#97392 by Howard Marks on 8/28 at 8:01 pm

“I cannot believe the trash in this article and the overall low-level of thinking in this discussion.
Of course Nixon was worse”

Wow!  A self-assured poster, how unique.  I guess Mr. Marks way of thinking has merit if one counts only the issues of the Vietnam war and the Iraq (what is it?) and further considers civilian casualty counts to the primary issue of worse or better, Guess by these standards Roosevelt, Truman would eclipse either Bush or Nixon. Reagan (Guatemala & Nicaragua) and Jackson(indigenous people)both get honorable mentions if “genocide” is an issue as do Ford (Chile East Timor)and Carter (East Timor).

Unfortunately “The war” is not the only issue (for most of us) that effects our preference for “worst president” For-an-instance, odor is a big issue when I personally judge presidents, and Bush definitely stinks!

I cannot believe the trash in this article and the overall low-level of thinking in this discussion.
Of course Nixon was worse and as for the figures of Indochinese killed by the US military the real figure
is between 4:5 and 5 million of whom 3.4 million were
Vietnamese. Far from being too high even these figures could be low. McNamara is right as is the Vietnamese government.
We know for a fact that 1:1 armed, uniformed Viet combatants were killed.
We also know from the testimony of American soldiers such as Winter Soldier that at the very least American troops were killing at least 3 civilians for every one combatant. That is a low average often they were killing ten or more civilians for every Vietnamese in uniform.
Under Nixon the bombing increased by a massive amount on a scale far beyond anything in Iraq or Afghanistan.
We are also know for fact that the US killed 1 million Cambodians, 600,000 directly, 400,000 less directly.
By the way during the 1990’s Bill Clinton and his cohorts killed over 1 million Iraqis plus hundreds of thousands of other people across the world. This was done by a two pronged policy of genocidal sanctions and frequent bombing.

If anyone really believes Clinton was the first to have sex in the WH, they should get a stay in a rubber room for awhile.

What’s Bush’s thing with Condi Rice, anyway?
She’s as big a joke as Bush.

I just re-read the story above, and although I agree with the political leaning, I’m becoming wary of the “facts” for an instance the author states:

“.....But without the Americans, there never would have been a Vietnam War....”

This is patently false.

The Vietnam war, a product of French Colonialism was in play long before the US became involved (read Fire on the Mountain by Tom Dooley) The Amaricans began picking up the financial tab during the Eisenhower administration, and then sending advisors, then finally troops. BUT that is precicely what makes that war different from the war in Iraq.  Rather than jumping in with both boots (as we did in Iraq) Vietnam became an increasing addiction like a guy on heroin. 

The author additionally states:

“.....There never would have been a South Vietnam....”

From Wikipedia:

“The Partition of Vietnam refers to the establishment of the 17th parallel as the Vietnamese Demilitarized Zone in 1954, splitting Vietnam into halves after the First Indochina War.

The Geneva Conference was held at the conclusion of the First Indochina War. As part of the post-war settlement announced on July 21, 1954, Vietnam was temporarily partitioned into northern and southern zones pending unification on the basis of internationally supervised free elections to be held in 1956. The elections were never held.”

As the retiring captin said in “Fort Apache the Bronx”
\
“There’s enough dirt here to bury everyone involved.  Nixon, for all his faults, and The USA with hers are not solely to blame for that debicle

Ah, but you are ignorant Greg, in the sense of “lacking knowledge.” And I’m not just referring to your ignorance of how to spell words such as “missile” and “Buchanan.”

You’re ignorant of the fact that the Bay of Pigs invasion was cooked up by the Eisenhower administration and Kennedy allowed it to proceed so as not to derail plans of a presidential predecessor. You whinge about the misdeeds of JFK’s father but are ignorant of the worse crimes of the Bush Crime Family, which included doing business with the Nazis. Read “American Dynasty” by Kevin Phillips if you want specifics of the many misdeeds of the Bushes.

I could go on, but it’s useless talking to Kool-Aid swilling Republicans. You people adopt the attitude of “all politicians are dishonest, so that excuses the dishonesty of OUR crook.” Well, George Bush the Lsser will prove to be even worse than Nixon, and the damage that he does to America and the world will be much further-reaching. I hope you’re young, mate. You deserve to live for a long time with what your little man has created.

“You have to understand that all politicians are scumbags and they aren’t honest about getting a seat of power.”

Greg D.

TELL US SOMETHING WE DON’T KNOW!

