This last weekend, I watched Sean Wilentz on Hardball w/Chris Matthews discussing his Rolling Stone article on Bush 'possibly' (HA!) being the worst.president.ever. This is something we already knew!
Is this a shock to my readers? Je think not. Is it a shock to most half-educated american? Je think not. Is it a shock to the deep deep red states? Of course it is. First off, they don't know who Buchanan, Johnson, Harding or Hoover were anyway. Second, as Morty pointed out months ago, W could kill newborns with his own hands and still have their support.
Though the article is good - I somehow can't get over that it is from Rolling Stone. I'm being a snob. I expect an article like this (albeit a better written) in the Atlantic. This is Rolling Stone. I mean, there is not one mention of the Dave Matthews Band!
That being said, I love articles that include numbers and stats. Throw in the history and I'm hooked! Read the entire article. But for those who skim or think that this is a fluctuation due to a bad news cycle, I point out this from the piece:
Twelve percent of the historians polled -- nearly as many as those who rated Bush a success -- flatly called Bush the worst president in American history. And these figures were gathered before the debacles over Hurricane Katrina, Bush's role in the Valerie Plame leak affair and the deterioration of the situation in Iraq. Were the historians polled today, that figure would certainly be higher.
Though one could argue that the last sentence is suspect at best - it does stand to reason. And note - there is nothing about 'illegal wiretapping' there either.
That being said on Shrub - there are other GOPers in the toilet too. Like....um......oh.......Rick Santorum.
...and yes, I know the graphic included here is not Rolling Stone. I just like the mock-up of the Time cover.
No comments:
Post a Comment