The First Draft of History Looks a Bit Rough on Bush
President Bush often argues that history will vindicate him. So he can't be pleased with an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted by the History News Network. It found that 98 percent of them believe that Bush's presidency has been a failure, while only about 2 percent see it as a success. Not only that, more than 61 percent of the historians say the current presidency is the worst in American history. In 2004, only 11.6 percent of the historians rated Bush's presidency in last place. Among the reasons given for his low ratings: invading Iraq, "tax breaks for the rich," and alienating many nations around the world. Bush supporters counter that professional historians today tend to be liberal and that it's too early to assess how his policies will turn out.
Reader Comments
History repeats itself as "historians" muse
As a historian myself, I know when these things are hogwash. Just xerox Reagan for Buishg II, and wwe see "histyory" according to the "craft<" repeating itself.
History Repeats
Academia proves its stripes again!
I'm sure the polling experts also asked the question 'Which political party do you affiliate yourself with?'
I'm just impressed that 2% of historians don't impose their own beliefs in answering this question!
98 percent
98 percent...... Sounds pretty close to the percentage of voters that re-elected Saddam.
History will be kind to Dubya
I am disappointed with this administration, but I believe history will be kind to Dubya. Especially in the aftermath of the successor administration and the carnage of policies of climate change alarmists on the world economy.
History will be kind to Dubya
I am disappointed with this administration, but I believe history will be kind to Dubya. Especially in the aftermath of the successor administration and the carnage of policies of climate change alarmists on the world economy.
Ambition plus Incompetence equals Disaster
If Bush were a genuine conservative, which is to say, CAUTIOUS, he might be a mediocre president. Instead, he's tried to reshape the world, and that kind of ambition deserves not only the label of "liberal," but a grade of F-.
http://newsprism.wordpress.com
History & Bush
I'll wager that 100% opf the historians in Lincoln's time considered him a failure as well!
breaks for the rich
This is the code-phrase for the truly ignorant.
The top 50% of income earners pay 97% of the tax burden. This is an absolute fact and no amount of spin will change it. Oh yeah, they only earn 84% of the income.
So these historians should spare us their idiotic comments on this until they look at basic facts.
Its truly pathetic that people spending their own money is an outrage to todays leftists/statists.
bush
Bush made the mistake of not handling immigration properly, not fighting the war in Iraq ruthlessly enough initially and having too few troops, and above all not vetoing spending bills, but to put him in last place is absurd. Jimmy Carter is easily the worst president of modern times, a fool and anti Semite whose handling of the Iran hostage crisis was pretty much the reason we are where we are today. Clinton's handling of terrorism helped greatly too.
These historians are obviously people with left bias. I would wonder how they rated Reagan.
Historians Poor Predictors of History
Historians think the Bush presidency the "worst in history. Do they think that Carter's ineptness, particularly in regards to the Iran hostage crisis, historically will be viewed as the last chance we had to stem the rise of Islamic fascism that now threatens the peace of the world? And "tax cuts for the rich?" Clearly these "historians" have a grasp of economics second only to their understanding of history. If taxes are cut, who do they think will get the best break? Those who pay little or no taxes?
bush
Bush made the mistake of not handling immigration properly, not fighting the war in Iraq ruthlessly enough initially and having too few troops, and above all not vetoing spending bills, but to put him in last place is absurd. Jimmy Carter is easily the worst president of modern times, a fool and anti Semite whose handling of the Iran hostage crisis was pretty much the reason we are where we are today. Clinton's handling of terrorism helped greatly too.
These historians are obviously people with left bias. I would wonder how they rated Reagan.
Historians are Liberals
Most historians are Liberals so whatelse would one expect? They surely love Clinton, and Jimmy Carter. Liberal do nothing Presidents!
So-Called Historians
Are these so-called historians officed at places like Harvard, Berkley, etc.? This story is flimsy because it says nothing about the political leanings of the "historians" polled.
I am a conservative, Christian Republican. I will tell you that "W" has kept his word on the war on terror, reduced taxes, and pro-life legislation.
I admire "W" because he is not afraid of being the locus of the left's venom. He is a two-term president, a man of his word. Nothing the Left can say will change it.
don't believe you are a historian
an inebriated amateur, possibly.
Buishg II, and wwe see "histyory" according to the "craft<"
News Flash: 2% of Professional Historians
...must really be knuckleheads.
Bush's legacy
The transportation and banking sectors are hurting, basic inflation is soaring, a senseless war grinds on and no coherent vision for our country...nor the ability to articulate it if there was one. Thanks, Mr. President!
Bush's legacy
The transportation and banking sectors are hurting, basic inflation is soaring, a senseless war grinds on and no coherent vision for our country...nor the ability to articulate it if there was one. Thanks, Mr. President!
A conservative agrees
W put the final nail in the coffin of the Reagan revolution with his spend money on anything approach. Still, you have to think Carter was worse.