Comment #47990 by Greg D on 1/16 at 12:42 pm

Look at this arguement without concluding that im a liberal-bashing conservative. I am a Republican, but I am not ignorant. For example, I think Clinton was a good presedent…....

Hummm.. “all politicians are scumbags and they aren’t honest about getting a seat of power.” but Clinton is a good president?

I agree on the first, but on the second I have to ask; Why do you think Clinton is a good president.

Near as I can tell, he’s just as bad as Bush

As for the “Liberal media” the right wing has been beating that dead horse for a long time, but like the “scumbag politicians” it just is not an honest assessment.

ABC is owned by multi-national Disney and has large financial interests hinging on votes like the minimum wage, mandatory health care, and the opening of new markets (like the middle east)

Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch an Austrailian businessman with right wing leanings, and a financial stake in the same legislation as above. CNN is owned by Time Warner (also owns AOL) not really a communist organization.

NBC’s parent corporation is the General Electric Company a known war profiteer, and beneficary of several no-bid contracts in Iraq.

CBS has a list of affiliations so long that it is almost impossible to make money in the entertainment business without increasing the wealth at C.B.S.  Here’s a partial list of what they own
CBS, The CW (co-owned with Time Warner),
CSTV Networks, Showtime Networks

CBS Television Stations
CBS Paramount Television, King World, etc.
CBS Records
CBS Radio
CBS Digital Media
CBS Outdoor advertising
Simon & Schuster
Legacy brands
Westinghouse Electric Corporation (1998)

Suppose this company has interests in changing anything.

Even the alternative weeklys (losing readership like rats leaving the Titanic) are now owned by the big boys

The Village Voice is owned by Rupert Murdoch.

The New York Times bought the (once liberal) Boston Globe and the Worcester Telegram.

These companies are either bland to bordom, or rabidly right wing…

Give me an example of mainstrean “liberal” media.

K, Bush and Reagan aren’t the worst presidents. They’re down there, though. Bucananhan (probably spelled it wrong) is the worst.

We say Bush and Reagan are because we’ve witnessed it. However, our grandchildren will not be as personally mad as we are now. And as for presidents in the 20th Century, Kennedy.

You have to understand that all politicians are scumbags and they aren’t honest about getting a seat of power. Since both Reagan and Bush are republicans, the liberal media is quick to point out horrible things, even if it has to be yellow journalism. The Kennedys are sleazy people who made thier money by running illegal speakeasies during Prohibition. Also he started the Cuban Missle Crisis and didn’t end it either. Kennedy attack Cuba in the Bay of Pigs to overthrow Castro… and failed and embarrassed the nation like a true, spoiled Kennedy. On the brink of war, Khrushchev sent a letter to Kennedy saying he would remove the missles, if he wouldn’t attack Cuba and remove the Jupiter missles from Turkey. But that was all covered up by the media and he was a saint.

P.S.: Look at this arguement without concluding that im a liberal-bashing conservative. I am a Republican, but I am not ignorant. For example, I think Clinton was a good presedent… except for his choice (or lack of) in women, haha.

Comment #45022 by Carroll Skinner on 1/02 at 12:21 pm says:

“Bush the father was one of our most competent behind-the-scenes leaders, but a poor politician.”

Hummm, lets examine that:

Installed Manual Noriega in Panama, Who he later had to remove.

Engineered the coup in Chile and arranged the assassination of duley elected President Salvatore Allende

Conspired with Gerry Ford, and Henry Kissenger in the “Consent” of the United States for Indoniesia’s genocide in East Timor.

Worked to help Augusto Pinochet consolidate his power in Chile while that administration offed an estimated 100,000 chilians.

Conspired with Oliver North in the Iran Contra mess,

defended Kuait with US soldiers while allowing kuaities of draft age to rock the night away in Egypt.

There’s more, but no use attempting to educate a person who believes Bush a “competent leader.”

We haven’t had a “competent leader” since Eisenhower!

This is typical liberal trash. How about LBJ?--his Great Society program was an abject failure and started the whole welfare system as it exists today, creating a permanent underclass that lives off the taxed earnings of working people---who think they are OWED this benefit.LBJ turned the Vietnam war into a politician’s war, created rediculous things like “demilitarized zones” and forbidding fighter pilots to use their own discretion in bombing targets (just ask John McCain, U.S. Senator and a former pilot who had to put up with those rediculous rules of engagement). The politicians, not the military, conducted the war in Vietnam, with disastrous results for the U.S. LBJ was the top dog in this completely mismanaged war.

Although a Republican, I am no fan of George Bush. He spends our tax dollars more than just about any Democrat. Bush to me is not a very good president; but he is far from the worst.

