Worst President Ever?

I just spent a few days at Yale University with about 25 scholars, talking about slavery, freedom, emancipation, and modern problems of human trafficking. Not surprisingly, at dinner someone asserted that George W. Bush was the "worst" president in American history. That led me to think about the criteria for such a title or award.

I have heard this said about every president since Lyndon B. Johnson (or Lying B. Johnson as we used to call him -- the man who invented the credibility gap). Johnson - he of the Great Society and the Civil Rights Act -- looks pretty good these days. Even Vietnam seemed to have more of a purpose than Iraq. But, with more that 55,000 Americans killed and maybe a million Vietnamese, it is hard to argue that Iraq, at least at first glance, is a greater catastrophe than Vietnam. But, historians know that we need some perspective on these things. In the first half of this year the United States imported $1.8 billion worth of clothing from Vietnam. Last year a close friend of mine went there for vacation and got to shoot AK-47s in front of a tunnel from the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Our enemies are now our trading partners who also provide us with entertaining vacations. Soon they will be our friends. So, if all is well that ends well, Vietnam was not the catastrophe we thought it was at the time. But I lost classmates there for no good reason, and however it turned out, at the time it was a huge mess. I was wearing a shirt that said made in Vietnam the other night when I was approached by a homeless vet from that war. We have surely not fully recovered from the War and for some Americans and many Vietnamese there will never be a recovery. The good of civil rights, Head Start, and a host of other great programs may in the end balance out the bad of Vietnam. Johnson was not the greatest president since World War II, although absent Vietnam he might have been. But surely he was not our worst.

Nixon was a crook and surely a threat to the Constitution, but in the end the system prevailed. He left office, his henchmen went to jail, and we tried to reform the political system. Meanwhile, we got the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and even the War Powers Act. Nixon opened up China and began the process that led to peace between Israel and Egypt after the Yom Kippur War. He also kept Vietnam going for more than six years after he said he had a "plan" to end the War. A lot of young men died for no good reason there while Nixon was figuring out what that plan was.

Ford and Carter were so-so at best. Ford was hardly in office long enough to do anything, although at the last minute he tried to send more troops to Vietnam. His greatest legacy was Justice John Paul Stevens. He pardoned Nixon which for many was unforgivable and also pardoned draft evaders, which for many was unforgivable. Carter was barely competent in the White House and the best we can say for him is that he did not start a war with Iran. He was mean spirited, sanctimonious and politically inept. He did not do much that we remember fondly, but somehow managed to get us through four years of drifting policy and sometimes absurdly high inflation. He set the Democratic Party back a decade at least.

Reagan looks less bad over time, except for his politicization of the Courts. He was genial even though his policies were mean spirited and in the end harmful to those who have the least in society. He thought he ended the cold war -- and maybe in another fifty years we will have access to the documentation to prove or disprove the argument. The first Bush had the good sense not to send the army into Baghdad and to overthrow Saddam. He bequeathed us David Souter and Clarence Thomas -- sort of wash! Bill Clinton brought us prosperity and Monica Lewinsky. Not a great president but surely not the worst of the lot, despite what the professional Clinton haters would have us believe.

Now there is George the Second. In many ways he is far worse than any of his immediate predecessors. It is true that Iraq has not cost us as many lives as Vietnam, but it is also true that there was even less of a reason to start this war than to go into Vietnam. We sent troops to Vietnam because a friendly government asked us to, and because everyone believed in the domino theory of the spread of communism. The first troops went in under Eisenhower, and Kennedy expanded them a little. There was never a plan to turn it into a war, it just sort of happened, gradually, a few troops here, a few there.

