Thanks for coming! I plan to post a lot of interesting articles and comment on a wide range of things-- from political to religious, from private to public, from formal writing on public policy to snippets on random observations.
C-Span's Presidential Rankings are out-- with results from 2000 and 2009 (hat tip: Masson's Blog).
posted by Eric Schansberg @ 11:13 AM
0 Comments
First and foremost, I am saved by God's grace as manifested most clearly through the atoning death of Jesus Christ-- and thus, adopted into His family. As a result, I increasingly seek to extend His grace to others in my daily life. On the home front, I am a husband and father to four young men (two by adoption and two the more conventional way). Professionally, I am an economist who loves to teach and is active in public policy circles. Vocationally, I am an active writer and the author of three books (one on the book of Joshua; two on public policy-- one secular, one Christian). Finally, I am the co-author of a 21-month discipleship curriculum, Thoroughly Equipped (and a lighter 36-week version), for developing competent lay-leaders in the Church. Related to that work, Kurt and I have two books, Enough Horses in the Barn and Roll Up Your Sleeves.
Subscribe to
Posts [Atom]
-It is incoherent to put Reagan much below FDR.
-On economics, it is incoherent to rate Hoover much differently than FDR.
Glenn responded to that-- and I then elaborated:
Independent of one's assessment of the New Deal, you can't distinguish that strongly between FDR and Hoover on economic policy. (In other words, if you like the New Deal that much, then you have to rate Hoover a lot higher.) And if you assign credit to FDR for the reasons you give, then you have to give similar props to Reagan for the recovery from the post-70s malaise.
One can argue that FDR should get a lot of credit for WWII. But to borrow from your Gorbachev point to diminish Reagan, we could say the same thing about Churchill (and Stalin, in a sense).
If you rate FDR #3 (which I don't), I can't imagine how you could rate Reagan lower than #4 or 5. And you'd have to move Hoover to at least the middle of the pack.