Democrats from Truman, whose policies cost us victory in the Korean War, to Kennedy, whose fiasco in the Bay of Pigs disaster was a major embarrassment to America, have shown that they do not know how to conduct a war. The first Bush knew how to prosecute a war, unlike his son. Too bad he was so awful at public relations.

Bush the father was one of our most competent behind-the-scenes leaders, but a poor politician.

Bush the son has involved us in a quagmire from which we’ll not easily escape. He is a shrewd, if not entirely ethical politician. He favors his cronies in the oil industry and therefore has done almost nothing to stem the outrageous rise in the cost of gasoline and other petroleum products. He has successfully used “the war on terror” to become a 2-term president. But I don’t think the Democrats would have done better than Mr. Bush. Most likely we would have gone the route of the Clinton administration in saying a few harsh words publicly, but in actuality doing nothing to respond to the perpetrators of terrorism. You can’t argue against Bush’s record of capturing many terrorist leaders and either killing them or bringing them to justice. At least with Bush, terrorists have gotten the idea that America can and will make them pay for their crimes. So Bush deserves at least a mixed review.

The common caricature of Bush as a stupid good ole boy is very far off the mark. He does know how to maneuver behind the scenes to get his way. I think it no accident that Mr. Bush won the first election against Mr. Gore, and he simply outmaneuvered Mr. Gore when and where it counted most.

Like him or not, the man is shrewd about getting what he wants, and whereas he has overstepped badly into Iraq (still with a casualty count very small in comparison with other wars--heck, there were 25 times more casualties in the Battle of Gettysburg, a SINGLE battle of the Civil War), he has very definitely made other strides in the international war against terrorism.

But I don’t expect liberal Democrats to acknowledge the contributions of Republicans. They practically ignore Eisenhower, who not only was a great World War II general, but a great president as well. His strong leadership kept the Russians in check at a time when the Cold War was at its hottest. We should thank God, or our lucky stars if you happen not to believe in God, that we had such a leader to bring us through such perilous times.

Comment #42662 by jkoch on 12/18 at 11:35 am says:

Had Nixon won in 1960, there would have been no Vietnam

Self serving, revisionist!

I’ll take that wager.

The policies of Eisenhower Nixon insured ground troops in Vietnam.  In fact, Eisenhower told Kennedy upon his taking office that when Kennedy had to go the next step and use American forces in Vietnam, He (Eisenhower) would “come up from Gettysburg and stand with Kennedy when he made the announcement.

History learn it or repeat it.

A warning to all re Ken:

While this site is a “democratic” place, and everyone is entitled to his/her opinion, I should point out that Ken is a “troll” who has been jamming up various threads on this site with the same type of absurd invective you see here.  I strongly advise against engaging him, as he is an expert at diverting attention from the subject at hand to himself and his rants.  The best thing you can do is ignore him.

Peace.

Three wagers: 1) Had Nixon won in 1960, there would have been no Vietnam.  First, Bay of Pigs would have received US air support, but the reconquest of Cuba would have been too messy to allow for another intervention soon, but Khruschev would not have wanted to test this; 2) Nixon would have negotiated anti-Soviet alliances with both China and Vietnam; and 3) Nixon would have stopped Israel from occupying the West Bank or Sinai, precluding the subsequent nightmare of intifadah, and imposing a treaty of mutual recognition on both Arabs and Israel.

If mediocrity be the prize: buchanan, andrew johnson, harding, coolidge, eisenhower, lyndon johnson, ford, reagan and bush no. 1 (no shortage here). Least mediocre: jefferson, both roosevelts, kennedy. The worst of the worst were those wanting it both ways: adams, wilson, hoover, carter, clinton. Smarties who crashed and burned, leaving behind chaos. That leaves the best of the best: washington, lincoln and truman, both the least and most mediocre of all: “little” guys who stood up to a lifetime of goliaths and won. Then there are the “well poisoners"--nixon and bush no. 2. They should be taken off the list and placed in a special category of “anti-presidents”. ‘Nuff said?

I have to say something about that picture.
It’s one of my favorites.
I can just hear the prez saying, “Use this, This is my working hard and thinking on my feet at the same time, photo.” It cracks me up every time I see it ... especially with Nixon in there. He use to do the same thing.

I can remember all the way back to Roosevelt, F.D. that is. Of course Nixon stands out. He didn’t scare me as much as he cracked me up, but a lot of awful stuff happened under his leadership. Stuff that most of us didn’t know about until after the fact.
The question is, did he know everything, or was he just responding to the spin around him?

