<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2180" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bottomMargin=0 leftMargin=3 topMargin=0 rightMargin=3>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Siarlys, I'd call into question the value of such opinions. Saying it was a
survey-by-mail. Only those who cared to reply did. Which implies there are huge
masses of historians that haven't voiced their opinions! To ease some questions,
it would have been nice if they had said, "Out of X millions of surveys mailed
out only Y replied". Then at least we know only Y cared or had the desire to
participate in such a survey. Or maybe the # of replies tells us how bogus these
historians felt this survey to be? (<FONT color=#0000ff>Only a critical
question</FONT>, <STRONG><EM><U><FONT color=#ff0000>no facts trying to be
stated</FONT></U></EM></STRONG>.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Also, who's to say this group didn't send a letter a head of the survey
stating their goal or hinted strongly at their goal for this survey? Which might
then explain why so many HATE Bush, yet some with dignity decided they weren't
going to let this survey go completely without someone speaking out in favor for
Bush. <FONT color=#0000ff>This is PURE speculation! I in no way have a clue how
it was done. But as a critical thinker must question the validity of a pole that
was mailed out and only accounted for those who replied. Which says only those
who care to reply do.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>God bless,</DIV>
<DIV>Lance<BR>John 8:32 "You will know the Truth and the Truth will set you
free."<BR></DIV>
<DIV>On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 14:54:24 -0500 <A
href="mailto:gcfl-discuss@gcfl.net">gcfl-discuss@gcfl.net</A> writes:<BR>>
There is an excellent review of George W. Bush's place in history <BR>>
at:<BR>> <BR>> <A
href="http://www.h-net.org/~hns/articles/2004/092004a.html">http://www.h-net.org/~hns/articles/2004/092004a.html</A><BR>>
<BR>> Siarlys</DIV></BODY></HTML>