wow...what the hell is this? its like when i played that old "doom" game on my computer and found the secret nazi zombie shooting gallery chamber...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/7/2007

a whole new place i can talk to myself...

i voted the absurd option on the last one, assuming it to mean either "i dont know" or "none of the above" in lieu of such a specific option.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/7/2007

holy crap...it IS the nazi zombie shooting level! postings appear backwards. can i vote multiple times?

Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/7/2007

Thanks for voting Ibb!

Posted by Peter Rothberg at 02/7/2007

Why isn't Andrew Johnson here? What a disaster he was! A racist fanatic who sought to return power to the old Southern grandees he had hated until the Blacks he hated even more were freed.

Also in that case, Congress had some Republican leaders with spine -- Stevens, Sumner, Trumbull, Butler, etc., who took over organizing the reconstruction from the president, using their legitimate emergency powers to do so.

Also the attempt to impeach Johnson failed by one vote.

I oouldn't bring myself to vote because Andrew Johnson wasn't listed. He was every bit as much of a disaster as Bush, and more so because their were politicians who were actually on a high moral level back in those days, but as I said, Congress pretty much put a stop to him. No such luck this time, it seems.

Posted by fred feldman at 02/7/2007

ALmost inclined to agree with Mr. Feldman about Jackson. But, might consider the numbers game. Who deserves impeachment more. Who killed more innoncents. Bush or Jackson. both deserve impeachment. COuld look at it this way; back then in the US , it was not even necessary to lie. Few noticed mass murder. Now, maybe more get upset. ?

Posted by cyclezealot at 02/8/2007

The fact the Bush has created a situation that quite likely will lead to the destruction of the Nation and make him the last US president probably qualifies him as the worst.

Posted by jimpat at 02/8/2007

Let's see...choosing a President who refused to deal with the issue of slavery that has lasted for over 400 years vs. a President who goes to war with Iraq, with Congressional backing that's been going on for 3.5 years now?!!!

What a freaken joke!!! I guess the enslavement of a race of people for more than 4 centuries doesn't make anyone here feel too badly. How is it that all of you can be so outraged by this war and yet you still have trouble talking or sitting next to a person of color? How is it the left can demand that this government use diplomacy with other countries and yet there's truly no demand for proper dialouge amongst white, black and brown Americans? Why is our diplomacy at home so hard to come by?

Posted by ACook at 02/8/2007

Why isn't Woodrow Wilson here? He is the one that re-segregated the South and the Federal Government and started the policy of invading Central America. Iraq is not the first country that we invaded.

Posted by jdmccrosky at 02/8/2007

george w. bush...no other president or administration has ever made such an attack on our civil liberties as this one. Watch Aaron Russo's film "America: From Freedom To Fascism" and see what you think.

Posted by spearmanjr at 02/8/2007

I'll cast a write-in vote for Franklin Pierce. His refusal to accept the "free soil" constitution of Kansas made Buchanan's - and ultimately Lincoln's - job much tougher.

Posted by DGB at 02/8/2007

We all recognize the President Bush is a lousy president. His domestic and foreign policies are truly a calamity. However, is it really fair to say he's worse that Buchanan, whose disasterous presidency contributed to the Civil War, a truly bloody disaster?

Posted by trabaris at 02/8/2007

Note to ACook - people don't feel "badly," they feel bad. One performs or behaves badly, indicating a method of behavior. We don't say "I feel unhappily," we say "I feel unhappy." There are many examples of this difference. Try "I feel miserably" or "I feel joyously."

It's incredible reading blogs. The average person's grasp of the English language is not good. For proof, just read how many bloggers use "it's" as a possessive.

Posted by LeeAnnG at 02/8/2007

Considering total death toll of the Civil War (359,528)and the total death toll of the Iraq War (including innocent civilians), which varies wildly depending on the source, it's hard to say who is worse - Bush or Buchanan. If the high estimates are accurate, he's right up there with Buchanan. If we were basing this on IQ (lack of), arrogance, insensitivity, ego, hypocracy, blatant corruption, etc... I would give the nod to Bush.

Posted by IMAX at 02/8/2007

Also a note to ACOOK - Your assumption that anglo-americans (referred to as YOU) still have trouble sitting next to or talking to people of color is founded on WHAT? That was a blanket, racial stereotype. Before removing the splinter from the eye of a friend, it's best to remove the splinter from your own. I think it is more productive to think of human failings as HUMAN failings rather than categorizing them by ethnicity. Have you noticed what's going on in Darfur?

Posted by IMAX at 02/8/2007

You forgot one huge reason why George W. Bush is history's worst president. He showed callous and heinous disregard for Hurricane Katrina's multitudes of victims, many of whom are African-American.

Posted by jeffhirst at 02/8/2007

I find it a bit odd that Ronald Reagan is missing from the list, given the extent to which his administration contributed towards creating the conditions (eg sponsoring the Islamists in Afghanistan/Pakistan, bolstering Saddam) that gave the Bushies an excuse for launching their stupid wars.

Posted by Tarantula at 02/8/2007

There appears to be a consensus that Bush should receive the accolade of "The Worst President" Now that has been decided how in the blazes do we rid ourselves of this wretched man? Impeachment is the only way - a long and arduous business that leaves us with acrook,Cheney, to assume the mantle. Frankly it's about time we took a long look at stting up a parliamentary sytem og governance. It sur as hell would get rid of political scum much quicker and is more in line with direct democracy. How about it!

Posted by brigadier at 02/8/2007

In Bush the 2nd's list of misdeeds, you left out the billions and trillions of dollars of national debt that he is solely responsible for passing on to our children and grandchildren.

Posted by hayneswm at 02/8/2007

"Also a note to ACOOK - Your assumption that anglo-americans (referred to as YOU) still have trouble sitting next to or talking to people of color is founded on WHAT? That was a blanket, racial stereotype. Before removing the splinter from the eye of a friend, it's best to remove the splinter from your own. I think it is more productive to think of human failings as HUMAN failings rather than categorizing them by ethnicity. Have you noticed what's going on in Darfur?"

Posted by IMAX 02/08/2007 @ 5:27pm

IMAX I can say such things because as a woman of color I've experience such behaviors from those anglo-americans you speak of.

Posted by ACook at 02/8/2007

I am not much of a history buff but I can not even imagine what other president screwed things up so badly as George W. Bush. To make matters worse he has convinced many in Congress that he gets his policy from GOD! Heaven help us.

Posted by loubranch at 02/8/2007

All George Bush had to do was stay out of History's way and hold the reigns for eight years and then go back to his ranch in Texas and the idiot couldn't even do that. We are hated in the World and we could not even help our own after a Hurricane. It sure would be nice to have a President that owns up to his own human failings and apolgizes for his mistakes on National TV.

Posted by gwats1957 at 02/8/2007

It's disappointing, but of course completely predictable, that Bush would win this poll. But we cannot look at things so narrowly; in the larger scheme of things, isn't Harding almost universally thought to be the worst? And what about Hoover? Why are these in such low single digits? Didn't that guy help precipitate the largest economic disaster in our history? Bush cannot claim that title.