History proves...
...that if your website is linked to the Drudge Report, 98% of the reponses will be from right wing wackos.
President Bush's Legacy
President Truman when he left office was considered a failure. History now considers him as one of the greatest presidents in the history of the U.S.
I feel the same thing will happen with President Bush. History and the American people will treat him fairly as well.
History
His presidency isn't even over yet. There goes the news media running around with an INFORMAL survey of 109 historians. Definitely a lefty slant with the opinions. A good historian will put the events of the last several years in context. BTW, how does one qualify to be a historian? Where are they from? Where do they teach?
Invading Iraq: Context - Iran now has U.S. forces within striking range on two side. You have a growing democracy starting to find its legs. It took the US how many years to ratify our constitution?
Tax cuts or the proverbial Rich: Context: Look at how far our economy has come since... say late 2000 under Pres. Clinton's watch. Many indicators are better now than during Clinton's glory years.
Same old conservatives banter...
Whenever you guys here something you don't like, it's always the liberals fault. Do your comments actually mean you thing the tax breaks (unprecedented during wartime) were a good idea? Don't forget the recession we're in when you answer. Do you think Iraq was a good idea and that it was handled professionally without corruption by American Corporations? Did you approve of Bush completely disregarding New Orleans during one out our countries worst natural disasters? What else has this buffoon done right? It really feels these comments were do bag on liberals. It's about Bush, cronyism, corporate corruption and incompetence. This has nothing to do with liberals. As one of our founding fathers and conservative John Adams once, said, "facts can be stubborn things". For you conservatives defending Bush here, you are ignoring facts!
Meaningless report
I am actually pleased to hear these liberal "historians" condem President Bush. It confirms to me that he has done the right thing.
Iraq, although devastating, was necessary, and history will show that to be true. Very few nations are willing to stand up to tyrants. They all rant and rave and complain when a tyrant is murdering their own people, but few countries (LEADERS) are willing to do anything, especially when it may "hurt" their legacy or reelection bid. President Bush had the courage to do so, and may just have more impact on the long term success of the Middle-East than any leader to date.
"Tax cuts for the rich" is an out and out LIE. More middle income people got a larger percentage tax cut than the rich. Currently, after these tax cuts, the rich actually pay a greater share than they did before. The top 1% of wage earners pay 39.58% of ALL taxes. The top 20% (above 70,000 per yer) pay 68% od ALL taxes! The bottom 30% pay NOTHING. This is not FAIR and it is NOT right. NO ONE should get a free ride in this great nation....NO ONE. This only breeds an entitlement mentality, and, on the other hand, resentment! Just what liberls want. It is easier to buy votes.
I for one DO NOT CARE what other countries think. What has that go to do with how we run OUR country. THey get "mad" at us when we don't immediately help countries in need...then when we do the get "mad" as well. They are self serving blithering idiots.
Bush Presidency
While not a supporter of Bush, I believe that world events need to play out before it can be determined whether his presidency was a success.
These are historians. They should know that an answer of "no comment" would be appropriate, since we've yet to see how the eight years of Bush will affect the U.S. 20, 40, or 60 years down the line.
I'd like to see a list of these 109 professional historians. Only then can it be determined if they are subject to be biased.
Wow
What a nasty, biased article. Does US News have no shame?
History & Bush
Taking their research straight off the NEW YORK TIMES front page. Jesus couldn't get a break from the Times!
short memories...
For all of the posters who remember Reagan with such fondness and revile Carter, here's a couple of facts. Carter was NOT flying the helicopters trying to rescue the hostages. The military cooked up the plan for the rescue,not Carter. So the failure was military,not Carter's. Also, if you don't remember, Reagan ILLEGALLY SOLD Iran ARM AND ROCKETS (iran/contra) so as to free the hostages. The money for the arms went to fund rebels in Central America.
We will see
GW is the greatest president ever, nobody I know has been layed of due to the "slow economic times". The war is great, I hope we can keep more of them coming, there is nothing like spending every dime we have on tanks on planes, in fact I love spending money we don't have on tanks and planes. Plus our kids are now the most intelligent students in the world, our current education system is second to none.
And we all have $600 coming in May, what else could a guy ask for.
always the "liberal" label tossed at Critics.
Since I pretty much expected some of these replies,, here's a nice quote that i like:
Quote:
“It is not a coincidence that the two fields most commonly accused of being liberal - journalism and academia - are two fields whose central purpose is the pursuit of truth.” — Kenneth Quinnell
you people are funny
har har 98% think Bush is a failure they all must be liberals!
Oh wait, Drudge linked to this, no wonder the brain-dead cryptofascist zombies are out in full force. Don't worry, history won't be kind to you either, and especially to the christofascists that hijacked this country on 9/11 when it was at her most vulnerable..
Young Historians
They must be asking some really young historians who were not around when Jimmy Carter was president. Even with liberals I debate- they can't defend Carter. In another poll- 97% of college professors felt that working 4 hours a day for 8 months a year was worth a 100k salary.........