I believe Bush on the other hand actually does know what’s going on. The duh… performance is just that and he makes it very believable because of his difficulty expressing a cognizant thought. But don’t think for one minute he doesn’t have them.

However, both of them suffer/suffered from a common malady in the White House ... being surrounded by bad people. Amazing how many of the same names we see moving in the shadows behind the two administrations.

Nixon listened intensely to bad advice.
We read Bush doesn’t listen to any advice. So the choice is obvious.

Ha ha Ken! Great satire. You’re one of those guys from Jesus’s General or Conservatives for American Values (cfav.blogspot.com), aren’t you? For those of you who don’t know these sites, they’re spoofs of right-wing religious ideology. They’re totally over-the-top with their ultra-right parody of what Republican Christians think. If you want a good smirk, check them out, but don’t read them while drinking milk, or you’ll have to clean your keyboard after blowing that milk out your nose laughing.

Nixon was gracious enough to resign.

Bush is a stubborn idiot.

Comment #42339 by John on 12/15 at 11:44 am Says:

“Ahhh how quickly you democrats forgive and forget”

I’m a Republican.  and Clinton was a lousey president.

Comment #42507 by Ken on 12/16 at 5:10 pm says:

“...So to all you who try to destroy the USA, SCREW YOU AND ROT IN HELL !
President Bush will be entering the gates of heaven while all of you will be burning in hell for your hate and lies !
Bye People !”

First off, one can not “rot in hell” Hell described as “a sea of fire” would not sustain rot.

The Taliban is back stronger than ever in Afganistan The only place semi controled by the allied forceds is Kabul.

The US did remove a “murderous Dictator from power, after giving him (when he was our ally) the tools to be a murderous dictator.  We additionally killed many Iraqi civilians (non-combatants) while doing the Iraqi people the “favor” of attempting to bring them (democracy?")

Our country is not a “democracy.” If it were, we would be complaining about President Gore...if you check history you’ll find we are a “representative republic”

Bush bringing democracy to the middle east?  What’s he doing exporting it from New York?

People have to overthrow their own rulers, establish their own forms of government. You can’t “give” a country democracy any more than you can give it morality.

Finally this is a “discussion” folks here are looking for answers. Quakers call these folks “seekers after truth” No one here deserves the vitrol you inflict every where I’ve seen your name.

I’ve had to temper myself, for I have found it easy to “whip” faceless people I do not know on this medium.  Try it.  It’s good.  I’ve even agreed with some things you have written, BUT I can’t associate with you while you are spitting acid at everyone.

Discussions need opposition. You are valuable. please moderate your tone and join the civilized dialog.

i would remind ken #42507 that santa, in whom he might as well believe, checks his list twice to find out who is hateful and dishonest.

I am sure Ken is a good fellow and ,of course ,right from his perspective and based on his experience. I would suggest that he go to Google video, type in 9/11 -then click on 9/11 mysteries . I suggest he watch it with great distrust and skepticism. It may be looney left propaganda or it may be the truth..he can decide.

To the Idiots on this forum that attack this freely elected government of the United States.
What Middle East , African or Asian dictatorship allow their people to speak the way you do and not get thrown into jail or murdered ?
Nearly 4 billion people on this planet live with this terrible fear from their governments.
You speak so freely on this site because you know this is the USA and you will not be hunted down and silenced.
You spit on this great democracy yet live here and enjoy the freedoms you have.
You see how change of power is done under the Constitution without violence and bloodshed. You saw in this past election that power shifted, at the will of the people, from Republicans to Democrats !
That President Bush stated that the American people have spoken and established a policy review panel that stated the mission in Iraq was not going well and changes need to be made.
What dictator would allow such a panel to suggest that he is not handling things correctly and change is necessary ?  Answer: NONE !
This Truthdig site is an anti-American, anti-Jewish and anti-God propaganda tool.
Yet, I fully support your right to speek freely and not be punished for your views.
Only in this way can reasonable people see how destorted and false are the ideas of those who would try to destroy this geat country called the United States of America !
God help you to see the errors of your ways !

“President Bush will be entering the gates of heaven while all of you will be burning in hell for your hate and lies !”

Ken--after reading your rant, we now truly understand what the word delusional means--irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, resistant to change even when given proof that contradicts his belief.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0209-36.htm

“I have seen the Enemy and it is us...” We the people who tolerate such a government. We are too busy with being entertained to give a damn. We derseve every bit of it.

I’ll take Hell over your Heaven any day Ken…

Nixon looks like a choir boy compared to this administration.

