Is Bush the worst president, ever?

[carnide_]

From CNN:

(CNN) -- With record low approval ratings and intense criticism for his handling of the Iraq war, Hurricane Katrina and the economy, the word most used to label George W. Bush's presidency will be "incompetent," historians say

The full original text

[Dinner]

Hands down worst President in at least a century.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

but his redeeming quality was that he was a funny guy... he made my mornings better many times

[Ben Kenobi]

Hands down worst President in at least a century.

Not anymore. 2nd worst in a century.

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

He's better then Taft, Hoover, Harding, Carter, Kennedy, LBJ, Wilson, Nixon, Clinton and HW Bush.

That puts him right in the middle for presidents in the 20th century.

JFK, LBJ, Clinton? WTF? And I say, Hoover, WTF, but I'm a in a minority concerning Hoover's merits.
Then again, why should I expect BK to agree with me?

My 20/21 cent. ranking:

Truman
FDR
Eisenhower
LBJ (who'd easily make #1 for me, without Vietnam)
Clinton
Hoover
GHW Bush
Teddy Roosevelt
Wilson
JFK

Reagan
Taft
Ford
Nixon
Coolidge
Carter
GW Bush
Harding

out of competition: Mc Kinley, having basically NO knowledge about his presidency whatsoever.

There'd have to be many incompetent or evil 19th century presidents if GW should fall out of my bottom 10.

[Barnabas]

Well, I think G W Bush will not pass to history as Bush the Good.

[MrFun]

I would think Andrew Johnson still made for a worse president than George W. Bush. Although W. makes for a strong contender for the worst.

[RGBVideo]

Ben Kenobi is part of the reason why nobody takes "historians" seriously anymore

If we define "good" president as someone who has moved USA into a more powerful nation and "bad" as someone who's done the opposite in the long term:

Roosevelt, T.
Reagan
Clinton
Roosevelt, F.
Eisenhower
Truman
Bush, G.H.W.
Ford
Nixon
Wilson
Hoover
McKinley
Taft
Kennedy
Coolidge
Johnson, L.
Harding
Carter
Bush, "W"
(Buchanan, J.)

To be fair, W. Bush has been exceptionally effective in pushing through his political agenda. The problem is that his agenda has sucked. Constant incompetence, corruption, policy decisions which ended up hurting America made because of almost hopeless ignorance of reality. 2nd worst ever, worst during the last 100 years.

Originally posted by Wernazuma III

JFK, LBJ, Clinton? WTF? And I say, Hoover, WTF, but I'm a in a minority concerning Hoover's merits.
Then again, why should I expect BK to agree with me?

My 20/21 cent. ranking:

Truman
FDR
Eisenhower
LBJ (who'd easily make #1 for me, without Vietnam)
Clinton
Hoover
GHW Bush
Teddy Roosevelt
Wilson
JFK

Reagan
Taft
Ford
Nixon
Coolidge
Carter
GW Bush
Harding

out of competition: Mc Kinley, having basically NO knowledge about his presidency whatsoever.

There'd have to be many incompetent or evil 19th century presidents if GW should fall out of my bottom 10.

[RGBVideo]

Originally posted by Arrian
mujahadeen (sp?)

mujahideen

Also, you should understand that the term can't be really used with a capital M to define a given faction in a given country (as mainstream newspapers such as Time and The New York Times have usen it for the past 5 years when referring to Afganistan, Iraq or Sudan) for it is a generic word for men who are fighting a war in the name of Islam.

If you want to use a term for "islamic fighters" while speaking English, a good phrase would be "islamic fighters" instead of a hard-to-spell foreign term with meaning requiring specific understanding of cultural context, no?

[Wernazuma III]

If we define "good" president as someone who has moved USA into a more powerful nation and "bad" as someone who's done the opposite in the long term:

Certainly not the key issue for my ranking, although of course this forms part of the president's job description and has been considered by me. Certainly, making this the supreme aim, TR and RR move quite a bit up, LBJ down.

[Zkribbler]

Jon Coultron's The Presidents

[Zkribbler]

Re: Ben Kenobi is part of the reason why nobody takes "historians" seriously anymore

Originally posted by VJ
If we define "good" president as someone who has moved USA into a more powerful nation and "bad" as someone who's done the opposite in the long term:

"More powerful??' How about happier, with "happiness" being defined as the state of the nation arising from liberty, peace, and prosperity.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
He's equally bad to Hoover (who was really in a bad position)

Oh please the Hoover administration did EVERYTHING wrong in response to the Depression. Strictly on economics alone (leave Iraq out of the picture because Hoover had no real equivalent) Hoover was clearly worse than Bush.

[Thue]

Originally posted by conmcb25


Oh please the Hoover administration did EVERYTHING wrong in response to the Depression. Strictly on economics alone (leave Iraq out of the picture because Hoover had no real equivalent) Hoover was clearly worse than Bush.

But then the whole subject of economy was perhaps not as well known then as it is today.

There were plenty of people who predicted that giving away loans to people who had no chance to repay them could lead to problems if the house prices went down.So Bush had the opportunity to prevent the current crisis if he had listened to the right people.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by conmcb25


Oh please the Hoover administration did EVERYTHING wrong in response to the Depression. Strictly on economics alone (leave Iraq out of the picture because Hoover had no real equivalent) Hoover was clearly worse than Bush.

Hoover did not invade Iraq.
Hoover did not trample civil liberties.
Hoover did not alienate our allies.