Please...
Any person claiming to be a historian who claims to know today what history will judge tomorrow, isn't a professional historian.
They are all failures
They are all failures... FDR was a Facist... trying to stack the Supreme Court and locking up innocent civilians (worse than Gitmo). It is the Constitution and the people that keep America going... Bush, Clinton... Nixon FDR and the rest prove one thing... Any idiot can run a country that runs itself.
Big Surprise on the Dem Poll
Go figure, the lame reasons the pinko-profs gave is the democratic party line:
Iraq's a failure, tax breaks for the rich, and we are "alienating many nations around the world." Same old whiny mantra of unilateral-whatever from the surrender-now / blame America first crowd. We couldn't possibly make any foreign policy decisions without the permission of the thug-ocracy of the UN. It's time stow the UN on the same shelf as the League of Nations -- out of sight, out of mind!
Drudge Report
For those who comment on the Drudge Report as having "right wing wackos" they must never read the Drudge Report. If you took the time to lok whenever possible Matt puts bot sides of the story there for us to read. Gee, I know that it probably isn't as unbiased as say...The Huffington post...ot The Daily Kos........but no the less, it is one of the few places to get both side and make your own decisions.
Historians on Bush
I have never understood that anytime anyone criticises the Bush Administration, they are immediately accused of being partisan, political hacks.
When the merits and mistakes of this Administration are layed out in an objective manner, independent of who made the decisions, there are few conclusions that can be made. From tax breaks biased to the wealthy, the pathetic response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the deregulation and lack of oversight of our Corporate Citizens, dramatic separation of wealth, contraction of the Middle Class, and the expansion of extreme poverty.
That's just a few of the domestic catastrophes that have occured over the past 7 years. Regardless of political party, these are massive, abject failures that cannot be defended as "good decisions" or "competent leadership".
these comments...
are awesome.
Stop indoctrinating my children!!!
When you substitute your beliefs for ones that would grow independently, you are indoctrinating our children. History does repeat itself and I see a lot of the Third-Reich in our education system today. What did N.A.Z.I stand for? Oh, thats right, the National SOCIALIST Workers Party. I think it might be time for another French Revolution, American Style!
Bush's Rating
I can't believe 98% of "historians" rate Bush as a terrible president. Let's see, the highest DOW Jones in history. Lower taxes (not only the rich benefited) resulted in the highest employment rate ever and highest revenue into the treasury ever. If he had controlled Congress spending we would have a surplus now. Also, eliminated the world's worst tyrant, Saddam, who had been firing on us in violation of the no fly zone for ten years. War would have been justified on that alone. In time the war will prove to be a success if we keep a stiff backbone.
With a competant Congress more would have gotten done: Social Security reform, Medicare reform, immigration reform and now Pelosi has put a hold on the Colombian free trade bill.
If the left gets in control hide your wallet you middle class people unless you just love more taxes.
John of KS should care
"I for one DO NOT CARE what other countries think. What has that go to do with how we run OUR country. THey get "mad" at us when we don't immediately help countries in need...then when we do the get "mad" as well. They are self serving blithering idiots."
Keep saying that when the dollar is plummeting. I'd try to explain to you how we live in a global economy but based on your interpretation of statistics it's pretty obvious you're too dumb to grasp any reality outside of the county in which you subsist in Kansas.
The idea that the lower class is entitled is so laughable I nearly fell out of my seat! Black is white, war is peace, freedom is slavery. I bet you think the world was created 6000 years ago too?
"Tax cuts for the rich"?
Any economist will scoff at such ignorant nonsense and suggest you read an INTRODUCTORY Economics text. The fact that 'Historians' cite that as one of Bush's failings makes me wonder what qualifies these windbags to rate anything, much less a Presidency. My 5th grader understands the fallacy of that statement.
Lets see...I dont understand politics, diplomacy, economics or the need to defend one's country, I think i'll be a Historian and comment on all those things!
There goes the legitimacy of this story!
This has just been linked over at FARK.
Let the laughter begin!
2% Versus 28%
A recent Gallup poll shows that Bush's approval rating is now 28 percent, continuing a long downward trend. Bush is headed for the dustbin of history and many of today's 28-percenters will eventually come around to this consensus view.
This Survey
was a pile of worthless nonsense, Why do you expend time and resources on something so utterly meaningless?
Historians don't know History
Look at the interest rates, inflation rates, and rates of unemployment when Carter left office. All of these were worse under Carter. Also, note the fact that Carter did not even do well enough to get re-elected. Finally, look at the weak foreign policy of Jimmy Carter. This isn't to say that Bush is any great shakes; just not last.
