The thing that makes GWB especially horrid is the fact that, unlike previous Presidents who hid wrongful deeds like this and covered them up, he and his Administration are cloaking them with legality and the imprimatur of the Constitution.

They are, essentially, providing the legal basis for tyranny.

This cannot be stated often enough.

They are, essentially, providing the legal basis for tyranny.

While not necessarily an issue, it is always interesting to wonder if he would have had Truman’s courage in bombing Japan, but that is another conversation

I don’t think that there’s a chance FDR, or any other president, wouldn’t have dropped the bomb. The conventional wisdom at the time was that the death toll would be much higher with an invasion of the Japanese mainland (with a lower probability of success). Considering the information they had available and the information they didn’t (the lasting effects of radiation) the usage of the A-bomb on Japan was a no-brainer in 1945.

I do wonder sometimes, what FDR’s legacy would look like today if he’d been the one to do it. Actually, I doubt it would have changed all that much. He might be a little less popular in some supportive circles, but most would probably be willing to write it off as a necessary action at the time and the people who would have hated him for dropping the bomb were most likely the same people who hated him for a lot of the other stuff he did (so their opinion would probably have been unchanged). For myself, I think FDR was an absolutely horrific president, but if it had been him in charge of dropping the bomb I probably wouldn’t have held it against him because I think it was a necessary action given the circumstances and the timeframe.

You can’t tell me that other Presidents have not used torture to get what they wanted as well, they just did a better job of covering it up.

True…but Bush isn’t even trying to cover it up. He’s been claiming that it’s the government’s prerogative to torture prisoners as well as strip them of their rights of due process (based on an almost completely arbitrary usage of unlawful enemy combatant status). And U.S. citizens have not been exempted from this treatment, as the case of Jose Padilla has illustrated. What he’s doing in regards to torture is worse than what any other U.S. president has done.

All Presidents in recent history have gone into other countries unprovoked, just on a smaller scale and with more compentency than GWB.

Also true…but the level of sheer incompetence pushes Dubya to the top in the category of “Worst President On Foreign Policy” to my mind.

For a republican, however, GWB has been by far the worst President in regards to economics in recent memory

No argument from me on that…he seems to be channeling Herbert Hoover lately.

Of course, ultimately this is all just personal opinion based on how much we value certain issues. Our preferences aside, I think we can all agree that whatever his true ranking might be Dubya is one of the most horrific presidents ever to sit in the White House…and that’s saying a lot.

GWB and LBJ are fighting for second. Most of what GWB has done, other Presidents were doing as well, just not as in as big of way or as incompentently. Presidents have been spying on Americans for years. GWB has just taken it to another level. You can’t tell me that other Presidents have not used torture to get what they wanted as well, they just did a better job of covering it up. All Presidents in recent history have gone into other countries unprovoked, just on a smaller scale and with more compentency than GWB. For a republican, however, GWB has been by far the worst President in regards to economics in recent memory along with his disdain for individual rights and lust for power and control he is right up there with LBJ and maybe even in front of him for beinn the second worst President ever.

For instance, we now know that they were spying on Americans prior to 9-11. The Total Information Awareness program spent our tax money to spy on ordinary Americans conducting totally legal activities in their everyday lives. And it didn’t stop when found out, they just shifted to “the program”.

One thing to point out is that part of GWB’s incompetence regarding Iraq can be pointed back to FDR. When FDR was attacking Germany, he was allowed a total war approach (destroy, then rebuild) rather than whatever the incompetence we hold today to be American military strategy. It also is important to remember that FDR and his wife were part of the creators of the United Nations, another black mark on the Presidency, and one of the stumbling blocks with GWB and Iraq.

Overall, it is hard to fully blame GWB without acknowledging the things that he is allowed to get away with simply because Americans were conditioned to accept them under FDR.

I do have to agree that FDR is worse simply because of his ability. GWB’s incompetence has gotten both sides to try and distance themselves from him. FDR is worse in my book simply because as the Left argues against GWB, they point at FDR with fond memories.

(On a side note, technically FDR died before the end of WWII. While not necessarily an issue, it is always interesting to wonder if he would have had Truman’s courage in bombing Japan, but that is another conversation.)

I guess I still think FDR was worse in the long-run because his excesses have been responsible for not only his near-tyrannical governance, but also the vast majority of federal tyranny of the last 60+ years. I would further argue that FDR’s excesses did more than anything else to set the table for GWB’s abuses of power.

Then again, reading the torture memorandum today, I may have to rethink my position.

he might not have tortured, but GWB can’t hold a torch to the internment camps in terms of scale and scope

Very true…but let’s also not forget that a) FDR did not pre-emptively invade Japan and b) he didn’t lose. Again, I realize that many libertarians will disagree with me on those points and on the value of WWII in general, but I also consider service in the role of Commander-in-Chief during wartime to be a prime judging characteristic of a president. FDR, for all his horrific faults, was a competent wartime leader…Bush has been anything but. In fact, I’d argue that he’s been far and away our most disastrous wartime president.

I kind of agreed with the New Republic’s rating of Nixon several years ago. They gave him both an A and and F. Seems appropriate on several levels.

Dubya and FDR I consider straight “F” presidents. I’m intermittently reading the Caro biographies on LBJ so until I finish them he gets a D- from me. Maybe Caro will make me a little more sympathetic, but judging from what I’ve read of the first book it doesn’t seem likely :)

As for LBJ, you’re right that he was dealt a pretty rough hand. I’ll cop to being a bit unfair to him. And on the whole, I think he deserves credit for the Civil Rights Act- despite its flaws, I think it was clearly a net gain for liberty.

What’s sad is that Bush has so far surpassed Nixon in bad governance that Nixon doesn’t even enter the conversation (a lot of Nixon’s foreign policy was actually pretty good, though he did plenty of crappy things in other arenas).

I half agree with you. I personally think Bush Jr. slots right between FDR and LBJ for second place. FDR so radically debased the concept of rights and liberties that it would take a full on dictator to top him, and while GWB is many things, he ain’t that.

LBJ, though, did nothing but extend FDR’s vision, and for that I can blame him only so much. He, and the rest of the left, we so drunk on the apparent success of the New Deal that one of the left-wing presidents would try to expand it. LBJ was caught between the assassination of a very popular president, a worsening situation in Southeast Asia, and a mandate that he “do something.” There’s nothing to say that another man in his spot wouldn’t have done the same.

GWB, with his visionary incompetence and embrace of socialism under the title of “compassionate conservatism” are things not easily replicated. Let’s give discredit where discredit is due.

Lest we forget, FDR was also an outright socialist, while Bush’s views on the economy are just crony capitalism.

I submit that Medicare Plan D exposes GWB as more socialist than you’re giving him credit for…even though the point was really just to buy votes among the elderly (most socialists in power are only that way because it aids them too).

Also, while FDR did many horrific things on the domestic front, he still didn’t openly advocate for the usage of torture by the U.S. government. It may be a small distinction for some, but to me it’s a major line in the sand.