Failures of the Presidents: From the Whiskey Rebellion and War of 1812 to the Bay of Pigs and War in Iraq PDF
Preview Failures of the Presidents: From the Whiskey Rebellion and War of 1812 to the Bay of Pigs and War in Iraq
FAILURES OF THE PRESIDENTS FAILURES OF THE PRESIDENTS FROM THE WHISKEY REBELLION AND WAR OF 1812 TO THE BAY OF PIGS AND WAR IN IRAQ THOMAS J. CRAUGHWELL WITH M. WILLIAM PHELPS CONTENTS INTRODUCTION: CHANGING VIEWS OF PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESS AND FAILURE 1. THE WHISKEY REBELLION: GEORGE WASHINGTON 2. THE ALIEN AND SEDITION ACTS: JOHN ADAMS 3. THE EMBARGO ACTS: THOMAS JEFFERSON 4. THE WAR OF 1812: JAMES MADISON 5. THE TRAIL OF TEARS: ANDREW JACKSON 6. REPEAL OF THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE: FRANKLIN PIERCE 7. THE ATTEMPT TO ANNEX SANTO DOMINGO: ULYSSES S. GRANT 8. THE PULLMAN STRIKE: GROVER CLEVELAND 9. “A SPLENDID LITTLE WAR” WITH SPAIN: WILLIAM MCKINLEY 10. THE PUNITIVE EXPEDITION INTO MEXICO: WOODROW WILSON 11. THE BONUS ARMY: HERBERT HOOVER 12. INTERNMENT OF JAPANESE-AMERICANS IN WORLD WAR II: FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT 13. THE BAY OF PIGS INVASION: JOHN F. KENNEDY 14. THE TONKIN GULF RESOLUTION: LYNDON B. JOHNSON 15. THE BOMBING OF CAMBODIA: RICHARD NIXON 16. WATERGATE: RICHARD NIXON 17. THE IRANIAN HOSTAGE CRISIS: JIMMY CARTER 18. ENERGY CRISIS AND “MALAISE”: JIMMY CARTER 19. THE IRAN-CONTRA AFFAIR: RONALD REAGAN 20. WAR IN IRAQ: GEORGE W. BUSH SUGGESTED READING ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABOUT THE AUTHOR ART CREDITS INDEX INTRODUCTION CHANGING VIEWS OF PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESS AND FAILURE UNTIL RECENTLY, THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH WAITED FIFTY YEARS AFTER THE death of a candidate for sainthood before beginning the investigation into his or her life and merits. Centuries of experience had taught the Vatican that when someone with a reputation for holiness dies, a great emotional outburst naturally follows, as happened with the death of Pope John Paul II. But wait fifty years, and all the hysteria as well as the hyperbole will have settled down, and the men whose job it is to examine the lives of potential saints can go about their business like scholars—in a judicious, methodical, and rational manner. Something similar happens when an American president leaves office, or leaves this world. Washington correspondents, political pundits, and cable news commentators vie with one another to make the most sweeping statements—and quotable sound bites—about the success or failure of the former president’s administration. It can’t be helped; the format of twenty- four-hour news coverage demands on-the-spot assessments, and then assessments of the assessments. But as with sorting out saints, weighing the successes and failures of a presidency takes time. History will always have its say, but many years may pass before it speaks. Harry S. Truman is a classic case. He left the White House in 1953 in near disgrace with an approval rating down around 22 percent. Even president-elect Dwight D. Eisenhower snubbed Truman, at first refusing his invitation to a pre-inaugural luncheon at the White House, then failing even to make the customary courtesy call on the outgoing president and first lady. Instead, the general sat in his car outside the White House, waiting for President Truman to come to him. FOR MANY AMERICANS THE IMAGE OF THE SCORCHED WRECKAGE OF AN AMERICAN C-130, WHICH COLLIDED WITH A U.S. HELICOPTER DURING A FAILED MISSION TO RESCUE HOSTAGES IN IRAN IN 1980, REMAINS A BRUTAL REMINDER OF THIS JIMMY CARTER FOREIGN POLICY FAILURE. Twenty years later, Truman’s reputation was reborn thanks to Merle Miller’s popular book Plain Speaking: An Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman, published in 1974, followed the next year by the one-man show Give ’em Hell, Harry! Truman, once derided as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s hapless successor, a man entirely out of his depth in post–World War II politics, was now hailed as a feisty, straight-talking man of the people who fought for his principles, and perhaps was ahead of his time. He urged Congress to pass a national health insurance program, saying, “The health of American children, like their education, should be recognized as a definite public responsibility.” (Sadly, Truman’s proposal was rejected, thanks in part to the American Medical Association, which campaigned against the program, claiming it was “socialized medicine” and calling the Truman administration “followers of the Moscow party line.”) Even Richard Nixon’s reputation has been refurbished a bit. At the time of his resignation in August 1974, Nixon was one of the most intensely despised men in America. He was airlifted by helicopter off the White House lawn into political exile; by and large he kept out of the public spotlight, although he was a prolific writer of memoirs and many books on foreign policy (The Memoirs of Richard Nixon, Beyond Peace, In the Arena, etc.). In recent years, however, historians have reminded us of Nixon’s support for environmental protection (he founded the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970) and his call for universal health care. It’s not enough to obliterate the stigma of the Watergate debacle, but after the passage of decades, some of his accomplishments mitigate the well-worn impression of Nixon as a complete ogre. Readers who scan this book’s table of contents may wonder what happened to the chapter about Bill Clinton’s impeachment and his scandalous relations with Monica Lewinsky and other women. The Clinton sex scandals and the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice were tawdry, they were a national embarrassment, and they were a major distraction from the nation’s business, but my coauthors and I, along with our editors, could not agree definitively that the Clinton scandals, for all the “sound and fury” that came with them, actually inflicted serious damage on the United States at the time. It could be argued that had he not been distracted by the scandals and the impeachment, Clinton might have been able to broker a peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinians that could have prevented the Second Intifada of 2000. The suggestion makes for an interesting discussion, but in the end, such discussions are hypothetical. GROVER CLEVELAND’S DECISION TO SEND IN MILITARY FORCES TO QUELL THE PULLMAN LABOR STRIKE IN 1894 SPARKED RIOTS AND ULTIMATELY STAINED HIS LEGACY WITH AMERICAN BLOOD.
Description:The list of books you might like
