HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

[JakeStarkey]

You are fooling no one, L, no one. You are far right out of the mainstream reactionary with little political sense at all. You do not grasp in your little reactionary brain that you do not espouse any decent or worthwhile philosophy of classical liberalism. You can't define what you are, but I can: crack-brained reactionary.

Your hoax remains crystal-clear, and the rest of the board is chuckling at you.

 

[Liability]

* * * *

History News Network | Because the Past is the Present, and the Future too.

An interesting COUNTER-note:

Thomas Fleming: Was George W. Bush the Worst President?

* * * *

There have been several polls of historians who have voted George W. Bush the worst president in American History. This baffles me. I’ve been writing and reading about presidents for a long time. What I know, and what I presume these gentleman know, doesn’t connect.

Is Bush worse than John Adams? When a shooting war at sea finally started between the United States and Revolutionary France in 1798, after five or six years of reciprocal snarls, what did Honest John do? He wrote a letter to George Washington, offering to resign, so George could resume the job. How is that for presidential leadership? * * * *

Is Bush worse than Adams’s successor, Thomas Jefferson, in his second term? Rather than build a decent navy to reply to the British habit of boarding American ships on the high seas and kidnapping sailors into semi-slavery in their men of war, Jefferson declared an embargo on all trade with them and their chief enemy, France. The American economy came to a horrific standstill. Smuggling became New England’s chief industry. Someone described the embargo as “cutting a man’s throat to cure a nosebleed.” Nonplused, President Jefferson quit, without telling anyone but James Madison, his secretary of state, who was de facto acting president for the last year of Tom’s term.

James Madison made presidential passivity into an art form. He did nothing while Congress refused to renew the charter for the Bank of the United States in 1811, even though we were on the brink of war with the British. The next year, when the War of 1812, began, the country was soon so bankrupt, the government could not even pay the salaries of the clerks in Washington DC. Thanks to a rare ability to select the worst generals in sight, “Little Jemmy,” as they called him in New England, watched while 4,500 British troops landed from their ships, marched to Washington DC and burned the White House and almost everything else worth torching. You can’t do much worse as a war leader than that performance.

Worse than Woodrow Wilson, who unilaterally invaded Mexico in his first term, simply because he did not approve of the man who was president” When World War I exploded, his pro-British sympathies made him a sitting duck for British propaganda, When the Irish-Americans objected violently to his London tilt, Wilson said that ethnics like these loudmouthed micks were “pouring poison into the veins of our national life.” Meanwhile as a southern born pol to his shoelaces, he segregated almost all employees of the federal government. Finally, he talked Congress into declaring war on Germany on the assumption that we would not have to send a single soldier to France. Before the war ended, we had 2,000,000 troops in Europe and in three months of fighting, lost a staggering 144,000 men. Wilson then persuaded the Germans to negotiate a treaty based on his idealistic 14 points, which might have achieved a lasting peace , if he had insisted on them. Instead, he signed on with the British and French revenge-seekers and forced the Germans to sign the most vindictive imaginable peace treaty, which virtually guaranteed World War II.

Then there’s Warren G. Harding, whose dimwittedness was legendary in his own time. Elected by 7 million votes thanks to the electorate’s loathing for Wilson, Warren confessed to an amazing number of reporters that he was not up to the job. * * * *

Worse than Franklin D. Roosevelt in his second term? Elected by a massive majority, he decided he could get away with packing the Supreme Court with an indeterminate number of Democrats. Congress wasted a year wrangling over the bill and ultimately rejected it. Few presidents have been so humiliatingly repudiated by a majority of their own party. * * * *

Worse than Jimmy Carter, who presided over the most horrendous stagflation in our history, without a clue about what to do about it? He frequently denounced Congress, where his own party had a solid majority * * * *

* * * *

I write all this not to denigrate these men. All of them deserve measureable admiration for achievements in their presidencies or after them. * * * *

In this light, however wavering, maybe it is time to suspend the rush to judgment on George Bush for ten or twenty years. * * * *

http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/64311.html [I snipped pretty very profound stuff, too. I'd recommend reading the entire thing.]

 

[Liability]

You are fooling no one, L, * * * *

I commend you on your ability to play parrot.

But the fact remains.

You are a fraud and everyone knows it.

 

[Patrick2]

President Bush is still being polled?

I bet he really gives a flying fuck.

The "ratings" offered by the liberal "historians" in 2009 concerning their assessment of the Bush Administration is

soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo meaningful.

Yes....every historian is a liberal

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

 

[rightwinger]

The "ratings" offered by the liberal "historians" in 2009 concerning their assessment of the Bush Administration is

soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo meaningful.

Yes....every historian is a liberal

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right wacks like L and Pat want to rewrite history (Revere riding to warn the British, Lexington in New Hampshire, the black family was better off under slavery), and they know real historians from conservative to liberal will kick their TeaPot asses.

 

[Patrick2]

Yes....every historian is a liberal

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

Patrick, give us your list of conservative historians, please.

 

[rightwinger]

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

There os no registry of Liberal or Conservative Historians. Just like there is no Register of liberal or conservative scientists

All we know is that they thought Bush did not know what he was thinking

 

[chikenwing]

smart people have a left leaning bias.

BWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA


wow!!!!! guess your not one of them,and it isn't the left leaning part.

