The Sacred College Of Historians

by Emmett Tyrrell - December 7th, 2006 - Townhall.com

WASHINGTON -- There are certain questions frequently asked of eminent minds in public that must be avoided lest that eminence reveal himself to be a moron or at least moronic in certain areas of intellectual endeavor. Recently the Washington Post addressed one of these questions to Eric Foner, DeWitt Clinton professor of history at Columbia University. Naif that he is, Foner exuberantly rushed forward to prove my point. The question asked was one variation or another of "rank the present president of the United States on the historians' scale of 'great' to 'failure.'" Foner, though the author of distinguished historical studies of 19th century America, bemanured his scholarly credentials by ranking George W. Bush as "the worst president in U.S. history." Now I like a good joke, but nowhere in his tortured exposition was there a hint of humor.

I am sure that Emmett Tyrrell is correct that George Bush does not belong as the worst President in history. However I do think that Tyrrell's listing of George Bush's accomplishments (a minor but still obvious part of the article), ignores Bush's shortcomings. I also think it ironic that if you asked the professor, Eric Foner, he would not list any of Bush's real shortcomings in his evaluation. My list includes the following:

1. Bush has refused to enforce our immigration laws and continues, as do many Republicans, to prefer open borders for the cheap labor it permits. There is no doubt that this cheap labor helps to reduce the outflow of manufacturing jobs to other countries. However, ignoring the laws passed and allowing 12 million illegal aliens to reside here contributes mightily to the attitude around the world that our laws mean nothing since we don't even care about them ourselves. The rule of law is a joke because of this attitude.

2. We are at war, and the number one job of a war President, as shown by Lincoln and Roosevelt, is to keep the citizens focused on the war. Bush has tried to manage it as a minor issue, and focus on his domestic agenda, growing the education department, expanding welfare entitlements for the elderly and involving more religious groups in sucking at the public trough of government handouts. None of these are consistent with any form of conservative thought. They are in fact more classicly liberal than conservative. The Republican Party is in disarray because of convulsive attempts to support the President while rationalizing this program with conservatism.

George Bush has had very good economic policies, and our job and business markets reflect those policies. Only a moron like this professor can ignore what he has done good. However I suspect that George W. Bush has, like his father before him, alienated much of the conservative base in his party. He will be despised by many in the Republican Party for this even more than he is despised by the socialist elements in the democrat party for his economic success.

Tyrrell is right in one thing though. Being despised by partisan elements in your own time does not equate to being a bad President historically. I despise Bush, but I do not think that equates to being the "worst President in history".