I'm not terribly old, no matter what my ankles say every morning. I should have at least a little more life than I've passed already. But I've seen some shitty presidents in my time. In fact, my political personality seems to have been constructed in opposition to what I've seen.
When I was born, Richard Nixon was president. Enough said.
The next president was his accidental Veep, Gerald Ford. Good criminy--I've been alive for six years, and I'm still stuck with Republicans? This sucks.
Finally we get a decent human being in the White House in 1976, a Democrat named Jimmy Carter. Unfortunately, he's so tied down by conservative mismanagement he can't get anything done. Fortunately for conservatives, Ronald Reagan is making illegal deals with all kinds of people, like terrorists in Iran, to win the election in 1980.
In 1980 Reagan wins. I didn't even understand what was happening, but I somehow knew this was bad. Turns out Reagan spends eight years tripling the federal deficit while encouraging people to be greedy. Holy crap. Eight years of disaster.
In 1988 I get to vote for the first time. That means the guy I didn't vote for--George H.W. Bush--wins the election. Great. The Reagan years are extended without the Reagan personality, which means the presidency is both empty and bland.
My absentee ballot never showed up in 1992, but I was happy to see Bill Clinton elected president that year. Too bad the Republicans went into roadblock mode in 1994. And too bad Slick Willy couldn't keep his pants on. He was the best president of my lifetime so far and his tenure is sullied by silly shit.
And the conservatives were so outraged that in 2000 George W. Bush, the least qualified human being possible, took office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. He didn't win, but he became the first Presidunce.
And in 2004 a bunch of halfwits and victims of hypnotism voted for Dubya, and he won again.
Good criminy I hope in 2008 we can do better. I hope we can elect someone with some sense, some semblance of ability. I hope we can get past the ridiculous lies.
Really there is only one choice. Obama.
McCain is an idiot. I'll write more about that soon. But for now, I have to say this: we need to reject the culture of greed promulgated by Reaganomics, we need to stop the deception perfected by the Nixon administration, we need to reject the lame-ass policies of the Ford and Bush administrations. In short, we need to reject the conservatism of the last forty years because it is ineffective, unrealistic, and divisive.
I don't think John McCain is a bad man. I just think he'd be a terrible choice for president.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I would say that the order of badness from worst to best reads something like this:
- Bush,2K
- Nixon
- Carter
- Bush, Herbert Walker and Gerry Ford (Tie)
- Reagan
- Clinton
I am no Ronald Reagan apologist, but he was effective at what he did (regardless of whether you agreed with him or not). In contrast to Jimmy Carter, who is a brilliant man with great ideas, but not a particularly astute manager. One could realistically swap Reagan and slick willie, mostly because Clinton's personal character flaws really kept him from being as effective as he could have been (a real squandered opportunity in my eyes, and if he keeps it in his pants, Gore probably wins the popular and Electoral votes in 2K).
Again, Bush I was not really a bad human being, or a horrible president (in fact, W makes him look like a genius), but I did not really agree with much of his domestic agenda. But its hard to argue that the country would somehow have been better off with Michael Dukakis as president, is it not?
Anyway. Let's hope that we do better in 2008 than we have done since you and I have been alive, because the track record really is not so great.
Here's my ranking:
-Bush II
-Nixon
-Bush I/Ford
-Reagan
-Carter
-Clinton
It's not because I disagree with you--you're right. Reagan was effective at what he did. My problem with him is the philosophy guiding him was flat evil. Effective evil does not impress me.
My rankings might fall more closely in line with yours if I could get past that.
The diference between Bush I and Dukakis intrigues me. Since it's a historical impossibility, it may be pointless to speculate, but I voted for Mikey D. I'd like to think things would have started improving earlier under him.
You're entirely correct on that last point. No matter their relative merits, the US hasn't done well in the leadership category for half a decade.
It's been 38 years and the only guy worth a poopie in the White House was Clinton. Although I am not a political anything..nor do I claim to be engaged in the process that is taking place I think Obama is a fresh perspective the country is ready for.
And by "decade" I obviously mean "century."
Criminy--who's editing me?
I would..however I am neither qualified, nor do I have the ability to edit. Have you read my blog? I am sure there would be red marks all over that damn thing. I am lucky I can speel...whoops.
Post a Comment