Posted by antiPartisa at 02/8/2007

I've been alive since FDR's last term. BUSH (The Shrub clown) is by far the worse. If you dont want to believe it, then read many of the book written since he's been president. Some by republicans and some who were part of his administration. He doesn't seem to know how to manage. It is hard to believe he graduated from Yale and HARVARD business school.

History will not be kind to him.

Posted by swbtmis at 02/8/2007

I can remember from Truman forward, and none of the bad actors, not even Nixon, did their worst without the slightest bit of empathy for the people, like George W. Bush. He doesn't care spit for us. He should be impeached for all his dirty deeds.

Posted by 10000things at 02/8/2007

Reagan was certainly worse than Harding. To a huge degree. Reagan, in reality, was impeachable due to Iran-Contra, to a worse degree than Nixon, who is actually the most benign entry on the list, and Reagan probably was right up there with Hoover in terms of his heartfelt contempt for those who are not rich. And war? Reagan relished it.

However, hands down, Bush is the worst president in American history. He is more violent and destructively, needlessly, he is more corrupt, more dictatorial, more profoundly subversive in his contempt for the constitution, more heartless and servile to the rich, more impeachable, and more dangerous to the future than any other president on the list. While Buchanan may have precipitated a civil war that would have happened anyway, Bush may have precipitated the decline of the US as an entire body.

Posted by Zero at 02/8/2007

Von Hoffman's piece is amusing, if uninformed about presidential history, and the omission of Reagan, who did so much to make Bush possible, is indeed an oversight. But there can be little doubt that GWB will endure as the least competent, most venal and most destructive president so far in our history: the continuance of the Republic is more threatened at present than at the time of Buchanan, Nixon or Reagan.

Posted by Chalcedon at 02/8/2007

I also think it should be pointed out that von Hoffman has barely touched the tip of the iceberg of the damage and bad things that Bush has done. Bush is redundantly impeachable for lying to start the Iraq war, violating FISA, and probably a bunch of other things. Yes, torture is a problem with Bush, as van Hoffman mentions, but so is the disastrous, retrograde Bush environmental policies at a time when global warming alarms are going off, so are the nearly 800 "signing statements" Bush has issued indicating that he doesn't think laws actually apply to him, he may start ANOTHER war shortly.

Bush's financial management has set the country's fiscal health on a course to a train wreck that will have deep impacts on the US when the chickens come home to roost.

Speaking of despicable cabinet members, Bush has not only Rumsfeld to answer for, but also Rice, John Aschroft, now Torture Boy as well, and his treasury secretaries have been non-entities when something more than political cheerleaders are needed.

Bush has attempted to reignite a global nuclear arms race, and may have succeeded.

In terms of sheer disaster, loony radicalism, and obstinate, ideology-driven craziness, Bush takes the cake. In terms of criminal behavior, Bush really may take the cake. In terms of subversion of the Constitution in how many different ways? 10? Bush really, really takes the cake. In terms of needless violence and warfare with bad consequences, Bush takes the cake. In terms of economic mis-management and doting on the rich, Bush takes the cake.

He is the worst president of all time, hands down.

Posted by Zero at 02/8/2007

Bush is the US Nero.

Posted by Zero at 02/8/2007

well, this is the first time i ever voted for george bush.

Posted by pretzel at 02/8/2007

What about Andrew Johnson? Though impeached and denied a second term, he delayed Congressional Reconstruction, persuaded Southern elites that they might win through sullen resistance what they'd lost at Appomattox. Johnson wins my vote. And what about Lyndon Johnson? The tapes clearly demonstrate that he knew as early as '63 that he didn't have a strategy. Granted, LBJ's redeemed by civil rights legislation (though Vietnam undermined his domestic agenda) -- but he ought to be a choice. Confession: I chose GW Bush because I hate his incompetent, venal, and intellectually lazy guts. But I think Buchanan, Nixon, and Andrew Johnson are arguably worse.

Posted by Tom Laichas at 02/8/2007

History can only be understood in context. Many of the nominees here did not have the sheer volume of information that this wretched man who occupies the whitehouse has and therefore his willfull ignorance and appeals to a god with whom he regularly communictes makes him the prime candidate for the worst pres. of all times. Reagan is a close second, for I believe that he laid the groundwork for Bush 2. It has allowed him and his cohort of crude thugs to do the gravest damage to the country and indeed the entire world.

But on a more personal level, he has demeaned what it means to be a soldier in a democracy. I was born and raised in the military. I served for 16 months in Vietnam. I later left the military as a profession and eventually joined the Vietnam Vetrans Against the War and have, while not a pacifist, nevertheless stood agains most of the military escapades and brutal interventions commited by this country. Bush is an affront to us all because he was a draft dodging rich white boy who supported the Vietnam war while at the same time shirked going there to join the fight he supported by getting Daddy to jump him ahead of 500 applicants to join the Texas National Guard...where he was awol several times. Everyone who has been paying attention knows this yet millions voted for this draft dodging thug anyway.

Makes you wonder about the character of so many of our fellow citizens...don't you think?

Joseph

Posted by outsideag at 02/8/2007

Even though it's too early for a definitive answer -face it, unfortunately, dubya still has 2 years to add to his to date impressive list of lies, failed policies, missteps, and maladministration, thereby significantly adding to his already impressive accumulation of points toward this ignominious award/title- insofar as I am concerned, george w. shrub definitely had a commanding lead at this time. Not only has he lied us into Iraq with it's resultant loss of American and Iraqi lives, injuries to our and coalition service personnel and Iraqi civilians, severely strained to the breaking point our military, material and monetary losses -both military equipment and Iraqi infrastructure [it would appear the only one benefiting to date is Halliburton, et al], lost significant ground in Afghanistan allowing a re"surge"ance of the Taliban, failed in capturing/killing bin Ladin, et al, substantially diminished the standing of the U.S. in world opinion, divided this country as never before -or at least since Nam, failed in the basic job of President for which he took an oath " ... to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution ...", fiddled in Crawford while New Orleans and Mississippi flooded and compounded it by doing little or nothing since, gave the Executive and Legislative Branches of Government to the amerikan taliban [i.e., the ayatollah robertson and imams falwell, f. graham, dobson, wildmon, et al] neoconservative, "religious" far right, as well as the K St. lobbyists, and only pushed the really big domestic issues of terri schivo, gay marriage, flag burning, and court packing ... but, aside from those minor failings, he's only a complete asshole !!

Posted by Old Lemming at 02/8/2007

I agree with Chalcedon & Zero to a certain extent. Nixon, Reagan and, to a lesser degree, Bush I and Clinton were the enablers who made it possible for Mad King George to wage his reign of terror using a rain of terrorism as an excuse.

Nixon sowed the seeds of the imperial(ist) presidency. Reagan made greed, corporatism, & lack of compassion and humane practices standard government policy. He also, by waging meaningless victories against inconsequential opponents - remember the glorious Grenada campaign - popularized US militarism. Bush I was characterized as a wimp, and while that isn’t entirely true, it’s not entirely false either. He did conduct himself better with Iraq and had the wisdom to listen to his advisors in matters of war. Clinton enabled the Republicans and the NeoCons by caving in to their policies while remaining a lipstick liberal. I suspect his late second term popularity had more to do with the 22nd amendment than public esteem.

