Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

graham4anything

(11,464 posts)
58. Was it worth it to have Nixon/Ford/Reagan/bush/Bush and possibly Bush,jeb in 2016?
Thu Feb 7, 2013, 11:12 AM
Feb 2013

Both entered the white house because of doing illegal things to get in, Reagan with the hostage interference, Nixon beating an inferior candidate, thought a great guy, nice guy, and liberal (but not as liberal as LBJ was btw).

HHH ran with all the baggage of LBJ, but not on any of the positives.

So, was it worth it in retrospect?

And the war didn't end for years later.

Looking back it is clearer, we can't go back, no sense in whining either way, but make sure we don't fracture and at the worse, hold ones nose and push that vote for the democratic presidential candidate, no matter who it is.
The worst democratic candidate is indeed better than the best republican presidential candidate.

And dividing on one issue(the war in 1968) and letting that trump all the other issues, well again, is it worth it, when the other side won't stop the war(s) and the other side won't do the good stuff.

Protests are great, but electing a better congress is a more worthy time in 2013. This is not 1968.

Did voting in Nixon and Reagan over say LBJ and Carter really better America?

Look at the comments every major REALISTIC thought about politician on the democratic side-Elizabeth Warren said everything should be on the table re:Iran.

Reagan should never have had a democratic voter. But the fracture between Carter and Kennedy, and then the 3rd party run of John Anderson...what good did that do?
I love Teddy, but 1980 was the one wrong time for him to run.
(Should have run in 1972,1976 or 1984 instead.)

I wouldn't have said these things back then either.
But in retrospect, sad to say, it is all true. imho of course.

BTW-the protesters of the 60s, so many of them ended up running for office that were not underground. And some won, some lost.
And those like Mark Rudd, on his website the last few years, has backed President Obama and other 60s protesters have backed the President.
Nobody gets 100%.

So the correct question is-
would the other side do the same bad stuff?
then ask
would the other side do any of the good stuff?

IMHO the first question is YES, the second one is NO.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Birthers beware..... wow.... yes wow. n/t 2on2u Feb 2013 #1
Na, Obama will just put you in his FEMA work camps. JoePhilly Feb 2013 #2
The New Yorker is hardly World Net Daily. sadalien Feb 2013 #4
So Obama can kill you, but not put you in work camps? JoePhilly Feb 2013 #5
Why Not... He Can Kill You... But Not Torture You... WillyT Feb 2013 #10
He probably won't, but what will the president following him do? nt sibelian Feb 2013 #38
Post removed Post removed Feb 2013 #3
Do You Remember Cambodia, Laos, And Vietnam ??? WillyT Feb 2013 #7
It's sad that DU doesn't have members who remember NIXON/Watergate KoKo Feb 2013 #6
Word !!! WillyT Feb 2013 #8
I'm no fan of the Occupy movement Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2013 #49
There are some of us who are old enough to remember... markpkessinger Feb 2013 #20
Beg to differ, alas! One of my best summers was spent watching the Watergate Hearings! Oh, and WinkyDink Feb 2013 #21
I damn well remember Nixon, and LBJ would have beaten him in 1968 graham4anything Feb 2013 #53
Well if I read you correctly, all our activism was a waste G_j Feb 2013 #56
Was it worth it to have Nixon/Ford/Reagan/bush/Bush and possibly Bush,jeb in 2016? graham4anything Feb 2013 #58
When Nixon bombed Cambodia there were demonstrations G_j Feb 2013 #54
has Obama's hit list been made public? quadrature Feb 2013 #9
LOL. Wow. Are you actually serious?? nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #12
Apparently Not... WillyT Feb 2013 #13
who defines what 'due process' is? nt quadrature Feb 2013 #15
Eric Holder... WillyT Feb 2013 #16
So... ReRe Feb 2013 #31
This article states that the policy goes back to the Nixon Administration, but guess what?.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #11
Are those to blame for this policy still president? bobduca Feb 2013 #14
When did Castro become an American citizen? WinkyDink Feb 2013 #23
Hmmm. I thought we were talking about the US policy of overseas assassinations.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #44
Eisenhower was president when CIA hired Mafia to kill Castro, not Kennedy. Octafish Feb 2013 #32
But, RFK continued that policy as JFK's AG. nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #43
No. RFK ordered CIA to stop dealing with the MAFIA Octafish Feb 2013 #47
Okay....appreciate the additional info. nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #52
When it comes to all-things-JFK, I defer to Octafish. David Zephyr Feb 2013 #62
Yes. We've been the bad guys for a long time now. So what? n/t Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #37
Exactly my point. Thanks for seeing it. Can't just blame the President for this policy. nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #45
Because if it was bad when dealing with foreign entities we were at war with Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2013 #50
How exactly has it been expanded? What "better alternatives"? nt. OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #51
Have you lost all sense of reason? "They did it too" is what children say to excuse their bad acts. Egalitarian Thug Feb 2013 #65
"let's just blame President Obama for a program he inherited, right?" sibelian Feb 2013 #39
It's morally acceptable to me to not have to send in US troops to do the same job.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #46
"he or she has forfeited any rights under the 6th Amendment" sibelian Feb 2013 #68
Unless the 6th Amendment has been rewritten in the last few seconds, the 6th Amendment.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #69
+1 n/t. okieinpain Feb 2013 #57
Cambodia was one of the articles of impeachment against Nixon (in committee) cthulu2016 Feb 2013 #17
THANK YOU !!! WillyT Feb 2013 #18
Worse, this policy puts such power in the hands of any future Nixon. MadHound Feb 2013 #19
That is the biggest issue . . . markpkessinger Feb 2013 #22
Because they've bought the Fear Propaganda. "In An Emergency, Shred This Document." WinkyDink Feb 2013 #24
Psst... I Lean Toward "Will Not"... WillyT Feb 2013 #25
I don't even understand those who put this trust in Obama. morningfog Feb 2013 #26
The "future Nixon" has already come and gone. His name was Bush II.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #70
How can we be sure this is not used in the US against any group deemed a terrorist organization? dkf Feb 2013 #27
What about Congressional Republicans?.......Can he kill them?? W T F Feb 2013 #28
This Insures a Permanent State of War for the U.S. triplepoint Feb 2013 #29
That's what I've been saying, it makes it easier to wage covert war Puzzledtraveller Feb 2013 #55
Wow... Just Wow... Hadn't Looked At It That Way... Until Now... WillyT Feb 2013 #59
This may come as a surprise to a lot of people, but we've been in a state of.... OldDem2012 Feb 2013 #71
DURec. bvar22 Feb 2013 #30
Huh? ReRe Feb 2013 #35
It MUST be a Right Wing Source. bvar22 Feb 2013 #60
Ah... ReRe Feb 2013 #61
During Campaign 2008, I rejoiced at the "Team of Rivals" declaration. bvar22 Feb 2013 #63
I was not fooled by... ReRe Feb 2013 #67
How quickly the President forgets tpsbmam Feb 2013 #33
K&R Solly Mack Feb 2013 #34
K&R Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #36
K&R woo me with science Feb 2013 #40
I wished this could be kicked for the next 4 years. Luminous Animal Feb 2013 #41
Du rec. Nt xchrom Feb 2013 #42
Ah, the last "liberal" President. ProSense Feb 2013 #48
it is interesting the writer brings up cambodia arely staircase Feb 2013 #64
...1 KoKo Feb 2013 #66
DURec leftstreet Feb 2013 #72
kick woo me with science Feb 2013 #73
kick woo me with science Feb 2013 #74
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Wow... It Gets WAAAY Wors...»Reply #58