Richard Nixon

[I LOVE HO CHI MINH]

No doubts for me he was a MAD BOMBER
Reasons:
He planned to help the french at Dien Bien Phu with an air strike and was willing to use atomic bombs.
He heavily bombing the trail in Laos, cambodia and North V anti-aircraft bases
He wanted hanoi to release POW´s. How was he to get this? HIs only mean of persuasion were Mad Bomber performances.
Help me give other reasons
Lets see what the cappies will say?

[Ernest Everhard]

wow, nixon a mad bomber. Tried to help the french at bien den phu? well in 1956 while the french were rightfully getting their asses kicked all over indo china, nixon was in the most powerless office in the US, if not the world, he was the Vice President. I have no idea how he could've planned to help the french with airstrikes and nukes, especially with IKE at the helm.
Furthermore as a person of liberal leanings I drool for nixon, he was one of the most progressive presidents ever. Don't think so, well we'll discuss it. But find out what laws and actions he was responsible for first.

[El Che]

(Edited by El Che at 4:07 am on April 25, 2002)

[RedCeltic]

Nixon may have been a republican and 'not-a-crook' lol...
however in actuality Agusto/Ernest (or whatever) is dead on... he was a progressive. He inherited alot of the mess LBJ caused with Vietnam, and has been demonized because of his dirty dealings in Watergate.. however in truth he had alot of progressive policies.

[vox]

Nixon? Great guy. You know, in that illegal-bombing-of-Cambodia and overthrowing-Allende-and-installing-Pinochet kind of way.

vox

[Ernest Everhard]

Nixon policies: -Clean air and water act of 71, created
the EPA
-Integration of public schools, busing
-Affirmative action in Government
employment
-stressing treatment as oppossed to
incarceration for drug users
-declared once "we are all keynsians"
and instituted price controls to keep
prices down
-expanded funding for head start
programs
-increased food stamp funding into
the billions (from millions)
-nationalized three welfare programs
and expanded the benefits

pretty "progressive" i guess.

[RedRevolutionary87]

these are minor things, the capitalist has always offered the middle class small things to pacify them. meanwhile he stole tax dollers which were used to fund for israels atomic bombs. come on people progressive maybe, however it doesnt justify anything he did.

tircky dick nixon is not a good man, he just knew how much to give the people to keep them somewhat calm without hurting his own power

[Ernest Everhard]

you could say that about any leader, if I made a similar comment about Che, you'd say I was deluded, so with similar brevity I will dismiss you dismissal of Nixon's Progressiveness.

[RedRevolutionary87]

no actualy one cant, because with che he gave the people what they wanted and didnt do anything behind their backs, trickyy dick on the other hand was always scheming behind the peoples backs, he believed in cointelpro which is one of the most horrible counterintellegence actions done. so therefore one cannot question the integrity of che's actions, while it is very easy to question the integrity of dicks actions.

[I LOVE HO CHI MINH]

Very progressive eh? He do that minor things ernest said but he could not achieved a republican characterise that is to be a "master" on foreign affairs. If he take so long to end the war I dont know how progressive he maybe. Who care if he integrated public schools when decents of Americans were dying? Ernest, if you say that all that minor things he did can be compare with what he did with Vietnam you are totally wrong.

[I Will Deny You]

Quote: from Ernest Everhard on 12:24 am on April 25, 2002
pretty "progressive" i guess.
Indeed! He's the most "progressive" paranoid anti-semitic neo-prohibitionist hypocritical delusional alcoholic thief of a murderer that I've ever known. That Henry Kissinger was quite a "progressive" as well, what with financing the illegal shipments of weapons that were used to massacre thousands of innocent civilians half a world away.

A person does not drink to get drunk,
Lindsay

(Edited by I Will Deny You at 1:46 pm on April 26, 2002)

[Ho]

Richard Nixon and Kissinger were in my point of view some of the worst war criminals of the world.
What is very sad is that Kissinger received the peace Nobel price for ending the Vietnam war while he was one of the main responsible for it.

