It is through the lens of history that the actions and decisions of our leaders are truly seen and understood. In response to a recent grading on U.S. Presidents, presidential historian and Ronald Reagan biographer, Craig Shirly, shared unsettling sentiments in connection to the present Head of State, Joe Biden.
The survey, conducted by the scholars of Presidential Greatness Project, surprisingly ranked President Biden over Reagan, seeding him as the 14th greatest president in US history. The notion did not sit well with Shirley, who expressed distaste and dismissed the analysts as having a left-leaning inclination.
In direct reaction to the survey’s outcome, Shirley, the accomplished author of ‘The Search for Reagan’ and a soon-to-be-published biography on President Trump, replied with fervor and dared to forecast the historical judgement of Biden. According to him, the judgement of impartial historians, in the fullness of time, will place Biden as the least effective among all American Presidents, a prediction drenched more in concern than in annoyance.
While expressing his disdain towards the study’s results, the Reagan biographer voiced that the notion of Biden being a distinguished president was an absurdity. He asked rhetorically, ‘Can we highlight one sphere where his success sparkles, except for budget consumption?’ It was pointed out that the task of squandering resources, in his view, does not take immense skill or brilliance.
The critique extended beyond Biden’s spending habits, with Shirley also questioning the credentials of the group that carried out the survey – members from the American Political Science Association who focus on national and presidential politics. The survey used a 0-100 scale to rank the presidents, from the nation’s inception to the present. The liberal orientation of scholars led to unsurprising top five: Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, and Thomas Jefferson.
The ensuing five Presidents as per the study, however, stirred a bit of controversy: Harry Truman landed at sixth, followed by Barack Obama, Dwight Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, and John F. Kennedy. Just hanging on within the top twenty, Reagan snatched the 16th spot while Trump was pit in the last, 45th spot.
The seemingly incongruous positioning of Reagan and Trump piqued Shirley’s interest, leading to a reflection on their political careers and influence. Despite their political, cultural, and individual differences, the two Presidents, he asserted, had similar takes on momentous matters. He highlighted that it’s their shared challenge to authority and the establishment of Washington that made their presidencies remarkable and similar in essence.
There’s no doubt Biden and Reagan’s administrations belong to markedly different eras, inspiring divergent political and cultural norms. However, Shirley believed it was essential to retain some parallels between past and present, to inform how authority and established order are confronted.
In a possibly related concern, a recent report cited a psychiatrist, Dr. Carole Lieberman, experienced in working with elderly and dementia patients, who claimed that President Biden’s demeanor during a recent State of the Union Address may hint at some form of medication. The psychiatrist, based on Biden’s fiery and aggressive deliveries, speculated that stimulants might have been in play to cover cognitive decline, according to a report by the Washington Times.
The 81-year-old President, known for his calm demeanor, appeared noticeably rushed and vehement in his statements, raising his voice beyond the necessity provided by his microphone. Such sudden shifts in speech pattern and volume, Dr. Lieberman suggested, could indicate the use of stimulants such as Adderall.
The forensic psychiatrist went on to detail that signs of possible pharmaceutical use are not confined to speech patterns alone. Commenting on his behavior, she noted an unexpected surge in kinetic energy during the speech. President Biden was seen to frequently gesture and amplify his movements, which was not customary for him.
The President’s familiar mannerism of resting his hands on the podium during teleprompter readings was noticeably absent during the State of the Union Address. Dr. Lieberman put forward the hypothesis that such a drastic change in actions and delivery might suggest the aid of psychopharmacological substances.
Not just his actions, but some of his choice of words, which typically align with his speech pattern, exhibited a certain aberration during his address. Dr. Lieberman indicated that there were moments when the President slurred the words, something that is at times observed, but the pace was significantly more brisk and animated.
The psychiatrist’s analysis, as reported by the Times, suggests that President Biden, known for his slow and measured deliveries, exhibited markedly different behavior during his State of the Union Address. According to her, such a rapid-fire and heated presentation is often a sign that a person might be under the influence of a stimulant like Adderall or similar.
However, without an official examination, it remains speculative whether the President was under the influence of any stimulant. It is essential to remember that Dr. Lieberman has not personally examined President Biden, and her comments were purely illustrative, relying on her professional experience with elderly and dementia patients. Consequently, her conclusions remain as conjectures rather than any clinical diagnosis.
Throughout this wave of allegations and comments, the White House has given no hint or admission of pharmaceutical enhancement being utilized by President Biden during his State of the Union Address. Therefore, until more concrete evidence emerges or the administration makes a statement, any inference remains speculative.
The discourse around leadership often ranges from presidential surveys to behavioral changes, but only the passage of time and historical wisdom can truly judge the success or failure of a presidency. As the various voices and opinions echo in our political sphere, the country moves forward under the banner of democratically chosen leadership. The final judgement of any presidency remains in the hands of history, to be studied and scrutinized by unbiased scholars of future generations.
