I never get tired of the left trying to make President Bush the worst president ever. Note this, by noted socialist historian Eric Foner in the Washington Post:

“Harding and Coolidge are best remembered for the corruption of their years in office (1921-23 and 1923-29, respectively) and for channeling money and favors to big business. They slashed income and corporate taxes and supported employers’ campaigns to eliminate unions. Members of their administrations received kickbacks and bribes from lobbyists and businessmen. “Never before, here or anywhere else,” declared the Wall Street Journal, “has a government been so completely fused with business.” The Journal could hardly have anticipated the even worse cronyism, corruption and pro-business bias of the Bush administration.

Despite some notable accomplishments in domestic and foreign policy, Nixon is mostly associated today with disdain for the Constitution and abuse of presidential power. Obsessed with secrecy and media leaks, he viewed every critic as a threat to national security and illegally spied on U.S. citizens. Nixon considered himself above the law.

Bush has taken this disdain for law even further. He has sought to strip people accused of crimes of rights that date as far back as the Magna Carta in Anglo-American jurisprudence: trial by impartial jury, access to lawyers and knowledge of evidence against them. In dozens of statements when signing legislation, he has asserted the right to ignore the parts of laws with which he disagrees. His administration has adopted policies regarding the treatment of prisoners of war that have disgraced the nation and alienated virtually the entire world. Usually, during wartime, the Supreme Court has refrained from passing judgment on presidential actions related to national defense. The court’s unprecedented rebukes of Bush’s policies on detainees indicate how far the administration has strayed from the rule of law.”

This “opinion” sounds more like a post at the DU. But that side not the tire “Coolidge” and “Nixon” comparisons. However the most hilarious point is bringing up Abraham Lincoln, (who supended Habeas Corpus) and Franklin D. Roosevelt who interned tens of thousands of American citizens of Japanese desent while also unlawfully seizing their property. Another fact glanced over was that Lincoln’s decision to suspend was opposed by Chief Justice Roger Taney who strated that such suspension was not within the powers of the President and remains controversial to this day.

Consequently the “rebukes” foner cites don’t come close to the myriad of rulings that supported our policy on detainees. Remember, these are not American citizens, but foreign nationals who had designs and affliations that are against our national security, not US citizens picked up, locked up and deprived of the constitution simply because they were Japanese.

Not to forget that Roosevelt’s willfull blindness to the Soviet Union bought us 40 years of Cold War, a willfulness that caused the suffering and deaths of millions under communist rule.

But NO President in history compares to the records held by President William Jefferson Clinton. Shall we review:

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court

Simply no comparison. Of all US Presidents NO one comes close to Clinton’s record, and no wonder Foner leaves him out.

Foner is considered by the dimwits of the left as a god of historical accounting, when in truth he is, at least by this sample, the worst historian – ever. Of course we should be judged by our words, and remember that Foner said of 9/11:

“Like all momentous events, September 11 is a remarkable teaching opportunity. But only if we use it to open rather than to close debate. Critical intellectual analysis is our responsibility‚Äîto ourselves and to our students.” – “Rethinking American History in a Post-9/11 World”

Right.

UPDATE I: More denial here.