A look at the mediocre presidents
All: We are the mediocre presidents.
You won’t find our faces on dollars or on cents!
There’s Taylor, there’s Tyler,
There’s Fillmore and there’s Hayes.
There’s William Henry Harrison,
Harrison: I died in thirty days!
All: We… are… the…
Adequate, forgettable,
Occasionally regrettable
Caretaker presidents of the U-S-A!
………………………………………………….
I’ve been considering the argument inherent in this article on what brings us the “Imperial Presidency”, and presidential oversteps and arrogance. We value Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson (unfortunately), … um… Reagan… which is to say: Presidents who did something, and who, in large part, enacted the “Imperial Presidency” for theirownselves.
The problem is that the other extreme takes us to the corruption of President Harding, the “Return to Normalcy” after the public spit in the face of Woodrow Wilson’s “Imperial Presidency”. None of the corruption was Harding’s fault, except insofar as he had a weak executive style that allowed it to happen — and so Harding’s most famous quote “I’m not really up to the job of being president” (Bush II would say “It’s hard work”, seemingly begging the public to vote him out of office — which we either did or did not.)
Or the Post Reconstruction Presidents. And therein is the other big problem. Their very existence was a testamont to a refusal to uphold civil rights for the recently freed African American slave. Another “Return to Normalcy” after a bitter war, and another karping on historical responsibilities. And federal powers are thrown over to the state — no “Imperial Powers” here — for the benefit of Mississippians upholding their right to wear white hoods and lynch black people (and Catholics and immigrants) without federal interference. And suddenly everything becomes messy in consideration in the stupid parlor game ranking the presidents with a juanced view of contrarianism to uphold the Great UnUsurpers.
Consider the lot of the presidents in this history, and I will note Mark Twain generally voted for the Republicans, excepting Blaine where he turned to Grover Cleveland, a bastion of honesty against the railroad-enfused corruption of Blaine. Grover Cleveland, the Democrat who Ayn Rand cited as the most “Libertarian” in American history — that is to say non-activist… and I quote Grover Cleveland:
“I find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and the duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit… The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood.”
… a quote used by people opposing aid to Katrina-victims to show that, Hey! It ain’t the government’s responsibility. One thousand points of light — and never mind if I’m not one of those lights (Ayn Rand opposes personal charity, mind you), and never mind if the sheer volume of the situation requires a more concerted and centralized effort… because, no less an authority than the much beloved…
… Grover Cleveland???…
opposes aid to disaster victims. (Again: Grover Cleveland? He ain’t no Herbert Hoover!)
So, what? Is there a happy medium? Thesis – Antithesis – Synthesis? No. Consider everything on a different plane, and move on.