Holy #$%!, has anyone been watching C-SPAN 2?

[DerekG]

The station had been broadcasting the convention speeches of '48-64. Truman was occasionally rousing, Stevenson was tepid, Kennedy was eloquent, but mother of mercy, has anyone been listening to the oratory of LBJ and Hubert Humphrey?

They were talking about ending poverty in America.

Let me repeat that. They weren't talking about "bringing more people into the middle-class," they weren't boasting about Welfare Reform as Clinton did tonight--they spoke of *ending* poverty!

I would give my right arm (pun intended) to hear a Democratic nominee use the sublime rhetoric employed by Johnson and Humphrey!!

I've read myriad books that chronicled political discourse in the 20th century, but it wasn't until I saw with my own two eyes that I realized Democratic leaders used to be bloody liberal!

Liberal, I say!!

[PsychoDad]

1. They were once were.

Perhaps someday, they shall find their way back to the path.

[Warren DeMontague]

2. Yes, once upon a time

you could advocate such silliness and not be burned at the stake of public opinion.

A massive re-education campaign came in with Reagan, and over the past few decades has taken serious hold in the public psyche. Ideas that were pretty much given when I was a kid, like the idea that widespread poverty was a blight and an embarassment and a sign that our society was not living up to it's ideals, were fairly widespread. As was the idea that being "Christian" actually had something to do with helping the poor and downtrodden, as opposed to lookin' out for #1, worshipping supply side jesus, and yelling at people about their sex lives.

They've managed to do quite a number on all our heads. Next on the long-term agenda is the wholesale discrediting of FDR and the sliming of his legacy, just you watch.

[ThatPoetGuy]

8. Extraordinary post

Thank you, impeachdubya.

[WillyT]

37. Truly Excellent Post !!! - Thank You !!!

Peace!

[Tommythegun]

48. That'll come...

when the bottom falls out of Social Security.

[KansDem]

73. Perhaps, but...

A couple of years ago, a DUer once posted that thre are few things sadder to see than an old, rusty $300 car with a "Bush/Cheney" bumpersticker. He was making the point that the VWRC has been able to convince a significant number of Americans to vote against their own self interests.

While I believe your point, I have to wonder if the VRWC will manage to convince enough Americans that giving up their Social Security is the "patriotic" thing to do...

[Octafish]

71. "wholesale discrediting of FDR and the sliming of his legacy"

That's what the turd who tried to slime Teresa the other day is all about:

This column will really upset liberals

By Colin McNickle
Sunday, December 16, 2001

EXCERPT...

All who enter my office are reminded of my persuasion when they leave. It's so chilling that some even here don't linger very long.

SNIP...

Oh, and did I forget to mention the pristine, framed copy of the April 12, 1945, edition of the Martins Ferry-Bellaire, Ohio, Times-Leader, my hometown newspaper, that hangs just to the right of my clock and above my bank of computer terminals?

It features that very large headline, ``Roosevelt Dead,'' from which I garner immeasurable inspiration every single day.

CONTINUED GASBAGGERY...

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/mcnickle/s_8526.html

THIS is the BFEE mini-turd Scaife toady who hounded Teresa. And this goes back farther than Pruneface in 1981, although his contribution to lowering our country should never be forgotten. This Colin McNickle is the kind of SHIT this country has put up with since 22 November 1963.

iDET: slupid hTmL

[JohnKleeb]

3. despite their views on Vietnam, Humphrey and Johnson

believed firmly in the great society. Thanks for sharing this, thats great. Humphrey and LBJ were great dems.

[ashling]

13. LBJ was a great Texan

[JohnKleeb]

31. you bet he was

Great man, I think he would have been remembered like FDR if it wasnt for Nam.

[HarveyBriggs]

44. He murdered 50,000 good soldiers.

Not even Bush is such an accomplished thug.

Also remember Kennedy was killed in LBJs home state.

If that's what it takes to be a great Texan, then Dante had it wrong and there are more than 9 levels of hell.

Harvey Briggs

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

60. Not to mention about 3 million SE Asians.

All to show that he was good anti-Communist.

[Nevernose]

62. RFK was killed in Nixon/Reagan's home state

What the hell does location of assassination have to do with anything?

[Charlie Brown]

41. I've always felt LBJ got a bad rep

Most people don't realize that Vietnam evolved from a generation of questionable contingency plans, poor advisors (Dulles and the Domino Theory) and apathetic number crunchers at the Pentagon. Neither Kennedy nor Johnson created Vietnam the way Bush created the conflict we are intrenched in now, and any Republican would probably have made their same mistakes (remember Nixon's "peace with honor" pitch?)