Historians on Bush
Most of those historians in the poll forgot to study 19th Century Anarchist History. It took the efforts of European and other governments over 100 years to quell the bombings and killings of government and dynastic leaders brought on by this loose group of political terrorists. And these governments did not use kid grove methods, they were very harsh in their commitment to end this threat. The Bush doctrine in fighting a 'religious-political' terrorists movement has been reasonably successful in that the physical threat has been kept out of the US proper for years. Also, have they not noticed that many other nations have increased their awareness of the threat, especially France, and increased their efforts to fight the terrorists where they stand? The economic situation is such that the government has little direct control. The greed of banks and financial institutions has created this problem as well as the speculation in the futures market and the increased demand of nations like China and India for more and more basic goods. Please be good Historians and study, in depth, the subject you comment on! PL.
Historians Rate President Bush
Not sure how a historian could rate Bush worse than Wilson; the harm Wilson's ideas such as "make the world safe for democracy" did to our country are incalculateable Carter was inept, but Reagan quickly undid most of the harm Carter caused us, so Carter really can't go on the bottom of the list.
Historian's Opinion
To all the people who are still saying that Bush is the greatest president.
"How is your grocery bill these days?" " how does a gallon of at $4 sound.
How is your gas bill?
Or may be you have so much money that you do not care.
Bush is a LIBERAL PHONY.. the `historians` must hate liberal traitors
Bush;
Would give every one of 20+ million illegal aliens who have snuck into the nation under his ``watch`` AMNESTY in a heart beat if he could force it through,..
Just authorized 30 billion in WELFARE to bail out an UNSECURED financial investment company that had crashed because of its own bad business practices, which would have brought down our whole CORRUPT lending system ( which would actually have been good for middle class americans in the long term- Bush would never let the middle class off the hook from his financial cronies though) because we are so deep in the hole after this big spending liberal turds 2nd term,...
DOESNT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN AMERICAN BUSINESS INTERESTS, which are vital and deserve tax breaks because they create jobs and build communities, AND GLOBAL BUSINESS desires, paid for by lobbyists, which destroy American business to the benefit of a few individual investors,
Wants to force through trade agendas falsely labelled `free trade` which are really schemes to allow business to move manufacturing and production facilities to a third world country, dump US jobs to the benefit of foreign nationals, (see a relation here to Bush`s love of ILLEGAL ALIEN citizenship?) but then import its goods into the US without penalty to the citizenrys detriment but to the financial benefits of Jorge Bush / Hillary Clinton / Hussien Obama (more `fine` liberals) investor class cronies.
Bush PANDERS like a whipped puppy to foreign lobbies and global business interests who will reward traitors that cooperate with their goal of using the US to solve their problems and/or provide them free access to pick the bones clean from the US market.
%$&# THIS IDIOT!!! Any moron still suggesting `Jorge` is a Conservative needs to be committed for physchiatric evaluation. Bush is a radical, which is the OPPOSITE of conservative, there is no precendent in US history for a few rich isckly old men making vast profits from sending all US manufacturing overseas, importing Unassimilitable masses at the same time, and suggsting that now, the only way you can protect us is by spending trillions we dont even have to fights battles 7000 miles away while our own border remains unguarded with crickets chirping...
@#$% Jorge Bush - he is the worst, not just LIBERAL, but TRAITOROUS, president we ahve ever been cursed with!!
Historians
Ninety-eight per cent of historians turn out to be failures.
too soon and too biased for real historians
What percentage of historians in 1952 thought that Truman was a failure? Now, most see him as great or near great. Shouldn't historians wait to see how the war in Iraq turns out -- whether that country can become a successful, multi-ethnic Muslim democracy? I think Bush put too few troops in Iraq from the beginnning, but how could he have put many more in when the last two presidents cut the size of the military way back? As to alienating nations around the world, I would think a billion Chinese appreciate us because we provide an open market for their products. I would think a billion Indians like us for a similar reason, and because we are standing up to Muslim extremism. France and Germany have elected leaders who are fairly pro-American; Berlusconi is winning in Italy. Many Muslims in Iraq are coming to see that Al-Qaeda's fanaticism and brutality is not the way to go; is it possible that Muslims outside Iraq will learn the same lesson AS A RESULT of the way things will turn out in Iraq? I think it's too soon for real historians to say.
Why does one become a history professor?
They lack mathematical, scientific, and accounting skills...
all the above are vocations based upon the ability to use concrete analysis, something which is not a prerequisite for teaching history.
The Historians are biased because they are educated
Yes, it's true. Intelligent people who study history might be a little biased against our brainless President and the ridiculous things he has done during his presidency. Historians might understand bad fiscal policy, bad foreign policy, and the value of our Constitution a little better than the average Bush supporter. Don't you hate it when the guy with the education is right? I guess the truth hurts sometimes.
Take a look at the History News Network
If you go to their website and look at the contributors, you will find it's a literal "who's who" of leftist radical contributors. The first clue should have been that it's published in Seattle.
Shorten Bush-bashing to just "Bushing."
