Obama Might Not Be First...But He Is Not Worst

The first year of the Obama Presidency is nearing its close. With that in mind, I thought I would address some of the claims against President Obama. First off, I voted for then-Senator Obama in 2008 because he was breath of fresh air. Now despite many of “his claims” or campaign promises, Washington does not seem to be going in the right direction and possibly is even worse. But if you think that is President Obama’s fault and his entire fault, you are delirious. Both political parties are guilty of adding to the partisanship especially the Republican Party’s stalwart tow the same line philosophy and lack of moderate perspective.

But the thing that perturbs me the most is what the far right and die-hard conservatives say about President Obama’s place in the annuals of the Presidency. They call him “the worst President ever”. I would like to think that most of that is rhetoric for the purposes of energizing their base and find a way to give the President negative attention. I would be remiss to leave out the fact that many on the other side said similar things to a slightly (not much) lesser degree of President Bush. Bush’s story is finished and is being analyzed while Obama’s story is still in progress. But despite both presidents’ flaws, I doubt they can be called the worst. Obama has the chance to go down as one of the better presidents if he can return the economy to somewhere remotely close to where it was before the recession. And that does not even take into consideration many of items on his agenda that could be the second coming of the Great Society.

I may support most of what President Obama has outlined, but do not associate me with some Obama-head or any other term used to describe a 100% Obama supporter who see no flaws in him and his presidency. I also am not a liberal, but a realist and moderate. With all that said, many historians would agree with me that President James Buchanan would in ranked at the bottom of the lists of presidents and he not Obama should be vilified by critics. Something that happened 150 years ago is not really important to people today rightfully so, but at the same time today’s critics lack historical perspective, which I love providing.

James Buchanan was the nation’s 15th U.S. President from 1857-1861. He came to the White House after terms of office in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. He was also the Secretary of State under President James K. Polk. Slavery was a growing issue in the years leading up to his presidency especially how it pertained to the differences between the Northern states who opposed it and the Southern states who favored it. Buchanan did not want to take sides and his neutrality would only alleviate one of the worst events in our nation’s history: the U.S. Civil War.

The issue of slavery was put in the spotlight early in his term with the Dred Scott Case, where the Supreme Court ruled Congress had no constitutional power to exclude slavery in the territories. Buchanan did not want to take on the issue of slavery head on and preferred the Supreme Court handle the situation with legal decisions. His stance only further grew the South’s entitlement to slaves and slave property. Next, he favored the Lecompton Constitution with regard to Kansas and its admittance into the Union as a slave state. It would eventually get voted down after much dispute. Buchanan’s stance shows that clearly he favored slave owners’ rights and the institution of slavery. He battled with abolitionists and Northern groups. Some claimed that for a Northerner he sure had Southern principles and values. As the Election of 1860 approached, an impending secession by several Southern states seemed eminent. Sensing this he was warned to deploy several hundred federal troops to the states in question. Buchanan once again went against what was probably the right decision and took no action, which made it that much easier for the Southern states to enact their plan.

He lacked a backbone when it came to the issue and virtually said that the federal government could do nothing about the South and the South was open to do what they wanted despite some words by the President against seceding. He wanted representatives from the North and the South to solve the problem themselves and virtually let the South know that he had no real power over stopping them from leaving the Union. Then on December 20, 1860, South Carolina seceded from the Union followed by six other Southern states over the next two months. Because there were no federal officials and troops to protect the South from taking federal property in the South; they began to take over buildings and cities and formed their own country and called themselves the Confederate States of America. The South was taking steps along the way in early 1861 before Abraham Lincoln took over the presidency that would lead to their attack at Fort Sumner.

James Buchanan’s legacy is often forgotten as the man who followed him not only cleaned up the mess he made, but also went onto the guide the nation through the Civil War and become arguably the greatest U.S. President. And much of his success was due to the failures of Buchanan who is arguable the worst U.S. President we have had in our over 200 years of existence. Buchanan went against convention wisdom and refused to take proper action to avoid secession. That decision has stood the test of time and ranks as the worst mistake by a U.S. President. So, for all the people who want to jump to conclusions and say that President Obama is the worst president or will go down as the worst president; how about you open a history book and open to Chapter 15 of the U.S. Presidency chronology. Stopping spewing partisanship ideologies and use facts and evidence. It is what I try to live my life by and history should as hell teaches us a lot about today. That history gives us comparisons and contrasts and certainly anything that Obama has done in the last year doesn't rank anywhere near what Buchanan did to nation during his four years.