Reply With Quote
eh I think jimmy carter still has him beat.... lol
Wow!
While I don't agree with this administration on a number of issues, it never occurred to me that this might be the worst administration in history.
IS GEORGE BUSH THE WORST PRESIDENT -- EVER? By Richard Reeves
Fri Dec 2, 8:13 PM ET
Yahoo! News
PARIS -- President John F. Kennedy was considered a historian because of his book "Profiles in Courage," so he received periodic requests to rate the presidents, those lists that usually begin "1. Lincoln, 2. Washington ..."
But after he actually became president himself, he stopped filling them out.
"No one knows what it's like in this office," he said after being in the job. "Even with poor James Buchanan, you can't understand what he did and why without sitting in his place, looking at the papers that passed on his desk, knowing the people he talked with."
Poor James Buchanan, the 15th president, is generally considered the worst president in history. Ironically, the Pennsylvania Democrat, elected in 1856, was one of the most qualified of the 43 men who have served in the highest office. A lawyer, a self-made man, Buchanan served with some distinction in the House, served as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and secretary of state under President James K. Polk. He had a great deal to do with the United States becoming a continental nation -- "Manifest Destiny," war with Mexico, and all that. He was also ambassador to Great Britain and was offered a seat on the Supreme Court three separate times.
But he was a confused, indecisive president, who may have made the Civil War inevitable by trying to appease or negotiate with the South. His most recent biographer, Jean Clark, writing for the prestigious American Presidents Series, concluded this year that his actions probably cons uted treason. It also did not help that his administration was as corrupt as any in history, and he was widely believed to be sexual.
Whatever his sexual preferences, his real failures were in refusing to move after South Carolina announced secession from the Union and attacked Fort Sumter, and in supporting both the legality of the pro-slavery cons ution of Kansas and the Supreme Court ruling in the Dred Scott class declaring that escaped slaves were not people but property.
He was the guy who in 1861 passed on the mess to the first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln. Buchanan set the standard, a tough record to beat. But there are serious people who believe that George W. Bush will prove to do that, be worse than Buchanan. I have talked with three significant historians in the past few months who would not say it in public, but who are saying privately that Bush will be remembered as the worst of the presidents.
There are some numbers. The History News Network at George Mason University has just polled historians informally on the Bush record. Four hundred and fifteen, about a third of those contacted, answered -- maybe they were all crazed liberals -- making the project as unofficial as it was interesting. These were the results: 338 said they believed Bush was failing, while 77 said he was succeeding. Fifty said they thought he was the worst president ever. Worse than Buchanan.
This is what those historians said -- and it should be noted that some of the criticism about deficit spending and misuse of the military came from self-identified conservatives -- about the Bush record:
He has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend and foe alike in the process;
He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive military spending and reduced taxation of the rich;
He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and state;
He has repeatedly "misled," to use a kind word, the American people on affairs domestic and foreign;
He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and foreign (Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida);
He has sacrificed American employment (including the toleration of pension and benefit elimination) to increase overall productivity;
He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress;
He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic's oldest problems, corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.
Quite an indictment. It is, of course, too early to evaluate a president. That, historically, takes decades, and views change over times as results and impact become more obvious. Besides, many of the historians note that however bad Bush seems, they have indeed since worse men around the White House. Some say Buchanan. Many say Vice President Cheney.
Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback
eh I think jimmy carter still has him beat.... lol
I'm sure alot of people stopped reading at "PARIS".
Pretty stupid poll -- I expect better from GMU.
interesting how you dismiss the article even though it poses very valid points
in my lifetime there is no doubt
I dismiss it becuase it's completely ridiculous for any historian worth his sheepskin to rate a president in a historical context two full years before that president even leaves office.
Truman would've gotten more than his fair share of "worst ever" votes in 1950. Look at him now.
I'm no fan of Bush, but this is more of a stunt by the HNN than anything. The issues raised are nothing new.
a stunt such as gay marriage on ballots of states where it is already illegal
You make a valid point. W still has two year to solidify that "worst-president ever" designation.
Exactly. Why jump the gun?
yeah but afterwards he'll be regarded in a better light than Reagan and we all know Reagan became the greatest president ever a few years ago
can you imagine in 20 years if we have a more conservative president, Bush has alhzhiemers and then he dies during the peak of yuppieass white couples naming their kids Bush
he'd be like the Steven McGee of Presidents
Finally, someone with a sense of humor.
As far as i have been alive. the worst. by far.
Yeah!!
Well seeing how you've only had two administritations to judge by...
Dubya couldn't say it better himself
On the contrary, I believe that President Bush will be regarded as a very great president with the passage of time and when current events are evaluated from a historical standpoint.
What accomplishments will people point to when describing the Bush presidency as great?
Anyone heard of William Henry Harrison?
The only guy he killed was himself.
He shorted himself then.
Well the only decision I know of Harrison making was not to wear an overcoat to deliver the longest inagural speech in American history outside in the cold wind.
As far as that goes, I suppose one could say his decisions were 100% bad.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 12-05-2005 at 02:16 PM.
mmm don't know. But he is definitely the most dumb-looking president ever.
The only guy he killed was himself.
I guess if that's the criteria, then he has to be somewhere on the list...
I guess since you base presidents on looks you must have the "sexiest presidents of all time" list in your possesion
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
