Skip to main content

    For your Sunday reading pleasure, Rolling Stone magazine has a couple of articles that should be getting play all over the MSM - so of course you'll be lucky to hear anything about either of them. Princeton historian Sean Wilentz has put together a look at how the Bush presidency stacks up against other really bad presidents. This is worth looking at if only for the historical perspective. There are too many good quotes to pull out here. Definitely a must read. The Worst President in History? One of America's leading historians assesses George W. Bush
     If that weren't enough, Rolling Stone sets the Wayback Machine to1999 and reminds us we were warned.
All Hat, No Cattle We warned you! Look back at our 1999, pre-primary assessment of George W. Bush  (more)

      My apologies if these have already been posted about here; I don't have as much time to track these things as I once did, but repetition can't hurt in this case. I rather expect these articles to get the Colbert treatment by the MSM - at least initially. Ignore them, and hope they'll go away.
       The 1999 piece makes you wonder how anyone in the MSM could have ever taken W seriously as a candidate - and why the hell didn't they ever question W about any of that stuff. Truly, if W ever stands in the dock for any of his crimes, the MSM should all be listed as unindicted co-conspirators.
      As for the piece by Wilentz, this paragraph towards the end of the article provides a cogent summary of W's performance - why he's a strong contender for Worst President Ever.

The president came to office calling himself "a uniter, not a divider" and promising to soften the acrimonious tone in Washington. He has had two enormous opportunities to fulfill those pledges: first, in the noisy aftermath of his controversial election in 2000, and, even more, after the attacks of September 11th, when the nation pulled behind him as it has supported no other president in living memory. Yet under both sets of historically unprecedented circumstances, Bush has chosen to act in ways that have left the country less united and more divided, less conciliatory and more acrimonious -- much like James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson and Herbert Hoover before him. And, like those three predecessors, Bush has done so in the service of a rigid ideology that permits no deviation and refuses to adjust to changing realities. Buchanan failed the test of Southern secession, Johnson failed in the face of Reconstruction, and Hoover failed in the face of the Great Depression. Bush has failed to confront his own failures in both domestic and international affairs, above all in his ill-conceived responses to radical Islamic terrorism. Having confused steely resolve with what Ralph Waldo Emerson called "a foolish consistency . . . adored by little statesmen," Bush has become entangled in tragedies of his own making, compounding those visited upon the country by outside forces.

   By now things have gotten so bad, you'd think the MSM would be all over this. Where are the jeremiads?
      Instead we have the NY Times being threatened with treason trials and the rest of the press looking into Michael Jackson's finances and the 60th anniversary of the bikini. They're probably already working up articles on how Democrats are completely unfit to clean up the mess W has made, just in case the Democrats actually take back one or both sides of Congress. Don't even think about the White House in 2008. (All this assuming there actually will be elections.)
        I suppose the only other thing to look for will be a response from the Mighty Wurlitzer to Wilentz. The Rove reflex is to defend by attacking. Tactical nukes anyone?

Originally posted to xaxnar on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 06:18 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  All Hat, No Cattle (0+ / 0-)

    I wish I could confidently say "history will write this as the worst presidency ever" or some such but unfortunately I don't believe the U.S. is going to last (in its current form) another twenty years.

    thus, no history will be written. the survivors will simply have bitterness and depair over "how good things used to be".

    "Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue; a state of mind; a disposition for benevolence; confidence; and justice." Spinoza

    by Superpole on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 06:30:23 AM PDT

  •  Don't forget JAMES BUCHANAN. The Civil War... (0+ / 0-)

    Buchanan preceded Lincoln. He vetoed everything. Literally everything.

    When the South left, there wasn't much to leave.

    But Bush is on track to catch up with Buchanan. Bush has lost the Iraqi Sunnis and Africa's Somalia to Saudi al-Qaeda. And he's done it while blowing a trillion $$$$$.

  •  60th Anniversary of the Bikini.... (0+ / 0-)

    Wow !

    That was French, right ?!

  •  Worst president ever (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I remember when the word president used to be capitalized. In times past, I was much more conscientious about it, but not since 2000, for sure, and it is a conscious omission.

    I think he will go down in history as the worst for the so-called Bush doctrine, of doing unto others before they do unto you. It's an untenable standard, and there would be war in the streets if the citizenry adopted it in neighborhoods. "Oh I had to attack my neighbor! He was gonna do blah blah blah if I didn't." Nope, it is untenable, and history is going to view it with a withering condemnation, fully deserved.

