Posted on 03/11/2007 11:20:43 AM PDT by mcvey
People that vote this way....ar perverted nitwits
to begin with....They all wantthe killing of our
troops t stop...but they agree t kill (abor) babies..
millions of them. Clinton was bette than Carter...
Reaan was better than both of them and you can bet
on it.... JK
Yes, I remember the labor dispute in St. Louis (which may have had a racial angle to it also), but I don't remember which organization it was--I think maybe the OAH. I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the AHA.
He did such a swell job with Iran and the hostage crisis and all.
He's their buddy, of course. Historians won't admit it but they are a bunch of school girl groupies with respect to WJC.
I'm quite willing to believe it was the OAH that bugged out of St. Louis. Maybe over the Adams' Mark hotel? I am too lazy to go dig it out and the last AHA conference I attended was, well, let's put it this way: ROTFLMAO. I heard a spirited defense of Michael Bellisles based on the fact that while he may have faked his data, we really don't require honest data in a post-Modern Era because no data is honest. I pointed out in one session that one of the reasons that the Fatamids were often tolerant of Christian monestaries well up the Nile River was because they couldn't do much else, the monestaries were too far away and the abbots went out of their way to maintain good government in their regions (cited the bishop of Durhamn clause as a parallel) and was met with shocked silence. Haven't been back since.
McVey
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha . . . . . . . . .
Historians!!??? I think not!
I call them "REVISIONISTS"!!
Why is anybody surprised ..??
Most of the "Historians" of today are extreme left wing elitists. Of course they're going to pick democrats .. I mean get real ..!!
Is my math that bad to see that Carter was not a president in the last quarter century?
2007-25=1982
Carter shouldn't have been included if the survey was 'legitimate'.
If you feel responsible for these people, say so. But don't include me in your generalized mea culpa. I may be part of the boomer generation, but I reject the guilt the children are trying to thrust upon us. They will have their own sins to atone for.
"monastaries" not "monestaries", you idiot.
OK, Bush I -- Foreign policy wise, the Berlin Wall fell, we officially won the Cold War and we threw Saddam out of Kuwait, which isn't a half-bad record. The economy wasn't great -- unless you compare it to Mr. Malaise then it's the Roaring 20s, the Go-Go '60s and the Dot-Com '90s rolled into one.
Name one -- just one -- good thing that happened to this country under Carter?
Harding was the better president. Wish I had time to write more . . . .
If the younger generations believe that their generations are producing conservative historians, they had better think again. Liberals gravitate towards history and the other LIBERAL arts fields. The history professors I first encountered in the sixties (non-boomers) were overwhelmingly far-left liberal/communist. And todays younger historians are as assuredly as liberal as the older ones.
Surely these few hundred university professors couldn't possibly be liberals.
I can only imagine what they're teaching students these days.
Every professor of history in this poll who named Cater should e named.
END TENURE FOR UNIVERSITES!
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.