Iraq is different. Not since we fought Mexico in 1846 or maybe the war against Spain in 1898, has the United States ever wanted to start a war. But from day one of the Bush administration the president and his advisors were looking for an excuse to go to war with Iraq. No one knows why. Did they really believe there were weapons on mass destruction? It is hard to imagine they could have in the face of so much intelligence to the contrary. It was not to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq -- that explanation came later. It might have been over oil, although we surely could have bought all the oil for much less than the war cost. It was not over 9-11 because the idea of a war in Iraq was in place before 9-11, and everyone knew that Al Qaeda hated Saddam as much or more as it hated the United States. If we were looking to avenge 9-11 we should have invaded Saudi Arabia, where all those terrorists came from. Possibly we invaded Iraq to avenge the insults Saddam had made to Bush's father. Some day we may better understand the administration's thinking -- or lack of thought -- in starting this war. Many of us knew the war was pointless from day one, but Bush pushed forward.

The wars with Mexico and Spain had clear goals, they were quickly won, and they when they were over we had acquired new lands and destroyed an old colonial empire. There is no end in sight for Iraq, no enemy to defeat - or to make peace with - and nothing apparently to be gained from the war. It is surely our worst foreign policy adventure since Vietnam and may end up being our worst foreign policy adventure ever.

But unlike Johnson, Bush will have no other accomplishments to redeem his presidency. He has not led the nation to new concepts of justice or civil rights. He squandered a huge budget surplus and left us with monstrous debts. Under his watch the rich are richer than ever; the poor are poorer than they have been since the Great Depression. All positive social indicators are down. Internationally the United States has never been so disrespected. We have seen an American administration perpetuate torture and defend its use, making the United States seem barbaric to the rest of the world. Indeed, we have never been hated by so many people in so many places.

What happens after Bush leaves office will in some ways determine his place in history. If the next president figures out how to extricate us from Iraq and how to repair our image abroad, Bush will, ironically, not look so bad. One test of a failed presidency is how quickly the nation recovers from the damage and how much the damage cost. By this standard, Bush is likely to be the worst president since World War II, because it will take us so much longer to recover from his misguided foreign policy and his domestic policy of callousness and greed.

Having said all this, my guess is that Bush will be remembered as the third worst president in history. The highest place of dishonor will still belong to James Buchanan. Under his administration the United States shrank - as seven states declared themselves out of the Union while he was in office. He did nothing to stop or even discourage them for doing so. Rather, he presided over the collapse of the nation and seemed to favor the outcome. If any president could have been tried for treason, it might be Buchanan. While the South talked of secession he authorized the shipment of arms to southern states for their militias. We might have avoided a civil war (at least at that time) if Buchanan had acted forcefully and confronted or even negotiated with the secessionists. Instead, he did nothing. Even if the war had come, different policies by Buchanan would have enabled the United States to win the war faster and with fewer lives lost.

The second spot will still belong to Andrew Johnson. His racism and incompetence encouraged the rise of white terrorism after the Civil War and undermined the freedom of former slaves. He pardoned former Confederate leaders without exacting some sort of support for black freedom or reunion. He vetoed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Freedmen's Bureau Act and refused to fully enforce them when passed over his veto. Thus, he prevented the implementation of a Reconstruction that might have altered race relations and protected black liberty and the safety and lives of southern unionists. He turned his back on U.S. Army veterans when they were shot down by southern white extremists and terrorists. It took the nation a hundred years to recover from Johnson's unwillingness to support black freedom in the wake of slavery.

In a few years -- or a few decades -- will learn the full extent of the damage of George Bush's presidency. Meanwhile, we can probably say with some certainty that he is the worst president of our lifetimes, even if you are old enough to have lived through Warren G. Harding and Herbert Hoover. He has surely carved out a space for himself that will get him lots of coverage in the history books. It will probably not be the coverage he would like.

Comments

[doug108]

Speaking of being tried for treason, Bush/Cheney make that grade easily. Lying your countrymen into war? Yeah, I'd say that qualifies as treasonous.

And when the Iraq debacle finally runs its course and some normal lifestyle returns, it will not be to George Bush's credit. No war or anything else lasts forever. The man has to be judged by what he's done, what he knew when he did it, his motivations, and the devastation he's wrought. Not the fact that, in the end, Saddam won't be around and the Iraqis managed to scrape and claw and get their lives back after an illegal, unnecessary war that has cost hundreds of thousands of lives.

