Replies

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.