Customer Reviews

Star-Spangled Men: America's Ten Worst Presidents

5 star:		(7)
4 star:		(12)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

In an age of ultra-partisan hit pieces, this thoughtful and factual account is refreshing. You may not agree with Nathan Miller's choices of the ten worst presidents, but I believe you will find this a very readable and intelligent critique of ten different men who have attempted to lead the country. Though I remain one of those who felt last year's whole impeachment sideshow was a waste of precious tax dollars, I have to admit that I had to agree with much of what Miller has to say about Clinton's character. (Our current president is not on the list, though Miller has reserved the right to include him in future editions.) He also makes excellent cases against presidents who have been revered, such as Andrew Johnson who faced impeachment in 1868 for his undermining of Reconstruction. Calvin Coolidge is pilloried for refusing to forgive the debts of our Great War allies and, indirectly, contributing to the rise of Adolf Hitler. Some of the choices are predictable (such as Richard Nixon), but others like Jimmy Carter may (or may not) surprise you. Miller doesn't pick on people for party or ideology: he seeks instead to define for each man what exactly it was that made him so bad for the country. Those who are picking our nation's leaders this year should review this book before selecting from the candidates.

Modesty is rarely a politician's strong suit. When he sought his country's highest office in 1976, former Georgia Governor Jimmy Carter titled his campaign memoir "Why Not The Best?" The former president, no doubt, would not be happy to find himself included in this far less flattering work. In this witty and informative volume, author Nathan Miller focuses on Carter and nine other chief executives who he rates as the worst presidents in our history.

Some of his choices--Andrew Johnson, U.S. Grant, Warren Harding, Benjamin Harrison, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan--are pretty much consensus picks. The inclusion of Carter and Richard Nixon will no doubt stir the ire of their partisans. And putting Calvin Coolidge and William Howard Taft on the "ten worst" list is definitely debatable. But that's part of the fun of this book. Miller writes with an obvious delight for his subject matter. Whether you agree with his conclusions or not, you will have to concede he lays out his arguments with a definite sense of conviction. Perhaps the greatest prospect for debate will be the epilogue, in which he argues that Thomas Jefferson and John Kennedy are our two most overrated chief executives.

Although these tales of incompetence, corruption and failure might seem disheartening after a while, there's one positive thought the reader is left with when it's all over....we've survived this bunch, so we're likely to survive a few more turkeys!--William C. Hall

Miller has given us a valuable history lesson whose readership should include every candidate or potential candidate for the presidency. Although Bill Clinton is not considered for this book, will he become a "Starr (sic) Spangled Man?" This chapter is yet to be written.

In any event, the portraits of our White House schemers, wusses, and do-nothings are well sketched out, although I would have preferred more depth on the great "worst" -- U.S. Grant and Richard Nixon. The analysis seems a bit thin on these men, both of whom had such rich and and extraordinary pre-presidential careers. The chapter on overrated presidents, Thomas Jefferson and JFK was on the mark, althogh here, too, deeper analysis would have been welcome. I would quarrel with MIller on one major point. In his table of contents, he lists the 10 worst presidents in order from poor to horrid. If one regards the actual harm a president did to the country, I would rank order the final four as follows: Harding, Pierce, Nixon, and Buchanan. Buchanan was the very worst because he did not even attempt to halt the drift to the bloodiest period in American history. Nixon was bad enough, but his resignation prevented him from doing more harm; give him credit at least for not prolonging the agony and departing the scene voluntarily. For us history buffs, Miller should now try a new arcane theme. How about America's best Secretaries of Commerce?

My son and I are home schooling and we always use a minimum of three sources when we study people. Luckily this book is one of our sources for the ten worst presidents. Invariably, this book makes understandable what some of the others don't--for example, why Andrew Johnson is among the ten; some of our other books seemingly only convey that Johnson continued in the footsteps of Lincoln's vision of reconstruction! Nathan Miller's descriptions of all of these men are true studies in how good men (and in some cases, not-so-good men) can become very bad presidents. There's a lot to learn between these book covers. Sandy Kalman

I repeat my review of below so it will be linked with my newly created ID on Amazon:

These 10 Chief Executives are well-picked. Mr. Miller, an eminent historian and author, brings his extraordinary talents to bear in this nice little tome. Although brief, this book will gives more than enough information to whet the appetite of the most avid history buff. If you think things are bad with the current administration, a look back at Teapot dome, Watergate, the near impeachment of Johnson, and all the other shortcomings and scandals documented here will certainly leave you asking the question "Have things really changed?". The appendix on Jefferson and Kennedy were especially refreshing Another great contribution by Mr. Miller.