Most presidents make some good and some bad decisions. The critics see only the bad and the fans only the good. Viewed impartially, the Bush Doctrine and its implementation were good, cutting taxes was good,, but refusing to grasp the border situation, federalizing TSA, steel tariffs, and a refusal to veto excess spending were bad. However, he gets bonus points for saying what he means, even nonfluently, and meaning what he says. He keeps his word, which is a sorely lacking trait in politicians.
Isn't an historical view of the present oxymoronic?
This is a perfect example of why historians should should stick to what they are trained in, the past, and allow the manipulation of public perception of the present to those with the appropriate expertice, the media, or perhaps those with a sense of self-importance, readers with comments.
"PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS"?
NO ONE WHO THINKS SERIOUSLY CONSIDERS THE OPINIONS OF THESE SO-CALLED "PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS" FROM INDOCTRINATION CAMPS (UNIVERSITIES) AS VIABLE ...JUST JOURNALISTS WHO GRADUATE FROM THESE SAME INSTITUTIONS! MR. WALSH SO BLYTHLY ACCEPTS THE "UNBIASED", "INFORMAL” POLL RESULTS AS GOSPEL. AS IS TYPICAL OF JOURNALISTS OF HIS ILK, NO RESEARCH HAS GONE INTO THE "STATISTICS" CITED: WHAT CONSITUTES AN "INFORMAL" POLL? WHAT IS THE DEFINITION OF A "PROFESSIONAL HISTORIAN"? WHAT PERCENTAGE OF ALL "PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS" DO THESE 109 REPRESENT? WHAT ARE THE POLITICAL AFFILIATIONS OF THESE "HISTORIANS"? WHAT ARE THE PROFESSIONAL CREDENTIALS OF THESE "HISTORIANS"? TO WHAT POLITICAL PARTIES DO THESE "HISTORIANS" CONTRIBUTE MONEY? FROM WHICH POLITICAL PARTIES DO THESE "HISTORIANS" RECEIVE RESEARCH FUNDS? WHEN THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS ARE APPREHENDED, THE "98%" STATISTIC IS A JOKE! LOOK AT HOW THESE SAME "HISTORIANS" RATED RONALD REAGAN, WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE...ONCE AGAIN, POLITICAL BIGOTRY MASQUERADING AS NEWS!
hey homer
Federal revenues have gone UP since the cuts were enacted. If you were taught economics in school you would know that its not the tax rate alone which dictates revenues but the amount of money moving through the circulation. More money in the hands of consumers makes the economy grow and adds numbers to the tax rolls.
Its really besides the point, military spending is around 4% of the GDP, one of the lowest in HISTORY.
Ready to face facts yet?
I love the leftists in here who come in slinging ad-hominems. I suppose ignorance truly is bliss. The only entity which can use force is GOVERNMENT. It is also the most inefficient and corrupt organizations known to mankind. It is in THIS entity that the Democrats want to entrust our healthcare, education, retirement, etc.
Brilliant!
tax breaks for the rich
The phrase "tax breaks for the rich" given as one of the reasons for Bush's failure betrays the bias of this survey, with a sound bite that is the religious dogma of the Democratic party. This survey is an insult to the public's intelligence.
Carter
Carter was a failure. Bush was reelected.
2%?
So there are 3 (0.02 x 109= 2.18?) historians who, like their hero "don't read newspapers' and a surprising number of the comments to this article who stubbornly refuse to pay attention to the world around them.
Bush - Like Lincoln and Truman is hated in his own time, but will be vindicated by history. He ran on a pro-American platform and had the nerve to stick with a war that had to be fought even when it was unpopular. He removed a dictator from power and put the most dangerous man in the world on the run. I think by any real measure he is a success and like Lincoln and Truman will be vindicated. And by the way, I am a professional historian - nobody asked me...
History is....
It's too bad that history is limited to what historians and reporters say it is. It is difficult to know the true history. Consider events in our past are still under some dispute. Such as:
-Did we know about the Pearl Harbor attack prior to?
-Was the US government responsible for 9/11?
-Who killed JFK and Robert Kennedy?
-Did Diebold rigged the 2000 and 2004 elections?
-Did the Supreme Court hand the 2000 election to Bush?
History is twisted based on modern mores. Our founding fathers are routinely criticized being as old, rich, white, slave, owning men. Is that really fair considering how they wrote the constitution saying that "all men are created equal" and limiting the power of slave states through the 3/5ths rule.
Also, we can never know that history of what could have been.
- What would have happened if President Bush had not invaded Iraq?
- What would have happened to our economy if taxes had not been cut?
Finally, there are the obvious distortions of premise that no one even challenges anymore.
- The tax cuts were passed by Congress and signed into law. Yes, the President pushed for them, but to put "blame" on the President ignores the will of the people as expressed by Congress.
