just look on the Fark discussion board of this post - http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=3539977&ok=1686138172
ReplyDeleteYou'll see I don't know that Dread Scott was ACTUALLY two days after Buchanan took office... but I'm not wrong to suggest that it was up to HIS administration to enforce the decision.
And I fixed that Ruby Ridge thing - sorry bout that. 2-26-03 Was on Clinton's watch...
In the words of Ralph Wiggum, "William Henry Harrison: I died in thirty days!"
ReplyDeleteIt was thirty one, really, but let's not hold it against Ralph.
While these presidents were indeed terrible, I think Bush deserves a high spot, if not the highest. Aside from Carter, all of these presidents presided over a pre-super power US, and for all their incompetence and blunders, did not have nearly the same influence as our current president. They would be hard pressed to throw into two wars in a hotbed region in a scant few years, one of which is largely perceived as unjust domestically and abroad, or to have such powerful national effects as Bush has wielded through his unprecedented power of administration argued via executive privilege, signing statements, etc.
ReplyDeleteWe'd be fortunate to have Bush in the 1800s instead of now, when he can do so much harm, but alas, we're stuck with him.
You are full of shit. Like most leftists, the ones you think are great are the worst. Lincoln ran his administration like a military dictatorship. he destroyed federalism, the beginning of the end for our (former) republic. Woodrow Wilson was the worst. He allowed himself to be blackmailed into entering the european war, thus making it a "World war." He signed into law the Federal Reserve
ReplyDeletesystem, which he admitted later "I have ruined my country." FDR entered another european war. (Both "world wars" were started by the American president, because they would have remained European wars without America's entry). LBJ belongs on the list of "worst" presidents. He allowed Israel to attack and kill American servicemen
and refused to allow them to be rescued because he didn't want to embarrass an ally (Israel)That makes him Number One on my worst list. Let's see: 1-Wilson, 2-FDR, 3, LBJ, 4-Lincoln,that leaves our present stooge in the White House coming in at fifth worst.
By the way, Janet Reno was the attorney general responsible for Ruby Ridge. Bill Clinton, not H.W. Bush, appointed Janet Reno. I saw Randy Weaver's lawyer, Gerry Spence, being interviewed by Tom Brokaw. Spence told Brokaw to tell Ms.Reno the federal government committed murder.
ReplyDeleteHow can you say that Bill Clinton was soft on terrorism? Robert Oakley served as ambassador for counterterrorism in the Reagan State Department and praised Clinton's administration saying to the Washington Post "Overall, I give them very high marks... The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama, which made him stronger" Oakley's successor, Paul Bremer, who is also the civilian administrator in Iraq told the Post that he believed Clinton "correctly focused on bin Laden"
ReplyDeleteRather than start a war in a foreign country after the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, which occured 38 days after Clinton took office, he arrested the terrorists involved. Holy gee! He then went on to thwart plots to kill the pope, blow up twelve U.S. jetliners simultaneously, attack the UN Headquarters, the FBI building, the Israeli embassy in Washington, the LA and Bostonairports, the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels and the George Washington Bridge.
Clinton tripled the counterterrorism budget for the FBI and doubled counterterrorism funding overall. He rolled up al Qaeda cells in more than twenty countries. He created a top level national security post to coordinate all federal counterterrorism activity.
His first and second crime bills contained loads of antiterrorism legislature.
After our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed, Clinton ordered the assassination of bin Laden. How is that being soft on terrorism?
After the attack on the USS Cole, Clinton put Richard Clarke in charge of coming up with a comprehensive plan to take out al Qaeda which was thoroughly ignored by the Bush administration. As a senior Bush official told Time magazine, Clarke's plan amounted to "everything we've done since 9/11"
I put this together in 8 minutes. Maybe this is why you won't make it as an AP Writer someday?!
Sorry, but Ruby Ridge happened under George H.W. Bush. The firefight and standoff started on August 21, 1992. Here's the damned DOJ report outlining the entire thing. I have no idea where you are pulling the 2-26-03 date from.
