Scan barcode
A review by epersonae
James Buchanan: The American Presidents Series: The 15th President, 1857-1861 by Jean H. Baker
4.0
I picked this up after reading a blog entry that claimed that Bush couldn't be called the worst president ever as long as there was Buchanan.
And I think the guy had a point, although it may be that only the existence of the slavery problem made that so. (Ie, a problem so huge that it was already tearing the country in two before Buchanan ever got there; except for 9/11, Bush seems to have manufactured all this sh*t himself.)
Because otherwise, the failings of the 2 administrations feel quite similar. In particular, a blind devotion to a particular ideology and to particular advisers. (Neocons = Southerners?)
Sometimes he seems to have acted beyond his own perceived limitations (in re: Kansas -- the section on the statehood battle was fascinating), and in other moments chosen not to act and let let things get substantially worse, esp with the situation in South Carolina after the 1860 election.
Apparently the usual judgment is that he dithered, but this author thinks it was more deliberate than that, a choice not to act because his sympathies were essentially traitorous. (Holy moly!) She makes a decent case, I think, highlighting his behavior throughout his life in public service. It's one of those stories that almost automatically draws out the "what if." And it's a sad, sad story, ultimately, both for Buchanan himself and for our country.
The book is also a very quick and lively read! Well worth a couple of afternoons.
And I think the guy had a point, although it may be that only the existence of the slavery problem made that so. (Ie, a problem so huge that it was already tearing the country in two before Buchanan ever got there; except for 9/11, Bush seems to have manufactured all this sh*t himself.)
Because otherwise, the failings of the 2 administrations feel quite similar. In particular, a blind devotion to a particular ideology and to particular advisers. (Neocons = Southerners?)
Sometimes he seems to have acted beyond his own perceived limitations (in re: Kansas -- the section on the statehood battle was fascinating), and in other moments chosen not to act and let let things get substantially worse, esp with the situation in South Carolina after the 1860 election.
Apparently the usual judgment is that he dithered, but this author thinks it was more deliberate than that, a choice not to act because his sympathies were essentially traitorous. (Holy moly!) She makes a decent case, I think, highlighting his behavior throughout his life in public service. It's one of those stories that almost automatically draws out the "what if." And it's a sad, sad story, ultimately, both for Buchanan himself and for our country.
The book is also a very quick and lively read! Well worth a couple of afternoons.