[Cybergata]

64. LBJ

It is so hard to add together all the amazing programs that LBJ pushed through Congress, and the LBJ who escalated the war in Vietnam.

I was only 13 when he told the U.S. on TV that he wasn't running for a second term, but I remember it all too well. He looked like a beaten man. He looked like a man who realized just how wrong he had been.

I wish he had the guts to do something about it before he left, like pull the U.S. out of Vietnam, but it was his pride standing in the way. He didn't not want to be the president that lost the war.

:hippie:

[RummyTheDummy]

4. I don't buy into the myth of LBJ

Yes, he did a wonderful job of carrying JFK's policies forward. Yes he truly believed in them.

But the other side of the coin is a war so bungled, it makes the current war in Iraq look like a border skirmish. For all the good LBJ did, he did far worse by escalating the war in Vietnam, sending 58,000 Americans and countless more Vietnamese to their deaths and ultimately producing a generation of forgotten veterans many of which brought their problems home with them when it was over.

There was a reason why the hippies of the day, the kind of people I would have associated with had I been alive back then, burned LBJ in effigy. Let's not forget that.

[Tom Kitten]

7. I think LBJ realized that...

he chose not to run for re-election, after he left office he just let himself go to hell...he didn't care about himself, stopped getting his hair cut, smoked and drank himself to an early death...
LBJ was the president of my preteen years...never understood him or the times then, being less than twelve throughout the decade really, but I admit my comments are purely subjective...

[RummyTheDummy]

10. No that's the right way to look at it

I truly believe he did a lot of good, but I think you have to take the good with the bad. And you're right, I think he did realize it and felt a sense of great personal responsibility. We've all seen the famous photo of him with his head in his hands. The only trouble was by that point it was too late.

[elperromagico]

51. Stay the course! Stay the course!

We will have Peace with Honor in Vietnam. :eyes:

The phrase "peace with honor" has always pissed me off. It implies that there's something dishonorable about peace.

[Liberal Christian]

36. Don't forget, however

that LBJ never tried to deprive the protestors of their constitutional right to protest; that he heard the chants of young people allowed to march right past the White House, shouting, "Hey, hey, LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?"; that when it came time to acknowledge his mistake and step aside, he did, which is something his fellow Texan who currently occupies the White House would never do.

[DerekG]

12. Please just let me have this moment

I wouldn't attempt to absolve Johnson of his genocidal war against the Vietnamese people.

But this broadcast was from 1964. You should have seen the people: they thought LBJ was the peace candidate; they actually thought that American abundance and ingenuity could dispel poverty and racism. I could not detect one hint of Democratic centrism from Johnson's lips; more astounding, Humphrey actually savaged the right-wing, instead of trying to appear as its more benign brother. These were utopian ideas, here.

Just let me think "1964" for a little bit longer, ok?

[ashling]

14. LBJ did more than carry the policies of JFK forward

dont forget that JFK had advisors in VietNam and countenanced CIA operatives over there

JFK did not start the war on poverty. That was Lyndon Baines Johnson.

He pushed through civil rights legislation knowing that it would be at his own political risk.

LBJ was a great man, and likewise his faults were great.

[TeacherCreature]

17. I was alive back then

and hindsight is 20/20. Johnson was wrong on the war...but people really did fear communism and for good reason. Back then it was not at all clear that communism would eventually fail.

[StandUpGuy]

33. Is this the same thing ?

I was alive back then and hindsight is 20/20. Bush was wrong on the war...but people really did fear Terrorism and for good reason. Back then it was not at all clear that Terrorists would eventually fail.


I wasn't around then but I'm concerned about the future perceptions of the current phony war we find ourselves in.

Was it possible that the fear then was just as manufactured as it is today?

edit:

People often say mass media makes controling the masses easier, but
I think it would be easier to control much less media.

[Beam Me Up]

40. Excellent, excellent question. And , man, do I wish I had a clear answer!

This is said by someone who lived through those years. I'm 56 years old. I was a teenager when JFK was shot and LBJ became the President of the United States.

Who ever controls your perception of reality controls you. That is my motto.

Knowing absolutely NOTHING, I felt that something truly horrible had happened. The president was dead, yes, but it was more than that. From that moment *I* no longer completely trusted my government. From that moment I observed that governments, and the people who make them up, often--I want to emphasize OFTEN--lie. And the amazing thing is, they do it well in most instances, quite convincingly. On the whole, by comparison, Bush* doesn't lie very well, or believably, or at least to me. Perhaps some find him believable but I never have and never will.