[Ernest Everhard]

How is kissinger responsible for the vietnam war?

[I Will Deny You]

I don't believe that he was responsible for its start. But he played a big role in its escalation (after Nixon promised to end it) and its spread to Cambodia, etc.

[vox]

You know, all of this rather reminds me of those who wish to revise Stalin's legacy: "Sure, he wasn't perfect, but he did some great things."

I don't buy it with Stalin and I don't buy it with Nixon. Either does Hunter S. Thompson (http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/graffiti/crook.htm).

And the question isn't really, I think, how good was Nixon, but would McGovern have been any worse?

vox

[RedCeltic]

Well, I was making a comparison between Nixon and modern day republicans who tend to be farther right.

as far as McGovern is concerned... he was much more of radically left by comparison... however was an ineffective campaigner and received bad press.

I agree with you that the bad clearly out weighs the good with both Nixon and Stalin.

[Ernest Everhard]

Vox, I will say, you have pulled the trump card. I will retreat against the words of the good doctor. But I will say if you ever read or have read Fear and Loathing on the campaign trail 72' you'll notice that HST was PERSONALLY enfatuated with Nixon, almost beyond reason. It's one of the reasons the book is so funny.
As for the Vietnam thing, the war was toned down after the NIxon administration took power, soldiers began to be sent to back to the states, Kissenger was probably uniquely responsible for the bombing of laos and cambodia, but then again its not like the NVA was not in laos and cambodia.
As a last statement on nixon, his progressive politics are hardly an even exchange for his personal power hard on, but they are undeniable. What upsets me is that people often cite nixon as one of the paragons of American conservatism simply because of party affiliation, when in truth he was hardly the stereotypical conservative people make him out to be. Stalin on the other hand was the stereotypical totalitarian communist dictator.
Finally, I think its great that you had to resort to quoting libertarians in your argument. I'm glad to see you read people like HST, simply because he's fun to read, and it always seemed to me like you took things way too seriously.

[vox]

I'd never say that Nixon was a paragon of conservatism, but I do find him repugnant as a human being. Republican politics have moved to the right since the early Seventies. Even Barry Goldwater has criticized Republicans for being too conserevative!

Is HST a libertarian? It's kind of hard to tell with him. I've read a bunch of his stuff. I think I'm one of the few who really liked The Curse of Lono, but Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas will stand as his legacy, I think.

"I'm glad to see you read people like HST, simply because he's fun to read, and it always seemed to me like you took things way too seriously."

I believe you warned against drawing conclusions about people based on some posts on a messageboard. Do I take some things seriously? Sure, of course. Many of the things discussed on a board like this are serious, for often we're ultimately talking about human suffering, which, as topics go, is a pretty serious one. That doesn't mean I never get whiskey drunk listening to rockabilly just for the hell of it.

vox

[reagan lives]

The HST article in question is actually the epilogue from "Better Than Sex: Confessions of a Political Junkie." Taken in the context of the doctor's larger body of work, specifically Fear and Loathing 72, it actually stands as an homage to Nixon. Ernest is right, you need to read F&L 72 to understand the relationship between Nixon and Raoul Duke, and why this particular article is actually an homage to the President.

Just a note: I seem to remember once mentioning PJ O'Rourke on this board, and vox decried me for citing "humorists." Moral relativism really IS an amazing thing.

[vox]

Hmmm, I think the HST piece first appeared in Rolling Stone, but I can't recall exactly. It's been a while.

RL,

You did mention O'Rourke. You did so in response to a list of examples of US intervention I offered that referenced Killing Hope by Blum, a well-researched work that has yet to be discredited. Perhaps you can't see the distinction? Regardless, I stand by what I wrote.

Did you really mean moral relativism? Or is this just another example of words meaning whatever it is you want them to mean? Kind of like homage.

By the way, I've read Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72.

vox

[Xvall]

He's the bastard that killed Allende?
Thanks.. I hate him more now...

- Drake Dracoli

(Edited by Drake Dracoli at 9:49 pm on April 28, 2002)