- President Bush did not alienate other nations. We had a coalition that included many nations, just not France and Germany. Did Australia, Britain, Spain, and Japan alienate the rest of the world by joining us? Now Germany and France are on our side on the war. It just took time for their democracies to work out the details by electing new leaders. Sounds like President Bush built a pretty good coalition.
- Many complain that Bush stole the 2000 election because his brother was the governor of Florida. But consider that the state acted properly and every recount has said Bush did win.
It's definitely too early to tell if Bush's Presidency will stand the test of time. We should at least wait until the Presidency is history before we judge it.
Time Will Tell if the Historians Got It Right
Are you speaking of historians, who have had a lot of time on the ground in Iraq and in the region, or are speaking about the kind of "desk pilots," who write articles like this one.
Having spent a fair part of 2004-05 in Iraq, during what appeared to be a more promising period, I was one the co-directors of the Baghdad Convention Center, which became a "center of gravity" for major diplomatic, political, and media events throughout the transition from the Coalition Provisional Government, the UN Charter, Interim Iraqi Government, National Assembly and referendum just prior to elections. I was personally familiar with nearly every dignitary, who made their way to the BCC, as well as most of the prominent Iraqi religious figures.
Additionally, following my efforts to initiate emergency relief and humanitarian assistance in support of hundreds of thousands of non-combatant refugees from Najaf and Fallujah, I was invited to audiences with senior-most Shiite clergy and facilitated their first meeting with the US Embassy.
As Americans are only beginning to understand the real centers of gravity are the Sheiks, their tribes, and wherever Arabic is spoken, Islam, it's a bit early to say "historians have got it figured out." It takes awhile to gain perspective, and many people demonstrate a nearly complete inability to walk a mile in another man's shoes.
As a sidebar note: in this increasingly interdependent world of ours, observe how EU leaders, contemplating an Olympics' boycott in Beijing, have already smacked the Chinese leadership - without regard of the value their culture places on "losing face." Don't think this will be lost on the Chinese. BTW, President Bush has it "right."
Following 911, we were required to respond - in the Arab world, just as in that of cultures, a non-response would invariably been seen as a sign of weakness, inviting more of the same.
Invading Iraq gave us a chance to take out the weakest link and drive a wedge between allies, Syria and Iran.
Sadaam had been cheating on OPEC for many years and reportedly, the French, Swiss, Germans, and others sent their shredding teams into town following the invasion just to clean things up a bit.
Had we not invaded, Iraq would have provided China unfettered access to the world's third largest oil reserve, which would have fueled both their economy and their armed forces. It's that simple.
Notwithstanding, I encountered a positive reception on the part of senior Shiite clergy, who held the same position as our President in opposition to: the violence of abortion - that a soul is imputed to a human being at conception; and in support of conventional family values. These issues alone transcended the current temporal affinity displayed for the "war in Iraq." Time will tell.
Your Statistics are Flawed
98% of people don't agree on anything!
I'm not kidding.
Think about it. Generally 3 t0 15 percent of people answer don't know. You got zero that don't know? Thats odd, did you just disregard those replies ?
I saw a pole once that asked is thermonuclear war a bad thing.........that question got a 6% response of I don't know!
Why don't you reveal the actual questions you asked, and the answer options as your interpretation is suspect.
Hisotry can look back, but never foward...
Neville Chamberlain was Time Man of the Year in 1933.
I wonder if the same historians can 'predict' our future. Nothing too far ahead, but how about five years?
economy, foreign policy, employment numbers, technological advances, or anything they could speculate upon.
Would 98% be correct, or would 2% be correct?
Surprised it's not 100%
For all the people rushing to W's defense here. Would you please provide for us a list of the things this man has done that can be considered a success since taking office? I seriously would like to know. I wish you could qualify your staunch support of this man with facts instead of the go-to defense of "the media is all liberal" or "the professors are all liberal" or "the commenters are all liberal." Is that all you can do is point a finger and call people "Liberal" as if it's insulting or something? Surely you can do better than that. I was a lifelong Republican before this administration came to power. Now it will take me decades to get the bad taste out of my mouth. And why? Because the last 7 years have been a complete FAILURE for our nation across multiple issues. It doesn't matter what direction you point at when it comes to our current national issues...no matter what it lands on, your finger will come up stinking something awful these days. The economy, foreign relations, defense, health care, the environment, domestic production, trade, government regulatory agencies, housing, education, crime, corporate freebies, poverty, unemployment, etc. I mean, how much lower can W and his cabinet sink this country? Please tell me in comparison to all these things what he's done right and I will stop thinking you're a completely brainwashed idiot.
The Idiot in the White House
Why is anyone suprised that the "Idiot in the White House's " Arbusto program flopped on all levels, foreign and domestic.? You don't need 110 academic"s to tell you that -- just open your eyes a little.
Your Statistics are Flawed
98% of people don't agree on anything!
I'm not kidding.
Think about it. Generally 3 t0 15 percent of people answer don't know. You got zero that don't know? Thats odd, did you just disregard those replies ?
