csua.org/u/eq4 -> www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/neuharth/2006-01-19-neuharth_x.htm?csp=N009
Hillary has it wrong, Bush not the 'worst' The 2008 presidential election still is more than 33 months away, but the campaign to succeed President Bush started in earnest this week. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, seeking an almost certain re-election to that seat this year but with both eyes on her party's presidential nomination in two years, charged that the Bush administration "will go down in history as one of the worst that has ever governed our country." As a serious student of politics and history in high school and college and a close observer as a journalist for more than a half-century, these presidents were the five "worst" in my book: Andrew Jackson, 1829-37 James Buchanan, 1857-61 Ulysses S Grant, 1869-77 Herbert Hoover, 1929-33 Richard Nixon, 1969-74 It's very unlikely Bush can crack that list in his remaining three years in office. His tragic "pre-emptive" war against Iraq may well go down as the biggest foreign policy blunder ever, especially if he "stays the course" and the unconscionable cost in lives and dollars goes on. But domestically, except for the foul-up of the follow-up to Hurricane Katrina, Bush has done reasonably well. In the areas of health care and education, he gets pretty good grades. Democrats will paint Bush with a brush that makes him look worse than he was (is). Some Republicans will run scared and run away from some of what he did. So, even though he won't be on the ballot, he'll be the battle cry. Fortunately, as usual, political independents will issue the final report card.
|
http://csua.com/feed/