[JimLarkin]

bush has single handedly obviated godwin's law

[Vajara]

Hey, why do you pundits continue to measure a war by the body count. There are many more soldiers and civilians injured mentally, physically, and emotionally that are rarely counted. How about the collateral damaged caused by our war and the private army? The families of the service members who serve several tours of duty are suffering in ways that you will never comprehend, especially if you don't talk with them. Our country has been divided for 7 years and our allies know we are useless and destructive as a nation. Who in their right mind would ever trust our Administration again? Our other resources are stretched beyond our sight for repair and rarely does anyone discuss the vast quantities of petroleum used to continue this religious war.

Come on, do tell the whole story if you wish to paint a real picture of this disgusting president-vice president and their total destruction of our American dream.

[NotWaldo]

Bush will be remembered for 9/11, Katrina, Abu Ghraib, torture, a broken military, renditions, a monstruous debt ... and the biggest mistake in history, Iraq :

“The one endeavour at which Islamic people excel is expelling imperial powers by terror and guerrilla war. They drove the Brits out of Palestine and Aden, the French out of Algeria, the Russians out of Afghanistan, the Americans out of Somalia and Beirut, the Israelis out of Lebanon. We have started up the road to empire and over the next hill we will meet those who went before.”

Pat Buchanan, The American Conservative, 2002

[psylocke99]

More than being worries about what kind of legacy the president will have after he leaves office(if he even leaves, there is still time for marshall law folks. Does anybody else out there have a vision of 'Lil Bush crying and screaming holding onto the the door frame refusing to leave, kinda like an 8 year old that doesn't want to do what he's told?) Anyway,I'm more interested in America's legacy after he's gone. How many years will it take us to undo the contempt and disgust that the rest of the world has for us, now? If, that is, we can elect a leader who can even begin to usher us out of this dark age Bush&co have lead us into.Any of you whom have traveled abroad know exactly what i'm saying. WE not our administration are not liked, the people around the world find US just as evil as Bush beacause we(congress)are not doing anything to hold these crooks acountable. IMPEACHMENT and tried for war crimes is about the only way to restore our place in the world, if its even possible

[avergejoe]

His neozioncon masters, who control msm, will have their minions, like bechloss, talk in glowing terms - like they talk of #2 worst, truman.

[lovethesinner]

Paul,
Only a real baseball fan could look at Bush's record that way. (I'd rather hear what you think about Joe Torre moving to the Dogers... but...)

George Bush is the worst president of all time because he's managed to do the exact same thing that Buchanan and Jackson did, simultaneously.

As you said about Buchanan, Bush has "presided over the collapse of the nation and seemed to favor the outcome." The collapse was to our system of checks and balances, and it's something his party and cabinet members have worked on for thirty years, since Nixon. When Bush leaves office, it will be a completely different office he's leaving.

And like Andrew Jackson, "his racism and incompetence encouraged the rise of white terrorism." When Kanye West announced on live television that "George Bush doesn't care about black people" he was only saying something that everyone already knew. That Republicans have long sought to marginalize if not downright supress people of color throught the world and in America through the use of innuendo and media propaganda. But Bush raised (or should I say "razed") the stakes when he tore down New Orleans only to provide opportunities for new investment. He gave Halliburton the middle east, and Blackwater (his Waffen SS) got the domestic front.

But, most important, if he leaves office without being impeached or even censored for his crimes, the worst damage Bush will do is to the expectations of the nation.

No one will ever expect that our President is above being a crook, they will only wonder if he's as good a crook as George Bush. In the end, the office will be defined by this "soft bigotry of low expectations."

George Bush is to the U.S. Presidency what Barry Bonds is to the Baseball Hall of Fame: an end to the notion of honor.

(Now, how 'bout those Dogers?)