I saw a pole once that asked is thermonuclear war a bad thing.........that question got a 6% response of I don't know!
Why don't you reveal the actual questions you asked, and the answer options as your interpretation is suspect.
Your Statistics are Flawed
98% of people don't agree on anything!
I'm not kidding.
Think about it. Generally 3 t0 15 percent of people answer don't know. You got zero that don't know? Thats odd, did you just disregard those replies ?
I saw a pole once that asked is thermonuclear war a bad thing.........that question got a 6% response of I don't know!
Why don't you reveal the actual questions you asked, and the answer options as your interpretation is suspect.
Bush Supporters
"Bush supporters counter that professional historians today tend to be liberal and that it's too early to assess how his policies will turn out."
---- Oh yeah, if the Bush family thugs get their way, they'll erase all the terrible things this family has done to our nation, constitution, and people and blame it all on democrats that were never involved with any of his shenanigans because of all the closed door meetings with top GOP dictators.
Liberal historians are "Liberal" because they think for themselves and they consider humanity important. "Conservatives" which the GOP is no longer described as, tend to give Not a ratsass about people except themselves and prefer to take power and greed over social needs of others.
Why send children to college anymore?
This kind of lock-step mindless hatred is what scares so many today. It's a known fact that between 85 to 95% of all academics (professors, administrators, etc.) in America's colleges and universities are openly and often militantly NOT Republican, yet Republicans keep getting elected to the White House and for 10 years had a majority in Congress. Still the nattering nab-bobs of negativism keep on with their rank hatred of all things and all politicians to the right of whoever the Democrat of the moment is. Soon parents will be home-schooling their children for post high school education, too. Who needs all this hate???
Unqualified to Judge
Professional historians, whether they work at universities, museums or like institutions, by-and-large work in extremely specialized fields of study and their judgment amounts to little more than opinion. Why give credence to someone who has dedicated their life to the study of 18th-century railroad technology?
Laughable
The reporting of this story isn't top notch, and it would be helpful to include details of who was polled and their political leanings. But come on, how can non-historians, non-liberals still stand by this bad joke of a president?
You can't possibly still call youserlf a conservative if you agree with Bush administration policies to not curtail any spending (until after house R's lost control), and its frightening use of signing statements to gather more executive branch power. C'mpn, you can't possibly agree with that even if the guy doing it all nudges you with a smile and calls himself a conservative. Laughable.
And christians, do you really believe you are on the same page as Bush? Pre-emptive war doesn't appear in the bible. Not even in the old testament. Do you think maybe Bush was born again so he wouldn't have to answer to his cocaine and alcohol tinted previous life?
Those of you who believe that Carter' was the worst president should do yourself a favor and read Charles Beckwith's book where he details his team's failings in that rescue mission. In the end, Carter took full responsibility for the failure, personally and privately and Iran gave back the hostages as Reagan took the office. They would have given them back to whomever had taken the oath had it been Ronald Reagan or Ronald McDonald.
It is strange that for some, a president who takes responsibilty for a failure is considered a failure while a president who takes no responsibility for his disasterous actions is seen as a "future success".
I can't believe what I'm reading...
Your beloved "W" got us into a completely unnecessary war where THOUSANDS of American soldiers have been killed, and tens of thousands left paralyzed or as amputees. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. The war was with Al-qaida, and had nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq. Saddam was a bad man, but was it worth all this? Absolutely not. Where has it gotten us? Are we safer? No. Are we stronger? No. Are we better off? No. Should we attack every third world banana republic dictator just because we have some ridiculous guns twirling, shoot from the hip, cowboy, "I'll kill you because you tried to kill my daddy", redneck SOB president? No!!!
Yee haw! Shoot 'em up cowboy! Thank God for term limits. You people are freakin nuts.
And by the way, I'm a republican.
98% of conservatives are idiots...
Apparently 98% of conservative responders still have their heads in the dirt.
The equivalent of what I'm seeing here is "durr... I listen to Rush Limbaugh, so I'm smarter than any historian, durr, go Bush"...
Seriously you people are a joke.
There isn't even a *single* Bush accomplishment that I can think of that's positive, yet I see the Drudge morons here posting about how they're outraged by this article. Please turnoff your brains, and listen to more Rush.
Worst in History, Wow
That's a pretty sad comment on the competence of historians in their own field.
history professors cannot add
"Not only that, more than 61 percent of the historians say the current presidency is the worst in American history."
Iraq-4000 dead.
Vietnam-51,000 dead.
61% of the professors who were polled must believe that Vietnam was a far more practical effort thna Iraq.