The nerve of the person or people who suggest that President Bush is one of the worst Presidents !
This entire Truthdig site is in fact a Falsedig site which supports anti-American, anti-Jewish & anti-God, propaganda ! 
President Bush will be seen, as years go bye, as the President who told the Terrorists we are not going to sit still when you attack our homeland and kill our people. You are going to pay dearly for your murderous actions !
The Bush administration has not allowed even 1 terrorist attack since 9/11/01 !
He removed a mass murderer and his regime from power in Iraq.
He removed the Taliban from its oppressive rule in Afghanistan and sent Bin Laden & his crew running like cowards to hide out in some caves for the rest of their miserable lives.
He informed nations that the support or harboring of terrorists will not be tolerated.
President Bush is trying establish democracies in order to give the people in the Middle East & the world, the same freedoms we have here in the USA.
A democracy is the most difficult type of government to establish.
It will take many years for it to work in those middle eastern countries.
This is due to Arab Muslim dictators who use religion to hold their control over the people they rule.
They are anti-democracy and not tolerant of other religions. They are trying to establish Islam as the one religion for everyone to follow. If not the Infidel must die !
So to all you who try to destroy the USA, SCREW YOU AND ROT IN HELL !
President Bush will be entering the gates of heaven while all of you will be burning in hell for your hate and lies !
Bye People !

Nixon aspired to be a tyrant, but Congress checked him. George W. Bush IS a tyrant and with the acquiesence of Congress!

Bush has trashed science.  That’s perhaps the most evil thing he has done.  From global warming to stem cell research and everything in between, when it comes to science Bush has tried to put civilization back into the Middle Ages.

I think we will all be judged harshly by future historians (if there will be any), not only because we allowed this administration to maintain their offices, but by our lack of outrage in the streets, the papers, the news, etc.  We are our own worst enemy.  We have become apathetic to politics and its associated corruption.  We have become a nation of ‘let someone else do it’ or ‘it is someone else’s fault’ mentality.  In our desire and addiction to acquire things on ever mounting debt, we ultimately only have ourselves to blame.

We are not a democracy, as we would like to believe.  Our elected leaders do not represent us, they represent themselves and their own greed.  Those who would make great leaders voluntarily choose not to.  Not to say that I necessarily blame them.  Masochism only goes so far!

We’ve allowed our elections to be dictated by the wealthy at the sacrifice of the common working American.  Humanity’s worst traits are flagrantly in play.  I hold little hope, faith, or confidence that we can return to and maintain the altruistic nature we harbor. 

Armaggedon?  Of our own making.

“What about Nixon, down on his knees, with Henry Kissinger, praying in the White House pantry, for the salvation of his presidency”

And you think this is bad?  Is it as bad as Monica on her knees in the Oval Office giving Bill Clinton HEAD?  Ahhh how quickly you democrats forgive and forget.

the real question should be who is worse ....Bush or Jimmy Carter.  Easily Carter wins hands down.  No president in my lifetime..54 years did as much to make Americans feel worse about themselves and their country.
He should stick to building houses.

W Bush is by far the worst, I feel like we are under comunist rule.

where does he get off thinking it is ok to moniter phonecalls and even have access to everywhere you go on the computer? And some of the stupid laws he has passed are something else.

Let’s forget for a minute that comparing these two presidents based on body counts is distasteful and immoral… no, on second thought let’s not. This is utterly outrageous to me. It’s the same morbid “ambulance-chasing” mentality that also has people arguing about who the worst war criminals are… which ironically brings these two embarrassments to our country back into the conversation.

A shmuck is a shmuck, an ass is an ass and both presidents were bad. Period. I have a better idea. Instead of people morally masturbating about just how bad Bush is, let’s throw him and the rest of those murdering fools either in prison for life or in front of a firing squad for treason. We all sit around debating and moaning about these things, get all amped that we “sent a message” during the last “elections” but I’ll bet you every dime I have and will ever make that not a damn thing will be done about all of the crimes that have been committed in THIS country by THIS administration. EVER. And yes we will still be in Iraq come the ‘08 presidential elections because none of the politicians in this entire nation are anything more that talking heads that will get another pay raise while our country rots around us…

Our nation is like Microsoft Windows. It started out as a simple and good enough idea. But over time we just kept piling on patches and emergency security updates instead of rewriting the damn code when it became clear it was not working anymore. Now we have a gigantic behemoth of a mess that we’re so invested and entrenched in that all we can do is suffer through the incessant crashes and hope to god that the next update will get us thru until the following one is released.

