Okay, you're right. The idea that he's worse than both Buchanan and Johnson is not a fact per se. That's a conclusion. But, all his actions as president have been severely deleterious to the country. While it's true nothing lasts forever and eventually the U.S. would have lost its supremacy, Bush propelled the loss forward, compressed it into one presidential term. He bankrupted us. He proved to the world that militarily we can't win over a bunch of rag tag insurgents. He galvanized the Muslim world against us and created an elite breed of terrorists in the process. He did absolutely nothing to prevent (strengthen levies) Katrina. He turned FEMA into a joke and even added the punch line, Good Job, Brownie. The borders are a shambles. We're broke and live on $2 billion a day worth of credit. Without it, the country will shut down. These are facts. But, that he's worse than Buchanan and Johnson is a conclusion, albeit one based on facts. We forget that a bunch of rag tag insurgents called the American colonies also defeated the greatest power in the world at the time. Leaders are sometimes very bad, as George V? of England and Stalin and others have proven over and over. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Amago To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 12/5/2005 9:48:10 AM Subject: RE: [lit-ideas] Re: Historians & Bush Prove me wrong. Do it by looking at Bush's record. ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Geary To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Sent: 12/5/2005 9:31:52 AM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Historians & Bush AA: > These are not opinions. These are facts. Here's an instance where I long for icons -- is Andy being serious or ironic? I can't tell from the context and I don't know him or his style well enough to judge. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, as Brother Nietzsche said: there are no facts, only interpretations. Mike Geary Memphis