It is my sincere feeling that I was born into the last generation who grew up inheriting the notion that we could trust our leaders, that they were men of integrity, worthy of respect. I was born on Eisenhower’s second inauguration day. Since 1968, I’ve been able to say that I get a turkey for my birthday every four years and he gets put in the White House. Of my eight presidential votes, four have been for Dems, three for Repubs and one independent; most of those votes were reluctantly cast, and of the four cast for winning candidates, each met with varying degrees of regret.

It seems a more sensible way to ask this question is, “Of the presidents you’ve been able to vote for, who has been the worst?” My answer to that is that they keep getting worse and worse with no end in sight. All I can say about the current crop of potential candidates is that anyone who wants to be president should not be allowed to run; maybe then we’d get someone with real ability.

Posted by runar at 02/8/2007

Lord have mercy if any future president is worse than Bush II.

Posted by iowadude at 02/8/2007

You are underestimating how bad Reagan was. The combination of the tax cuts for wealthy, raised payroll taxes (then stealing from that to help pay for tax cuts on wealthy), attacks on unions, deregulation, equal time rule, media conglomeration, GATT treaty, etc... are the greatest cause for the huge rise in income inequality and economic insecurity & poverty (at least greatest that could be under control by presidency) that we have today. Bush is worse ever on international. Despite Bush's crimes against constition domestically I'd place Reagan as much worse domestically.

Posted by drsteveb at 02/8/2007

AMAZED you don't mention Reagan, who for reasons already mentioned and then some was worse than any except GWB.

Posted by jgold2 at 02/8/2007

Bush and Buchanan are close--both will have left quite a mess behind due to a lack of intellect and imagination, as well as a sense of responsibility and flexibility. Bleeding Kansas, or bleeding Iraq? What's the difference? Both show a lacking of imagination as so-called "leaders."

Posted by Dr. Mabuse at 02/8/2007

I've heard historians put Buchanan as the worst for the lead up to the secession of the Southern states from the Union thereby nearly breaking up this country.

But while I read that history, I've lived through sorry ass excuse of an individual as our president. (little p intentional)

Posted by COProgressive at 02/8/2007

Tom - you mean Andrew Jackson. Enlisted the aid of the Choctaw to beat back the French at New Orleans, then turned around and went all-out after all the Indians. Lincoln did that too, fore & aft the Civil War. Not my favorite Presidents.

Reagan did a helluva lot of damage, put this train wreck in motion. I didn't pick one.

Posted by cominin at 02/8/2007

First I want to say that very very few world leaders, including most US presidents, have ever done much to improve the world around them. Secondly, I don't know enough about all the others to say whether GW is the worst in absolute terms but when measured in light of the staggering problems the world now faces, Bush II is without question the absolutely worst US president and possibly the worst national leader the world has ever known.

Posted by Marquis8 at 02/9/2007

Time will tell about all of this, though for the moment it looks like you would have a hard time finding any one American president who single-handedly made a bigger mess of American foreign policy than Bush-Cheney. I mean WOW!!! The last time we appeared this vulnerable militarily was either a.) at the end of the Civil War or b.) when Washington was burned down in 1814. Of course, we defeated the British in the War of 1812 whereas with Iraq, well, who are we fighting again?

Posted by hhemwm at 02/9/2007

Gotta hand it to President Bush, he proved that competency and electability have nothing in common.

I wonder if this will change the way we look at presidential candidates down the road?

Nah. We will still want to see who is likeable enough to have a beer with, I suppose.

Posted by hhemwm at 02/9/2007

I am not able to evaluate Presidents before I was born. However since I have been on this planet George W. Bush son of Bush 1 is by far the worst president I have had to live under. He is I believe suffering from paranoia, which is a serious mental condition characterized by delusions of persecution and of grandeur. This President has lost touch with reality. My observations lead me to conclude that President Bush harbors a deep mistrust of people and nations with out the evidence or justification. He has committed barbaric crimes and alienated our friends around the world. He has trashed our Constitution he promised to defend. Unfortunately the Republicans, the Press and some Democrats bear a heavy responsibility for the damage Mr. Bush has committed in our name. Our elected leaders have allowed this administration to succeed by their lack of oversight, their cowardliness and blind support of this administrations policies. During this period our leaders have served us poorly. The few patriots who have stood up have been isolated and ignored. After the Second World War I often wondered how the German People stood by and allowed Hitler to take them to war and commit atrocities. Now I understand. Under this administration the curtain has been lifted to reveal that we are not the leaders of the Free World, but we are a collection of people who have lost our way. Our minds are easily distracted by questions that should compel us to oppose. We have become a people who can not stand to question their leadership. Our citizens have placed their faith in what they want to hear, rather than what they can see with their own eyes. Posted by N.GEE ignore this person

Posted by walkerng at 02/9/2007

...Where's Reagan? Anybody recall his pet(war) projects in Latin America?

Posted by colmedo10 at 02/9/2007

Though Reagan's administration did indeed institute many egregious policies (and laid the foundation for the imperial presicency that now plagues us) we managed to survive him, and even experienced an economic recovery during the Clinton years. The burdens that the current Bush administration have placed on our nation are staggering -- astronomical debt, an enfeebled military and seething hatred from the international community -- and it is possible that we may never regain our position in the world again.

Posted by phillipe at 02/9/2007

Bush fils will certainly end up as the worst President in American history to date, in no small part, in my estimation, due to the too strong probabilities that we have neither yet seen the worst of his crimes nor will he serve out his term of office. ---However, the poll above, as with others I've seen in recent months, omits the man certainly the worst American President to this time: John Tyler. A review is instructive.

A Virginian and erratic Democrat sufficiently extreme as a states-righter to be on the outs with that party, John Tyler was through a fluke and bad judgment put up by the Whigs as the VP candidate to buy Virginia's votes electoral votes. This despite the fact that the election of 1840 was one the Whigs couldn't lose after the Depression of '37 brought on by rampant land speculation under the Jacksonian Democrats. The Whigs took the Congress and William Henry Harrison on the top of the ticket won; he got pneumonia on Inauguration Day giving his Address, and died by March, leaving Tyler as President for most of four years. Tyler _immediately and totally_ repudiated every policy of the party which had put him in office, and connived with the minority Democrats in Congress to advance their most extreme agenda. Tyler vetoed the banking bill put through by the Whigs to restore the nation's banking system from the banking crash of the Depression because it would have set up a crypto-regulatory, pro-Northerner banking framework that would have blocked the kind of land speculation Tyler had and continued to favor.

Tyler's Cabinet resigned. He filled their posts with nobodies and ultimately with Democrats. Tyler was a lifelong slaveowner, including while President. Tyler continuously and ultimately successfully advocated the annexation of the Republic of Texas to the Union, first because it would be a slave state. That this would---and did---upset the carefully balanced slave and non-slave ratio of states and precipitate an increasingly violent rush to force annexation of new states with national political stasis the result worried him not at all; this outcome was more his goal than not. Annexation of Texas further guaranteed war with Mexico, whose territory it was still, technically. This, too, was far from a worry of Tyler's but a goal in that he hoped for further, extensive conquests of territory from that country which might be settled as slave states too, in time.

