Obama's Secret Meeting With Historians

Reader Comments
Back to article

"If he was only going to do what he wanted to do then there would be no need for him to have meetings like this."
Three words: Public Affairs Stunt
In short, he did it to try to gain support from the public as his numbers plunge. Then again virtually any politician in a similar situation would pull some sort of PAS in order to revive their popularity.
As for the assumption that I am a 'hater', all one needs to do is look at the presidents who are listed as 'strong' by the historians in question. With the exception of Lincoln, the first Republican, all are left wing and highly ambitious, thus making it obvious that they are only re-enforcing his ideas. I honestly only believe that Lincoln is on that list because Obama repeatedly compared himself with him during his campaigns as well as in some speeches.
If one looks at Lincoln's policies, they had nothing in common with the rest of the presidents listed. During the Civil War, Lincoln had 18,000 suspected confederate sympathizers detained without trial, suspended habeas corpus and spend money before Congress authorized him to. He furthermore had former Ohio Senator Vallandigham deported to the Confederacy after he repeatedly gave speeches denouncing the Union and defending the Confederacy, something akin to if Bush had deported Pelosi to Syria after her stunt in Damascus. He also based his presidency on reviving the moral and traditional values of the founding fathers, something which is virtually as far from the truth as you can get with regard to Obama.

Stephen of WI 2:16PM July 17, 2009

@ken pon
He is doing that in order to stay in touch with the opinions of real people and like he said, avoid the white house bubble that Bush happily lived in for 8 years.
@H8ters
To those ppl that claim that he only got left wing historians and was only told what he wanted to hear....oh please... Give me a break. If he was only going to do what he wanted to do then there would be no need for him to have meetings like this. President Obama is an educated individual an knowns about the importance of counciling with individuals that are experts in their respective fields. Or would you rather have the leader of our country take advice from Joe-the-Plumber?

Kubush of CA 9:07PM July 16, 2009

Wow! Ten whole 'hand-picked' letters a day. Now that's doing something for the country.

ken pon of FL 5:17AM July 16, 2009

Hmm, I wonder if he asked English Historian, Author and Journalist Paul Johnson for his opinion on the matter? He has been given numerous awards by various leaders of the UK throughout his long career (he's 80 years old now).
I would wager not because Paul Johnson lists FDR as a complete failure of a presidant with reguard to the failure of the 'New Deal', stating:
"If interventionism works, it took 9 years and a world war to demonstrate the fact."
He went on to state that the 1980-1989 time period was "the recovery of freedom" following "America's suicide attempt"--the 1963-1980 time period. His book, Modern Times, is thoroughly researched with over 2,400 sources listed for data, quotes and opinions.
Obviously he is inviting left wing bias historians to give him ideas.....they probably think that the 'New Deal' actually worked, that FDR did all he could to save Eastern Europe from Communism, that it was Gorbachev, not Reagen who caused the collapse of the USSR, that Marxism is a solid philosophy and that history was determined solely by 'class struggle'.
Given that in an previous post, someone noted that the 'historians' in question listed FDR, Jackson, LBJ and Lincoln as 'Strong Presidents', while the title only belongs to Lincoln. It is pathetic that Reagen isn't listed, and that Washington is absent as well. It could be worse I guess, they could have listed Carter as a 'Strong President.'
Nevertheless, these historians are telling Obama what he wants to hear 80% of the time. The comment that 'more change is needed' only supports that, as does the backing of the healthcare bill.
All in all, this is a stupid propaganda stunt to make it look like Obama is going to 'the experts' with regard to what has worked and failed historically and that he would change his ways accordingly. I feel sorry for the people who actually fall into this kind of trap.

Stephen of WI 11:44AM July 15, 2009

Quite honestly, I really appeciate President O'Bama and his desire to stay in touch with his constituents in general. Reading 10 personal letters per day, spending quality time with his family. As for the goal of acquiring a national health care plan...a worthy goal yes, and hopefully congress will offer some degree of cooperation in getting this big issue passed into a feasible law for all concerned. Thank you...

Randall Laraway of OH 10:35PM July 13, 2009

I highly doubt that the headline (Secret) equates to "private discussions". Nice to hear from another journalist trying to drum up a few more viewing hits...
I've had a few dinners in my time -- most of them private, but none "secret". Drat...

Uncle Al 6:13PM July 13, 2009

Thank goodness for the comments of Bob Greene! I was beginning to think I really lived in the dark ages, after reading the comments that preceeded his. Maybe I am an outsider, since I personally enjoy listening to the historians who were guests at the White House-they at least can read and write.

E. Colgan of SD 6:09PM July 13, 2009

All those historians wrote about strong Presidents: FDR, Jackson and Lincoln. Throw LBJ in there too since Dallek
was at this confab. Strong Presidents are "activists" in that
they try to get legislation passed and try to lead the
public. Give Obama credit for trying to change the political
culture. Bush II had some "political capital" and squandered
it with his idea of privatizing Social Security.

Don Saunders of CO 4:46PM July 13, 2009

I bet they were all liberal historians that Hussein Obama was courting to write a glowing fictional account of his presidency. I hope the can start writing this Hollywood make-believe in 2013!

Ken of WI 4:19PM July 13, 2009