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.

Uh...if they are looking at him "today" then it's not the kind of history we are talking about.

See what is said 50 years from now after these mush heads have all kicked the can and bereft the earth of their biases which taint their current liberal minded opinions.

As soon as they said, "Tax breaks for the rich", you know they are liberals.

Wait till the Bush tax cuts expire and the ten percent bracket goes to fifteen percent. In other words the lowest tax bracket gets a 50% increase.

When Would the President's Tax Cuts Expire?

"..# The Income Tax: Rates will increase between 3 and 4.5 percentage points in each bracket on January 1, 2011.

# The 10 Percent Bracket: The bracket will be eliminated on January 1, 2011, raising the income tax burden of many workers by 5 percentage points..."

That means that 61 percent of 'historians' are so manifestly incompetent that they should be summarily fired. No one who knows anything about US history could rationally defend the "worst ever" judgment, so it's obvious political bias masquerading as scholarly judgment. But since the 'survey' is probably completely unscientific we need not assume that the rot in the historical profession is quite this bad yet.

There is no way that Bush could be worse considering the "Big 3" 19th Century successive dullards Millard Filmore, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan. This was the time of Fugitive Slave Acts and prelude to the Civil War; which, with the exception of the slavery issue, was directly resulting from the incompetence of this trio. Then there are other flops like Grant, Ruther"fraud" B. Hayes, and Benjamin Harrison to consider. "Mission Accomplished" Bush, though, IMO stacks up well below most 20th Century chief executives and is only treading water above Carter, Clinton, Warren G. Harding, Hoover and his pop "Read My Lips" Bush.
Bush will forever be blamed by me for allowing Rumsfeld to mismanage the global war on terror as well as some domestic slips and I'll gladly say good riddance to him come January 20th when McCain is sworn in.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.