/endrant

“In the attempt to calculate America’s “worst of the worst” you have left out one significant factor: I believe George W. Bush is the first president since McKinley to claim a conversation with god. As such, my vote for worst goes to W.”

So not only do we have an incompetent in the Oval Office we have a schizoid.

I think Bush is far, far worse than Nixon.  Think of the ramifications of what Bush has done in Iraq:  1) exploited the 9/11 tragedy to wage war in iraq, 2) lied to the american people and the world, over and over again, to wage war in iraq, knowing full well there were no WMD over there, 3) created a situation in the middle east that is much, much worse than it was when Saddam Hussein was in power, 4) immeasureably damaged america’s relationship with her allies AND her enemies, 5) immeasureably damaged america’s standing in the world for decades to come.

Yes - Nixon was a scondrel, and yes he broke the law and obstructed justice, but his paranoid doings relative to the watergate scandal pale in comparison to what bush has done.  Furthermore, Nixon was an intelligent, dark, and fascinating man.  Bush, on the other hand, is an idiot.  We were planning to impeach Nixon.  We should carry it through with Bush.

nixon was at least introspective. george bush is a buffoon.

Comment #42136 by Jim Mamer on 12/13 at 9:15 pm Says:

“Richard Nixon, never got close to claiming a real heart ot heart god talk”

Wrong!!

What about Nixon, down on his knees, with Henry Kissinger, praying in the White House pantry, for the salvation of his presidency .

Assholes the lot of ‘em

I noticed what your article did not say—what about Afghanistan, where Bush and his followers [NATO] invaded after 9/11 and is now in the grip of a civil war almost as bad as what is going on in Iraq?

If we can count Laos & Cambodia (I admit that those states are contiguous to Vietnam, but Afghanistan isn’t next door to Iraq) into Nixon’s “death count,” then we can add Afghanistan’s death toll [don’t forget the various NATO (Canadian, Polish, etc) soldiers killed] to Bush’s too.

I still think, as someone else pointed out, that the worst president the US has *ever* had may be a long-dead one.

No other presidents but Bush is guided to war in Iraq by higher father to whom only he is privy. Facing all the problems and bloodshed in Iraq, the father, son and the holy ghost are nowhere to be found to guide George. Is George abandoned by all of them plus >70% negative polling results?

Ronald Reagan made US the largest debtor from the largest creditor nation on earth. Bush 43 accelerated the deficits to historical high. He is the one presiding the 40%+ decline of the once mighty US dollar vis-a-vis Euro since his appointment.

No other presidents had done these. The history will be the judge of who is the worst. History will also judge his right wing evangelical supporters, and conclude that father, son and the holy ghost didn’t bail them out because they prefered killing than thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor and love thy neigbor.

The devil rules.

In the attempt to calculate America’s “worst of the worst” you have left out one significant factor: I believe George W. Bush is the first president since McKinley to claim a conversation with god. As such, my vote for worst goes to W.

Your other candidate, Richard Nixon, never got close to claiming a real heart ot heart god talk. Fascinatingly, both McKinley and Bush got similar commands, presumably from the same everlasting (and ever angry) supreme being: an aggressive war.

McKinley’s nighttime tête-à-tête reportedly resulted in a direct order to “take the Philippines and Christianize them.” While, Bush’s conversation, which was famously reported in the pages of Bob Woodward’s “Plan of Attack”, resulted in Shock, Awe and the Aftermath.

While it is generally agreed that McKinley was simply lying, I’m convinced that George Bush actually believes this conversation took place.

Such evidence of lethal lunacy should add weight to the candidacy of George W.

I submit them both. One must consider the women that married these men too. What kind of women are they really? Apparently after their husbands became presidents, their life changed dramatically. Pat Nixon and Laura Bush had the so called “stepford wives” expression. As if on a leash and afraid to give a REAL smile. A fake smile is presented. Don’t know much about Mrs. Nixon, but Mrs. Bush was once a librarian. It makes me wonder...most would want to author their own book(s) to be placed on a library shelf in this case or bookstore. I am sure she has lots to write about. She mentioned once she likes to curl up with a good book. Why not use that time to write one, even if it is a children’s book like Mrs. Cheney wrote.
I do know one thing for sure. I hope Mrs. Laura Bush writes her memoirs and I live to read them. Now there’s your major bestseller.
Want to know the man...Study the women in his life.