Late in his single term of office, Tyler vetoed a Whig-passed tariff bill, because while it would fund the perennially impoverished national government it would also favor Northern financial and manufacturing interests at the expense of Southern trade with Europe. The Whigs in Congress bruited discussion of Tyler's impeachment at that time, but lacked the votes, the nerve, and the stomach for it.

Well after he left office in nearly his final acts in public life, John Tyler advocated the secession of Virginia from the Union, and then joined the Confederate Congress, but dying before he took his seat.

On balance then, John Tyler was extremely vain; indifferent at best to advice or facts; a chaotic executive; a political betrayer; disdainful of political negotiation; contemptuous of compromise; deaf to the need to balance interests in the interests of the nation as a whole; an open backer of all policies which favored him directly financially and socially regardless of their cost to the country; the nation's highest advocate for what, until the invasion of Iraq, was the nation's war most shameful and nakedly pursued for conquest; and at the end of his life a traitor to the Constitution he had sworn to uphold as the condition and obligation of his term of office. By the 1850s when Buchanan was elected, a civil war, large or small, was all but unavoidable, but in 1840 there was still political room to avert that outcome, perhaps. Tyler's total committment to sectionalism was the tipping point after which no compromise could realistically bridge the issues. As he later showed, Tyler didn't care in the least because he had no committment to a larger country and hence a national interest whatsoever. Rich, white, Virginian, slaveholders where the only constituency he talked to in earnest or cared about.

Sound like anyone we know?

Posted by BelaXadux at 02/9/2007

I've been around since FDR, but only started paying attention during Eisenhower's presidency. Until George W. Bush, I would not have hesitated to cast my vote for Nixon as the AntiChrist. Reagan was a disaster, but maybe we can give him a few sympathy points for being in the early stages of Alzheimers. Now we get to Bush II. Whether it's foreign or domestic policy, religious zealotry or cynical politics-as-usual, cronyism or just plain corruption, stupidity or megalomaniacal sadism [see Justin A. Frank, MD's Bush on the Couch], destructive economic policies or oil corporation shill, The Shrub wins the brass ring hands down for unmitigated destructiveness to the American body politic.

Posted by DBSweden at 02/9/2007

I believe the consequences of BushIIs actions will far surpass those of other contenders. GB effectively trashed the scientific community by abetting the false controversy over the critical issue of climate change. He set back the world's efforts to mitigate global warming by many years - a span of time that may yet put us over the tipping point. He thereby prevented us from reacting appropriately to this crisis. The effects will be uniquely global. The depravity involved in knowingly trashing the world's climate for personal and corporate gain far eclipse any damage that was possible in earlier administrations. Reagan first mobilized the Religious Right but Bush was able to corporatize it through effective use of the internet. Robertson, David Barton (WallBuilders), etc combine Biblical Values with strong support for tax cuts, Republicans in general, support for Israel (end times) and support for the War on Iraq. Reagan and others had a corrupt cabinet but Bush II had a corrupt Congress through which he was able to sell the country wholesale. The robber barons of yesterday would have been green with envy. Other presidents have put inferior people in office but who else would have put Brown, who had no relevant or reasonable qualifications, at the head of FEMA? How many other presidents would have been so base as to milk the 9/11 tragedy for political gain? How many other adminstrations have openly espoused the wonders of torture for enhancing courtroom verdicts? Bush II has a unique blend of messianic delusions, corruption, absolute ruthlessness, incompetence, and the ability to appeal to our basest instincts. These qualities have been amplified to an incredible degree by technology.

No, there is no real competition. Bush II is in a class by himself.

Posted by thunderclap at 02/9/2007

None of the above. The WORST President was Clinton. Why? Because he sullied the office of the President, and he sold our secrets to the Chinese. He committed treason, folks! I don't know of anything more egregious than that!

Posted by PatG at 02/9/2007

I used to think Nixon was the worst ever, but Dubya has prevailed. And, we thought he wasn't good at anything! However, with role models like Nixon, Reagan, and of course, his daddy H-Dubya, is it any wonder he thought he could get away with it? It didn't help that he had the likes of Cheney to hold his hand through the lame duck stage and erase any doubt that he could be THE President to make history. It brings a tear to my eye. The really scary part? He has lowered the standards of the Presidency so much that I wonder who is next? Who will be the NEXT worst President EVER?

Posted by Dana C at 02/9/2007

PATG....

Really? Treason? You want to talk TREASON? Ignoring civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution and outing an under cover CIA agent isn't TREASON?? Fudging intelligence to make a case for war isn't TREASON??? Bush has made a mockery of the Presidency! He is a liar and a cheat! Get real! Clinton did some things I don't agree with, but treason should be reserved for this administration.

Posted by Dana C at 02/9/2007

My own personal pick is Harding. However, Nicholas, your facts are a little off. TR went "to Bat" for blacks: and how exactly would Buchanan have staved off to horrors of a civil war? Crunching the South hard would have been the only way to get rid of slavery-You think they would have put up with that without a fight? Johnson left a legacy of inflation still with us today, and Kennedy also deserves a little credit for helping blacks. As does Nixon for opening China. As for your list, can't help but notice they are all (I forget about Buchanan) Republicans. I'm sure Front Page Mag's list would all be Democrats, though: That makes you as competent to discuss such things as David Horowitz.

Chip

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 02/9/2007

I am not a Democrat or a Republican. I do study history as a hobby, especially WWII. Bush is a liar, a thief, and a murderer. He is a war criminal. He should be indicted and tried in the Hague for war crimes. The invasion of Iraq is a crime against humanity. At least 650,000 dead innocent people and 2 million displaced. No other human being ever born in the US has been solely responsible for killing so many innocent people. Vietnam was a joint responsibility of all the American Presidents after the French defeat at Dienbienphu (sp) in 1954. Bush has killed more than Jeffrey Dahmer and all the other American seriel killers in history combined. He is not just the worst President in history, he is the worst person ever born in the United States of American, period. The facts supporting this view are so overwhelming that it is almost not subject to debate.

Posted by richschneid at 02/9/2007

And quite frankly, when a serious determination of Presidential qualities are taken into account, it cannot be done using 20th or 21st century values to judge 19th and 18th century behavior. So the fact that some were slave holders means NOTHING when determining how well they did in office.

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 02/9/2007

It's Reagan, hands-down. There seems to be a sense that he should be FORGIVEN because he suffered from incipient Alzheimer's (by 1988, he was well on his way to full-fledged). A patriot would have gracefully, and with the nation's gratitude, retired. But besides that, he was, thoughout his years in office, the ultimate empty suit. He was trotted out, he read his cue cards, and then he was guided back inside. Literally. The infighting among Regan, Schultz, Nancy, Baker, et al., was always about who was going to run the country, not for who would have Ronnie's ear. Obviously, we have a similar situation today, with Cheney running the country and Bush trying unsuccessfully to read the cue cards. But Bush is merely stupid, he is not non compos mentis. Therefore, Reagan gets the prize.

