Sunday, September 21, 2008
Finally, I have gotten back! The beginning of semester workload hit me a lot sooner than I thought. Here are the next few rankings (from the bottom).
22. Bill Clinton. Gets some points for seeing the writing on the wall and cooperating with a Republican Congress. He was also surprisingly capable when not, er, occupied with things south of the border. Yet competence doesn't get you much when you're competent at corruption (again, both current candidates take notice).
21. James K. Polk. His western expansion was at the price of freedom for so many and his policies helped contribute to a bloody Civil War. It seems hardly worth it, especially since it's what landed us with Oregon and California.
20. Thomas Jefferson. Usually, the Prince of Presidents for liberal historians, Jefferson's economic policies were a disaster. Even his vaunted purchase of Louisiana merely ensured southern dominance of the country (with its protected institution of slavery) for the next six decades. And he only managed that because he violated all his most cherished principles of executive restraint. Furthermore, having come to office, vowing to abolish the controversial Alien and Sedition Acts he jailed more opponents of his brainless embargo than Adams did. His belligerent foreign policy coupled with a domestic lack of concern for the state of our armed forces led like day into night to the War of 1812, a careless war we weren't prepared to win.
19. Grover Cleveland. Was a decent man and had a decent first time. His second term, however, like many presidents, was pretty much lackluster, if not downright awful.
18. Lyndon B. Johnson. His foreign policy and handling of the Vietnam War were an unmitigated disaster. The main point of his presidency on that level should have been: Don't fight a war you're not prepared to win. On the domestic front, his welfare programs and War on Poverty have proven to be as much a quagmire as Vietnam. He does, however, get some point for defying his party's southern wing (and siding mostly with Republicans in Congress) to pass and sign the Civil Rights Act, a great expansion of civil liberties for African-Americans.
17. Benjamin Harrison. One of the few "Ohio Republicans" who attempted, albeit somewhat halfheartedly, to relieve southern blacks from the torment of their former masters. For someone supposedly in bed with big business, he did more to expand freedom in his one term than the more reform-minded presidents did.
16. Calvin Coolidge. High marks for the economy, if not for foresight. Low marks for foreign policy. Decidedly average overall.
15. Zachary Taylor. Normally way down the list due to the shortness of his term, Taylor stood up to secessionists and broke with the establishment of his party by being willing to listen to arguments against the expansion of the Missouri Compromise.
14. George H.W. Bush. Stunningly successful, although not entirely, in foreign policy, he crashed and burned at home, although again not as complete a failure as many in the media made him out to be.
13. James Madison. Had trouble running a war his predecessor had ill-prepared him for, but his willingness to bend on economic issues led to the re-establishment of the National Bank, which kept the American economy running until Andrew Jackson shut it down. Unlike both his predecessors, Madison was widely criticized yet did not jail a single person who spoke against his administration.
12. John Quincy Adams. Gets this high a mark mostly for character and competence. His economic policy was basically sound: invest in the country, not out of it. He even attempted to stand up for Native Americans being run off their land by Georgian settlers. His successor caved entirely. Following his presidency, Adams fought for the abolition of slavery and even argued the case of a shipload of escaped slaves before the United States Supreme Court, a decision which he won and the slaves were given their freedom.
11. John Adams/Woodrow Wilson. A statistical tie I was unwilling to break. Adams gets high marks for realism, for preparing the nation for war and yet negotiating strenuously to avoid it. His foreign policy and national defense credentials are unimpeachable (this from a man who never fired a gun in anger). However, his unwillingness to tolerate debate are unmistakable flaws that lowered his score. Wilson gets high marks for foreign policy and for character and competence. His economic policies and the fact that it's hard to argue he extended freedoms for others when he sanctioned the virulently racist film "The Birth of a Nation" and the regimes he propped up in Europe turned into militaristic dictatorships. He also, like Adams, refused to tolerate criticism and hundreds went to jail for criticizing his policies. I also like the fact that they tied due to the fact that they were both highly unlikable as people.
