"Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We of this Congress and this administration, will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance, or insignificance, can spare one or another of us. The fiery trial through which we pass, will light us down, in honor or dishonor, to the latest generation." -- Abraham Lincoln
"Worst President in History?" ... certainly a lot of people (especially liberals) try to make that case about Bush. Is it just partisanship or is there something more to it. A recent article that shares the views of a large group of historians with no particular axe to grind leads one to think it isn't just political name-calling:
One of America's leading historians assesses George W. Bush
Some highlights:
"... Now, though, George W. Bush is in serious contention for the title of worst ever. In early 2004, an informal survey of 415 historians conducted by the nonpartisan History News Network found that eighty-one percent considered the Bush administration a "failure." Among those who called Bush a success, many gave the president high marks only for his ability to mobilize public support and get Congress to go along with what one historian called the administration's "pursuit of disastrous policies." In fact, roughly one in ten of those who called Bush a success was being facetious, rating him only as the best president since Bill Clinton -- a category in which Bush is the only contestant. "
" ...The lopsided decision of historians should give everyone pause. Contrary to popular stereotypes, historians are generally a cautious bunch. We assess the past from widely divergent points of view and are deeply concerned about being viewed as fair and accurate by our colleagues. When we make historical judgments, we are acting not as voters or even pundits, but as scholars who must evaluate all the evidence, good, bad or indifferent. Separate surveys, conducted by those perceived as conservatives as well as liberals, show remarkable unanimity about who the best and worst presidents have been.
Historians do tend, as a group, to be far more liberal than the citizenry as a whole -- a fact the president's admirers have seized on to dismiss the poll results as transparently biased. One pro-Bush historian said the survey revealed more about "the current crop of history professors" than about Bush or about Bush's eventual standing. But if historians were simply motivated by a strong collective liberal bias, they might be expected to call Bush the worst president since his father, or Ronald Reagan, or Nixon. Instead, more than half of those polled -- and nearly three-fourths of those who gave Bush a negative rating -- reached back before Nixon to find a president they considered as miserable as Bush. The presidents most commonly linked with Bush included Hoover, Andrew Johnson and Buchanan. Twelve percent of the historians polled -- nearly as many as those who rated Bush a success -- flatly called Bush the worst president in American history. And these figures were gathered before the debacles over Hurricane Katrina, Bush's role in the Valerie Plame leak affair and the deterioration of the situation in Iraq. Were the historians polled today, that figure would certainly be higher."
"...No other president -- Lincoln in the Civil War, FDR in World War II, John F. Kennedy at critical moments of the Cold War -- faced with such a monumental set of military and political circumstances failed to embrace the opposing political party to help wage a truly national struggle. But Bush shut out and even demonized the Democrats. Top military advisers and even members of the president's own Cabinet who expressed any reservations or criticisms of his policies -- including retired Marine Corps Gen. Anthony Zinni and former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill -- suffered either dismissal, smear attacks from the president's supporters or investigations into their alleged breaches of national security. The wise men who counseled Bush's father, including James Baker and Brent Scowcroft, found their entreaties brusquely ignored by his son. When asked if he ever sought advice from the elder Bush, the president responded, "There is a higher Father that I appeal to." "
I think that Bush genuinely believes he is making history ... in a good way. That is what is scary about the neo-conservative agenda. The broadening American presence in the Middle East is a planned agenda ... not a reaction to Sept. 11. Sept. 11 was just a convenient event that they could use to further that agenda.
No one can truly say how history will judge this President and this administration. But the signs are not encouraging. If this was just about the historical legacy of a single person, that would not be a big deal. It's a big deal because his legacy will affect the future of our country and the world.
"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." -- Karl Marx
6 comments:
Great post! And, yes, great minds!
Of course he thinks he's doing good - he cannot reflect on other ways of doing things and therefore thinks his ways are the best, and only way. To compromise is weakness... if you compromise your 'morals' or 'convictions' then the terriers win...
Ahh this is in the newest Rolling Stone, very interesting article.
You can't help but wonder how history will remember him.... I have a feeling that it won't be warmly...
Add me to the list as historian number 416.
In the race to the bottom, he has already passed his father, Warren Harding, US Grant. He is quickly closing in on Andrew Johnson. Can he catch Buchannan? He has a year and a half to do it. Should be a stone cold lead pipe lock!
Post a Comment