Posted by bookmanjb at 02/9/2007

BookmanJB's point defines a flaw in the competition. The contest should be broken down into categories: 1. Most overall damage done to the US and to the world: easily Bush II 2. Most incompetent: easily Reagan 3. Most malevolent: I'd vote for Bush II but lack sufficient historical knowledge to feel confident. 4. Cause of greatest number of unnecessary deaths (murders): Bush II but perhaps Johnson should be here for Vietnam. On the other hand, we don't yet know GB's contribution on the climate change issue and the continuing conflagration in the Middle East that may significantly outlast his presidency. 5. Greatest short-term ecological destruction: Johnson for his deforestation project in Vietnam. 6. Greatest threat to civil liberties: Bush II has the greatest potential through his frontal attacks on the Bill of Rights yet these are apt to be blocked by the current Congress. Woodrow Wilson's Palmer raids actually followed through.

Posted by thunderclap at 02/9/2007

In my 50+ years, there is no question in my mind about Dubya being the worst "president". He wins (we lose!) because his "policies" and "decisions" have far more reaching consequences globally than any of his predecessors except perhaps Clinton or G. H.W. Bush, both of whom demonstrated a level of intelligence in understanding the complexities of world politics, if not always domestic ones. Sadly,there is often corruption, deception, and cronyism occuring in many political systems and organizations, however Dubya's administration has taken it to new depths.

Posted by kabac55 at 02/9/2007

Excellent post, Thunderclap. I would like to advance another reason for my claim that Reagan was the worstest. One of the first things the oil companies instructed him to do back in '81 was to suspend the tax exemption accorded to companies engaging in alternative energy research, effectively flattening out the remarkable upward curve of R & D that had started in the Counterculture in the 60's and had exploded during the 70's. I mean, there is no underestimating the damage to our nation and to the world for that single act. Talk about mind-boggling. Try to imagine what the international geo-political-economic situation would be now if alternative energy research had been financially encouraged instead of hindered in the US for the last 25 years or so. You could make a good case that the Iraq debacle would never have happened. Perhaps 9/11 as well. No, no doubt about it. Ronnie was the flat-out worst... but a nice guy, so they tell me. Oh yeah, as an actors' union leader in the early 50's, he informed on his colleagues to the FBI. What a sweetheart!

Posted by bookmanjb at 02/9/2007

Reagan was also the greatest ENABLER. Under his administration, the nation's largest group of anti-intellectuals was mobilized - the Religious Right. This group was responsible for dismantling the growing population control efforts which has enormous ramifications for our climate change problem.

Bush II ("Jesus is my favorite philosopher") was then able to gull them into becoming the shock troops (votes) required to implement corporate attacks on society. Any opponent of abortion must be our friend, right? So the Culture of Life and Absolute Values people now support (albeit in decreasing numbers) what may be the most bloodthirsty, corrupt administration in our history.

Reagan led the way. Bush II was great on the follow-up.

Posted by thunderclap at 02/9/2007

No one has spoken about all of the other issues that Shrub has left floundering in the midst of fixating on this phoney war: the debt its created, health care system out of control, educational system in the U.S. a joke, Social Security (hohoho, we'll see what happens with all the IOU's in that pot!), homeland security--another joke...it's appauling what has happened to our "infrastructure" on this guy's watch. Well, maybe I should say Cheney's watch...

Posted by BKarwhite at 02/9/2007

I think Bush II is the worst by far... he combines the arrogance of Nixon, the incompetence of Hoover, the aggressive ignorance of Reagan, and a myopic ahistoristicity that is all his own. Add Rove and Gonzales to the brew and the country is teetering on the edge of authoritarianism... BOOKMANJB makes a very important point about Reagan and his complicity in derailing energy R&D... I would add that Reagan's evisceration of the 1934 Communication set the stage for much of the media consolidation we see today.

Posted by EVC at 02/9/2007

The current Bush presidency -- a demented disgrace -- is the worst by far. Whoever comes in second is not even within hailing distance.

Posted by mfed at 02/9/2007

I'm surprised that no one even thought to nominate Andrew Jackson, a vehement racist who ignored a Supreme Court ruling that would've enabled the Cherokee of Georgia to keep their land, and had them march on the "Trail of Tears" to what is now Oklahoma.

Posted by nikora at 02/9/2007

Where's James K. Polk? He got us into the Mexican-American war in the 1840s--based on similar lies. Buchanan deserves to be on there, however, because he was Polk's Sec. of State. He helped create the slave/free state crisis he then had to fix as president! What a kook. Bush II is worse, however, I agree. This is going to be damaging for over a generation. http://chickasawpicklesmell.blogspot.com/index.html

Posted by Dr. Mabuse at 02/9/2007

Oh geeeeeeeeeeeeezzzzzzzzzzzzzz; Caerter was the worst!!! The only good Carter did was prove this country survive just fine without central leadership for four years.

Posted by robster at 02/9/2007

But Hillary will prove to be the worst.

Posted by robster at 02/9/2007

Bush is the worst! He is an ignorant, arrogant, lying UPOC who probably couldn't support his own family if he wasn't born to "wealth". He is a hypocrite. He claims to be Pro-Life yet led us into a war that has caused the death of thousands. His legacy, if you can call it that, will be one of Death, Destruction, Debt and Disabled Soldiers whom he never mentions. He should be impeached for what he has done to our wonderful country. His cavalier attitude and disregard toward the American people is appalling.

Posted by Hernova at 02/9/2007

I'll add my support to THUNDERCLAP and BOOKMANJB ... Shrub's idiocies (the racism, the economic profligacy, the pointless wars on peoples of color around the globe, the government-for-sale, the pandering to religious fanaticism) are identical to the two Reagan terms. What made Reagan far more dangerous than Shrub is that Ronald Nimrod Reagan was a far more accomplished liar than Shrub. Thus, he was able to sell all of that evil with a smile and a wave of the cowboy hat. Folks were far more willing to buy those buckets of spit from RR than they are today from Shrub.

Posted by reddavie at 02/9/2007

It's sad that the best Presidents in my lifetime have been Ike and LBJ - talk about a low bar. Then, a succession of awful ones -- including Clinton who sold out the American worker with "free" trade treaties. How *do* we survive?

For worst, it's hard to out-bottom Pierce and Buchanan whose policies led to Civil War. Luckily, Kennedy didn't get us into a nuclear exchange with the Soviets -- annihilation of the species would be hard to compete with.

But Bush II is in the bottom 5, no doubt. Too dumb to be President; responsible for many thousands of deaths; a medieval hinderance to Science; bought and sold by the rich (via Cheney), who he rewards constantly by funneling money upward; an abrogator of those principles we were founded on: freedom, justice and at the top of the list Democracy: Let us not forget that he sullies the Presidency by stealing 2 elections.

Posted by JazzyJake at 02/9/2007

The description regarding Bush's offences fails to do justice to the magnitude of his insidious performance as chief executive. Yes, Iraq, spying on citizens, giving the US a blackeye around the world, but more important is his gutting the civil service, making government an ideological imperative, and generally providing a safe haven for all the faith-based and commercial ventures that would rip off the public and demoralize our sense of a shared and fair and caring community. Elected to restore honesty and openness, he has changed the meaning of these key pillars of democracy.

Posted by gmp1 at 02/9/2007

It surprises me that Nixon didn't come out higher in the worst poll, where were you people when he was in office? But Shrub is definitely the worst, he's sort of gone for the antithesis of the Marine Corp motto: "Be the worst that you can be."

