Ward Churchill:  a disgrace, or not?
921392
I do not think very highly of Chief Foot In the Mouth either, but he does offer a different viewpoint and that is what higher education is all about.\n\nThe idea of him swaying impressionable young students is a bit laughable - even the most gullible apparently see him as somewhat nutty.
799821
All race-hate, political correctness, anti-blasphemy and similar regressive and primitive  laws should be abolished or ignored:  "I care not for what they say, but I will lay down my life in defence of their right to say it" (Dickens 'A tale of two cities') People must be free to say what they think: no one can be made to listen to or agree with them and I will not be told by a bunch of politicians, religious crackpots, 'do gooders' or any other self- interest group or cardboard 'little Hitler' what I should think!\nCensorship of any description is nothing more than an attempt by one group of biggots to forcibly foist their jaundiced views on the rest of us. Remember 'Lady Chatterley's Lover' when the publishers were hauled before the courts because 'they' claimed that it would 'deprave and corrupt' - but failed to produce a single example of one such?  But what about those who had read it in order to object to it's content - surely they must have been 'depraved and corrupted' themselves in order to recognise the symptons - isn't there a parallel here somewhere?
974684
Hehe, I wouldn't say role models, but measures. I can compare myself to a lot of the OT folks (in the bad actions) History itself bible or not is full of people who were good but did bad stuff. \n\nBut, I would rather look to them as a role model rather than Bill Clinton any day.
728417
i think it is disgraceful!!-we have lost the freedom of speech in the UK and are now being forced to bow down and comply with the wishes of individuals and organizations who preach racial hatred far louder than the two gentlemen to which you refer. when you consider that certain characters were allowed to preach hatred on the streets of london only a few months ago unmolested by the law only serves to fuel my disgust and contempt for this puppet government. the only reason the two gentlemen are in court is because certain government officials know they have ballsed up on the asylum issue and all they want to do is bury their head in the sand and pretend its not happening-well i am afraid it is. and but for the two men in the dock no-one would know the truth. i wish them good luck.
213555
Not good enough.\n\nHe should be tried for treason and the proper punishment meted out.
372738
i agree with you that some people who have been prez in the past wernt worthy of the honour.\n\nthey were unable to rise above petty politics and act independently.\n\nfor eg.\n\ngyani jail singh\nk.r. narayanan
796418
Kissinger was one ,or I should saw is one of the worst scumbags going. There is so much I can only suggest reading " The Trial of Henry Kissinger" by Chris Hitchings. I would say the man should be declared an enemy of the USA. He is also guilty of Crimes Against Humanity. It's because of ppl like him, that the US will not recognize "The World Court, for Crimes against Humanity.
966338
I don't think many serious historians will consider him to be anywhere near that famously bad, but he is actually definitely in the running for the worst president in American history (link 1, below).\n\nAfter all, if you look at the huge blunders that have caused other presidents to be considered to be the worst in American history, it's not too hard to find an analogue that the most recent Bush has also committed.  Consider the overt corruption, the exposed illegal activities, the erroneous wars, the devisive name-calling... all of these FACTS and matters of public record.\n\nIn truth, I'm actually rooting for him to get the title.  I think it would be interesting to live in the time of someone who might so famously go down in history.  I'm a little disappointed that he lost congress' help.  But we still have two more years...
420693
the single worst leader of the uk in my life time!\n\nno-one has done more to crush the working man and support the rich in the last 35 years.\n\nyes i am only 35 years old but political history is important.\n\nboring sometimes!\n\nbut important.\n\ntony blair is not great but compared to her he is ok.
650163
You're not bush bashing? Too bad. i thought i'd found a kindred spirit. Lol. Anyways, if i believed in a heaven and hell, i'd say Bush would be going to the deepest circle of hell. The one reserved for the Hitler's and the Stalin's. Though he's not quite as bad as those two, he still belongs in that category.
160659
I was going to say that Traitor may be too strong of a word for this however, after thinking about it Ive changed my mind.  As a former Vice President one would hope he would have had a little more respect for America, the administration and our armed services.  In times of war the last thing we need is a former VP giving the enemy ammo to use against us or fanning the fire.  This could lead to added hostility and attacks on US troops.  If that is the case we have Al Gore to blame.
626860
Not at all - look at what made him the most known (a cheat), that is not the type of reputation I would want to have & hopefully not many would want that type of recognition. Honor and integrity are a very important part of my life & I wish it were so for more people.
804906
Yes he is shameful.  He testified that American Soldiers committed war crimes in Vietnam (he admitted to participating himself), threw his medals back at the White House, and now that being a Service Member is honorable again, he only wants us to remember his Service.  He was born privileged and married into even greater wealth, and then he denigrates our Service Members who are in harms way.  Very sad.
818079
No one (OK only a very few people) can take an apologist stand for this man, he was a street thug who rose to power and, like so many before him, abused that power to retain it.  There are no mitigating factors here and, although I view everything I hear from Iraq with a huge amount of cynicism, I do not doubt his guilt.\n\nThere are two things that bother me however the first is my general opposition to the death penalty, I see the need for retribution in some cases but I fail to see how this is achieved by multiplying the number of coffins involved.  The second thing is that we, and by that I describe both the USA and the UK, promoted and supported this man for years, we nearly wet ourselves with joy when he began to make war on Iran where he did incalculable damage and wrought havoc while we capered gleefully at his behaviour.\n\nWe encouraged him in what he became and are, to a degree, culpable in his maintenance of power and I just find it distasteful that we should all be so pleased at the prospect of another death.
440854
I agree with most of your comments.\n\nI agree that Truman was one of the best.  He, above all other things, accepted responisibility for his actions and wanted the President to be a man of unquestioned integrity.\n\nFor that reason, I believe the two Bushes to be the worst.  Neither has shown any desire to be a President that would make the American people proud.  All three of their combined terms have been marked by avoidance of responibility and the pursuit of personal interests over the good of the country.\n\nKennedy was overrated.  Didn't really do very many things well.  He relied almost completely on charisma.\n\nCarter was in way over his head and deserves to be among the worst, but has been a great ex-president.  I think he deserves some respect for his dipomacy and charity work since leaving office.\n\nRight on about Harding and Silent Cal.  I am torn on Clinton, although the country was relatively peace and prosperous during his tenure, I think much of the credit goes to Congress and gridlock rather than his own actions.  And he didn't have a strong sence of honour and integrity.\n\nI noticed you left off FDR and LBJ.  Both of whom were inexplicably popular.  FDR had good luck and charisma, JBL had bad luck and charisma.  I would put FDR on the best list, but not very high.  The circumstances surrounding his presidency would have made anyone look good.  Johnson belongs on the worst list in my opinion.  Although he did much good, he chose to sacrifice thousands of lives in Vietnam rather than make the unpopular decision to pull them out.
891046
Sorry but I can't agree, only that there might well be a relationship to the aforementioned knights.\n"Naysayers" is a perfectly legitimate, well-established Anglosaxon expression and I find it far more agreeable than "NIMBY"(not in my back yard) which is widely used in my neck of the woods (Ireland).\nI myself hate jargon, and expressions like "signage" instead of "road signs", which I find far more offensive.
398093
I think history will judge Paul martin fairly accurately.\nBeing that is quite possibly could be a victim of unfortunate circumstance.  One of the pillars in a party riddled with corruption.   however being that he was the finance minster during ad-scam, I find that to be unlikely.