I had to laugh when I read this line from "DavidM of"GA: "(at 13:17:22 pm): "breaks for the rich.This is the code-phrase for the truly ignorant...Its truly pathetic that people spending their own money is an outrage to todays leftists/statists". No stupid, the outrage is that you right-wing clowns have advocated a government that has been spending your children's money, and one that has been living on a credit card for the past seven years. Every "tax break" that you give yourselves only adds an additional burden to our children and grandchildren, when they become tax-payers. You haven't been "spending (your) own money", you have been spending Asia's money. And the worst of it all is that you clowns have deluded yourselves into thinking that you have done something prinicipled,, when in fact you have simply met the definition of "deadbeat". You are the cancer that is killing this country, and if the country lasts long enough I hope that your grandchildren remember to piss on your grave.
Without the test of time
Historians rating a contemporary president takes history completely out of it, and makes it a totally political rating. How stupid can you get!
Whinging gliberals wrong again. History repeats
If five years from now Iraq is semi-stable or at least still improving and Afghanistan is still not run by the Taliban, objective historians will be more kind to GWB for his stitch in time. And there will be democratic spinoffs in Syria, Jordan, Saudia Arabia and elsewhere. If Arabs created algebra they can learn to run for the local school board.
I have a B.A. and M.A. in history from two different schools and can tell you with certainty that it is probably closer to 99.5% of the arts professoriate who bat from the left side of the plate.
I guess 300,000 plus Iraqis in mass graves, the horrific war with Iran, rape of Kuwait, attacks on Israel and the Taliban-sponsored jungle gym training camps for Al Qaeda are an "inconvenient truth" .
The really secular will always hate the really genuine and really faithful. George Bush understands that preserving fundamental human freedoms means you might have to act preemptively, without perfect information and decisively. Saddam bluffed and pretended to have WMD in order to keep the Iranianians guessing - he forgot how serious that omission of truth was to the west. He was not responsible enough to have sarin tipped missiles. Blair and GW did the right thing, though I'd admit that Gen. Eric Shinseki should have been listened too when he said that garrison levels would need to be 400,00 plus. If anything that just means the Bush administration had little experience in invading and occupying a nation of 35 million. What administration does though?
I thank God George Bush surrounded himself with grownups and did not make foreign policy on the fly (remember Somalia?) at two in the morning over diet cokes and takeout pizza. (When the interns are not tucked safely in bed)
Iraq is not a Vietnam, geographically, militarily or a proxy state of a superpower as Hanoi was.
It is eminently winnable and worth it - if we have the will -, but not with half measures and the Dutch, Canadians, British, Poles, Aussies and others helping clean up the failed state of Central Asia deserve more thanks from the leftocracy whose very freedoms and ivory towers they preserve as they slog the fields of Kandahar.
Elect Barack Rhetoric or Hillaryista and all those lives lost or maimed in those wars would be for naught - they'd pull out and leave Karzai to die and no chance for Iraq to nation build.
Sort of like the Democratic Congress did to the South Vietnamese. Anyone remember that knife in the back after so many promises of support and aid?
Had to respond again...
I am truly embarrassed for my country. "Who cares what he rest of the world thinks", one serf has just charged. Since you are conservative and you surely support free market/trade and globalization (or at least their talking points), it is imperative that we have good relations with other countries. I know you're probably not very well educated but please think about what you are typing! You area proving the very points you are decrying!
And for the utter fool that thinks a high DOW is great. That only helps people that own stocks which is no where near the majority of Americans. Most of us are trying to keep our houses! The tax cuts did not help the middle class. I'm middle class and have seen no improvement in lifestyle during the past eight years. All I know is every thing is much more expensive (food, health care, insurance, gas) and wages have been more than stagnant. Only CEO pay has risen significantly. And the tyrant argument give me a break. If you BBC or CNN International, most Iraqis would rather have him back because it was safer when he was in charge as bad as he was. And if we're taking out tyrants, why don't we take care of the tyrannical government committing genocide in Darfur or Mugabe (inflation is so high in ZImbabwe they just had to print a 10 million dollar bill that only buys a roll of toilet paper!).
You people are acting exactly like the elitist conservatives need you to act. Your are arguing for policies that do not help you! Stop listening to Fox and Drudge and that drug-addled Limbaugh. Think for yourself and if the sin of pride is not to strong you will see the light. Bush is sociopath and does not care about the you!
History and Presidents
How convenient to bring this up during an election cycle.
Nixon was a disgrace and resigned. BTW he ended the Kennedy-Johnson war in VietNam, started the EPA, opened China to the world, reduced American gas consumption...
Reagan was an idiot... who ended the Cold War and started the collapse of Communism.
Clinton was a great president who gave us oral sex in the Oval Office, the original WTC bombing, and played golf instead of taking out Osama.
What kind of an historical perspective can we have on a presidency that is not even over yet. Call me a right-wing conspirator, but I think I'll wait until history is out of the hands of the media and it gains a little more of a long view.
Historians?
I thought historians are suppose to rate things in his
Historians Rate President Bush
The 98% of historians who rate President Bush a failure wouldn't be the same 98% of historians who are liberal, would they?
Apr 14, 2008 13:11:31 PM [permalink] [report comment]