It really isn’t new information, it was a strong strong suspicion for years.
Yes, as I (and the article) said. The attempts to reconstruct Nixon’s legacy as honorable has always sickened me. People keep pointing to his statesmanship as some sort of holy grail. The man was a fucking drunk who kept an enemies list, for fuck’s sake. Trying to sew a lace fringe on this dogshit doily doesn’t change history.
That’s where I was when I clicked on it, thinking it was simply reviewing that huge stack of suspicious, but short of damning. But in Haldeman’s own hand? The charge is treason, the verdict is guilty.
And to think, it only took fifty years.
And quite possibly tens of thousands of American lives, untold Vietnamese lives, and countless damaged veterans of that horror show.
Well, yeah, but Bob Hope’s jokes about hippies, jobs, and baths? Comedy geld!
Did you ever get that haircut?
Emphasis mine.
That’s true if the only deaths that count are American deaths.
As for Nixon, i’m not especially surprised by the revelation that began this thread. As others have noted, it’s been suspected by many analysts and historians for quite a while. But, much as i respect Johnson’s domestic policies, we can’t use Nixon to let him off the hook in any way, shape, or form for Vietnam. Even without Nixon’s backstabbing, i’m not confident that any lasting peace would have been established in 1968.
As for Nixon on the domestic front, we can give him credit for some of the policies he enacted and some of the laws he signed, but it’s also worth remembering that he was constrained by political reality. He was the first president of the twentieth century to enter office, and to serve his whole presidency, with the opposition party controlling both houses of Congress.
Yep, Nixon was a lying, cheating, dishonest son-of-a-bitch. Thank Og we’ll never again elect one of those again.
Bolding mine. Of course not, but then we never got the chance to find out, and there lies the tragedy of it all. Any sort of agreement may have saved at least a portion of the suffering that ensued. If Russia was willing to broker an agreement, it likely means that they were sick of expending resources on this debacle as well, and pressure from Moscow may have made both Uncle Ho and China come to the table. Once again, political gain ruled the day at the expense of the people.
I have to agree, although we came damn close to doing it this last election.
While someone, obviously, has to be the worst, people (yourself included, evidently) seem to forget that we had presidents prior to the last 50 years.
I don’t think any of the ones you mentioned, all things considered, even crack the top 5.
I disagree with this logic wholeheartedly.
Every president is going to make unpopular decisions–it goes with the job. Insisting that his skin color is the reason Obama is so disliked after 8 years in office is pretty much saying that being black is the only thing Obama did in office.
It’s not 2008 anymore and Obama isn’t William Henry Harrison. Agree with them or not (as I’ve said, I don’t), there are reasons to think of him as the worst president beyond “he’s black”.
Honestly, the far more likely reason is that they have the same lack of history that I perceive from your post. “He’s the Democrat we remember most clearly, Democrats are on the wrong side of the issues” is faaaaaaaaaaaaar more likely, much like how you cut immediately to Bush 43 instead of any of the other names mentioned elsewhere in this thread.
It wasn’t so much that he was black, being black was just a part of being different. For some people, sure, that was all they saw. But most people these days are either not racist or unwilling to admit that they are. Some don’t even know that they are, they measure the word “racist” according to a standard that will give them room to deny. Race is simply the most obvious.
For one thing, he’s smart, obviously smart. People can overlook being taller than them, better looking, more money, and flaunting it some. People about half expect someone to apologize for being smart. Common sense, they will say, is the important thing. Even though if that sense were so common and reliable, we likely wouldn’t make as many dumb mistakes as we do. We’d make smarter mistakes.
He’s different. That’s why he was so exciting to vote for, he’s change! Not even so much an agent change, he was change. That’s how we gave him shoes so damn big nobody could fill them, and we’re kinda pissed that he didn’t.
They don’t like him because they don’t like change and they don’t like us. Used to be, they were most of the people, now, somewhere less than half. Its taking a lot longer than we thought.
The one from 2 months ago? We elected someone even worse. You can say Hillary’s evil. But there’s something worse than evil for a politician to be, and that’s willfully ignorant. And you fuckers just gave a used car salesman the keys to the Oval Office.
If we survive the next 4 years, it’ll be despite Trump, not because of him.
Really? You’re going to turn this into yet another fucking Trump/Clinton thread? Well, fuck all y’all.
Almost everything you know about politics is wrong. Because you’re gullible you make bad decisions.
Well, Nixon’s a fucker, too. But he was PotUS when I was born, so I’ve always cut him a little slack. My apologies for my part in the hijack.
I have spent a lot of time since 2004 wondering if it is better to have an incompetent president with a devastatingly horrific political agenda in office, or to have a competent president with a devastatingly horrific political agenda there instead.
How about an incompetent president, easily controlled by career politicians whose devastatingly horrific political agenda has been frustrated for too long?
Tricky Dick was no different that Reagan was. Reagan sabotaged the Carter administration’s hostage negotiations with Iran, eventually convincing the mullahs that they’d get a better deal from Reagan than a second term of Carter. Turns out he kept his word and armed the Iranians.