perfidy

Senor dos Pesetas, I'm curious as to how I'm wrong about Kennedy. Point 1, "the only Irish Catholic president of this great nation of ours?" was a quote from Edward Burns' The Brothers McMullen. How's that wrong? He wasn't Irish Catholic? Contest that one. The U.S. isn't a great nation? Sure, that one is up for debate. Point 2, good taste in women. What in the hell was wrong with Marilyn Monroe? You got something against Norma Jeane? Them's fightin' words, Welshy. Jacquelyn? Okay, up for debate, but she was hot. Point 3, voracious in his carnal appetites? He had so many notches in his bedpost it was a toothpick. Please explain where I went wrong. 

By the way, if you fellas haven't figured this one out already, and I would think you have, none of today's posts, from me, are to be taken too seriously. All the president stuff is very highly subjective anyway. 
 

We're not all bastards? SO GLAD TO HEAR IT.

*snicker*

Thank you both for weighing in. This has been excellent so far. I'm not going to offer my, erm, two cents yet. Time is short and intelligence is shorter. But I will say now I think you're both right about Reagan, and both wrong about Kennedy.

For Lloyd George not counting, read the previous sentence. Then read the Lloyd George sentence. It will all make sense. Not all Welshman are bastards. Little disclaimer. 

Bear in mind that the little excerpt from my journal was not edited, except for two words. It's a random thoughts thing. But I'll explain. Churchill made things worse prior to the actual Treaty negotiations because he was responsible for deploying the Black and Tans in Ireland. He made things worse during the Treaty negotiations by strong-arming Collins and Griffith, constantly using threats of force. The Civil War to which I refer is the Irish Civil War of 1922-23, between pro and anti-Treaty factions. Churchill, Lloyd George, Birkenhead, Chamberlain, the lot of them, made things worse with partition because a 32 County Ireland, with Free State as opposed to fully independent Republic status, probably would have seen only the Civil War of 1922-3. The hook comes with the Troubles. No partition, no Troubles. Best case scenario was a 32 county fully independent Republic. No Civil War, no Troubles either. But Churchill, et al wouldn't hear of it. 

Some would argue, but the Loyalist community in the north would have complained and, blah blah blah blah. It was complicated. We don't what might have happened. We only know what did happen. Partition made the Troubles. Churchill helped make partition, but one in a long line beginning with Henry VIII, as far as the north is concerned. 

So yeah. I hate Cromwell too. James VI and I, for that matter, plantations and all. Elizabeth I? Oh yeah. Constant campaigns in Ireland under her. They're like presidents. They all kinda suck somehow. 

Pol Pot was a history teacher. But Cambodia didn't have the wonderful governmental system you were snickering at. Intellectuals should never be let near the levers of power. Many politicians, for all their faults, think of people as people (or at least voters), rather than abstractions. 

Reagan had a bad effect on Pittsburgh - perhaps. There were many other problems with American heavy industry - complacency, aging infrastructure, poor management, etc. And you can't assess the man's contribution (or bad effect) on a whole nation by what happened to one city. 

Dick Cheney is not president. Read Woodward's book if you're not sure. 

Coolidge is not, repeat not, to blame for the Great Depression. What in all likelihood would have been a cyclical downturn in the economy - a recession - was made far worse by Hoover's and the Federal Reserve's idiotic response to the stock market crash. The crash was in 29, the depression didn't really get going until 31, after hoover and his administration mucked everything up. Hoover's on my list. 

Nixon, the prototypical intelligent jackass, was not responsible for Kent State. That was the fault of Gov. Rhodes, of Ohio. 

Andy Johnson nearly lost the war after we'd lost 600,000 winning it. Kennedy was a tax cutting hawkish democrat, we could use more of those. 

The Electoral College keeps the Green party from being a force in national politics. Good enough for me. 

I know you don't like Thatcher, but she isn't in the same category. No gulags, no death camps, and she was voted out of office - which no communist or fascist has ever allowed to happen. 

At least we agree on Wilson. What a schmuck.

BH: I'll gladly take Reagan and Coolidge out of the same category as Hitler, Himmler, and Stalin for the very reasons you describe. But Thatcher stays.

If there would have been a civil war regardless of whether or not Ireland was partitioned, why do you blame Churchill for making things worse? Certainly, the British record in Ireland is abominable - they treated every other colony, even the ones composed of the most primitive cultures, better than they did the Irish. In fact, it seemed that they were trying to make the Irish into a primitive colony so that they could justify treating it so badly. I would think that you would hate Cromwell more.

Another side note: Top Five Unlikely Military Geniuses:

Being the overly judgmental and critical person that I am, I'll start with the five presidents I like the least with a brief explanation as to why.