Posted by brantl at 02/9/2007

> LOL!

Nixon doesn't rate as high [or is it low?] as Dubya because despite that he was a paranoid bastard, he nevertheless was not totally incompetent. Believe me, I'm not defending Tricky Dick, but it is possible to point to some things he did right. Not a single thing comes to mind that Dubya has; no, nothing but corruption, disasters, embarrassments and screw-ups.

Posted by JazzyJake at 02/9/2007

george the second and reagan have the identical profile. they are both hollow men with easily manipulated, ready to read whatever lines you feed them. just ronnie was much better at it. so for treachery, torture, corruption and ped o' feely ya, that was all about par for the course you can get that from anyone. uniquely this cheny led consortium has in attempting to eliminate any form of effective national government (just simply letting people die in the streets in new orleans, firing federal employees and hiring karl roves corupt compadres) sucessfully raped the treasury and tripled the price of oil. almost a billion dollars in profit a week is not accidental.

in short the american golden age is over. the ability to use slaughter to satiate incredible greed has demoted us to be equals to idi amin. our ability to dominate our neighbors can only decrease from here. besides all of our civil rights bush2 proved we are global idiots that can easily be taken advantage of.

as of now american citizens can be secretly arrested, charged with secret evidence in a secret court by a secret judge and secretly sentenced. just like in all our client states around the world. the rich are very rich, the poor are actively uneducated and the media is used to keep the populace in psyhic bondage. the only thing in the way was the middle class which has been effectively evaporated in this last incredible transfer of wealth.

break out the fiddle george, history will piss on your grave.............

Posted by jimharris at 02/9/2007

It's tough to think GW Bush could knock Buchanan out of his lock on worst President status, but as far as I know Buchanan didn't torture anyone.

Posted by srsjones825 at 02/9/2007

Of course there will be some nitpicking, but, overall the list is a reasonnable rogues gallery of the worst. We all have our lists I'm sure.

Mine includes Franklin Pierce, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush and Calvin Coolidge.

The modern day conservatives have special places at the bottom of the list. Reagan HW and W deliberately weakened the nation. The earlier presidents like Pierce and Buchanan were paralyzed by their own shortcomings. Hoover, Harding and Coolidge were crippled by their clueless misunderstanding of the world around them. But, Reagan, HW and W although also clueless set about on deliberate paths to damage the nation and continued to pursue their agendas even with overwhelming evidence that their policies were doing harm.

I sincerely believe that these three have earned a special category all their own.

Posted by bcbuddies at 02/9/2007

I sould add, concerning the special ignominy of modern conservatives, that their real agenda is deliberately disguised in a web of pernicious deception knowing full well that exposure of their ultimate intent would have meant that they could not have been elected.

Posted by bcbuddies at 02/9/2007

I agree! dubyah is the worst, but Reagan should have been included on your list. He is one of the most diabolical and dangerous men ever to live. We have him to thank for the AIDS and TB epidemics as well as shutting down all Carter's progress toward renewable energy. SOB403

Posted by shaber403 at 02/9/2007

Nixon's decision to extend the Vietnam War into Cambodia, which led to the Khmer Rouge takeover and well over two million deaths, is one of the worst things any American president has ever done. That alone puts Nixon in contention.

The corruption of the Grant and Harding administrations may have been the work of underlings, but in both cases the president had appointed the people in question, and bears ultimate responsibility for their actions.

The best you can say about Buchanan is that it isn't clear if ANYONE could have prevented the Civil War.

Some people would include Andrew Johnson among the worst presidents, though Reconstruction would have been a challenge for any president.

My choice for the worst president in American History is Jefferson Davis. (Though the Confederacy's defeat was due to a lot more than just his leadership.)

Posted by FrlessFreep at 02/9/2007

Your summary of George W. Bush's record is far too kind.

I am 71 years young. I started voting and followed politics as soon as I was old enough to vote. Without question, George W. Bush is by far the worst President in my life time. No other President even comes close.

He makes Nixon look like a saint.

I don't even know where to start in summarizing how bad George W. Bush has been as President and how much damage he has done to this country.

He's done far more damage to this country that Osama Bin Laden could have ever hoped for.

If I stayed up and typed for two days straight, summarizing Bush's failures and his personal weaknesses as a human being, let alone Presient, there are probably things I would miss.

For starters he's proven over his Presidency that he is a pathological liar and the truth means nothing to him.

He is personally responsible for the daily deaths of our kids in Iraq and all of those who died before them.

He has no conscience and is prolonging the Iraq occupation to delay the final worldwide recognition of his collosal failure in occupying Iraq.

It took him 6 years before he could complete a sentence of his own without reading speeches and phrases prepared for him, without screwing up at least one sentence.

He's universally recognized on every talk show and by every comedien as being stupid. A combination of being stupid and a liar are weaknesses a national leader should never have and that's why our country is in the mess it's in now.

Posted by JACK KIRWAN at 02/10/2007

I think there is someone missing from this list: Andrew Johnson. I also think Grant, though a brilliant general and decent man, has more to answer for than corruption. IMHO the Civil War was inevitable but the disaster that was reconstruction, which caused there to be a century before African Americans could put themselves on the road to equal rights, was not. Johnson shut down the people in Lincoln's government who wanted real reconstruction, and Grant carried on the quest for "reconciliation" at the cost of real, lasting equality for the ex-slaves. That is a legacy of shame that these other terrible presidents have trouble matching.

Posted by thesleepthief at 02/10/2007

We are forgetting something very important in all this. If G.W. Bush were heading a Conservative government we would all be merrily getting on with business as usual. However, this is not really a Conservative administration. Privatization is the key word with this administration. Remember it was Benito Mussolini that said, "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." With the old Nixon administration back in power within the Bush administration we have become a Fascist State without even recognizing it. The United States can survive and prosper with a Conservative government. The United States can survive and prosper with a Liberal government. The United States can not survive with a Fascist government, at least as we knew it. All Fascist States need wars to survive (and we are already getting the propaganda now to set us up to invade another country), so my vote for worst president has to be G.W. Bush. And I wish people would talk about our new Fascism, not Liberals vs. Conservatives, etc.

Posted by photo01 at 02/10/2007

One other 19th Century President not mentioned, and usually rated rather high by historians, comes to my mind--James K. Polk. Grant, in his memoirs, makes the point that there was no justification for the Mexican War, and suggests that the Civil War was our punishment for it. Swallowing up a huge expanse of Mexico may have been Polk's great coup, but the inability of post-Polk presidents to deal with the tension brought about by the question of how far slavery could expand into that territory brought us to Fort Sumter. (Notably, one of those most critical of Polk at the time as a freshman Whig congressman from Illinois named Abraham Lincoln.)

