There maybe some disagreement over which of our past leaders was the worst. I nominate James Earl Carter. And if his drubbing in the media this past week is any indecation, I am not alone is this opinion. The New York Sun
There maybe some disagreement over which of our past leaders was the worst.
Indeed. I think Bush is in the running. How many other Presidents have sent nearly 3500 troops to slaughter and created a training ground for terrorists?
The Sun article is hilarious. The oozing contempt and frequent generalizations make for a crass sort of elementary-school political analysis. And all of these cartoons merely insult, with no ability to either defend the current President or tease out what was wrong with Carter's administration (which was not great, but not as simply awful as Emperor Bush's cabal of political sorcerers). I think Carter, as a mediocre President himself, is in a good position to point out problems, because he has been there and made some mistakes of his own.
I think any comic that has to reference a man's cultural identity in a negative light fails on such an epic level that it detracts from the argument as a whole.
I thought so too up until Bush. He is the joke President of my lifetime. Whoever is the next President is going to look like Einstein compared to that clown.
I agree with your first point wholeheartedly. If he was so bad as a President, why not use THAT as a basis for satire or critique?
On the second point, we have had some pretty lousy Presidents. I think Nixon was quite bad, but Bush is pushing illegality and imperial rule past the breaking point. It is a toss-up, to me.
It's funny that they have to criticize Carter on the basis of "Billy Beer" and "malaise" (a word he never used). To me, it says something when irrelevancies and lies have to be dragged in to buttress a weak argument. Carter wasn't as bad a president as Reagan or Bush (any Bush). He didn't go to China like Nixon, but then he didn't break the law to spy on his enemies like Nixon, so I don't think he was worse than Tricky Dicky (who looks pretty good when compared to the insane clown posse that's hanging on to power by any means possible now).
Cox and Forkum lie about Carter "capitulating." But they're always full of shit, so no surprise there. Gorrell's attempt at character assassination is as devoid of content and good cartooning as ever. The guys with illegible signatures have nothing to say, so no refutation is needed.
just a note... I would be highly suspect of a "ideologically balanced group" as created by the WSJ and Federalist society. Given both organizations ideological bent, balance may include both the right and far right. That being said the list does look fairly similar to other such lists I have seen. (It does have a slightly more conservative bent than some of the others I have seen, but not to the degree of some)
One critique of any person or groups rankings of presidents is that in the case of Reagan forward it is really too soon to make an accurate empirical assessment of presidential performance. Personally I think it is far too early to rate even as far back as Nixon, although Nixon might be fair game at this point.
I have seen far too many poor quality scholarly articles that have taken an almost "journalistic" approach to instant analysis. (See almost anything written in Presidential Studies Quarterly in the last 15 years or so)
at least Carter didn't start a new Vietnam, destroy the justice department, purse illegal wiretapping, and generally send this country down the path of Hitler.
Carter didn't send his flunkies to his AG's sickbed in order to try to get him to signoff on an illegal program that greatly expanded the power of the executive for domestic spying which almost lead to mass resignations in Justice. It's pretty sad when your far right wing AG won't even sign off on your shit, but the stuff that Card and Gonzales did at the President's order? Pathetic and disgusting.
don't forget legalizing torture, ripping the bill of rights to shreds (and a good portion of the Constitution), making the country less safe from threats, instituting a (subjectively) massively flawed education bill, encouraging the class gap, destroying america's capital of international good will and good standing not once, but twice, and embarking on a less-cooperative, unilateral approach to international relations. and just sending the country down the path to hell.
Jimmy Carter: not the best president by any mean or measure, but certainly not the worst. that list above is hugely flawed for a number of reasons (some which have been stated), but especially because i'm betting it ranks them not only on what they did as president, but also what events they presided over, avoidable or not, due to prevailing and sometimes unavoidable circumstances, as well as personal fault.
March of 2005... so that was two years ago. Gee Dub has had and taken a lot of opportunities to go even farther down the list since that survey was taken. And, joy of joys, he's got two more years to take himself (and the rest of us) down some more.
I demand rose petals and joyous throngs in the streets. Now.
