How's He Doing?

For what it's worth, I heard somebody last week blame the president's Kyoto treaty decision for this very hot summer, for Katrina and, now--get this--for the recent surge in sunspot activity. I wonder, then, if he at least gets credit for the accompanying aurora borealis displays?

How could Bill Clinton not be included in administrations plagued by scandal, and who was passive as crises built?

Do you really think that your statement "But this survey-conducted...for the Federalist Society and the Wall Street Journal-aimed at ideological balance" fooled anyone other than the editors of The Wall Street Journal? Why do you continue to try to bolster an administration that is a failure at everything (especially in preserving freedom)?

Mr. Taranto, it says something about the immense wealth of the United States that in a post Katrina world, an inventive media leader like yourself can find the time to write about the current scholarly rankings of our president. May I respectfully suggest that most ordinary citizens rate their president by what he costs them, and what he is likely to cost their children and their grandchildren. Whatever presidential scholars may currently be thinking about "the vision thing" with respect to Mr. Bush, our country's $3 trillion, 50% increase in our cumulative debt in the past four years has fortunately gotten the attention of your colleague, Mr. Fund today. Perhaps you might help focus the attention of all concerned if you dust off President Hoover's ratings.

President Bush has failed at every level. He is a hard right ideologue and sock puppet from the largest and richest businesses in the country. They profit from his far flung ventures and everyone else loses since we didn't have the money to pay them: he borrowed it. Sort of like looting isn't it?

As with the rest of the Bush family war profiteering is the family business and has been since World War I. He will be known as a colossal bungler and dismantler of the American dream. He has no control over the weather. That assertion is a weak straw man. Mr. Bush just doesn't know enough to get out of the rain. That's what history has already shown us.

When all the hot air is gone and all that is left is the sobriety of historians, we will look at the presidency of George W. Bush at quite average. The age in which he governed may not be seen as average, but he and his presidency will. Even the rise of Neo-Conservativism and other political forces cannot be credited to Mr. Bush. Those forces were started by Reagan and their rise was unchanged during Clinton then Bush. Average at times better and at times worse, but overall very average.

If Mr. Bush is average now, just wait until he graduates into retirement. We can expect a spate of reports as to the "real George Bush," and the stories will not be pretty. Not only will he fall far below average but he will be depicted as pathologically narcissistic, a man in love with his image and personal power, incapable of appreciating that it is the Office of the President that has power derived from the people and for their benefit and not the man for his own ends.

Mr. Bush is a sad commentary on the present state of the nation: incompetent, religiously deluded, and suffering from a terminal case of patriotic hubris.

Just as we will only learn of the extent of Katrina's damage after the water is gone, so we will only see the extent of the man and his leadership once he leaves office--and it won't be pretty.

Excellent article.

As an economic and foreign policy conservative in a sea of liberals I am not surprised at the combined results. The hatred toward Mr. Bush here (irrational and ill informed) is almost surreal. I actually think at this point Mr. Bush comes out just about where he deserves. His misjudgment of the aftermath of Iraq is a big negative, but as to WMD, although they were not found, it is still a great mystery as to what happened to them.

I think one reason for the vitriol is the wacko hatred of the left for anyone who smacks of any religiosity, although the dislike of the right has more to do with the fact they are Republicans than that they are religious.

I also think the left has panicked that they no longer control all the media, and this has added to their rancor.

I believe Ronald Reagan should have been ranked as high as FDR and it is hard even to imagine a president as bad as Jimmy Carter. It is incredible that we elected a person to anything with such judgment. I don't think he has the competence to be a good local school board president.

As politically incorrect at this may sound, Dubya may be the first liberal conservative president. Liberal because of his big government approach to progress and conservative in his commitment to life and liberty. The fact is that President Bush will remain the No. 1 president this century.

Such rankings mean little unless they are weighted for the constellation of events confronting a president. Some exceptional men served as president in relatively unexceptional times.