TR great? Great but terrible, dishonest, and tyrannical. TR a nationalist and an internationalist? TR sold out the Koreans to the Japanese because he thought the Japanese were a better race. TR sold out the Russians to the Japanese through chicanery. The Russians would have crushed the Japanese had they continued to fight. The Japanese were at the end of their rope when TR fooled the Russians into talking peace. TR a realist? That’s a joke. A realist wouldn’t have created the Bull Moose Party. A realist wouldn’t have turned the country over to racist Woodrow Wilson. Karma got the bastard. He lost his son in the Great War which he vigorously argued the the US should fight. And for what? England defeating Germany? We had no business fighting in the Great War.

I could have learned as much if I skimmed Wikipedia. No personal touch, just a short article that happens to be read by somebody.

The one I listened to was the one about Theodore Roosevelt. The prof. lecturing let's you know right away that he is a BIG fan of extreme left progressivism. No thanks, I don't need the indoctrination. I hope you guys aren't planning on doing any of the president's between Lincoln and McKinley because he comes right out and says that they were all pretty much nameless and faceless guys with whiskers (I am NOT kidding, that is almost a direct quote), they didn't really do anything of note, and besides nothing much really happened in those years. Then he goes on to say that when TR, Wilson, FDR, and Truman really strengthened the presidency (note that he leaves out Coolidge, Harding, and Hoover all three conservatives) we had two world wars and a great depression. When I hear this I start thinking that the nameless faceless guys with whiskers are looking pretty good!! I'll try a couple more but if I see any type of bias I will be done with this.

Awesome stuff. Would love to hear more.

I was looking forward to my first podcast of this, but in the first few sentences, the reader said the source for the information was Wikipedia and I was disappointed, because it isn't exactly the best place to get valid information, and I could've done that in my spare time anyway. Maybe if they use better, more trustworthy sources instead of just reading off the Wikipedia page, I'll become more enthusiastic about this podcast, but for now, I'm just going to take everything they say with a grain of salt.

If it's all right with you to listen to someone read a Wikipedia article, go right ahead. I, for one, am horrified. From sentence to sentence, you never can trust the source. Was this line added by an uninformed undergraduate? Was that sentence inserted by a right-wing activist who wanted to make the article more "balanced"? Who knows? It's one of the many versions of the Wikipedia article. I can't listen to this with good conscience.

Horrible...beyond terrible. Using Wikipedia as your source material is pathetic. And the episodes are full of stops and starts...Would it kill them to learn how to edit out their mistakes?

high quality podcast.

I listened to the first couple minutes of the one on T.R. and cut it off when I realized they were reading verbatim from the Wikipedia article.....weak.

...it would be nice if the narrators could pronounce the words correctly. You are reading from a script, right? Just take the time to get it right. Getting past that distraction, it is educational.

All they do is read Wikipedia entries, yet its entertaining and I hope they post more soon. The narrator who does the George Washington podcast should be brought back.

These are very interesting but how come there are no more? Why doesnt itunes ever respond to qusetions?

This series is an excellent way to provide high school students, as well as adults, in the digital age with additional learning opportunities. I shared these podcasts on CD as gifts for history buff friends of mine. Please continue to add to this series while maintaining the integrity of the content.

The Washington was good. The Jefferson--please find someone who knows how to pronounce the English language properly. There were about half a dozen howlers in the Jefferson piece (e.g. "electorial" as a previous reviewer pointed out). Also that piece had multiple places where it stopped and repeated a few of the previous sentences. Thought I had hit the reverse button by mistake. Is anyone editing these things? I guess we'll see how FDR works out...

This was a pleasant surprise to find - who couldn't stand to learn more about our Presidents? They just need to hurry up and get some new episodes out there. And to ditch the Thomas Jefferson podcast narrator - just a hint, my friend, it's "electoral college" not "electorial college"..... dag.