Posted by aristides at 02/10/2007

While I certainly didn't support the Reagan administration, there is no comparison between Reagan and Bush II in terms of how bad they were/are. Reagan was a far more cautious man than Bush II, and would have run (in fact, in Lebanon, did run) from the type of folly Bush has embraced. Reagan was about raiding the treasury, not getting stuck in stupid wars. While the former is contemptible, its damage doesn't approach the magnitude of a mistake like Iraq. You can even make the case that Reagan was a very good president by pointing to his defense policies as playing a key role in the collapse of the USSR. I don't accept that: Reagan's place in history would be a lot more secure if he had predicted any of the events of the late 80s, instead of generally their excat opposite. Nevertheless, a non-idiot could at least try to argue by focusing on the ultimate result. But with Bush II, the only discussion among Americans of virtually any ideological stripe will be : "Was he bad, worse, or worst?" I believe Nixon was the worst. His lawlessness,warmongering, and vicious partisanship set the precedent for the current disastrous presidency.

Posted by JWiseman at 02/10/2007

Buchanan did not piss off a significant part of the world so much that we will be dealing with their revenge for years and years to come, and this at a time when revenge could include the use of some nasty WMD against us, which Buchanan's time never had.

Posted by barnesgene at 02/10/2007

Martin Luther King was speaking of the future on April 4, 1967 when he said these words.

Don't let anybody make you think God chose America as his divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world. God has a way of standing before the nations with justice and it seems I can hear God saying to America, "You are too arrogant, and if you don't change your ways, I will rise up and break the backbone of your power, and I will place it in the hands of a nation that doesn't even know my name."

The future is here.

Posted by seashell5 at 02/10/2007

Even if Bush leaves office with the nation falling apart it will have taken him two terms to do it. Buchanan almost lost the republic in one term. If we hadn't gotten lucky with Lincoln . . .

Posted by Dan Juma at 02/10/2007

W's incompetence and criminality is unmatched because never before has the United States been as hated, and in some nations, as despised as it is now. Claiming to be a man of the people and pretending to be a Texan who is down to earth, not only demeans Texans, but all Americans. He will be remembered as the president who brought about the downfall of America's prestige and credibility in the world and perminantly reveresed the image of the United States as a fair nation upholding the highest values of democracy and citizen's rights.

Posted by dmegalli at 02/11/2007

The ill effects of Bush's presidency will continue well beyond the lifetime of anyone reading this article today. We can't begin to fathom how bad these effects will be. The worst President at the worst possible time.

Posted by dogofthesouth at 02/11/2007

Your description of Bush is far too kind. Never mind the wiretapping, what about kidnapping people; holding them in custody, indefinitely, without letting their families, friends, or lawyers know where they are; having them tortured and even murdered? Vicious, amoral, unpatriotic, un-American arch-criminals. To criticize them for incompetence is like saying that Al Capone was a bad guy because he didn't pay his taxes.

Posted by sgoodman at 02/11/2007

I maybe young, 22 years old. But I am also a huge US History and President fan. And without a doubt, W is the worse and it is not even close. The only other one I would put up there with Bush II is Nixon but after reading John Dean's book, "Worse than Watergate" sold it to me.

Posted by jsatz23 at 02/11/2007

Bush is the worst for our country as a whole. However, the corporate class would disagree. As long as money controls elections and our media, what can one expect? Ironically, we support the financing of elections with our purchases of products and services. Who pays the lobbyists? Now, fake Christians have joined the pursuit of money and power. Would Jesus approve the accumulation of money and power? Marvin Wagner, Indpls, IN

Posted by Marvin R at 02/12/2007

Could you please add an "Other" choice, with a blank for name and short summary reason? It would be entertaining. Maybe someone would put in a bad word for Andrew Johnson for selling Reconstruction down the river. Maybe Reagan would get the thrashing he deserves. We could all learn something.

Posted by dryfoo at 02/12/2007

Why don't you guys have a poll asking who the BEST President was?

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 02/12/2007

I can't believe Reagan is missing from the list. He led to the end of labor unions and the fairness doctrine (which has allowed fascists like Bush/Cheney to steal elections with nary a media peep), slept through the AIDS epidemic, led to unemployment levels so high we had to change the way it is calculated to eliminate the counting of people whose jobs were never coming back, and fomented the whole "greed is good" right wing mantra that has destroyed this once great nation. He also disregarded early signs of global warming and helped lock us into the cataclysmic climate change we now face.

Posted by hmnpwr at 02/13/2007

I can only choose from those who were president during my 86 years, when I first became aware of politics. That was 1928 and the race for the presidency between Al Smith and Herbert Hoover. No president, in those 80 years, has, as your poll shows, been worse than the lying, paranoid psychopath who dodged service in Vietnam - patriot that he was - by having his "daddy" get him into the then closed Texas Air National Guard - from which he deserted. George W. Bush a Patriot? Hell No! A lying cowardly mouse surrounded by Secret Service, who has sent more than 3,100 men to the deaths in Iraq with his posturing as a "man".

Posted by Leedee at 02/13/2007

As a former United States Marine Corps Combat Veteran and fellow Texas, I am deeply ashamed of President Bush and his Toadies. He is a coward and Chickenhawk of the highest order like Cheney, Rove and their ilk. I eagerly await 01-20-09 to be rid of this disgrace to our Country and Constitution. He has been the greatest threat to our Republic in my lifetime! Semper Fidelis Pro Patria

Posted by Patrick Dugan at 02/13/2007

The problem is that the bad guy you know is always worse then the bad guy you read about. Franklin Pierce was far worse than this article makes out: Franklin Pierce’s list of bad decisions is extensive. Pierce’s presidency probably caused the Civil War and the hundreds of thousands of deaths associated with it. First he tossed aside the Missouri Compromise. Next, he approved the Kansas-Nebraska Act which led to a low level civil war in Kansas between pro- and anti-slavery factions. And to top it off he approved the Ostend Manifesto which called for the taking over of Cuba as a pro-slave territory. Pierce did his best to extend slavery in the US which led directly to the creation of the Republican Party to end slavery.

GWB is a piker in violating the Constitution compared to Woodrow Wilson. Wilson arrested Americans simply for being opposed to the war. The awful "clear and present danger" doctrine came from the Supreme Court by way of Wilson's attorney general.

Hoover, of course, stood by and let millions of Americans go hungry and did nothing while the Dust Bowl started.

So, yes, GWB is certainly one of the worst presidents but does anyone really think that he is worse than the guy who caused the Civil War and killed almost 1,000,000 Americans?

Posted by tgpaul at 02/13/2007

I must concur with LEEDEE. If, ineed, responsibility for the U.S. Civil War lies at the feet of Buchanan, he was a terrible leader. In my lifetime, however, no President can come close to the incompetence, arrogance, -- yes, ignorance -- and selfishness of George W. Bush.

Posted by pedoviejo2 at 02/13/2007

Why isn't Andrew Jackson on the list? His zealousness in legislating the extermination of Native Americans -- or, at best, forcing them on thousand-mile treks to exile in uninhabitable lands -- constitutes nothing less than genocide or ethnic cleansing. All in the name of the "Manifest Destiny" of the "real" Americans' right to the land all the way to the Pacific. His legacy continues today, among virtually every Native nation and tribe. Please take this as my write-in vote for Andrew Jackson as the Worst.

Posted by Bill Siegel at 02/13/2007

NIKORA -- thank you. I didn't see your post til after I submitted mine. So that's 2 whole votes for the only President who legislated genocide within this country.