Stay tuned: top ten coming soon!
22. Bill Clinton. Gets some points for seeing the writing on the wall and cooperating with a Republican Congress. He was also surprisingly capable when not, er, occupied with things south of the border. Yet competence doesn't get you much when you're competent at corruption (again, both current candidates take notice).
21. James K. Polk. His western expansion was at the price of freedom for so many and his policies helped contribute to a bloody Civil War. It seems hardly worth it, especially since it's what landed us with Oregon and California.
20. Thomas Jefferson. Usually, the Prince of Presidents for liberal historians, Jefferson's economic policies were a disaster. Even his vaunted purchase of Louisiana merely ensured southern dominance of the country (with its protected institution of slavery) for the next six decades. And he only managed that because he violated all his most cherished principles of executive restraint. Furthermore, having come to office, vowing to abolish the controversial Alien and Sedition Acts he jailed more opponents of his brainless embargo than Adams did. His belligerent foreign policy coupled with a domestic lack of concern for the state of our armed forces led like day into night to the War of 1812, a careless war we weren't prepared to win.
19. Grover Cleveland. Was a decent man and had a decent first time. His second term, however, like many presidents, was pretty much lackluster, if not downright awful.
18. Lyndon B. Johnson. His foreign policy and handling of the Vietnam War were an unmitigated disaster. The main point of his presidency on that level should have been: Don't fight a war you're not prepared to win. On the domestic front, his welfare programs and War on Poverty have proven to be as much a quagmire as Vietnam. He does, however, get some point for defying his party's southern wing (and siding mostly with Republicans in Congress) to pass and sign the Civil Rights Act, a great expansion of civil liberties for African-Americans.
17. Benjamin Harrison. One of the few "Ohio Republicans" who attempted, albeit somewhat halfheartedly, to relieve southern blacks from the torment of their former masters. For someone supposedly in bed with big business, he did more to expand freedom in his one term than the more reform-minded presidents did.
16. Calvin Coolidge. High marks for the economy, if not for foresight. Low marks for foreign policy. Decidedly average overall.
15. Zachary Taylor. Normally way down the list due to the shortness of his term, Taylor stood up to secessionists and broke with the establishment of his party by being willing to listen to arguments against the expansion of the Missouri Compromise.
14. George H.W. Bush. Stunningly successful, although not entirely, in foreign policy, he crashed and burned at home, although again not as complete a failure as many in the media made him out to be.
13. James Madison. Had trouble running a war his predecessor had ill-prepared him for, but his willingness to bend on economic issues led to the re-establishment of the National Bank, which kept the American economy running until Andrew Jackson shut it down. Unlike both his predecessors, Madison was widely criticized yet did not jail a single person who spoke against his administration.
12. John Quincy Adams. Gets this high a mark mostly for character and competence. His economic policy was basically sound: invest in the country, not out of it. He even attempted to stand up for Native Americans being run off their land by Georgian settlers. His successor caved entirely. Following his presidency, Adams fought for the abolition of slavery and even argued the case of a shipload of escaped slaves before the United States Supreme Court, a decision which he won and the slaves were given their freedom.
11. John Adams/Woodrow Wilson. A statistical tie I was unwilling to break. Adams gets high marks for realism, for preparing the nation for war and yet negotiating strenuously to avoid it. His foreign policy and national defense credentials are unimpeachable (this from a man who never fired a gun in anger). However, his unwillingness to tolerate debate are unmistakable flaws that lowered his score. Wilson gets high marks for foreign policy and for character and competence. His economic policies and the fact that it's hard to argue he extended freedoms for others when he sanctioned the virulently racist film "The Birth of a Nation" and the regimes he propped up in Europe turned into militaristic dictatorships. He also, like Adams, refused to tolerate criticism and hundreds went to jail for criticizing his policies. I also like the fact that they tied due to the fact that they were both highly unlikable as people.
Stay tuned: top ten coming soon!
// posted by The Pendragon @ 12:32 AM 
