In a recent post Matthew Yglesias gently chides his fellows for the claim that George W. Bush is “the worst president this country has ever had”. Apparently, the Democratic Party leadership has forgotten the presidency of Jimmy Carter. I wish I could.
For those with short memories let me remind you of a few things:
Annual inflation rate 1980 Then: 11.83% Now: 3.99%
Unemployment rate 1980 Then: 7.5% Now: 4.8%
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan: 1979
Sandinista revolution in Nicaragua: 1979
The Cambodian democide was in full swing. The period of the greatest number of deaths was 1975-1979. More than 2 million people died overall.
Carter supported the “realist” policy of his predecessors with respect to the genocide in East Timor.
Perhaps you’d like to contribute a few horror stories from the Carter Presidency of your own.
I’m not claiming that Carter caused all of the things I’ve cited above but I think that it’s pretty reasonable to believe that effective action could have made things a little better. I never voted for Reagan but my view has always been that the worst excesses of his presidency were due to playing catch-up after the stunningly incompetent Carter Presidency.
I also think it’s reasonable to believe that the economy and the actions of other countries are beyond the power of the president to control. Adhering strictly to that view, how was Clinton a good president? How is Bush a bad one?
It’s the “stunningly incompetent” aspect that frustrates me most when I hear talk about what a great ex-President Carter is, or how “principled” he was in office. (I have a few acquaintances who are quite close to the ex-pres).
To me, what defines the Carter presidency is the flaccid response to the Iranian hostage crisis. To me, a line can be drawn from that episode to the present day. If Carter had responded in a more exacting manner, today’s dynamic in the ME might be very different.
First President to be attacked by Killer Rabbit: 1979
Desert 1: 1980
First U. S. Ol;ympic boycott: 1980
It’s often said that Carter is better as an ex-president than he was as president. Harkening back to my Wall Street days, “that’s an easy compare.” And let’s not forget about his National Security Advisor, Zbig Brezinski, who initiated American aid to the mujahadden in Afghanistan, aligning the US with Islamic fundamentalists so as to create the USSR’s Vietnam.
Torture: One word that puts George W. Bush & Co. at the top of the heap of worst administrations ever.
Many things go into how Americans feel about their presidents. The economy is one measure, but I doubt it’s the most important one. I think a president’s popularity/perceived greatness is more a reflection of how we see ourselves … how we see ourselves as reflected in the eyes of those around the world. If we are admired, we feel good about ourselves. When was the last time we felt admired as Americans? Our uniter-not-a-divider leader has proved to be anything but that. To quote a line from The Candidate: “We are a nation divided by fear, hatred, and violence.” He is a constant source of embarrassment to many. We Americans don’t liked to be embarrassed, which is why Clinton took such a precipitous fall as his presidency wound down. His numbers, however, are making a comeback in the last year or two. Perhaps by comparison to what’s happening with W.’s tenure.
Jimmy Carter at least sounded intelligent (except for that “killer rabbit” thing 😉 ). He inherited a stagflationary economy from Ford. Carter appointed Paul Volcker as Federal Reserve chairman, who whipped stagflation and then inflation in the early 80s. He’s been exemplary in his work with Habitat for Humanity.
An interesting Zogby poll from earlier this year on the Presidential Greatness Scale:
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1057
Such comparisons are always empty (and silly, but whatever, you can have your great US Presidents versus Worst if you want), but re the whack supra (or so I interpret it) at Brezinski, that strikes me as rather cheap.
Anyone with a lick of sense knows that if not ZB, then President Reagan’s advisor or the like. The attractin of taking a whack at Sov Union via the Moujahidine (ah I so fondly recall the excitement and romantic cheerleading on the US Right for the moujahidine – that’s one of the problems in US politics, it’s all so very messianic and adolescently obsessed with noble heroes and the like) was far too great. A mistake? Eh, maybe, although probably getting so cuddly with the folks that Zia ul Huqq’s nasty fellows liked and allowing Zai ul Huqq’s nasty bastids to drive selection so much was probably the mistake. Not backing the Moujahidine per se.
American Left and Right criticisms (usually on the Left one must admit as a way of tweaking their political opponents) of working with the Moujahidine against the Sovs are both ahistorical and foolishly messianic in believing one can have riskless FP.
Of course, re ending up being wagged by the Zai ul Huqq regime tail, that probably can be pinned right on the US’s pitiful human resources network in intelligence, and on the Right, the near hysteric and irrational distrust of regional specialists (Arabists, China Experts, you name it…).
The messianism and post-facto Riskless FP game the bolshy fools on the Rigth and Left play are fairly understandable, if sad and stupid. But the constant Jihad the American Bolshy Right has against regional expertise in its diplo and espionnage services frankly boggles.
The worst man to be President in my lifetime was Richard Nixon. The best man to be President was Jimmy Carter. The worst President was George W. Bush. The best President in my lifetime was probably Ronald Reagan.
Remember: President Bush has actively sought a policy where American citizens may be imprisoned without charges and held indefinitely, without access to a lawyer, the chance to defend themselves in court, or even to know the basis of the charges against them. It’s hard to imagine a President who could do worse than that.
Ever? How about Sam Grant or Millard Fillmore? Or, if you want to focus exclusively on the downside, how about FDR, whose taxation policy smashed the potential recovery from depression.