Posted by Bill Siegel at 02/13/2007

Hey Ya'll, As I read all of the write-ins I get more and more bummed! Damn, Have there been any Great Prez'? I don't want to hear about that NAFTA approvin', Welfare reformin' Clinton. Ok so he spilled a little seed, don't care. Ok so he balanced the budget, at who's expense? Don't want to hear about the amphetamine shootin'* Viet Nam continuin' Kennedy. Ok, so he was good at playing Chicken w/Soviets, what if he'd lost? Ok He could really turn a phrase, "Ask not what your country can do for you, rather ask what your country can do to you" or something like that. So again my question, Have there been any Really Good Presidents? I think Douglas Addams had it right when he said-Any one who seeks power/authority should never be allowed to have any. Not a direct quote but close enough. He goes on to say,(and this is a direct quote) "People are a problem" Lately I've been thinking about this "every four years" thing. Man! Imagine how scarry that must be for other nations. No matter how much time, energy, and resources you devote and/or commit to a deal with the Usa's (=us a's=USA)in four years or less all bets could be off. Treaties be damned. Name one treaty we've honored once the powers that be deem it no longer serves their interests. Not renogotiated, 'cuz that ain't our style! Just ignore the thing as if it never existed. Well, enough ranting for now. *Yes I said amphetamines. He received shots from a doctor. Reportedly for pain. Maybe he had ADHD;) I don't know.

Posted by Tht1Gy! at 02/13/2007

Here's a vote for Woodrow Wilon. He brought Jim Crow laws to Washington, launched repeated interventions in Latin America while pretending he was more moral than anyone else, jailed hundreds for opposing his intervention in World War I, and was probably the most pompous, self righteous president ever

Posted by gus schwartz at 02/14/2007

While Woodrow Wilson did indeed start policies which re-segregated the south and unnecessarily invaded Central America, his worst crime was his complicity to the "Federal Reserve". Not only have we been suffering the consequences from that treasonous crime for 94 years, it made repugnant thugs like Bush possible and inevitable. Please watch Arron Russo's interview about the Federal Reserve, 9/11 truth and Nelson Rockefeller at http://naam.pair.com/aftf1626/AFTF/.

I would still have to vote Bush as the worst president we have ever seen. He's a spoiled brat who never did an honest day's work in his life, he did not earn the moral right office that he occupies, he's a well proven pathological liar, he still swaggers stupidly, he pretends to be from from Texas, commited criminal negligence during the Katrina crisis, bankrupted our credibility around the planet, disrespected and exploited our brothers and sisters in the military, precluded our rights to clean air, safe food or reasonable health care, declared war against America's working class, lies to start corporate wars of aggression against soverign nations, caused the unecessaty deaths of oner a million innocent people, blocked any serious investigations as to what really happened on 9/11, commited numerous acts of treason, destroyed our Bill Of Rights and he referred to our Constitution as a " goddamned piece of paper". Sure sounds like the worst president to me.

Posted by apparition at 02/14/2007

Reagan made Bush II possible. Reagan made Americans proud to be racist, fascist, elitist, warmongering sociopaths. He ushered in the era we now live where style finally bludgeoned substance to death. Reagan was the master of "It doesn't have to be true; I just have to say it." (credit: Steven Colbert) Then again, Truman was the one who dropped TWO atomic bombs on Japan after the war was virtually over as a "show of force" at the start of the cold war. Of course, W has two years left in office...and bunches of 'Nucular' weapons that he and Dead-eye Dick are itching to use on some poor brown people.

Posted by blueCedars at 02/14/2007

Today's Chinese menu 4 u

http://news.yahoo.com/i/578

Bush says confident Iran provided weapons in Iraq 41 minutes ago WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Wednesday said he was convinced a unit of Iran's military gave explosive devices to Iraqi militants but he could not prove Iran's leaders ordered the move.

Bush backs away from claim on Iran 2 hours, 48 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush on Wednesday backed away from a U.S. claim that Iran's leaders directed an effort to give bomb devices to Iraqi militants and said he was not using the charges as a pretext for a war with Iran.

Posted by Rese at 02/14/2007

It’s telling that this question of “Worst President Ever” has not really come up before this current occupant. No wonder your poll runs almost 90% in “favor” of W. Seems his place in history is secure.

Nixon was corrupt, paranoid, and egomaniacal. But he understood the discipline of governance, created the EPA, and arrived at Cold War rapproachment w/ China & the USSR.

Reagan was my personal “Worst Ever”—--until this one. I think Reagan really believed that what he was doing was patriotic. Not so with W. He has been a fraud all of his life. And someone with that level of self-contempt (well deserved though it be) can never do good with power they are entrusted.

So, in my life I have seen a continual decline in the abilities and character of our presidents: Starting with Kennedy, who had to be shot lest he institute anything like economic and social justice in the US; then Johnson, New Deal gone soft and sold out to McCarthyist Red Scare militarism; followed by Nixon, the paranoiac who tried to steer a pragmatist’s course between Wallace on the Right and the anti-war Left; followed by Ford, the unelected and compromised; followed by the anti-president president, Carter, who so hamstrung by his naivete of federal and international policy that his best work was done post-presidency; followed by Reagan the Great, who had such simpleton, dangerous notions that he nearly incinerated half with world with his policies, trashed the Constitution with his Bill Casey shadow government, and helped to slaughter tens of thousands with his racist war on Central America; followed by Bush I, who feebly tried to apply 1970s pragmatist solutions to 1990s realities, including an entirely avoidable First Gulf War; followed by Clinton, who for all his triangulation and personal failings, achieved real progress in combating street crime, international war and terror, and fiscal disaster. (We may well look back at him as the last reasonably acceptable president.) Finally, W—--pointless to add to the lists compiled here. Clearly the worst in a string of increasingly ineffectual and destructive leaders.

Need we further proof that the American Experiment is failing? Rottenness dominates the core of our polity. It is endemic to the system that has been grafted onto that structure of democratic franchise our Constitution attempted to institute. Nothing but rottenness can issue from this core of rottenness.

“Where vision is not, the people perish”—--the public now are herded everywhere by their keepers. They are told what to think and how to vote; they are stampeded by fear this way, then that. They are deluded, duped, and demented, willingly cooperating in their own cooptation. Until we have meaningful reform of the means of public information, and of the electoral apparatus, we are doomed to see much worse than we have witnessed in W.

Posted by goyadad at 02/14/2007

I think it's pretty much official that George the Lesser is our nation's worst president, especially given the seriousness of the consequences in this era of potential loose nukes and the looming spectre of global warming.

Sadly, we may not have experienced George's nadir--the varmint's still in office and slobbering over "Iranian supplied IED's". No mention of Saudi support for Sunni extremists of course.

In the final analysis, the current morass we find ourselves in is a reflection of our human natures. Dubya is simply a Smithsonian quality example of our worst capabilities. I think it's strongly evident that our future survival will very likely depend on a drastic transformation of the human species.

Good posts here by the way. It's refreshing to escape the echo chamber of the usual gang of doorway loiterers.

Posted by b_kool_66 at 02/14/2007

It's not that what's going on today is so different from previous corrupt administrations. It's the scale. Even back in 1970, trillions of dollars was simply inconceivable. But that's what Bush has shoveled off to his cronies. Watch him flee the country after the 2008 election . . .

Posted by Ray Barto at 02/14/2007