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.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
"Now there is George the Second. In many ways he is far worse than any of his immediate predecesso
You have given a great list of reasons why. I think there might be one more you didn't mention.
Through this administration we have lost our religion. Christianity is now in the position of having to explain how they could have given us the Bush years. They really have some explaining to do for reelecting him after the torture revelations. I think they fell to the double edged sword of the almighty political dollar. They caved in to the concept of taking faith based tax dollars, and they pulled their punch in fear of losing tax exempt status and closed the pulpit to mention of the evils of starting preemptive war and encouraging others in their wars. They are in deep, and I doubt they will be able to climb out in 100 years. It will probably take decades just for people to understand how much damage he has caused, or rather how much damage Christianity has done to itself through this administration. The GOP is a political party and it can change and start to rebuild no matter how corrupt it becomes, but Christianity will never again be the same.
There was nothing that could have stopped the Civil War. It was a mighty collision between the morality of slavery and a way of life. Blood had to be shed. Buchanan was helpless to stop it.
I'm compiling a cumulative subject index of book indices written about Bush, Family and Business - I call them the Mayberry Mafia.
I figure we're all going to need it to keep centered on just what actually happened to us as a country.
We're going to string those stinkin' chicken up where they need to be.
"If you are going to tell people the truth, you better make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." ~George Bernard Shaw~
The lack of faith in a functioning government by all Americans is the sum total of this presidents failures. In the recent past even if you disagreed with one party or another, you could believe that in the end, through debate and "politic'in" a compromise would be met in which a reasonable decision would be found. This administration has introduced a lethal cocktail of corruption, hubris, and incompetence that has gnawed away at the very foundation of rule of law, check and balance, and accountabilty. Without these limits on those in power the worst of human nature rises to the top. Our nation then becomes one of men not laws. Let's not forget the Democratic party's blame in all this mess. Opposition to this dismantling of our rule of law has been soft and ineffective, tepid and pathetic. We all know G-Dub can't resist a cocktail, but we also know our Democratic party has become the enabler.
Great article with lots of history.
Of cousre, your article pre-supposes there will be a "next President.
You should not rule out another false flag 9/11 operation. If Bush/Cheney strike the US agian -as they did on 9/11 - all the mechanisms are in place to impose martial law and suspend the Constituion- what is left of it.
Bush fear, hate, and war mongering is far from over. 2008 will be Bush dreams of mushroom clouds.
If there is a next President they will have to deal with the Bankruptcy of the Nation and the next Great Depression.
The United States will NEVER again hold the place it once did in the world. America is hated the World over. Killing innocent people becuase they live on top of oil will do that.
Bush's crimes will plauge this Nation, as it struggles to survive, for many decades to come.
If the ignorant populace decides once agian to vote for a Republican criminal, you can expect World War III.
RIP: US Constituion
A simply great read. George W. Bush will forever be the gold standard for shit presidents for centuries to come. It is ethched in stone for generations to create Benchmarks. My only issue is back in the days of Johnson and Buchanan incompetence had a long time to flowdown to the average citizen. Therefore Bush was worse. The entire world can watch "stupid". It was not the case in the 1800s.
Clinton lovers always say Clinton was great because the economy was great.
If that's the measure then Calvin Coolidge was a great President.
This is a seemingly sober and thoughtful analysis. However, its extremely difficult to make such a comparison across history, since no President can really be held responsible for the actions of free citizens, particularly in our day and age. It could be said convincingly that the moneyed elite silently set the agenda with impunity while the formal government has become a strawman for the masses to burn in effigy. We have become so thoroughly conditioned to accept this state of affairs that we hardly blink at the carnival atmosphere as Presidential candidates race more fervently for dollars than votes. In the United States of Ambivalance the separation of mind from body is now complete.
It's such a shame people can't remember what happens beyond their media broadcast. People of all political backgrounds praised Bush for his response to 9/11, and it doesn't seem to mean anything now.
Bush is far from "worst president.
Look at hard logic and one will easily see that Bush is not the worst president. Far from it. Iraq had less lives lost then Vietnam and hasn't even come close to the length of time that war lasted. The common person does not understand very much about this war because he does not have the information. Rather then admit he doesn't have it and cannot make a rational decision, he bases his decision without it.
The people do not understand how a war works. They have no concept of strategies, or of enemy mindset, morale, or anything. The failure of the Bush administration is not waging war. The failure of the Bush administration was waging a war with a people who do not understand war. The World Wars brought back the horror stories of mustard gas and death camps. Vietnam was televised and people were shocked.
When it comes to presidents after World War II, Bush hardly ranks among the bottom. Johnson and Carter allowed far worse, and Clinton committed crimes that impeached him. The hype and crying of the people is not enough for condemnation.
Bush has done more to injure our Constitution than the aggregate of all presidents before him, and for that reason alone is the worst president in our history.
So arguably, not the Worst US President in history.
But he made the medal platform.
the reason that iraq is worse than vietnam is we didn't have vietnam before vietnam.
if when the skull and bones brand was healing on w's butt, he stopped cutting and snorting lines off of co-eds tits long enough to walk outside and see, he would have noticed people riled up about the futility of vietnam.
maybe he did. maybe he didn't remember. good practice for all the other stuff he won't remember after 2008...
d
This pretty much sets it out -- no hysteria or ill will. Nice article, Mr. Finkelman.
This president needs to be impeached. Bush too.
And, if Iraq becomes a stable state with the freedoms we enjoy in the west and a secular democratic government? Don't forget who we got rid of. Saddam was not a nice guy.
It's interesting that some people are so anxious to rank GW, the guy is still in office. Think of Bill Clinton, the guy's time in office appears to have been much more average than anyone would have guessed at the time. And Nixon? Snooping on dems vs relations with China? And Jimmy who?
To even compare GW go the disasters that were pre and post civil war is quite a stretch unless you are still sore about 2000.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