    "The opposite of war isn't peace, it's CREATION." _ Jonathan Larson, RENT

    by BeninSC on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 06:55:54 AM PDT

    •  worst president 'forever' (0+ / 0-)

      of all the presidents that countries have known since history is written and will ever know.
      Name one president who has single handedly turned a super rich country into financial ruins, trashed the rule of laws that helped build a super power, destroyed an excellent military, brought ridicule for the country where there was just 5 years.

      Verdict: Worst president FOREVER

      If god also takes revenge and kills then what is the difference between him and we humans?.

      by Ruffledfeather on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 10:15:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Certainly one would hope none would ever be worse (0+ / 0-)

        But it's difficult to see the future. Even 7 years ago, no one could have predicted this.

        "The opposite of war isn't peace, it's CREATION." _ Jonathan Larson, RENT

        by BeninSC on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 10:21:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Bush attempts to liken self to Great Presidents (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    is laughable.  Whenever it is reported what he is reading, it is usually a biography of the Great Presidents in our history.  I think what he is doing is trying to find justification for his mistakes. When he compared himself to Truman, I allude to the quote of the late Lloyd Bentsen and I say, "President Bush, you are no Harry Truman".
    When he once compared himself to Franklin Roosevelt, Roosevelt's grandson basically said the same.  The reason he cannot be compared to any of the Greats are too many to name, but one major reason is that the Greats all had one thing in common, and that is integrity. The other thing they had in common is that they wanted to do what was best for America, not for their own party.  

  •  click on my sig.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RunawayRose, xaxnar

    for a detailed dissection of this article that I did when the article was released in April, along with around 400+ comments.

    •  past is prolog (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

         I rather thought this had been around before. Did it get any kind of MSM attention? Any kind of response from the right? I remember the cover illustration - but somehow missed the article itself.

        Ah well, What goes around comes around. There's a certain kind of problem which is incredibly frustrating - being right at the wrong time. If people aren't ready to hear what you're saying, all the facts and arguments in the world will make little headway.
        I got back to this article because a reference to Wilentz's piece popped up on the Netscape home page my browser opens on startup. It sent me to a July 2 article in Little India While "the largest circulated Indian magazine in the USA", it hardly counts as a typical MSM outlet - and it doesn't reference the Rolling Stone article by name. Plagiarism? I had to do a Google search to get to Wilentz article in  RS.
         BUT, the fact that Netscape linked to a reference to this piece could be taken as a sign that maybe, just maybe, the MSM is slowly getting ready to disengage from the 'popular president' story line they've been pushing for so long. Linking to an obscure publication lets them test the waters while being able to back away if it blows up on them. Granted Netscape is barely on the fringes of the MSM - but who knows how many people followed that link when their browsers opened?
           Maybe people are finally ready to hear this stuff in detail - so bringing these Rolling Stone articles back at this time is a good move. Certainly, that 1999 piece ought to be an eye-opener for people who still believe the MSM has a liberal bias - but never followed up what was already known way back then.

      "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

      by xaxnar on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 07:54:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So many of us saw this coming (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer but in many, many discussions with friends, it was noted how this man barely commanded the language, had been handed everything in life, had no discernable, professional qualifications and had no interest in foreign affairs or the issues of America's poor.  And he smirked.  He smirked until they taught him not to smirk.  

    I remember thinking during the 2000 campaign that I'd seen circus chimps with less handlers.  I still can't understand how half (almost) of the country voted for him.  

    I have always believed that as President, he is told what to do by "the cabal" and he does what he's told.  He's the only President in my memory who doesn't use the corporate "we," but instead impresses how "I did this," or "I signed that," belying his true figurehead role.  

    In six years, he's managed to learn how to read a teleprompter.

    (-7.75, -7.69) No matter how cynical I get, I just can't keep up - Lily Tomlin

    by john07801 on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 07:30:39 AM PDT

  •  They also warned about Cheney (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I loved this article!

    One nation, under surveillance, no liberty, nor justice for us

    by SisTwo on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 08:05:21 AM PDT

    •  A M A Z I N G (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RunawayRose, SisTwo

      Cheney, having assisted in wrecking Nixon, Ford and GHW Bush, gets Halliburton into asbestos trouble, appoints himself VP and assists in ruining the United States.

      I've never seen it laid out like that before, but it should be required reading for all CEO's and politicians about how not to pick appointees for management responsibilities.

      Resisting the Conservation of Joementum

      by LIsoundview on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 09:16:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A Fitting Conclusion (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        RunawayRose, SisTwo

         The only way for Cheney to keep his streak going is to A) get W impeached, B) himself forced to resign or indicted, and/or C) wreck the country. I vote for A and B - but am afraid we're going to be stuck with C.

        "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

        by xaxnar on Sun Jul 02, 2006 at 09:45:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site