So who's part of the 29%?

Although I am quite critical of Bush, I think it's rather exaggerated to claim that he's going to be the "worst" in American history, or for onr century. In recent history I can see, but even I'm still uncomfortable slapping labels on presidents without the full record being disclosed.

Call it an occupational hazard, but the full record regarding all facets of his administration still have to mulled, culled, critiqued and analyzed. Although I think Iraq is a disaster, that bird has yet to completely fly. I really do think if Iraq does have a chance at maintaining a modicum of stablility and success, his legacy will be a lot better than we realize. Nonetheless, historians have this uncanny ability to find at least some good and bad in all presidents--after all, although FDR tried to circumvent the Constitution to pack the Supreme Court with his own sympathizers, most agree that he was a pretty good president, or at least the right man at the right time. Lincoln pretty much arrested the whole MD state legislature without charging them with a crime, and somehow he makes the top of the list.

Not excusing these actions or defending Bush, but I think when people say "worst in history," they fall into the same trap as many mindless partisans who get caught up in the political heat of battle.

:shrug: