James Buchanan

Presidential Retirement Years And Constructive Post Presidencies

All of our Presidents, except for eight who died in office, have had periods of retirement after their years in the Presidency.

Some have had very short periods of retirement, periods of less than ten years, including George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James K, Polk, Andrew Johnson, Ulysses S. Grant, Chester Alan Arthur, Benjamin Harrison, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Calvin Coolidge, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Lyndon B. Johnson.

So fully half of our Presidents either died in office or had periods of retirement less than ten years.

On the other hand, the following Presidents had particularly long periods of retirement of fifteen or more years: John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, Grover Cleveland, William Howard Taft, Herbert Hoover, Harry Truman, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and George H. W. Bush.

The following Presidents had between ten and fifteen years of retirement: Franklin Pierce, James Buchanan, Rutherford B. Hayes, and Ronald Reagan.

Bill Clinton has had 13 years out of office, and George W. Bush has had five years out of office at this time.

With the retirement periods of all of these Presidents listed above, the question that arises is which Presidents made major contributions in their post Presidency years.

That list is a short one:

John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Theodore Roosevelt
William Howard Taft
Herbert Hoover
Richard Nixon
Jimmy Carter
Bill Clinton

Adams served nearly eighteen years in Congress.

Van Buren ran for President on the Free Soil Party line in 1848.

Roosevelt ran for President on the Progressive Party line in 1912, and went on an African safari, and explored the Amazon River basin in Brazil.

Taft served as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for nine years.

Hoover wrote books and served as an adviser to President Truman on reorganization of the executive branch of government.

Nixon wrote about ten books and remained an adviser on diplomacy in his nearly twenty years in retirement.

Carter has written nearly twenty books, and engaged in diplomacy, promotion of democracy, fought diseases, and built housing through the Carter Center and Habitat for Humanity.

Clinton has done similar good deeds through his Clinton Initiative, and also worked on relief for the Haitian earthquake and the Pacific Tsunami with George H. W. Bush.

The contributions of these former Presidents have had a major impact on America, and are worthy of remembrance!

The Case For Joe Biden For President

Almost everyone thinks Hillary Clinton is the almost certain Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party in 2016.

This entry is NOT designed to attack her credentials, or her worthiness to be President, and it is NOT designed to be critical of Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo, Amy Klobuchar, Mark Warner, Elizabeth Warren or Brian Schweitzer, other rumored possible candidates.

It is simply an entry to point out the case for Joe Biden for President of the United States!

When one examines Joe Biden’s political career, one can only marvel at his background and experience, although it is well known that often those with far less experience in government end up in the Presidency, as for instance: Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Jimmy Carter, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama.

But, seriously, if one is to use the measurement of experience in NATIONAL government, NO ONE comes even close to Joe Biden!

Only three Presidents had extensive experience in Congress before becoming President, and two of them became President originally by succession during a term–Andrew Johnson and Lyndon B. Johnson. The person to have the most national experience was, sadly, James Buchanan, often ranked as the absolutely worst President we have ever had in our nation’s history.

So one might say, see what happens when you put an experienced person in national government in the Presidency–that they turn out to be disasters, such as Andrew Johnson and Buchanan, and with much dissatisfaction with Lyndon B. Johnson for the Vietnam War escalation.

But it is really unfair to judge having experience as meaning an ultimate failure, and the point is that Joe Biden has a total of 44 years of experience in national government, unmatched in our history, and only Republican Presidential nominee Bob Dole in 1996 coming close, with 36 years of Congressional service!

Biden has unmatched experience and expertise in both foreign policy and legal matters, as he was Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman at different times.

Joe Biden is as skilled with working with the opposition party as Lyndon B. Johnson was in the 1950s, but for a much longer period of time.

Joe Biden would have the ability to get things done, that, arguably, Hillary Clinton would not have, and that other, less experienced Democratic nominees would not have!

Joe Biden is an extremely charming, charismatic , warm human being, and extremely likable and genuine. What you see is what you get, and Biden would be one of the most colorful and dynamic Presidents, were he to gain the Oval Office.

Joe Biden’s shortcomings are his age (although he has tremendous energy and shows no signs of slowing); his tendency to make verbal gaffes (although he has never said anything that did more than make him look foolish and really, human, in that regard); and his one great sin, if that is what it is to be called. That “sin” is having plagiarized in some speeches, and possibly in a term paper in his college years. This is certainly to be criticized, and it knocked him out of the 1988 Presidential race, which, however, was lucky, since he soon suffered an aneurysm, which required brain surgery. One could be concerned that he could have a repeat aneurysm, but it has been 27 years since that event, with no sign of that problem emerging.

The important thing, as always, with any Presidential candidate, is to have a strong, competent, decent running mate for Vice President, in case something tragic occurs, which can happen to anyone at any age! It is not a reason to dismiss someone for President, considering Lyndon B. Johnson’s heart troubles, and Dick Cheney’s multiple heart problems, among other cases of health issues (including John F. Kennedy and Franklin D. Roosevelt), faced by candidates for President and Vice President, as well as those holding the offices.

One thing is very clear! iF Joe Biden were to become President, he would do the nation proud, and we would know we have a President who has our backs, as he does not have a mean bone in his body, and really is compassionate and caring about all of us!

And also, Joe Biden is as close to an “average guy” as we will ever get, a guy who is likely close to the poorest politician throughout his career, living off his and his wife’s salaries, and off sales of his autobiography in recent years. He is not materialistic in the way other officeholders are, and has never had even a hint of scandal in his personal life or his financial life.

That is the kind of man that America deserves in the White House!

Chris Hayes’ ALL IN Discussion Of Worst President Ever: Interesting And Food For Thought!

Chris Hayes on his ALL IN show on MSNBC last night had a fascinating, nearly 20 minute discussion, with three experts on who was the worst President in American history. Certainly, this was very appropriate for Presidents Day!

This author has written about this before, but the four choices discussed were:

Andrew Jackson
Andrew Johnson
Herbert Hoover
George W. Bush

Seeing Andrew Jackson on the list (actually the choice of Chris Hayes) startled me, as he tends to be listed at about Number 12 or 13 on most surveys, and used to be in the top ten near the bottom. But Hayes made a good case based on the Trail of Tears massacre of native Americans, along with forced removal to Oklahoma, and the destruction of the National Bank as good reasons for putting Jackson near the bottom.

This does not mean that this author agrees he is the worst President, but the arguments were food for thought, but consider that Jackson is on the $20 bill, so it is certainly a bit awkward to label him, possibly, the worst President.

The case for Andrew Johnson is much stronger, and he is usually put in the bottom few, which is where this author would put him, but I tend to see James Buchanan as the worst President.

Herbert Hoover is certainly a failure, the President of the Great Depression, but some sympathy for him in his plight does exist, including by this author.

Now George W. Bush labeled the worst, which is becoming a popular thought, seems somehow a bit unfair, but certainly he would rank in the bottom ten without any doubt.

And of course, besides Buchanan, who I have mentioned is generally seen as the worst President, let us not forget other competitors—Franklin Pierce, Warren G. Harding, Ulysses S. Grant, and to some, although not to this author, Richard Nixon!

Presidents And Alcohol Issues

There are many ways that scholars and Presidential “junkies” evaluate Presidents, and one not often thought about is the problem of alcohol issues, Presidents who have had problems of drunkenness that affected their ability to do their job.

Three are well known for having major alcohol problems, and at least for two of them, it affected their performance in office.

Franklin Pierce (1853-1857) had a massive alcohol problem, made worse by the fact that his last and only child was killed in a train accident shortly before the inauguration in 1853. His Presidency is seen as one of the absolute worst, and his signing of the Kansas Nebraska Act in 1854 was a major step toward the Civil War.

Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877) was a great General who won the surrender of Robert E. Lee, and yet, it was well known that he drank too much, although it was claimed that he made better military decisions when drunk. But this massive drinking problem undermined his ability to do his job, and his Presidency became one of massive scandals, generally known as the Credit Mobilier Scandals, which along with the Panic of 1873, undermined his historical reputation.

George W. Bush was also a certifiable alcoholic, although it seems as if he had stopped drinking after his wife, Laura, threatened to leave him in 1986, when their twin daughters were still very young. But some have wondered about whether some of his decision making was influenced either by “stealing” a drink, or the damage done by the alcohol dependency that he had become captive of in earlier years.

Additionally, there are many who think that the following Presidents may have had too much dependency on liquor, while not maybe at the level of Pierce, Grant, and George W.

John Adams (1797-1801)
Martin Van Buren (1837-1841)
James Buchanan (1857-1861)
Chester Alan Arthur (1881-1885)
Grover Cleveland (1885-1889, 1893-1897)
William Howard Taft (1909-1913)
Warren G. Harding (1921-1923)
Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)
Richard M. Nixon (1969-1974)

The strongest cases would be Cleveland and Taft, both of whom were very overweight, and evidence of their extensive drinking is found in different sources about their lives. Also, it was known that Harding drank liquor every day in the White House, despite Prohibition being in effect

The evidence against Adams, Van Buren, Buchanan and Arthur is less extensive, but all three were known to be drinking a lot more than would be safe for one’s health.

The situation of Johnson and Nixon is more based on their personality traits, that under stress, they were likely to drink excessively, but not apparently an habitual problem.

At the same time, those who would be seen as least likely to lean on alcohol would include Rutherford B. Hayes, whose wife was infamously known as “Lemonade Lucy” for banning alcohol at White House gatherings; Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover, who were vehement in their enforcement of Prohibition of liquor; and Jimmy Carter, who avoided alcohol, although his brother Billy was an alcoholic.

The Case For A New Generation Of Democrats For The Presidential Election Of 2016!

As the Presidential race begins, and it has started already, like it or not, it is clear that Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 in 2016, and Joe Biden, who will be 74 in 2016, are the frontrunners, and that Hillary is using up most of the oxygen in the room, way ahead of Biden in polls, with other potential Democratic candidates in single digits.

But despite the confidence and optimism about Hillary and even Joe as a backup, there is a growing case for the argument that the Democratic Party should bypass both Hillary and Joe, no matter how much one may love or admire either of them, and go for a new generation of Democrats, as was done in 1960 with John F. Kennedy, in 1976 with Jimmy Carter, in 1992 with Bill Clinton, and 2008 with Barack Obama!

All of these successful Democratic Presidential winners were young–43, 52, 46, and 47 respectively at the time of the inauguration. All were younger than their GOP opponents, although Richard Nixon was only four years older, but represented a continuation of Dwight D. Eisenhower, our oldest President at the time when he retired in 1961!

But Jimmy Carter was eleven years younger than Gerald Ford; Bill Clinton 22 years younger than George H. W. Bush; and Barack Obama 25 years younger than John McCain!

The fact is ONLY three Presidents were inaugurated at age 65 or older—William Henry Harrison at age 68 and dying a month later; James Buchanan at age 65 but only 50 days short of age 66, and rated by many historians the worst President in American history; and Ronald Reagan, inaugurated at just weeks before his 70th and 74th birthday, and judged by many to have deteriorated mentally, with early Alzheimers in his second term of office!

And we have seen Bob Dole defeated at age 73 in 1996; John McCain defeated at age 72 in 2008; and Mitt Romney, defeated at age 65 inn 2012, but also about 50 days short of age 66 if he had been inaugurated, the same exact age as Buchanan was when he won in 1856!

Meanwhile, the Republican Party future is clearly in the hands of young politicians, including Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie, and others, with these candidates being mostly in their 40s and 50s, and all younger than Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden!

Historically, in most elections, the younger candidate wins, and the party of the President usually does not do well if it utilizes someone connected with the administration leaving office, no matter what level of popularity reigns when that President leaves office, as witness:

Richard Nixon lost after Eisenhower
Hubert Humphrey lost after Lyndon B. Johnson
Gerald Ford lost after Richard Nixon
Walter Mondale lost after Jimmy Carter
Al Gore lost after Bill Clinton

If Hilary Clinton runs, she represents Obama’s foreign policy record, for good or for bad, and also brings back the good and the bad of the Presidency of her husband, Bill Clinton.

If Joe Biden runs, he represents what happens to a Vice President under a President, that the negatives of that President harm the Vice President, as with Nixon, Humphrey, Ford, Mondale, and Gore.

Only George H. W, Bush was able to overcome this hex, and succeed Ronald Reagan in 1988, although then losing reelection in 1992, the greatest percentage loss of any President in American history, except William Howard Taft in 1912!

It is reality that Democrats will be heavily favored in the Electoral College in 2016, no matter who runs, but it would be easier for a “New”, younger Democrat to be the Presidential nominee, such as Martin O’Malley, Andrew Cuomo, KIrsten Gilllibrand, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, Deval Patrick, Mark Warner, John Hickenlooper, or Elizabeth Warren, all of whom are much younger than Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, with the exception of Warren, who would be 67 in 2016, which makes her a less ideal candidate based upon age!

It is important for Democrats to think carefully before they decide for a continuation of the Obama Presidency through Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, as nominating someone younger and separated from the Obama Administration would be preferable, and easier for the grueling campaign ahead!

The US Senate: Grooming Ground For The Presidency And Vice Presidency!

It has been said that the US Senate, the greatest deliberative legislative body in the world, is the grooming ground for the Presidency and Vice Presidency.

So therefore, it is worth a look at the facts regarding this statement.

So which Presidents had served in the US Senate, in chronological order: (a total of 16 Presidents)

James Monroe
John Quincy Adams
Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
William Henry Harrison
John Tyler
Franklin Pierce
James Buchanan
Andrew Johnson
Benjamin Harrison
Warren G. Harding
Harry Truman
John F. Kennedy
Lyndon B. Johnson
Richard Nixon
Barack Obama

However, and this is stunning, only THREE of these Presidents were directly elected from the US Senate to the White House—Harding, Kennedy, and Obama.

And four of these Presidents who served in the Senate were not originally elected, but succeeded a President who had died in office—Tyler, Andrew Johnson, Truman, and Lyndon Johnson.

And notice 10 of these 16 Presidents who had served in the US Senate did so in the 19th century, and
except for Harding in the early 1920s, while four others were President between 1945 and 1974, with Obama the 16th and most recent example, but really a fluke as only the third elected directly from the Senate.

When we examine which Senators became Vice President of the United States, we discover the following in chronological order: (a total of 22 Vice Presidents)

Aaron Burr
Martin Van Buren
Richard Mentor Johnson
John Tyler
George M. Dallas
William R. King
John C. Breckinridge
Hannibal Hamlin
Andrew Johnson
Henry Wilson
Thomas A. Hendricks
Charles W. Fairbanks
Charles Curtis
Harry Truman
Alben Barkley
Richard Nixon
Lyndon B. Johnson
Hubert H. Humphrey
Walter Mondale
Dan Quayle
Al Gore
Joe Biden

Of this list of 22 Vice Presidents who had served in the Senate, six became President–Van Buren, Tyler, Andrew Johnson, Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Nixon.

So the Senate gave us about 40 percent of our Presidents, and about 50 percent of our Vice Presidents.

Analyzing The Ten “Less Than One Term” Presidents: Kennedy And Ford Stand Out!

America has had 43 men serve as President of the United States over the past 224 years since George Washington was inaugurated in 1789. Ten of those Presidents, however, served less than one full term in office.

Of those ten, two served less than a year each—William Henry Harrison, one month; and James A. Garfield, six and a half months.

Of those ten, five served between 16 months and 34 months in office—Zachary Taylor, 16 months; Warren G. Harding, 29 months; Gerald Ford, 29 and a half months; Millard Fillmore, 32 months; and John F. Kennedy, 34 months.

The remaining three Presidents served more than three years, but less than four, as successors to the Presidency during the term—Chester Alan Arthur, 41 and a half months; Andrew Johnson, 46 and a half months; and John Tyler, 47 months.

Five of these ten Presidents died in office—Harrison, Taylor, Garfield, Harding, and Kennedy, with Harrison, Taylor and Harding dying of natural causes, and Garfield and Kennedy being assassinated.

One President succeeded after the resignation of the sitting President, Ford after Richard Nixon left office facing an impeachment trial due to the Watergate Scandal.

Five of these Presidents finished the term of the previous President—Tyler, Fillmore, Johnson,. Arthur, and Ford, and none were elected to the White House.

Which of these Presidents made a difference?

John Tyler brought about the acquisition of Texas during his time in office, along with the Webster-Ashburton Treaty with Great Britain, dealing with Canadian boundary issues.

Millard Fillmore brought about the delay of the Civil War by his agreement to sign the Compromise of 1850, and sent Commodore Matthew Perry to open up Japan to the Western world, although by the time Perry made contact with Japan, Franklin Pierce had become President.

Chester Alan Arthur signed into law the first Civil Service Reform bill for the federal government, the Pendleton Act.

Warren G. Harding pardoned Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs from prison for having violated the Espionage and Sedition Acts during World War I; and an important treaty, the Washington Naval Agreements, was negotiated by his Secretary of State, Charles Evans Hughes, the future Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the 1930s.

John F. Kennedy was the most accomplished, responsible for actions promoting civil rights; negotiating the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty; promoting the Peace Corps; advancing the US Space program to land a man on the moon; and avoiding nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, which undermined his popularity, but is now seen as having been the correct action to move the country away from the Watergate Scandal; resolved the Magaguez Affair with Cambodia, with the successful return of the hostages of that US Navy ship by direct action of the US Marines; and appointed long time Associate Justice John Paul Stevens to the Supreme Court, a great influence on the Court for 35 years.

The three shortest term Presidents had little impact, with only Garfield regarded as a major loss, since his education and his accomplishments, both politically and intellectually, made him seem a person who might have had a dramatic effect on the Presidency, had he lived to serve a full term.

The leading tragedy of these ten “less than one term” Presidents clearly was Andrew Johnson, who pursued a confrontational policy with Congress, showed intense racism in his approach to the issue of how African Americans should be treated in the post Civil War South, and faced impeachment and trial (which was unjust), but was caused to a great extent by his horrible relationship with the Republican majority in both houses of Congress.

If one was to rank where these ten Presidents belong in ratings in history, one just needs to look at the C-Span poll of 42 Presidents by 64 scholars, conducted in 2009 as George W. Bush left office.

What we find is the following rankings:

Kennedy—-6
Ford—22
Garfield—28
Taylor—29
Arthur—32
Tyler—35
Fillmore—37
Harding—38
Harrison—39
Johnson—41

Of course, listing Harrison and even Garfield may seem silly to many, since their tenure in office was so short, but it is interesting that Garfield’s potential and promise as a possible full term President is the idea now being promoted by scholars, who see him as a particularly tragic loss.

In the long run, it is clear that Kennedy and Ford will always stand out as the two best “less than one term” Presidents, with Garfield’s potential also significant, and otherwise, Tyler, Fillmore and Arthur having the greatest impact in their times. Harrison and Taylor had little impact, mostly remembered for their military exploits as President. Harding is still regarded as the worst President of the 20th century, particularly because of the massive political scandals in his administration, and Johnson is just seen as a total disaster, only standing above hapless full term President James Buchanan, so Harding and Johnson are seen as “failures”!

So this is the analysis of our ten “less than one term” Presidents!

Howard Dean’s Statement About Generational Differences Of Presidents We Elect Brings Up Interesting Point About 2016!

Former Vermont Governor, 2004 Presidential competitor, and Democratic National Committee head Howard Dean was on MORNING JOE yesterday, and brought up an interesting point about generational differences of Presidents we elect to the Oval Office.

Dean said it is highly unlikely that we will see Hillary Clinton have no competition for the Democratic Presidential nomination in 2016, because for the nation to go back a generation in birth from one President to the next is unusual—in this case to go back to a “Baby Boomer” born in the late 1940s after electing a President born in the early 1960s. Therefore, Dean states that he believed someone born closer to the birth year of Barack Obama would be more likely to be the nominee, a person such as Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley or New York Governor Andrew Cuomo as examples–with O’Malley one and a half years younger than Obama and Cuomo three and a half years older than Obama.

So Dean has brought up the age issue, just as Republicans have, with their numerous potential candidates in their 40s and early 50s–including Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, and Rand Paul among others.

This statement by Dean caused this author to check out how often has America elected a President much younger than his predecessor, and has uncovered the following:

William Henry Harrison—nearly ten years older than Martin Van Buren
Zachary Taylor—eleven years older than James K. Polk
James Buchanan—thirteen and a half years older than Franklin Pierce
Ronald Reagan—thirteen and a half years older than Jimmy Carter

A few other Presidents have been a few years older than their predecessor, but these are the only four cases of “generational” differences of Presidents we elect, although not precisely a “generation”, which is described as twenty years.

If Hillary Clinton was elected, she would be nearly 14 years older than Barack Obama, more difference than even Buchanan or Reagan from their predecessors.

If Joe Biden was elected, he would be nearly 19 years older than Barack Obama, the greatest difference between two Presidents in American history, and literally a “generation”!

This is food for thought, and realize that Harrison and Taylor were elected for their war exploits as generals, and all the cases mentioned above were before the Civil War, more than a century and a half ago, with the one exception of Ronald Reagan.

The question is whether, and said in irony, is either Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden another Ronald Reagan? Again, this is said with tongue in cheek by a writer who has never been a big fan of Ronald Reagan!

Karl Rove Totally Delusional On George W. Bush’s Greatness!

Former George W. Bush “brain” Karl Rove is totally delusional, as yesterday, he declared on Fox News Channel that George W. Bush belonged with the “greats” among the Presidency, including George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan!

This is the same man who failed to elect most of the Republicans that he supported through his campaign organization, wasting hundreds of millions of dollars from wealthy patrons who believed he knew who to back and could win seats in Congress.

This is the same man who said on Election night that Mitt Romney was going to win, and denied the obvious Barack Obama victory when it was already happening!

Bush will make the list of Presidents as one of the FAILURES of the Presidency, in the company of James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, Warren G. Harding, Herbert Hoover, and Franklin Pierce.

Rove has conveniently forgotten Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Thomas Jefferson, Lyndon B. Johnson, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, and John F. Kennedy, all of whom rank better than Ronald Reagan, who might be number 11, but not in the top ten of all Presidents!

And Bill Clinton may eventually rank above Reagan as well, and Barack Obama might also make the top ten to twelve list, when he has left the Presidency, and passions have cooled down!

St. Patrick’s Day: 22 American Presidents Have Irish Roots!

Today is St. Patrick’s Day, and whether Irish or not, the nation tends to celebrate it, almost as if it is a national holiday.

It turns out that fully half of our 43 Presidents–a total of 22– have Irish roots, including:

George Washington
James Madison
Andrew Jackson
James K. Polk
James Buchanan
Andrew Johnson
Ulysses S. Grant
Chester Alan Arthur
Grover Cleveland
Benjamin Harrison
William McKinley
Theodore Roosevelt
Woodrow Wilson
John F. Kennedy
Richard Nixon
Gerald Ford
Jimmy Carter
Ronald Reagan
George H. W. Bush
Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
Barack Obama

It is interesting how exactly half (11) were in the Presidency before 1900, and the same number (11) since 1900, with nine of the modern eleven Irish Presidents with Irish roots since 1961!