McAdams tries to debunk my credentials as an historian...LOL

> >So anything you try to confer on me that contains *Pamela believes* is
> >wrong.
>
> You claim to be an historian?

I am demonstrating that I am an historian.  You just don't like it.  My profs on both sides of the Atlantic, not to mention my father, would have a few choice words for your taking potshots at my education.  
>
> Historians have to sift through evidence and reach conclusions.

I have already stated than an historian can take the same evidence and argue from at least two opposing positions. 

Some do 'reach conclusions'; others do not even state their thesis -- they demonstrate it, allowing the reader to be persuaded to come to the conclusion they prefer.  But I don't expect that you can understand that; the framework of poli sci seems to be to do a hachet job on the evidence.
>
> You just refuse to deal with the evidence.
>
The tactics you use only work to try to redefine the evidence.  Poli sci seems to be a false study of history.  A rewriting of history according to an agenda. 

Not the same thing.

Pamela Brown
www.in-broad-daylight.com