 

[Patrick2]

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

There os no registry of Liberal or Conservative Historians. Just like there is no Register of liberal or conservative scientists

Of course there doesn't have to be a "registry" dumbass - one evaluates them by their papers, positions, books, public pronouncements - get it yet Sparky? You can't name any associated with a major university because there are extremely few, due to the fact that the left has had control of universities and won't hire them. The few there are that are academics as opposed to think tank writers work for the very few non-leftwing colleges such as Hillsdale and George Mason. Taking a poll of historians from the academy on presidents is like taking a poll of the democratic national committee.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Answer the questions, sparky. Pat, who are the conservative historians.

 

[Liability]

The far right wacks like L and Pat want to rewrite history (Revere riding to warn the British, Lexington in New Hampshire, the black family was better off under slavery), and they know real historians from conservative to liberal will kick their TeaPot asses.

Utterly dishonest liberal scumbags like FakeyJokey make-up "positions" ascribed to those with whom they politically disagree.

For example, I have expressed no desire to re-write history.

I do however like to correct lies from obvious liars like FakeyJokey.

HE pretends to be a Republican.



Oh wait. He can't understand why nobody with a functioning brain cell has ever bought that fable.

He would eagerly go down on President Obama, but, ok, sure. Yeah. Right. He's a ""Republican."



Why must the left wing whack jobs like JokeyFakey / FakeyJokey engage in such consistently deceptive efforts?

 

[rightwinger]

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

There os no registry of Liberal or Conservative Historians. Just like there is no Register of liberal or conservative scientists

Of course there doesn't have to be a "registry" dumbass - one evaluates them by their papers, positions, books, public pronouncements - get it yet Sparky? You can't name any associated with a major university because there are extremely few, due to the fact that the left has had control of universities and won't hire them. The few there are that are academics as opposed to think tank writers work for the very few non-leftwing colleges such as Hillsdale and George Mason. Taking a poll of historians from the academy on presidents is like taking a poll of the democratic national committee.

Such a profound observation....


Can you name a Liberal historian and what about his views makes him liberal?

 

[Wry Catcher]

Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

(This'll be good. )

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

Have you ever been on a college or University campus? Clearly you've never taken a history class beyond HS (and I wonder if you've ever gone to HS). You act about 14 and I'd not be surprised if you were in your room at your parents house.

The best history profs IMHO were the story tellers, those who were able to bring to life real people who lived and died decades, centruies or even a milleniium in the past. Profs whose reading lists were not text books approved by school boards but original documents, letters, journals and memoirs; newspapers and period novels which put the student into the shoes of those who lived and died before us.

Profs who asked why did our ancesters come to this county? What was happening in Europe or Asia or South America or Africa that motivated them to leave? Suggesting as you do Profs are simply propagandists defines you not them, for it's obvious from your posts - primary sources - that you're one ignorant troll.

 

[Patrick2]

​

The far right wacks like L and Pat want to rewrite history (Revere riding to warn the British, Lexington in New Hampshire, the black family was better off under slavery), and they know real historians from conservative to liberal will kick their TeaPot asses.

This is ol' Jake's one post - take a look at his list of posts. In essence, this his same post over and over again - his lame insult post. He has no ideas, no facts, no arguments, no knowledge - he can't even insult well. Beyond question, he is the lamest poster here. There should be a site rule banning people like this, who never contribute a single thing.

 

[JakeStarkey]

​

The far right wacks like L and Pat want to rewrite history (Revere riding to warn the British, Lexington in New Hampshire, the black family was better off under slavery), and they know real historians from conservative to liberal will kick their TeaPot asses.

This is ol' Jake's one post - take a look at his list of posts. In essence, this his same post over and over again - his lame insult post. He has no ideas, no facts, no arguments, no knowledge - he can't even insult well. Beyond question, he is the lamest poster here. There should be a site rule banning people like this, who never contribute a single thing.

The idea that the Tea Party leaders don't know their history. True.

My facts and discussion that make you and your pards look like idiots. True.

You want me banned because I make you look like a fool, Pat.

 

[Patrick2]

Do they register by liberal or conservative?

I thought they were just registered as historians....isn't that all that matters?

C'mon - no evasion or BS - Give me your list of conservative historians at major universities.

Have you ever been on a college or University campus?

Another clueless lib steps up to announce he doesn't have guts enough to address the issue I raised. I hold three degrees and have probably FORGOTTEN more than you'll ever know if you live to be a hundred.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, you do, Kindergarten, Elementary, and Primary.

Now give us a list of conservative historians.

 

[Patrick2]

Yes, you do, Kindergarten, Elementary, and Primary.

Now give us a list of conservative historians.

You are, without doubt, The Clown Prince Lamo here, but to reward you for managing to get out at least one relevent sentence (sort of like a three year old managing to say "Da-Da") I will respond, and am STILL waiting for your list of conservative historians currently-employed at major american universities.

Here's a few - not every one still alive. Note that since conservatives are blacklisted from the academy, in order to make a living some also do literary criticism or commentary on contemporary events.

Roger Kimball
John Lukacs
Stephen Hayward
Bruce Bartlett
Larry P. Arnn
Mark A Kalthoff
Gertrude Himmelfarb
Klaus Hildebrand