Exonerated by History! Huzzah!

[we vs us]

Er, wait.

quote: 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.

[FOTD]

"duh"
George W. Bush

[jamesrage]

Oh wow liberals trying to paint Bush as the worst president in history.Who would have guessed.I would have never saw that coming......NOT!.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by jamesrage

Oh wow liberals trying to paint Bush as the worst president in history.Who would have guessed.I would have never saw that coming......NOT!.

Well, they're actually historians, not liberals.

[waterboy]

No, no, they are all liberals. Liberals are everywhere, hiding behind college degrees, masquerading as republicans just so they can secretly vote for other liberals. Taking over forums and e-mailing tons of scurrilous fabrications to all true Americans. This liberal scourge is destroying the fabric of America. Obama? Liberal. Democrats? Liberal. McCain? Was liberal till he secured the nomination, now not so liberal. Think for yourself? Liberal.

Where is our modern day Will Rogers? He would say, "Everyone talks about liberals, but no one does anything about them!"

[tim huntzinger]

Yer right. These are most likely Democrat historians.  Hateful, bitter, angry Dumocrat eggheads operating in their echo chambers.  Jealous and pigheaded jerks who held their tongues in the rush to war and only now are getting all ginned up on the hapless Bushiites. Historians commenting on a current Adminstration. Idiotic at best.

[jamesrage]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us


Well, they're actually historians, not liberals.

Being part of a profession does not make you free of bias.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by jamesrage

quote:Originally posted by we vs us


Well, they're actually historians, not liberals.

Being part of a profession does not make you free of bias.

Bias only explains so much.  Virtually every historian surveyed agreed that his presidency was a failure.  That's not bias.  That's unanimity.

Also, what Waterboy said.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by tim huntzinger

Historians commenting on a current Adminstration. Idiotic at best.

Or ironic at the very least. []

[jamesrage]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us



Bias only explains so much.

Bias explains a lot behind someone's intentions.

quote:
Virtually every historian surveyed agreed that his presidency was a failure.  That's not bias.  That's unanimity.

Thats not unanimity ,that only demonstrates that most of the 109 people interviewed all shared the same political bent and bias.

[cannon_fodder]

Who cares who they are, what political affiliation they have, what degrees, or even what they say.  You're missing the big picture.

He is a sitting president.  The farthest back his "history" as president goes is 7.x years.  I'm fairly confident that looking back 7 years (6 really, since the first year of Bush was nothingness) is not what he was referencing when he said "history."

7 years into the Vietnam war we were ramping it up massively based on the "history" of that conflict.  7 years in to the revolutionary war we had just received a meaningful pledge of help from France.   7 years into Queen Annes war it looked like the American colonies would be speaking French.

Looking back 7 years is gazing through to historical yesterday.  The evaluation of the Bush administration is still in the domain of talking heads and politicos.  Nixon is just now coming to light, the rest of the JFK information was just recently released.

Of course, that's not a prediction that things will be kinder in 30 years time.  A poorly planned post-invasion strategy (say what you will about the entire invasion to start with), inheriting economic problems and failing to address them in a meaningful way (economic problem, solution - borrow money and give it away), a lack of moving speeches for future sound bytes and a failure to get assassinated (no one ever says - "yeah, but he sucked anyway" of an assassinated American leaders).  

I'm afraid I agree that the Bush legacy will probably be mixed at best, but it is too early to judge what history will say.

[FOTD]

I can't tell when you are serious or joking CF....