"A new poll suggests that George W. Bush is the most unpopular president in modern American history." http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/01/poll-bush-most-unpopular-in-modern-history/ Let me add the only thing this idiot has accomplished so far is top the list of most despised most unpopular people in the world. Congrats Dubya! Make America proud!
Lincoln wasn't terribly popular during his time in office either. History has a way of polishing the turds of imperial presidency. 100 years from now, Bush might be a heroic icon of the republic.
Maybe so, but in the present he is a blood thirsty warmonger that has participated in the destruction of hundred of thousands of lives. In my view he is a bastard!
Well, Lincoln participated in the deaths of 600,000 Americans. He suspended habeus corpus, and he jailed members of the press who dissented against the civil war. I think that people are much more cynical now. You might have a few status quo Pollyannas on the forum who endorse their leaders and every dump they take on humanity, but the next generation is much less loyal for loyalty's sake. Thankfully.
People have a short sited view of history, most would say the best and worst presidents were during their life times.
Yeah but notice your Pal guerilla thinks Bush isn't the worst? I'll never get credit for that from the Nixon Gang. I figure Hoover, Wilson, Roosevelt and Lincoln were pretty bad. I like Coolidge, Cleveland, Jefferson, Jackson, Grant, Washington. Lukewarm on Reagan and Madison.
Hamilton got what he deserved. That autocratic douche. Hoover was, in my opinion, victim of circumstances beyond his control. Additionally I think he handled the depression very well, and had he remained president his policies would have been vindicated. I regard Teddy Roosevelt as my favorite, and Franklin Roosevelt as my least favorite, along with Harding and quite a few others. Teddy understood much more than the rest of them, save for Jefferson, and helped to bring about fair economics, because a true open free trade market must have some form of assurance of fair practice - and it was clear that many of the trusts were using illegal and immoral tactics. Additionally he saw the benefits of preservation and conservation - a policy our current republican moron doesn't understand - and in addition to that, had he been elected to the presidency instead of Wilson, I think we would have finished World War One the way we ended up finishing World War (one part two) Two. Imagine if Hitler had never had the chance to rise because we demanded an absolute and total victory - we may have had a second world war with the Soviets, but there would have been a greater alliance including the great nation of Germany, rather than against the evil Nazi Empire. But, history is as history was. It was the best of times, it was the retardedest of times... just like today - but more retarded than best.
Hoover wasn't a victim of circumstances, he made the circumstances. The economy didn't go into a depression until he started waging a trade war with the rest of the world which turned a economic downturn into an economic depression. One could make the case that if Germany wasn't in the economic situation that it was, largely part of what was going on globally then the people of Germany might of never supported Hitler in the first place, let alone let WWII happen.
I am certainly not one who wants to begrudge such an honor to GW Bush, he deserved every single bit of this accomplishment and more.
I largely agree with your assessment of Teddy Roosevelt. But this is precisely the battle cry, isn't it? What I have called unbridled capitalism - literally, a capitalism devoid of "assurances of fair practice" - is a "true open free trade market," an unregulated system where only the "invisible hand" creates, morphs, and recreates economic structure and outcomes. My call for the assurances you speak of - engendered by Teddy Roosevelt's Square Deal - has been met with a charge of socialism, at least on this forum. A charge which I have always rejected.
@soniqhost too Hamilton was a federalist. From my choices, I have pretty much sided with the anti-federalist mentality. Many people say, and I am pretty inclined to believe that Hamilton was the original big government founding father. He certainly liked the idea of a national bank, instituting one in his time. The sad thing about Bush is that Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton had managed to meddle overseas AND increase America's profile as the good guys. Bush 43 has destroyed American credibility overseas. I really think his biggest crime is that he never kept Cheney in check, and the neocons have been running the Palace for 8 years. Excellent post. Hoover was the original "New Deal"er. As soon as the economy started tanking, he started cartelizing industry and creating all of these complex and elaborate plans to reshape the system. In the past, laissez-faire was the order of the day. Government generally stood by and let the market unwind and reset on it's own. Ethically and morally, it's the right thing to do. @all, I don't think Jackson gets enough credit. I really like him.
Returning to the opening thread and away from Guerilla's personal perspective, it is hard to see Bush regaining any stature as a president, unlike Truman, who had similarly low popularity ratings as his presidency ended but has rebounded in the views of historians. Under Bush 2, we have seen him start a war in Iraq in which he misled the American public, the economy has gone into the tank, inflation has returned, the environment has taken a beating, either cronyism or incompetence has reigned wherein the fiasco of New Orleans/Hurricane Katrina has occurred during which he basically ignored/forgot/or degraded a portion of the American population, and, has dramatically cut back on personal freedoms through expansion of review of all Americans. Currently there is a fairly significant review of various administration personnel who may have broken a series of laws. It is hard to see how Bush 2 will be vindicated by history. I think he will sit in history next to Nixon as one of the worst presidents of modern times and of all time. Getting back to those polls, the remarkable thing is that after 9/11 Bush 2 had the highest approval ratings ever.
I don't understand why people always have to involve Nixon in these things. He was a crook but he was smart and capable man. Comparing Nixon to Bush is like comparing a hawk with a fly.
Here I find a huge gap between Teddy's rhetoric and his policies. He spoke of anti-trust, but what are the results? TR was the first president to sign over money to JP Morgan for the purpose of buying up competition (not much different than the recent Bear Stearns deal) and the big deal they made about breaking up the oil monopoly was really just in name only as the majority shareholders now just owned 30+ companies instead of just one. IMO there is no difference between a monopoly and a cartel.