ReplyDeleteThe ensuing trial happened in 1993, but the shooting and events leading up to it happened five months prior to Clinton assuming office. Atty General Reno's only role in the matter was that she commissioned a task force to review BATF's and the U.S. Marshall Service's handling of the situation and produce a report, AFTER she took office. She was still in Florida at the time of the Ruby Ridge shootings.
http://www.justice.gov/opr/readingroom/rubyreportcover_39.pdf
Here's a quote from the 600+ page report: "Another area of investigative inquiry focuses on the efforts of the Marshals Service to apprehend Weaver. These efforts culminated in the August 21, 1992 gun battle at Ruby Ridge which took the lives of Deputy Marshal William Degan and Weaver's son, Sammy Weaver."
Yeah - I fixed that Ruby Ridge thing, moving on...
ReplyDelete2-26-03, Mr. Anonymous history person, was the first WTC bombing that failed to achieve the objective of knocking tower one into tower two in the middle of the day. They missed the main support by 5-7 mm.
I have real problems with Bill's administration and his follow up of that attack, and others, and more importantly his half-assed pursuit of the foreign terrorists in CONTRAST to those domestically.
My point, that you have failed to grock, Madam, was that Bill treated foreign enemies to trials, and once even threw some rockets into the desert - But if you were a domestic enemy - He just BURNNED YOUR HOUSE DOWN....
To Herman King:
ReplyDeleteYou, sir, know exactly what you are talking about. Being the one responsible for emancipation of black slaves and the end to the civil war would certainly be qualifications on my list for worst president. As would be making the decision to get involved in stopping the Nazi war machine which led to the ending of one of the worst genocides in the history of the planet.
I hope my sarcasm is palpable, you brain-dead idiot.
Mr. Anonymous History Person here,
ReplyDeleteFirst, I apologize for mistaking your post for another, I only saw you had changed to put Ruby Ridge under G.H.W.B.'s watch AFTER I had made my second post. Secondly, I'm not a "madam."
\My confusion as to part of your response is related to the fact , you were referencing 2-26-03 as a date of some import and I now realize you intended to reference 2-26-93 (Obviously Clinton was in office in 1003, while "W" was in office in 2003.)
Ok, now to the substance of your last post and the "real problems" you have with Clinton's follow up on that attack. What exactly do you have a problem with? Is the problem that every known member of the cell who planned and carried out the attack is either in US Federal prison or dead? Is the problem the fact that working with Pakistani authorities, FBI agents tracked and arrested some of the plotters on the street in Pakistan?
I don't know how you can say that the efforts were "half-assed" when all of the known participants were caught, convicted and/or killed. What more could one possibly do?
Clinton in that round of things, responding to something that happened less than a week into his administration, did in less than 2 years, what George W. Bush seems to be incapable of doing in nearly 7 years, and that is actually catch the big fish and the actual bombers and bring them to justice.
My bad, I meant to write 1993 in reference to Clinton's term.
ReplyDeleteYou know what, Anonymous, give me your detailed and researched list (show your work) and I'll post it and add pictures and give you the credit to discredit my list.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to guess that your list will only include Republicans, and most who have served in the last 50 years... Which was the point of the absurd point of listing terrible presidents.
What was lost on the whole discussion is that NO HISTORIAN would answer the Question -- as it should be seen as obtuse to judge "history" from the vantage point of the tip of your nose.
Godbless
Jimmy Carter shouldn't even be considered a worst president.
ReplyDeleteHe just wasn't that good. He was honest, and at the time, the American public didn't like honesty.
If anything, Reagan was worse than Mr. Carter. With Reagan came an unprecedented huge schism between the rich and the poor.
As well, you can't expect Carter to be an amazing president. He was brought into a legacy of Watergate, Vietnam, and worsening Middle Eastern conditions.
And, those 2% of historians who say that Bush's presidency is a success are the Cheney's, Rumsfield's, and Rove's of America.
I cannot argue that Bush was a terrible president because he was. However, for everyone that says Bush should be on the top of this list, you are being far too biased. How can you say Bush is worse than someone who was unable to prevent the Civil War, someone who's entire cabinent was corrupt, or someone who put the U.S. into the Great Depression. Sure, he is no where near the great presidents list, but many of Bush's failures pale in comparison to the blunders of these men.
ReplyDeleteEasy: Obama.
ReplyDelete