And then after you crown the worst president, what next? This is clearly for entertainment value, period.  How these clowns get into public office says so much more about the electorate than those they elect.  Let’s talk about that.  Was the electorate that put Bush into office more gullible, more ignorant, than the one that elected Nixon?  If this is government by the people, why don’t the people demand, and get, better leadership?  If it’s a matter of campaign reform, then reform. We’re such idiots.

All Moot now, by Monday next the Senate will be in Republican hands....

If Bush W. is not the worst President in American Presidential history then he certainly qualifies as one of the worst ever!  Some of the other Presidents already listed, such as Polk, Buchanan, Wilson (yes, I consider him an awful President who jailed dissenters of WW1 and was awful racist), Nixon (intelligent? maybe, PARANOID?  HELL YES!!! and deliberately CORRUPT) Ronald ReagUNS, yup, the ‘ol gipper who’s “morning time in America” was nothing but a charade for his LOUSY acting and his superficial and myopic understanding of the world at large and a BIG expander of the military industrial complex), these are terrible Presidents, IMO. But Bush W. really does take the cake as the WORST 20th century President. Nixon didn’t cause the Vietnam war. But Bush W. DEFINITELY chose to engage in war and defied International law at the same time. Bush W. is an awful President.

I think that Dubya gets it for his role in 9/11. You KNOW he knew he wasn’t a target or he wouldn’t have stayed in that elementary school in Florida for over an hour after he knew the country was under attack. I believe he was not smart enough to orchestrate 9/11, but it happened on his watch with obvious gov’t collusion (NORAD shutting down, etc.). Cheney is probably one of the architects of 9/11, too, and should obviously be impeached as well.

Worse even than killing thousands of your own CITIZENS (and targeting civilians is the sine qua non of ‘terrorism’), dismantling the constitution is the gravest offense because it would be the most difficult to recover from. Dubya has more to answer on that score than any previous president. (We did not elect him, either, so stop being embarrassed by your fellow citizens’ voting behavior; most of us voted for the other guy.)

But I also say that Woodrow Wilson is probably Bush II’s best competition for worst president: for his Federal Reserve, League of Nations, WWI, income taxes, the whole bit. He started us on a path to ruin, and Bush is just neatly hammering the nails into our collective coffin.

I’d much rather have an inert president; an inert one who had done NOTHING on 9/11 would have prevented 3,000 deaths because NORAD would have done their thing and intercepted the flights.

Another poster is right that our “president” lives and breathes and is president because those with power want him to be. People like Kucinich don’t have a chance for that reason; as soon as he looks like he’s going to win (or even win a Dem primary in CA, like Bobby Kennedy), he’ll find himself in a helicopter “accident” or someone will just shot him at close range.

Hey, is it true you presidental historians, that every American president elected in a year ending in “0” has had an attempt on his life? Ah, but if only that had happened back in TX. (I am bad, aren’t I? Go ahead and complain. I probably mispelled some words too, and doubtless deserve all your vitriol.)

Bush has demonstrated that he has nothing to offer.  A hint that this was so was the selling of him after his ascention to power.  Remember the statement “he’s beginning to look very Presidential?” Bush is only a front man for all that have benifited from his so called presidency.  Apparently he isn’t even a good liar, like Nixon, who at least tried to cover his tracks. So now those who created him are fleeing to cover their own tracks. 

At least Nixon knew what he was talking about most of the time.  He did his homework.  Bush cheated on that too, and IT SHOWS IN EVERYTHING HE SAYS AND ALLEGES TO DO.

In terms of merit: Nixon merits some respect for having conviction although he was despicable in the execution of it.  Bush stands for nothing.  Perhaps this may qualify him for the worst President, if in fact he was or will ever be one.

I am a baby boomer and was a college student during the Nixon days. He had philosophies and ideas that I marched in protest against. But at least he was thoughtful about and cared that they might actually work as public policy. His ideology was antithetical to mine, but his administration was competent at governance.

As Ron Suskind recently reported, the current administration is all politics and no policy. It was all about doing and saying whatever it took to keep them in power and the public bamboozled.

Bush is so bad, he actually makes me nostalgic for Tricky Dicky.

Notice the Presidents I did NOT mention, great, good, mediocre and even bad:
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
James Madison
James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson
Zachary Taylor
James K. Polk
Abraham Lincoln
Grover Cleveland
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
William Taft
Calvin Coolidge
Herbert Hoover
FDR
Harry S Truman
Dwight Eisenhower
JFK
LBJ
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
George H.W. Bush
Bill Clinton

If I had to pick the 5 worst presidents it would go like this:
1) George W. Bush
James Buchanan
John Tyler
(can’t decide on an order)
4) Ronald Reagan
5) Richard Nixon

Dishonorable mentions:
Andrew Johnson
Ulysses S. Grant.

