It is an Unfortunate situation for Liberals...History is not a science of emotion...if you ask the average American today who was the greatest President and good majority of them would say Lincoln...but if you do research, like I have you would know that Lincoln was one of the most hated Presidents during his Presidency...he had the second lowest approval rating, first was Carter, and Bush is 3rd (but if he ran this war like say FDR did, you would not know what was really going on...the Media only knew what Ike wanted them to know...)...Lincoln was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, he did everything that Bush is blamed for today...i.e getting rid Habious (spelling) Corpus, jailing Americans that disagreed with him, and so on...the reason Lincoln is known to some as the "Greatest" is because only one reason, he freed the slaves (which should have happened, and would have sooner or later if he had not had done it first) If I use your formula for "Bad" Presidents, death toll during war, FDR would be the next (100K Americans died in World War Two) and he jailed all Japanese Americans for no reason...we will be unable to see how he is viewed by History for at least another 20 years, like said above it all depends on how the War on Terror ends up...probably what you will find more shocking is that the Liberal Hero Clinton will probably be view as mediocre at best, especially since 4000 + American Soldiers died under his Presidency during Peace Time...our loses in this War pales in comparison to other Wars we have fought...4000 American Soldier dying was a good month during WWII...so putting all your emotion down, it will be Intellectually Dishonest to say either way at this point...like I said before, History is not a science of emotion...
Lincoln was really the worse because he allowed what Sherman did in his "March to the Sea"...if Bush allowed American Soldiers to rape and steal from American Civilians...what would you say?
2007-11-26 06:32:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Define seriously. I'm sure your liberal Bushophobic definition will amuse me. Because Jimmy Carter exists, Bush is nit the worst President ever. Because Bush is who he is, Bush will be seen as one of the best Presidents ever by adults who are qualified to make such judgements.
2007-11-26 11:02:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The lies, corruption, incompetence, arrogance, and greed we have seen exposed is just the tip of the iceberg. Once his Administration is over and the "tell all" books come out it will be obvious to everyone what some of us have said for the last several years, George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst President ever. Yes, Warren Harding, Richard Nixon, and James Buchanan can all rest easy, now.
2007-11-26 06:19:42
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
5⤋
Well, so far he has lower approval rating than Nixon did at his lowest.
Before now, Nixon was considered the worst due to approval ratings.
But make no mistake, our current congress has the lowest approval rating of all time. It's also democrat controlled. So the lesson of the day is that both parties suck, and neither have our interests in mind.
2007-11-26 06:03:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by Hellion 3
·
3⤊
4⤋
No. He will be remembered across the world as one of the best. Canada just elected a friend of Bush (Harper). England traded one friend of Bush for another (Blair for Brown). France just elected a friend of Bush (Sarko the American). Germany has also just elected a friend of Bush (Merkel). Australia has always been a friend of Bush. There is a very good reason for this: Clinton policies have failed the world just as they did in the U.S. and Europe is electing leaders who will improve their economies and give them jobs just as Bush's policies have done in the U.S. Iraq is grateful for Bush. Our troops also love Bush; many refer to him as "a real dude!" Bush stands for freedom and justice and the American way.
Worst President ever would be Andrew Johnson. He was not a leader. He was impeached for firing the Secretary of War. Second to Johnson would be William Jefferson Clinton. He was impeached for committing a felony in obstructing justice and perjuring sworn testimony. He also raised taxes, slashed our defense posture and repositioned our intelligence capacities and focus to diplomacy and peace-making all while an obvious, growing, and impending threat was sprouting up right in our faces with the bombing of the WTC in 1993, the attacks in Somalia, the attacks on our African embassies, the Khobar bombing of our wives and children overseas, the attack on the Cole, etc. Clinton consistently refused to face the music and placed our nation at risk.
And we paid dearly for that on September 11, 2001. It only took eight months for things to come full-circle.
Also, Clinton underfunded the SEC which allowed large companies such as Enron, MCI, Global Crossing, Rite Aid, K-Mart, and countless other major corporations to cheat investors during the nineties leading to economic collapse shortly after he left office. There was a lot of cleanup and collateral damage done to nearly zero regulation during the Clinton years and Americans paid for eight years of Clinton.
We should not do so again.
2007-11-26 06:20:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
5⤋
Why is it that every answer even hinting that he might not be the worst has a majority of negative votes? They are answering the question. If you don't agree with someones opinion, fine, but don't pretend they gave a "bad" answer.
to answer your question, the only right answer is: only time will tell!!!!
2007-11-26 06:17:08
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋
Yes, I believe he will. He doubled the National Debt, created a war of choice in a country that didn't attack us and had no part in the 9/11 attack, removed portions of the Bill of Rights, left our borders undefended and our country overrun with illegal aliens.
What ever happened to Bin Laden?
2007-11-26 06:04:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Zardoz 7
·
4⤊
6⤋
Not even close, read a book on the Presidency. Depending on the outcome in the Middle East, he could go down as just the opposite when all is said and done.
2007-11-26 06:05:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by booman17 7
·
6⤊
7⤋
George W Bush will hopefully not be remembered at all, except for the:
"Wecession"
2007-11-26 06:02:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by outcrop 5
·
5⤊
6⤋
In my lifetime, he has been the worst. Jimmy Carter wasn't good, but he gave it up after 1 term, so at least he saw it.
Bush thinks he is the be-all, end-all, but he is a poser. A stupid one at that.
2007-11-26 06:04:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by fairly smart 7
·
4⤊
6⤋