With Fresno State students receiving a much-needed reprieve from school on Monday on account of Presidents’ Day, it seems appropriate to write about presidents.
My favorite president is John Adams. He is one of the most distinguished men this country has ever produced. He served on the Continental Congress, as a diplomat to France, Holland and Great Britain and as the country’s first vice president along with being the second president.
In addition to all that, he nominated George Washington to be the commander in chief of the Continental Army, Thomas Jefferson to be the principal writer of the Declaration of Independence and John Marshall to be our fourth Supreme Court justice. He even wrote the Massachusetts state constitution, the world’s oldest active constitution.
His most important accomplishment, however, may have been keeping America out of war with Britain and France during our precarious early years. It was fitting that he and Thomas Jefferson both died on the same day ”” July 4, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Our two most indispensable presidents are George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. If anyone but Washington was the nation’s first president, the job may have never made it to John Adams. Washington was the only one who had enough support from every opposing faction to keep the country together, and his lack of ideological rigidity greatly served the country in its early years.
He was also great for stepping down after two terms when he could have served until he died. When told George Washington would simply go home after the revolution, King George III said, “If he does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.” Sounds about right.
Lincoln was the only man who could have kept the nation together during the Civil War. His combination of steadfastness, wisdom, wit and willingness to change when circumstances required it served America greatly during those perilous years. Though he made many mistakes during the early years of the war, if he had not served, either slavery would have existed much longer or the Confederacy may have survived.
The two worst presidents in our history have been Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson. Andrew Jackson was our first non-statesman president. Every president before Jackson had distinguished careers as diplomats, governors, congressmen and cabinet members. Jackson was none of these, only a war hero. His presidency was the first that descended into populism and set us on the path we are on today, where politicians are beholden to special interests and presidential campaigns are an all-encompassing feature of our republic.
Wilson’s policies are what make him one of the worst. His administration was the triumph of the progressive era, and along with that came the advent of the 16th Amendment, which instituted a national income tax, and the 17th Amendment, which usurped the original design of the Constitution by making senators directly elected, the creation of the Federal Reserve, which has been the cause of many of our economic woes, and the entrance of the U.S. into World War I, the worst, most pointless war ever fought. He jailed dissenters and was a virulent racist.
Somehow, both of these men consistently do well in rankings of the presidents.
Out of our 43 presidents, we have had many very different men serve in that distinguished position. Our tallest president was Lincoln at 6’4”; our shortest was James Madison, one foot shorter. Our oldest president was Ronald Reagan; our youngest was Theodore Roosevelt. We’ve even had eight presidents who never attended college (there’s luck for all of us yet).
But the best of them all may have been William Henry Harrison. He served only 30 days in office before he died ”” he did the least amount of damage.
Anonymous • Feb 17, 2011 at 10:41 pm
It is always folly to “rate” presidents. Certainly early American presidents are stupidly made into icons; you know, the ones that held slaves amongst many other things. Articles like these not only legitimize idolatry and horrid admiration for fallible, often despicable human beings–an admiration stemming from a willing neglect of important circumstances. This is not uncommon from this writer, who appears to enjoy the binary world he has made for himself. Things are either good or bad, moral or immoral. Rating presidents is like rating the best books, or songs, or colors of all-time; except it is much, much worse–it presents human beings as larger-than-life characters, when not only is your interaction with the figure superficial and therefore don’t know enough about them to make such a claim, it presupposes that the noblest of Americans can somehow make it through the political process without thoroughly executing their soul, their dignity, and their shame.
Ashley Carlson • Feb 17, 2011 at 8:55 pm
Tony, I do agree with you, especially on Jackson. He changed campaigning and not in a good way. It is unfortunate that he removed the Statesman reputation of the president and candidate so aggressively. We all hate it during election season.
I enjoyed reading your last blurb on the facts of presidents. Those were entertaining and so appropriate for Presidents Day. Great writing!
Philosotroll • Feb 16, 2011 at 6:14 pm
I’m not sure what the qualitative standard is that’s being used here. Jackson and Wilson both had serious flaws in their Presidencies, but Jackson (despite being borderline genocidal in his policies with regard to American Indians) is usually championed as a leader of early conservative policy for his opposition to the national bank. Wilson established the first efficient system of anti-trust law. I suppose if you want to consider anti-trust law “progressive” that’s fine, but he basically did what Taft and Roosevelt had not found an efficient way to do.
You may like Adams, but no President has a particularly great historical record. The Sedition Act, in the case of Adams, is one of the most ambiguous and disturbing pieces of legislation every passed in the United States.
We like to deify our Presidents in the United States, especially early American Presidents. I think this is a bad habit, as is attempting to categorize them as “good” or “bad.” They are human beings, and they make strong contributions despite their often unforgivable shortcomings. Lincoln is a case in point, proclaimed as a great hero of racial equality and the abolition of slavery by your average high school history textbook, but Lincoln was complicated and had many faults.
W.E.B. Du Bois quoted a pre-election Lincoln (in 1958) as saying: ” will say, then, that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races””that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people… I, as much as any other man, am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”
That doesn’t make Lincoln a devil, or a bad President. It humanizes him, which is important. To unilateral classify him as one of the “best” Presidents not only does injustice to his legacy, but betrays history, which is the study of human beings, rather than of myths.
Anonymous • Feb 18, 2011 at 10:39 pm
Can you tell me where I can find a document besides W.E.B. Du Bois’s claim that Lincoln said that? Thanks!
Philosotroll • Feb 19, 2011 at 12:35 am
Absolutely. It was delivered during the debate between Lincoln and Stephen Douglas on September 18, 1958, Charleston, South Carolina.
You can buy your own copy of the Lincoln-Douglas debates (which I strongly recommend, it’s fantastic reading) or you can skim the transcript online. I’m not sure I’m allowed to post links here, but if you google “charleston lincoln douglas debate september 18 1858” the third link that comes up is a link to the transcript, though I think it only offers Lincoln’s remarks, rather than those from both sides.