December 3, 2006
CANNON FODDER:
Move Over, Hoover (Douglas Brinkley, December 3, 2006, Washington Post)
Shortly after Thanksgiving I had dinner in California with Ronald Reagan's best biographer, Lou Cannon. Like many historians these days, we discussed whether George W. Bush is, conceivably, the worst U.S. president ever. Cannon bristled at the idea.Bush has two more years to leave his mark, he argued. What if there is a news flash that U.S. Special Forces have killed Osama bin Laden or that North Korea has renounced its nuclear program? What if a decade from now Iraq is a democracy and a statue of Bush is erected on Firdaus Square where that famously toppled one of Saddam Hussein once stood?
It helps that Mr. Cannon is the semi-official biographer of our last worst president: Ronald Reagan. We of a certain age can recall when even the Right had turned on the Gipper for meeting with Gorbachev, raising taxes and losing the Senate, while the Left had Iran-Contra to brandish about. But, as with Reagan then, W has already accomplished so much that irrespective of the final two years of his presidency he'll eventually rank with the great or near great, not the failures. Even setting aside foreign affairs -- where both the emerging special relationship with India and the liberalization of the Middle East will rank as historic achievements -- Mr. Bush has on the credit side of the ledger: multiple tax cuts; HSAs; the vouchers and anti-Darwinist measures in NCLB; the Faith-Based Initiative; abortion and bio-engineering limitations; civil service reforms and competitive-sourcing of federal jobs; retirement reforms; commencing the deconstruction of the 20th Century military; economic growth in every year of his presidency (though he, like Bill Clinton and George Bush Senior owes that mostly to RWR); two major appointments that could positively influence the country for years (Chief Justice Roberts, who has the potential to be a conservative Earl Warren, and the deflation hawk Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke); and more I'm likely forgetting off the top of my head.
The Left and far Right don't hate guys like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush because they're ineffective, but precisely because they are so successful in enacting measures that their opponents (and putative allies) abhor. W, thanks mostly to a Republican House and Senate, was able to get more done than Reagan was and will, as a result, rank even higher one day.
Posted by Orrin Judd at December 3, 2006 11:03 AMWorst president? Jeez, in the last 50 years, doesn't anyone remember Jimmy Carter or LBJ?
Posted by: pchuck at December 3, 2006 12:15 PManyone who ignores the existence of UN Resolution 1441 and accusses the US in 2002 of 'bypassing the UN' is, well, delusional.
hey, Doug: as a general rule, historians need to pay attention to the existence of things that I believe are called 'facts'
un-effing-believable!
Posted by: JonofAtlanta at December 3, 2006 12:33 PMPerhaps we should instead discuss whether Mr. Brinkley is the worst historian ever - the man seems to have little knowledge or perspective. I give you pchuck's Carter and LBJ and raise with Harding, Nixon and Clinton. And while perhaps not the worse, even the sainted FDR and Wilson must be ranked below GWB.
Posted by: jd watson at December 3, 2006 12:42 PMIn my lifetime, FDR* is the worst because he more time to create evil in the world, then Kennedy followed by Carter and Clinton. Nixon was a socialist. but could have been an adequate executive had the left's piranhas not fallen upon him with maniacal hatred rivaling BDS.
We were lucky that when 1984 came along, we were ready for it with our lucky star in the White House, but much as I admire Reagan, it will be Bush whose face will be on Mt. Rushmore.
*Sainted? Don't even get me started.
I get the feeling that maybe the Dems, who've been running against Hoover for seven decades have finally found his replacement. Their nominees in '040s will ritualistically invoke Bush's name with the same vervor, never realizing how instead they sound like GOP politicans in the 1950s who still complained about Roosevelt's actions, never understanding their popularity.
doesn't anyone remember Jimmy Carter or LBJ?
Brinkley certainly remembers Carter--he wrote The Unfinished Predidency about him.
GWB will be remembered rather favorably because the major bias of historians isn't toward leftism; it's toward activism. The Presidents they have traditionally ranked lowest are those who are perceived as having been inactive: Pierce, Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, perhaps even Calvin Coolidge are prime examples. Washington, Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt have always rated highly, despite owning slaves and ordering summary execution of deserters; suspending habeus corpus and imposing martial law; and leading the nation into a foreign war that some claimed was co-ordinated by allowing Pearl Harbor to be bombed. Truman was "the worst", then Eisenhower, then Reagan, now Bush. Wait thirty or forty years, and it's amazing how much better history tells us our Presidents were than we remember.
Posted by: AC at December 3, 2006 4:18 PMBrinkley, of course, is quite in the tank for John F. Kerry as well (he has the notes from his book on Kerry that would resolve the military records issue for good, but they aren't going to ever see the light of day). And (from Taranto) I believe it is up to about day 675 after Kerry's promise to Tim Russert to release his entire Navy record.
Posted by: ratbert at December 3, 2006 10:40 PM