How To Measure Presidential Greatness

Ronald Reagan was a great president! How to measure the greatness of an American president has always been an ambiguous ‘eye of the beholder’ kind of thing that is a veritable mandate for our republic. Is a president great because of what he accomplishes in office, or how deftly he guides the ship of state through troubled times, or just because he presents himself to be…well…presidential?

Ronald Reagan

President Ronald Reagan

In his inaugural address, President James Polk outlined the four major goals he hoped to achieve in his administration…and he accomplished every one of them! How often does that happen? If accomplishments in office are the measure of a great president, Polk should be high on the list, but barely receives more than a paragraph in most history texts.

Gerald Ford’s administration is largely unheralded, but the mild mannered president set the perfect example as he guided the nation through the tragic aftermath of Watergate, the Vietnam War, and the divisiveness of the anti-establishment movement of the day. Like Rodney Dangerfield, Ford often “Don’t get no respect,” but he actually ranks pretty high up the list of ‘greatness.’

On the other hand, history records that John Quincy Adams was very presidential in demeanor. He had been a very proficient ambassador and senator, but proved to be an ineffective and morose president. Strangely enough, he went on to a highly successful career as a U.S. Congressman after his presidency.

Now, we who reside to the right of political center must make a decision between four candidates (as of this writing) to represent our hopes and values in the November presidential election. Each candidate, to my way of thinking, has positive attributes that might make him fitted to be president, but the campaign has dwelt largely on the negatives, and the wounds are piling up. I personally am not thrilled with any of the choices, and dream at night of a Reaganesque white knight thundering into the Republican convention and sweeping away the delegates with his/her solid platform, aura of leadership, and love and respect for the Constitution, capitalism, and the American way of life. But that is not going to happen. We are going to be faced with a choice between these four flawed candidates, and our choice will likely come down to who we think can beat President Obama and who has lost the least amount of blood from this ‘campaign of 1000 cuts.’

I have a suggestion. One of the measures of a great president that is not politically correct but might be among the best indicators of greatness is the measure of how much the opposing side hates him. Abraham Lincoln was truly hated by the Democrats of his day. This hatred was so intense and extreme that southern states seceded from the Union and subjected the nation to four years of devastating civil war. Ronald Reagan was hated almost as much by the Democrats, as was evidenced by the daily vitriolic bashing handed to him by a liberal media during his eight years in office. His administration dealt a demoralizing blow to communism in Europe and to socialism in the United States, and the leftists vilified him for it. While there were a host of other attributes that defined his greatness in office, the hatred he still evokes from liberals is enough definition of greatness for me.

I’m not sure the Democrats harbor intense hatred for any of the four remaining Republican presidential hopefuls. For the most part, they ignore Santorum and Paul, although I suspect we will hear and read more anti-religion rhetoric from the left if the evangelical Santorum continues to gain traction. Far from hatred, the left actually seems to like Mitt Romney. Liberal talking heads always include the fact that, “Romney sided with Obama on this issue and that issue and so on.” It’s true, of course. Maybe the left doesn’t really care whether Romney or Obama is elected because the libs can press their agenda either way. No hatred there.

That leaves Newt. Left-leaning insiders in Washington harbor distrust and a strong dislike, bordering on hatred, of the former Speaker of the House. Problem is, Washington insiders on the right feel the same way. Gingrich, notwithstanding his many years as one of the ranking Washington insiders, is a loose cannon, a candidate who is almost the poster child for DID (also known as multiple personality disorder) in his loosely defined campaign strategy. A national talk show host recently said, “On his best days, Newt Gingrich is hands down the very best presidential candidate out there. On his worst days…well…he can do, say, or be anything!”

“Loose Cannon” may not be among the definitions for presidential greatness, but I kind of like it. For now, color me still undecided, but if I don’t soon see some rage from the other side aimed at a particular candidate, I may settle for the loose cannon.

At the very least, it will assure a very interesting presidency. That’s all I’m saying.

 

3 Responses to How To Measure Presidential Greatness

  1. @Cracolice1776 March 20, 2012 at 6:02 pm

    I am concerned about Medicaid fraud. After working for 5 years as a Medicaid Service Coordinator, in Buffalo, NY I had to resign due to pressure from the Directors, & Executive Director's of the agency, for my refusal to "educate clients how to vote correctly", refusing to March & Picket & Protest against a Republican politician visiting town & so much more. When I contacted a well known investigative reporter, who interviewed me, and was ready to break the story in 2011, I had to back out until I could financially find other employment. I ended up purchasing a business & am now independent and am seeking an avenue to expose the internal corruption that I was eye witness to, in the Medicaid Service Agencies, supported by Medicaid, in this country. Fraud is everywhere, no one will blow the whistle because they are afraid of the ACLU or other radical left wing idea logs, forcing those who fund an agency to cease their contributions & funding. I still feel filthy from the times I stood by while young women were urged to visit Planned Parenthood for abortions and advise, often under age & without parental knowledge. Medicaid Service Coordinator's (M.S.C's.), are absolute "Entitlement-Pushers" that drive Medicaid costs through the roof. If there is someone who is interested in discussing this outrage, that I have never heard discussed in the media by either the left nor the right, I would feel humbled to assist now that I am not relying on that industry any longer to support my family. Does the country know that Medicaid is paying for cell phone bills, rent, utility bills, housing, (not many people realize how those with an MSC advocate are afforded these types of entitlements). Also, horse riding, summer camp, free day care and, well, the list is outrageous & outraging. God Bless America & thanks for giving me this forum to rant a bit. Greg Cracolice

    Reply
    • Alan_Levesque March 20, 2012 at 10:19 pm

      Thanks for the comment. It sounds like the level of fraud is monumental.

      Reply
      • @Cracolice1776 March 21, 2012 at 7:35 pm

        Yes, very much so and there seems to be no end in sight with entitlements on the rise. Greece is about to happen here, we are only about 2-3 years behind unless this election changes things for the better. Thank you for the comment!!!

        Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Have a conservative business, group or cause? Why not advertise with the Daily Pamphlet? Spread the word about your organization to like-minded conservatives! We have a host of options sure to fit your budget and you will benefit from our ongoing promotional efforts!

What we offer:


Banner Ads


Featured Backlinks


YouTube Video Ads


 

Have questions? send us an email at:

advertising@thedailypamphlet.com