Five Best?
1) Washington (not a usual choice but he had challenges as the first President NOBODY else had)
2) Lincoln. Despite flaws he saved the nation.
3) FDR.  Saved the nation AGAIN
4) James Polk. The Best President nobody knows.
5) (tie) Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.  Carter was a visionary and saved the nation’s economy.  His administration was squeaky clean, he is an honest man, he did not manage theMSM well.  Clinton, well, had he kept his pants zipped he’d be headed for Mt.Rushmore.

Honorable mentions: Jefferson, Madison, TR, Eisenhower.

It is unfair to compare Bush with Nixon on just one issue.  The reason Bush is so bad is that he is so bad on so many levels.  Frankly, it is hard to find a subject on which he did not fail as President.

“BOY DID WE SCREW UP! - Part I”
Or, 99 Reasons To Be Embarrassed You Ever Voted Republican in the 21st Century

1.  You are fiscally conservative and believe governments should not spend more than you earn.  The conversion of a national budget surplus into a doubled budget deficit appalls you.

2.  You have read the Bible, especially the parts where it talks about what Jesus actually did such as throwing the money lenders out of the temple.

3.  You have read the Bill of Rights and believe the words might have some importance for fairness and justice such as the parts that forbid warrantless searches and you wonder why the President admits spying on Americans without warrants and says he plans to continue doing so.

4.  You believe the Bill of Rights should be enforced as written, not as someone else wished it was written.

5.  You believe that our system of checks and balances between the branches of government has worked well and should not be abandoned despite being at war, especially an undeclared one.

6.  You are appalled at the lack of oversight.

7.  You have read the entire Constitution and noted that only Congress has the power to declare War.  You are astounded that the last President to actually have the guts to ask Congress to declare a genuine War was Roosevelt.

8.  You believe that diplomacy should be attempted before military force, especially when the military option costs billions a day.

9.  You believe there should be plans for the peace as well as the war.

10.  You do not believe you should be paying civil mercenaries $150,000 to do the same job privates in the military are doing for $20,000, especially when military families sometimes have to go on welfare.

11.  You believe privates in the military ought to have effective armor vest and other basic necessities if they are heading into combat.

12.  You believe members of the armed forces should not be forced to waste time being used as backdrops for politicians giving to political speeches.

13.  You believe that the National Guard has a job to do in the states.

14.  You believe there should be at least enough people in the military to get all its jobs done.  For example, there is no excuse to not have guarded Iraqi arms depots so that the explosives could not be stolen for use later for explosives.

15.  You believe there should be an accounting for the missing billions of nation building funds in Iraqi.

16.  Your fiscal conservatism is appalled by the concept of no bid contracts granted to Halliburton and others, especially given the Vice President’s probable conflict of interest.

17.  You believe that contracts with soldiers such as their periods of enlistment ought to be honored rather than ignored.

18.  You believe in a return to the long established and highly useful tradition that those in command in the military ought to be reprimanded as well as any of their troops, especially when the troops in question seem to be following the spirit of what they were ordered as was the case with the torturing of prisoners by techniques that would not be allowed in US jails. 

19.  You believe that those in command when a military unit goes rogue and deliberately kills innocent civilians ought to be fired as well as the actual perpetrators.

20.  You believe that simply changing the definition of torture is not sufficient to claim there is no torture being conducted.

[the balance of the 99 are at resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]

Holy Moses, no wonder how he got elected to a second term.  Going off on a rant is one thing, but constructing a spurious argument where hyperbole is portrayed as logic is unbefitting the seriousness of the topic and the times.  The pretzel-twisting required for the “facts” alone is beyond shameful.

The bad actions of this man stand on their own without the exaggeration exemplified in this “report” and the comments that follow.  It undermines the credibility of the author AND the cause.  Throwing the bums out still takes 51%, a measure that cannot be attained if those inclined to support you are given every reason to question every other word you utter.

It feels good, no doubt.  But it’s not intelligent discourse.  Masturbation is not sex. 

Taken too far it actually helps the object of all that scorn.  I think it has, in Bush’s case. The results in ‘06 could have and should have been attained in ‘04.

There is irony in using distortion and untruth to condemn the man for his distortions and untruths.  Bush is wrong and we are right.  And others will come to see we are right by hearing what we say and how we say it.  That will never happen if the former is betrayed by the latter.

You seem to forgetting the total inaction addressing global warming-the consequences could dwarf the figures discussed.