When the energy market exploded — an occurrence Carter desperately tried to avoid during his term — he was planning on delivering his fifth major speech on energy. However, he felt that the American people were no longer listening. Instead, he went to Camp David and for ten days met with governors, mayors, religious leaders, scientists, economists and general citizens. He sat on the floor and took notes of their comments and especially wanted to hear criticism. His pollster told him that the American people simply faced a crisis of confidence because of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Vietnam War, and Watergate. On July 15, 1979, Carter gave a nationally-televised address in which he identified what he believed to be a "crisis of confidence" among the American people. This has come to be known by critics as his "malaise" speech because Carter used the word "malaise" in his televised speech, even though the word "malaise" did not appear anywhere in the officially released text transcript:
I want to talk to you right now about a fundamental threat to American democracy.... I do not refer to the outward strength of America, a nation that is at peace tonight everywhere in the world, with unmatched economic power and military might. The threat is nearly invisible in ordinary ways. It is a crisis of confidence. It is a crisis that strikes at the very heart and soul and spirit of our national will. We can see this crisis in the growing doubt about the meaning of our own lives and in the loss of a unity of purpose for our nation.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 12:37 pm (UTC)Indeed. I think Bush is in the running. How many other Presidents have sent nearly 3500 troops to slaughter and created a training ground for terrorists?
The Sun article is hilarious. The oozing contempt and frequent generalizations make for a crass sort of elementary-school political analysis. And all of these cartoons merely insult, with no ability to either defend the current President or tease out what was wrong with Carter's administration (which was not great, but not as simply awful as Emperor Bush's cabal of political sorcerers). I think Carter, as a mediocre President himself, is in a good position to point out problems, because he has been there and made some mistakes of his own.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 01:15 pm (UTC)I'd still say Nixon was the worst president ever.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 01:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 01:33 pm (UTC)On the second point, we have had some pretty lousy Presidents. I think Nixon was quite bad, but Bush is pushing illegality and imperial rule past the breaking point. It is a toss-up, to me.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 03:05 pm (UTC)http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007243
As you can see, Bush, both of them, are not the worst we have had.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 04:06 pm (UTC)Cox and Forkum lie about Carter "capitulating." But they're always full of shit, so no surprise there. Gorrell's attempt at character assassination is as devoid of content and good cartooning as ever. The guys with illegible signatures have nothing to say, so no refutation is needed.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 04:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 05:22 pm (UTC)One critique of any person or groups rankings of presidents is that in the case of Reagan forward it is really too soon to make an accurate empirical assessment of presidential performance. Personally I think it is far too early to rate even as far back as Nixon, although Nixon might be fair game at this point.
I have seen far too many poor quality scholarly articles that have taken an almost "journalistic" approach to instant analysis. (See almost anything written in Presidential Studies Quarterly in the last 15 years or so)
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 05:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 05:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 08:32 pm (UTC)'Nuff said.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 10:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-27 10:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 12:29 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 01:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 01:59 am (UTC)I demand rose petals and joyous throngs in the streets. Now.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 02:21 am (UTC)he was bad but not the worst.
he's easily the worst ex-president in american history though.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 02:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 02:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 04:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 05:57 am (UTC)Now Reagan, that guy was bad.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 06:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 09:12 am (UTC)Carter Said Malaise
Date: 2007-05-28 09:57 am (UTC)When the energy market exploded — an occurrence Carter desperately tried to avoid during his term — he was planning on delivering his fifth major speech on energy. However, he felt that the American people were no longer listening. Instead, he went to Camp David and for ten days met with governors, mayors, religious leaders, scientists, economists and general citizens. He sat on the floor and took notes of their comments and especially wanted to hear criticism. His pollster told him that the American people simply faced a crisis of confidence because of the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the Vietnam War, and Watergate. On July 15, 1979, Carter gave a nationally-televised address in which he identified what he believed to be a "crisis of confidence" among the American people. This has come to be known by critics as his "malaise" speech because Carter used the word "malaise" in his televised speech, even though the word "malaise" did not appear anywhere in the officially released text transcript:
no subject
Date: 2007-05-28 09:58 am (UTC)