Who was the best president in my lifetime? In history?
These types of questions are asked a lot just now because Bush has shown himself to so appallingly bad and now we are teased with the possibility that Obama may be good.
So what does it take to be a good president? I've never agreed when the presidential historians make their rankings. Sort of like picking a good coach, it would seem we should have some ratings based on success. Success would seem to involve inflicting the least misery on the populace.
Two quick examples. Lincoln and FDR seem to be at the top of everybody's list, especially the historians (I've attached a link if you click on the title). I question this. Consider, would you want to live your life during the tenures of Lincoln and FDR of those of Jimmy Carter and Warren G. Harding?
If 620,000 people died in Civil War during Lincoln's tenure and 408,000 died under FDR, neither one would really be in the running. I'm not saying either caused their wars, I'm saying that the high misery index was on their watch and we can hardly give them top historical rankings, any more than we declare a losing coach the best just because he did not have good players.
Harding was only president for a couple of years, so I think FDR should be able to misery average, so his war deaths are spread over four terms. But even at that, Harding comes out pretty good (certainly better than Woodrow Wilson with WWI and 117,000 deaths on his account). So although Harding usually gets ranked as one of the worst, the only deaths to mar his service would come from the China Yangtze service that resulted in 5 deaths over a period of 20 years, and apparently none during his tenure. And he gets credit for pardoning Eugene V. Debs and releasing him from prison. This increased the happiness index for Debs and a lot of nervous socialists.
Jimmy Carter gets blamed only for 8 deaths in Iran during his tenure. And he gets credit for the Vietnam War draft dodger amnesties, this increased the happiness index for about 100,000 men who got to come home.
I don't think war deaths or pardons should be the only measures. I think the misery index should include unemployment and inflation (granted, Jimmy may get into trouble here). Percentage of the population in poverty or prison, health of the nation, numbers of work injuries, life expectancy, alcoholism, drug addiction, education are all areas that would make a good rating under a happiness/misery index.
Better historians than I am can help straighten this out, but I think it is a better system than "leadership qualities" that seem to have no concern for the numbers of countrymen who are butchered, impoverished and jailed.
Next President's Day, think of Warren and Jimmy.
_-_Dante_And_Virgil_In_Hell_(1850).jpg)
3 comments:
ok, let's see if I have this straight: Lincoln and FDR both had wars thrust upon them, but they are bad because they won them?
Well, I guess that must be so. Damn Lincoln! He deprived the blacks of the pleasure of being slaves after 1865! Damn FDR! He deprived the rest of us of the pleasure of being slaves after 1945!
I don't hear a defense of Woodrow Wilson.
I'm not in charge of Wilson. I'm not in charge of Lincoln, either--that was just gratuitous. I am in charge of FDR. I'm on the board, you know.
Anyway, as to Wilson. If you want my opinion, he's a mixed bag. I liked the Clayton Antitrust Act and his attempt at the League of Nations. I think the biggest negative on him was his going along with the horrible abuses of civil liberties that occurred in 1919 and 1920--especially the Palmer Raids, etc. I don't have a problem with the war. Overall, I think I like him more than I dislike him due to his heroic but unsuccessful attempt on the League against public opinion and all odds and his own health and life as it turned out.
Post a Comment