He gave us trickle down economics, which was nothing more than a carte blanche for the junk bond kings, corporate raiders and robber barons. Billions were made on paper by the few. As a result, the many were left unemployed and sometimes on the street.
He gave us a sort of “mainstreaming”, better known as Dumping. He forced the mentally ill out of the hospitals and put them on the street.
He was the first to get really cozy with the “moral” majority, and the people associated with that sort of stuff - Fallwell, Robertson, etc.
But, even so, he only comes in after a few others.
Joe McCarthy, Jefferson Davis, Boss Tweed, Timothy McVeigh, are all up there too.
I’ve been an atheist all my life. I’d like to nominate Madelyn Murray O’Hair.
No, those two statements are not contradictory – IMO, she did as much harm to the public’s perception of atheists as any intolerant religious asshole.
The ridiculous self-promotion of her causes weren’t fueled by anything more altruistic than her own ego (and anger about her screwed-up life).
She also treated her family like shit.
Imagine how much better off we atheists would be if people thought of Bertrand Russell, H.L. Mencken, or Albert Einstein* when they heard the word ‘atheist’.
I know Einstein was a deist – but the entirety of his beliefs (e.g., his definite disbelief in a personal God) would meet many American’s standards for atheism.
If you look at the actual census numbers (which are pretty much the same as your cite but include about 4 decades of data), you can see why he chose those particular dates. He just found one low point and one high point that reinforced his preconceived ideas.
But what does that census data tell us? There was a dramatic drop in poverty between 1962 and 1968 (21% to 13%). After that, it bumped around between 12% and 15% (roughly). It looks to me like the trend in reduction in poverty predates the Johnson adminsitration, and that the rise in poverty during the late 70s/early 80s could just as easliy be attributed to Carter as to Reagan, since there is always a lag time for a given president’s policies to be reflected in the actual living conditions of people.
I think the problem people have with Reagan is that a lot of people got rich while he was president, and it is assumed (incorrctly) that a bunch of people must have gotten poor as a result.
But why? I don’t think he was any more corrupt than other successful politicians. Politics is the kind of business in which someone who is homest and decent is not going to be a success. I think Mr Nixons only real claim to infamy was that he was actually caught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Watergate is trivial. Nixon was elected in 1968, and re-elected in 1972, on a peace platform. And it was a lie. He never intended to end the Vietnam War on any terms that could not be considered an American victory. He deserves a place on the “worst” list just for that, even if we leave out Cambodia, etc.
It looks to me like for the 7 years prior to Regan the poverty rate hovered around the 11-12%. By his fourth year in office that number had peaked to 15% and settled back to 13%. For Bush’s presidency his numbers started at 13% and rose to 14.8% when his presidency ended. Clinton’s first year was 15.1% and that number pretty much steadily declined to 11.3% by the end of his terms. For Bush part deux he went from 11.3% to 12.5% in four years.
Looking at those numbers I see a fairly steady decline in poverty rate from '59 until Regan at which time it increased.
Exactly. Nixon’s biggest failure was he just should have quickly pulled out of Vietnam, and saved a lot of lives (both American and Vietnamese.) The only real harm from Watergate was to Nixon himself.
There were also countless “minor” corruptions (e.g. he basically sold a pardon to imprisoned Jimmy Hoffa in exchange for Teamster influence and money, routinely had people who spoke against him audited by the IRS, etc.).
I’ll nominate another candidate:
Jay Edgar Hoover- another self-loathing homo who blackmailed other homosexuals, a man who sent taped recordings of MLK’s extramarital affairs to Coretta Scott King strictly out of malice (and detoured FBI agents into taping yet more of King’s extramarital sex sessions for no real reason), kept dossiers on people no reasonable person could construe as a threat (Desi Arnaz Sr.s dossier was thousands of pages), worked arm-in-arm with McCarthy and Hays and other disgusting figures, etc… A police state would have been his wettest dream.
Once the eastern Cherokee population had dwindled to about 14,000 in the mid 1820s, some 20% of those attempted to assimilate into local white culture so they could survive. And two families — the Waties and Ridges — owned most of the slaves. But as Jim Stebenger wrote in Wild West magazine, the Cherokee took a much different approach to slave ownership:
Wasn’t it Kennedy that got the US involved in Vietnam? Johnson did continue it and I guess he escalated it as well, but Kennedy started it (at least as far as US involvment). By the way, I believe the hated Nixon ended it.
I agree that she did for atheists what the Hindenberg did for dirigible travel, but few people were really harmed because of her who wouldn’t have been otherwise. (On the subject of philosophers, I’d nominate Ayn Rand ahead of her.)
All 3 points are really quite horrible. He surely did a great deal of damage. But I think point 3 is the worst of the lot, the effects of which are still being felt today.
Apart from this I don’t think Reagan was evil. He was a dumb idealogue who probably believed he was doing good. McCarthy on the other hand was evil personified.
From my admittedly limited understanding on this matter I thought that Nixon wanted out of Vietnam but Kissinger persuaded him to continue. Am I incorrect?
OK, I’ll have to admit that Rove at present takes a backseat to some of the nominees, specifically Jefferson Davis and Andrew Jackson, both of whom surely take the cake. Probably Davis would be number one as he actually succeeded in destroying the United States for a time, though it must be admitted, he had a lot of help. I mean, it’s not like a lot of Southerners needed a great deal of persuading to break with the Union.
Still, I think Rove bears keeping an eye on as a contender for Worst American. He works as a political advisor, but his actions show he has no respect whatsoever for the democratic process. If anyone can figure out a way to transform American democracy into a banana Republican oligarchy, it’d be Rove, and he’d do it in a heartbeat.