[KRANKY]

While undoubtedly bad to the point of terrible, both Buchanan and Andrew Johnson will be footnotes as compared to this truly WORST president.
bush is a vile man, limited, proud in his stupidity, resentful of others more in telligent and capable than himself. He is stupid AND mean...the worst combination.
This proto-fascist plutocrat is purposeful. He does things that knowingly hurts peopl because he likes it.
Buchanan was an incompetent boob, paralyzed by half a nation that had a mindset that the current occupant admires and emulates.
Johnson was a small man dominated by right wing business thugs, similar to this jerk, but nowhere near bhaving the influence or reach.

There is a mass murderer living in OUR White House, and the world knows it!

[RobinLandseadel]

Sorry, but James Buchanan or no, it doesn't get more treasonous than throwning out Writ of Habeas Corpus. Seriously, Mr. Finkleman, Andrew Johnson may have been a crappy president, but he didn't have a Grandpa who bankrolled the Nazis. Bush is absolute zero.

[otiswaynehale]

Bravo, Paul!! Bush in a nutshell.

[Tellmethetruth]

Repairing the damage George Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfield, etc. etc. and healing the nation and the world from the wounds, lies, deception, and violence, is one more reason to vote for Joe Biden.

Joe Biden has the foreign policy experience to be president and the rest of the world leaders want him to be president.

Joe Biden wants an investigation of the torture, missing CIA tapes, and criminal indictments of wrong doers and will prosecute.

Joe Biden wants a return to the Geneva Convention rules on torture.

Joe Biden has the plan approved by the UN Security Councel and passed by both houses of Congress, presently sitting the Bush's desk to execute on how to end the war in Iraq without creating further damage from a civil war and having the war spead to surrounding countries, including Pakistan with nukes.

Joe Biden has the legistlative experience to get laws passed through Congress - he's one of the few stars in this past year getting his Biden Resolution passed to End the War in Iraq.

[randyw]

I must disagree , if the next President quickly figures out how to end the mess in Iraq and repair our reputation around the world it will only make bush look even worse!
After all hows come this guy can fix this problem when Bush just dicked around for 6 years "staying the course" ??? Bush just plain sucks and everyone but the 32% knows it! He has bankrupted and all but put the final nail in the coffin of this once great and respected nation!Long live America ,,FUCK BUSH!!!

[donaldw6]

Sorry, Paul, but if you think Reagan looks better over time, you either really hated him before, or you just aren't paying attention.

Actually, it's hard to hate Reagan per se. He was an actor. He had a script to read, and he read it better than in some of his movies. I can hate him personally because he was an old, ignorant racist, and because he was Mitt Romney's precursor, shifting his politics for whoever wrote the checks. The economic hack job of his administration laid the groundwork for the wrecking ball that is Bush, and honest histories will assess the blame correctly.

As for Bush, he still has another year to add to his "legacy". Barring some dramatic personal conversion, another year of the George Bush we've come to know and loathe will pile such excrement on our heads that we'll never forget who wielded the shovel.

This post, which purportedly takes the long view of history, strikes me as rather short-sighted. How ironic.

[Herrington]

Mr. Finkelman, if you mean to imply that the horrors of war, the nightmares of the rape of our constitution and the glee with which the aristocracy of the rich has been complicit in it all should go uncorrected so that we may play out the consequences to their last dreadful logical conclusion, I say, to what purpose?

Should we suffer the end of America so that Americans will then comprehend how it is that their end can come about?

Should we continue to make the poor more poor so that Bush can be indelibly branded as the enemy of the poor when we all have known it to be so, left and right, since before this all began?

Shall we countenance stupidity with the indulgence of proffering some higher unknowable motive when no such motive could possibly exist?

Maybe the liberal intellect is incapable of drawing a conclusion with enough certainty to act if in some ways we are unable to find even the courage of conviction to condemn that which is patently evil.

In short, give me a break with the doubt. Bush is a ridiculous ass that has never had any business being in charge of his own checking account.

[Dedalus2k]

And the worst part of it all is that no matter how history judges him, this deluded buffoon will go to his grave believing that in some distant future he'll be seen as one of the greats.