1) Woodrow Wilson. Hated the Irish, Catholics, the Chinese, probably anti-semitic as well, the list could go on and on. Having people as racist as this guy was in the White House is bad news. Loved the English at a time when the English were heinous. As I argued in my senior seminar at the dear old alma mater (snicker), let Irish rebel Roger Casement swing without lifting a finger. Thanks to this jackass, they'll never let another academic be president again. Wilson ruined it for me! Ruined it!

2) Ronald Reagan. When I was a little boy, I thought this guy was the anti-Christ. Now that I'm growed up, I see no reason to disagree with my former self. During his presidency, the mills in my hometown of Pittsburgh shut down, millions were out of work, and he was at least partly to blame. Laissez-faire economics, and breaking the Unions when firing all the air traffic controllers are little bits of evidence. Before Reagan was President, almost 2/3 of the world's steel was manufactured in Pittsburgh or near by. After he was President, about .00000000001% of the world's steel was manufactured in the region. Had a strong role in shutting down and emptying mental health hospitals.

3) George Washington. Back to the Western PA example, personally led 13,000 troops against the insurgents of the Whiskey Rebellion. First, only, and last president to lead troops personally against his own people. Hoover just had them attacked and hid in the White House. Nixon had the gestap- oh sorry, I mean the National Guard to take care of it without even waking him up. Owned slaves. Looked funny. Rich guy. Don't like him.

4) Teddy Roosevelt. Had a little cocktail weiner and overcompensated with imperialism and hunting. Freud musta loved this guy. I don't. He bugs me.

5) Dick Cheney. This guy is just totally out of control, as far as I'm concerned.

6) Nixon. Prick.

7) Collidge. Go play some golf while industry produces more goods than consumers can buy. Real good. When the bottom fell out, you were dead, so what do you care, you do-nothing laissez faire son of a bitch?

8) The rest of them. They all suck for some reason.

Oh yeah. Good presidents. Hmm. Jack Kennedy, "the only Irish Catholic president of this great country of ours." Had good taste in women, if a bit voracious in his appetites. Andrew Johnson, viz-a-viz the south and reconstruction? Sure! Stick it to those noose-swinging, sheet wearing, Jack drinkin', good old boys! "How you like me now, South Carolina? Try to pull that shit again with my presidential foot in your ass!"

Presidents in history are kinda like presidents in the past. They do things some people like and others don't. Bill Clinton tried to make everybody happy, Lyndon Johnson tried to use opinion polls too extensively. They did what they thought was best, like anyone else who held the office. So far, no president has actually sunk the country. I'm sure the Bucketman believes this is because of the brilliance of American governmental structure, so on, such forth. Okay. It seems to have worked to the point where the whole thing hasn't collapsed. Plenty of room for improvement on social and economic levels. Politcally ... 86 the electoral college and I like it a whole lot more. Stop fucking around with the Bill of Rights. Let it stand. It was a good idea.

Well, this could easily turn into something beyond wacky, cynical, slightly satirical rantings. I'll let it go at that.

I would, however, agree with your definition of greatness and infamy. I also tend to use a third category, importance. I think Wilson was a horrible president, who left the world worse than he found it. However, he is important. So, if I were to make a list of most important presidents, it might go: Washington, Lincoln, Wilson, Jefferson, FDR. Happily, we have had no truly infamous presidents - at least not by world-historical standards. Even our worst presidents rank pretty well when compared to the average run of national leaders throughout the world, throughout history. We are very lucky. Even someone like Nixon seems downright wholesome when compared to most Roman Emperors, but especially Caligula, Nero and Commodus.

Mike said about FDR, "His infamy also lies in his role as the savior of American capitalism, and not taking the New Deal far enough to the left." You cannot possibly imagine what that sounds like to me. If you want to blame someone for saving capitalism (gack) then blame our second Irish-American president, Ronald Reagan. FDR was an attempt at socialism that thankfully was aborted by the common sense of the American people.

Also, I really must object to putting Reagan, Thatcher and Coolidge in the same category as Stalin, Hitler and Himmler. Certainly, your political beliefs will ensure that those three are not on your "favorite leaders" list. But Thatcher, Reagan and Coolidge were not responsible for the organized slaughter of millions of their fellow citizens. At absolute worst, they were (elected) misguided leaders of democratic nations, who were replaced by constitutional means. This is a far, far cry from genocidal maniac leader of a totalitarian police state.

A side note: in general, the Soviets who died in vast numbers in combat against the Nazis died to save civilization - although in the process they also preserved (temporarily) the unmitigated evil of communism. American and British troops made the Germans die to save civilization. Like Patton said, "Don't be a fool and die for your country. Let the other sonofabitch die for his." This is, I think, largely a result of the total lack of concern for human life of the Soviet government.

Does Lloyd George not count because he is welsh, or is he welsh and doesn't count for some other reason?