I've mentioned before my fondness for foreign newspapers- here are a few stories that illustrate why.
Everybody loves lists. The Times has a list ranking US Presidents from worst to best (No, Bush isn't the worst). The comments are interesting, too- one commenter wanted Reagan listed as worst, and a good many held out for Carter. The Telegraph has a list of the top turning points in the campaign, while BBC has a list of the top YouTube campaign videos. (I still love John Edwards in "I feel pretty")
Leaving lists aside, The Times has a story on my own Indiana . The Telegraph has an interesting bit , "John McCain admits tensions with running mate Sarah Palin", and BBC has a video , "Peru's shamans send US election vibes"
6 comments:
I'm really confused by this list.
Also, I think Wilson deserved to be on it.
CC
I thought it was unfair to rank Harrison so low- he only served 30 days, 10 of which were spent in his sick bed. I'd have given him an "cannot be judged" pass.
I'd like to agree with both of you.
Harrison ranks that low on the list for a few weeks of poor performance? Really? Doing... what? What horrors did he inflict on the nation in one month that did so much harm that...?
It's gaffes like this that result in the public holding list-makers insuch low esteem.
And Wilson is a poster boy for nominal good intentions. Again, I'll give him something for the fact that he was in (terminal) ill health at the critical juncture of his career... but that's not really an excuse. If he was so incapacitated (and he was) then he should have stepped down.
Dubya is, I suspect, the only person who gives Buchanan a real run for his top (bottom?) spot. But we've not gotten to close the books on him, nor have people gotten to see what the closets are really full of, so... I'm withholding judgment.
And Carter, well, Carter had his flaws. One of them was being unfortunate, a failing for which no one ever really gets excused--particularly in such a high office. The universe deals out a lot of crap at times and in the Oval Office, you deal with it. That said, if his energy policies had been carried forward, we'd be in a much, much better place. So, not so much bad as... fell short. In ethical terms, there's not much criticism of the man in and out of office. Bad president? Nah. Mostly just a case of the wrong person, as it turned out. Not a patch on the bad of, say Harding--a boob who should never have been entrusted with the office. But he looked and sounded the part, and--damn, imagine what he'd have been in a TV era!
Actually, I think Hoover has been ranked too low. He was basically stuck cleaning up Coolidge's mess.
I can't wait to see who they put in the number one spot. Lincoln or FDR would be my choice.
Lincoln seems the logical choice to me.
Just peeked at the top ten. Yes, they gave #1 to Lincoln. Logical choice. Washington was 2, also reasonable.
In a clear effor to annoy me, they gave #10 to Wilson, ignoring his jailing political dissenters, inacting of the first modern military draft, and the first federal drug prohibition. He also set in place policies that headed the world right into WW2.
Wilson also re-segregated the federal government, telling blacks to consider segregation a “benefit."
Schmuck.
CC
Post a Comment