I guess I'd be more hurt if this came from one who could actually write a coherent sentence. I don't see why you're so high on Byrd's scholarship, which is why I asked for evidence. That you can't produce anything germane to the question is no excuse to get personal.
You are correct, that sentence is incoherent.
It is the result of faulty and rapid editing to try and remove any hint of it being a personal attack as that is not how it was intended.
I will try again.
I never said Byrd was a SCHOLAR, I said he was a historian.
From the Merrian-Webster dictionary:
Main Entry: his·to·ri·an
Pronunciation: hi-'stOr-E-&n, -'stor-, -'stär- Function: noun
1 : a student or writer of history; especially : one that produces a scholarly synthesis
2 : a writer or compiler of a chronicle
Robert Byrd is a student of history in that he has a Bachelor’s degree in political Science from Marshall University. He also holds a Juris Doctorate from American University Law School.
He is a writer of history in that he has written several books including, "The Senate of the Roman Republic: Addresses on the History of Roman Constitutionalism" and a four volume work entitled, "The Senate: 1789-1989."
If pressed, I could probably come up with a list of a thousand people who are Historians and as much full of shit as is Byrd. The fact that their conclusions and interpretations are unreasonable or even incorrect does not change the fact that are Historians.
A horrible lawyer is still a lawyer and a horrible teacher is still a teacher until and unless the are fired for their incompetence or malpractice.
As it stands, the sheeple of West Virginia have not seen fit to remove Byrd from office after 47 years and people continue to buy his books on the history of the Senate.