Doug:
I could make the argument that there were many worse than
he, starting with the Republican trio of Grant, Harding and
Nixon (whose damage to the office he held dwarfs anything
Clinton did), but I didn't really want to get into a
contentious argument about whose most deserving of debasement.
Doug
Me (my historical side kicking in at this point):
Actually, while I'm second to few in my condemnations of Nixon, grouping
Grant in with him is entirely unfair, I think. Grant himself was
completely honest - there are not, so far as I am aware, any accusations
that he profited personally from official actions. Modern historians
often, I have been told by a Harvard history professor, consider him the
most successful of the reconstruction Presidents. Setting aside the fact,
of course, that Grant (not the vastly over-mythologized Lee) was probably
the greatest American military leader of the 19th century (if not ever) and
his services to the nation in the Civil War would qualify him as a "great
American" even if he was an atrocious President - which I don't think he
was. Harding was just pathetic and lacked the capabilities of Clinton,
imo. It's hard to point out any actual _damage_ that he did, though, since
Teapot Dome really was completely unimportant in the grand scheme of
things, and he just wasn't around that long, when you get down to it.
Nixon was
as bad as it is possible for an American political leader to get.
_However_, it is entirely possible that Clinton's actions (or, more
accurately, his failure to act) in Rwanda are the lowest moral point for
the United States in the 20th century - they are actually physically
nauseating, and I urge anyone interested to read this month's Atlantic
cover story or the earlier one in The New Republic that is, in fact, on the
web. My description of Clinton as unique was not actually meant to refer
to his official record - it was actually meant to be a reference to his
political genius. In my assessment there is only one politician in
American history who stands as his superior in the actions that go under
the rubric of "politics" (as opposed to statesmanship) - and that was
Lincoln, which is kind of heady company to be in.
Gautam