This book helps you absorb a lot of material in 248 fast pages. The last 10 pages may be the best. A chapter on the 2 most overrated Presidents.

Jefferson purchased 8 additional slaves While President! Also his terrible hatred of Alexander Hamilton, one of our real hero's. Read Alexander Hamilton, by BrookhiserAlexander Hamilton, American I bought The Long Affair: Thomas Jefferson and the French Revolution, 1785-1800 to confirm what Nathan Miller wrote.

And a surprise, JFK. The start of Vietnam, initially cool toward civil rights struggles (Bobby Kennedy was the real force), too many women, and his enduring contribution, raising the curtain on the age of political imagery. I read several books about the Kennedy's, including the lost older brother. (I think that was the Lost Prince?)

If you like those three books you also might like Scam, Jesse Peterson Scam: How the Black Leadership Exploits Black America, Vital Remnants: America's Founding and the Western Tradition, and AMERICA'S REAL WAR

(original version posted May 8, 2000)
While the title does offer a warning that this might be a "fluffy," sensationalistic, or overly cynical offering, it's fortunately none of these things.

Unfortunately, that doesn't imply there's a lot of depth to this work. Miller does a competent job of picking ten of our less distinguished Presidents and compiling a lot of well-documented facts about their respective administrations. The book does a satisfactory job of telling us why someone is on his ten worst list. But the facts pretty much do this for us already without the need for much synthesis or supporting argument. In fact, it's hard to argue with any of his choices...with one exception.

I did find Miller's choice for the absolute worst President rather surprising and far too critical considering this President's skills and accomplishments (although I should note that I'm not a big fan of the 37th President). While I understand Miller's point, I really needed some more support for his argument.

Short on interesting arguments, viewpoints, or in-depth analysis, this book could still make for a nice quick read if you're looking for an overview. One last thing... if you're wondering if Miller may have forgotten any of our recent Chief Executives, note that the book was written before 2001.

While the title kind of warns us that this might be a bit "fluffy," sensationalistic, or overly cynical, it is fortunately none of these things. Unfortunately, that doesn't necessarily mean there's a lot of depth to this work. Miller does a competent job of picking ten of our less distinguished Presidents and compiling lots of well-documented facts about their respective administrations. The book does a satisfactory job of telling us why someone is on his ten worst list. But the facts pretty much do this for us already without the need for much synthesis or supporting argument. In fact, it's hard to argue with any of his choices...with one exception. I did find Miller's choice for the absolute worst President rather surprising and far too critical considering this President's skills and accomplishments (although I should note that I'm not a big fan of the 37th President). While I understand Miller's point, I really needed some more support for his argument. Short on interesting arguments, viewpoints, or in-depth analysis, this book could still make for a nice quick read if you're looking for an overview.

First of all I would like to say that it was an interesting, and occasionally very funny book on the ten most inept chief executives we've ever had. But that doesn't excuse the fact that 9 out of the 10 are for the most part hapless losers, which makes for slow reading. Most fall within easily seen categories: those who had really corrupt presidencies because of their con-men "friends", those who were brought into the white house by big-business interests and not expected to do anything, those who never took on controversial issues & so were liked by everybody(at least at first, their indecision invariably didn't get them re-elected), and finally in a category all his own, Richard Nixon. I've always enjoyed reading the "worst of" lists, but these guys are almost as bland and uninteresting to read as when they were alive. Go rent it from the library, or get it at a used bookstore.

If you're interested in some of the more obscure figures in presidenital history, then this book is for you. The chapter dealing with Warren G. Hardign made me laugh out loud.