Douglas Brinkley is the latest historian to prematurely judge George W. Bush as one of the worst Presidents in our nation’s history. And his reasoning is interesting. For Brinkley, Bush’s problem is not that he started a war under false pretenses. If that were a major criteria for judging a President then James Polk (Mexico) and William McKinley (Philippines) would not be judged near the top on historian’s lists. No, Bush’s problem is that Iraq is an ‘unmitigated disaster’.
I thought about Brinkley’s reasoning for a while and I guess I agree with him. After all, Brinkley is predicting how historians will judge Bush, he is not really saying how they should judge him. My thinking is that Bush’s failure reflects badly on both Polk and McKinley, and should cause historians to take a fresh look at the downside of their dishonesty and warmongering. In any event, I was with Brinkley until the end. Then he lost me.
There isn’t much that Bush can do now to salvage his reputation. His presidential library will someday be built around two accomplishments: that after 9/11, the U.S. homeland wasn’t again attacked by terrorists (knock on wood) and that he won two presidential elections, allowing him to appoint conservatives to key judicial posts. I also believe that he is an honest man and that his administration has been largely void of widespread corruption. This will help him from being portrayed as a true villain.
This last point is crucial. Though Bush may be viewed as a laughingstock, he won’t have the zero-integrity factors that have kept Nixon and Harding at the bottom in the presidential sweepstakes. Oddly, the president whom Bush most reminds me of is Herbert Hoover, whose name is synonymous with failure to respond to the Great Depression. When the stock market collapsed, Hoover, for ideological reasons, did too little. When 9/11 happened, Bush did too much, attacking the wrong country at the wrong time for the wrong reasons. He has joined Hoover as a case study on how not to be president.
I honestly don’t think we’ve ever had a more corrupt administration. Ronald Reagan’s was close, but Reagan actually forced his errant ministers to resign (dozens of them). According to David R. Simon and D. Stanley Eitzen in Elite Deviance, 138 members of the Reagan administration either resigned under an ethical cloud or were criminally indicted. The fact that many fewer people have resigned from Bush’s administration is not evidence that Bush is more honest than Reagan. Quite the opposite.
That will become much clearer when Henry Waxman gets going this year.
“the U.S. homeland wasn’t again attacked by terrorists (knock on wood)”
Why does Brinkley think this is a Bush “accomplishment”?
My house didn`t burn down last night, so I`m sending PETA a check for $50.00, as their accomplishment. How stupid would I be to actually do that? Does Brinkley not remember that Bush was against Homeland Security before “he” came up with the idea. Not that I think it`s a Homeland Security accomplishment either.
An “honest” man who had to steal his way into the White House? What the hell is Brinkley drinking????
It seems that Mr.Brinkley might have a “future” working for this administration.
who believe in the inherent specialness of the United States and its aims (the correct word escapes me at this instance). Maybe the words (and the jury) escape Brinkley right now as to whether Bush did get into Iraq under false pretenses. After all, that assessment would put him on the spot. As a historian, he probably doesn’t want to make that ‘radical’ step that would help the conservatives vilify his work now and in the future.
I would say that the history area is probably very, very politicized right now. Add people like Howard Zinn, Fawn Brodie and Stanley Karnow into the mix–people who are not necessarily historians primarily working in the field, and you have attacks from all sides as to the ‘factualness’ of their case.
To me, it’s the only step that can be made. If a president is wrong, then the country is wrong and its aims are suspect in the world. Only then can its citizens truly examine themselves, take responsibility, and make amends.
If not, mythography and propaganda keep on parading as truth (see Woodward). And we as Americans can’t afford to keep the blinkers on for much longer.
Between the WTC attack of 1993 and 9/11/01 the US homeland wasn’t attacked either. Does anybody credit Bill Clinton’s vigilance against terrorism for this?
Of course not. That would be stupid.
For W it is all spin until 12/31/2008.
W is for all pratical purpose…willing to stay the course in Iraq, until his presidency is over. And then he can blame the next president for not winning the war in Iraq..(sounds so grade school, but then look who were talking about).
No scandals, well there has been no oversight, Congress has let everyone speak without being under oath. You could have stolen my milk money, and then testified before Congress w/o being under oath and say you didn’t.
Yes, in almost every respect Bush is the worst President ever. However, if you are a billionaire or an oil/pharmaceutical company, Bush has been the President out of your wildest dreams, so he does have many accomplishments of the wealth accumulation/power accumulation type going for him even though I don’t think they’re going to brag about them in his library. If you’re not a billionaire or huge corporation, then Bush hasn’t done a single thing right in 6 years.
calvin, in his best disdainful cat mode, must, nonetheless, take exception to those who would argue that history will judge King George and not find him as wanting as is now the case.
calvin would point to the melt-down of the federal budget. This, alone, is enough to make him the worst. Then, there was the unprovoked attack on Iraq and lying about the reasons for doing so. Polk may have lied about Mexico, but the results weren’t as devastating, yet. The total gutting of regulations and laws affecting water and air quality, worker safety, discrimination, junk science, etc, etc.
And, calvin would remind the gentle reader of the administration minion who talked about creating new realities. The so-called new realities have a 1984 and Third Reich feel to them.
calvin thinks that it may take two more election cycles to figure out the depth and breadth of the bush ineptitude and corruption.
calvin also predicts bush will make a quick exit of the US after leaving office to a country that doesn’t have an extradition treaty with us.
You’d think that with Brinkley’s affection for New Orleans, he would call Bush the worst president ever for the singular act of the Katrina debacle alone.
I honestly don’t think we’ve ever had a more corrupt administration.
Before Bush latches onto a catchy phrase for himself equivalent to the “Great Communicator,” a word needs creation. He broke the mold in being the worst president.
Marquis de Sade — sadism
Vidkun Quisling — quisling
Lemuel Boulware — boulwarism
Draco — draconian
Niccolo Machiavelli — machiavellian
Charles Ponzi — Ponzi schemes
George W. Bush — ?