There is what I think to be a humorous anecdote, and which I like to tell, about my father, with whom I'd been frequently at odds. During my adolescence and young adulthood, we would constantly argue. And one day I was telling my mother about the most recent dust-up, the circumstances of which illustrating perfectly the absurd proportions of the relationship:
Dad: "You always argue with me."
Me: "I don't always argue with you."
Dad: "There you go again!"
Curiously, the headline of this piece -- Rove Defends Bush: He's Not Worst President Of Past 50 Years -- reminded me of that back & forth with dear old Dad. The world at large has been saying for at least over the course of his second term that Bush is the worst president in the last 50 years (and, for my money, since the dawn of time). And here we have the most aptly named "Turdblossom" -- give or take the blossom -- begging to disagree.
The point being, the mere denial of a circumstance cannot alone define whether the circumstance exists or not. And in this case, a Rovian denial notwithstanding: George Bush is the worst president in the history of the planet, including the last 50 years... and, uhm, maybe I always argue with my father.
Update: Of course the neo-dicks hang their hats on Jimmy Carter's reign of ineffectualism in response to the question as to who might've been the worst president. It says here, however, that at the very least, Carter brought Israel & Egypt to the peace table... and, uhm -- Oh yeah! -- he left office with a budget deficit of a now-miniscule $50 billion. Now what the hell has Bush ever done that could be deemed as remotely worth a damn?