I do not know what happened, why Kennedy was assassinated or, precisely, by whom but I am absolutely certain that it was not a "lone nut." This was a high crime of State and executed as such, every pun intended. I do not know HOW MUCH about it LBJ knew, but I am certain that he KNEW a truth that the American People have NEVER been told.

I could say the same thing regarding today and the subject of 9/11. In this case, however, I've never detected any REMORSE OF CONSCIENCE or GRIEF on the part of the low life that currently holds the office of President.

We are educated and manipulated by the media to focus a great deal of attention--both reverent and irreverent--on the men who occupy the role of President. So much attention is focused there we are never led to ask important questions about what OTHER very powerful MEN (mostly men) are DOING. We don't know their comings and goings, their daily briefings and meetings. What these men do is "behind the scenes," and apparently of little consequence most of the time. We are also lead to ASSUME that their behavior is, all in all, law abiding. That is, that they are subservient to the Constitution of the United States.

I no longer believe this is an accurate picture of our reality. Yes, the office of the President of the United States, in conjunction with the Cabinet and role in relation to the Congress, Judiciary and Military, is very powerful. The President can command enormous resources. However, I believe there are other very powerful people--families and corporations--who also command great influence and power that is EXTRACONSTITUTIONAL. That is, in some instances or at least at certain levels, outside the purview of the Constitution.

With that in mind, my reading of LBJ is that he knew all this. He may not have known every detail but he knew that JFK had been removed from office violently so that HE could be placed in his place. Try to imagine the burden not only of such a responsibility, but, if I am right, the burden of knowing that one was living a kind of charade, a lie: That there were REAL LIMITS beyond which even a genuinely liberal President could not go.

What is the truth?

Are we, as Citizens, in control of our Government -- or is it being controlled by someone else -- and we, by extension, by them? Is it a dynamic interplay that is governed by the rules of Constitutional law and order -- or is that only a cover, a make believe, a charade behind which lurks a more sinister reality?

I'll tell you what I believe: I believe that so long as men can make a profit off of war, there will be war. War will continue to exist so long as the few profit at the expense of the many. And it should now be clear to every man woman and child in this nation that WAR is no longer something which can be thought of as happening 'somewhere else but not here'. If 9/11 taught us anything, it should have taught us that.

The current pResident of the United States drew a line in the American Psyche the way his father once drew a "line in the sand." We are now either with him -- and all that he represents which is far more than he, himself -- or we are against him. Well, I knew long before he uttered those words which side of that line I was on. I have been appalled by the brazeness of this maladministration but I've never for a moment believed that it was ANYTHING but a total lie.

Edit: clarity

[StandUpGuy]

42. Thank you for your reply.

This is why I love DU so much.

If you have a moment I would like to know your thoughts on the second part of the question about media.

Also do you see the INTERNET affecting the media control or at least offering a true counter balance?

[Beam Me Up]

47. Counter balance. . .

There is a much deeper question here. It has to do with what HOLDS your attention and why. You understand, I hope, that the MEANING you find in these words is NOT a property of the little squiggles you see on your monitor. Meaning is a property OF MIND.

Now. Where does "mind" begin and where does it end? Is it only something inside your head, or is it also a property of the universe around you -- including the whole of your body itself?

If people asked themselves these questions more often and sincerely looked for answers -- not only in ancient texts and contemporary scholarship but directly from their own observations of what is taking place within themselves at any given moment -- human beings would not be so susceptible of being 'controlled' by anyone or anything.

As for the Internet; we are very fortunate to have access to it at this time. I personally anticipate that it will not last long. It is something that exists NOW. Tomorrow, who knows? One thing I am certain of: It's obsolescence is already being planned.

Edit: changed one word.

[StandUpGuy]

54. sweet

I know this thread is dead but I thank you for your reply.

You bring up very interesting points.

I've often wondered If my thoughts were my own or if they were just conditioned responses.

Even my counter-culture or progressive ideas.

Is this the way I am supposed to think?


Do you think the INTERNET was designed to play the role it currently does, or do you think its current manifestation is an anomaly in the grand design.

[nickgutierrez]

56. About the edit

In a manner of speaking, there is less media to control. I forget the exact statistics, but a vast majority of the mainstream media is owned by a handful of corporations (numbers are slippery for me, but the facts stick well otherwise :) ). So, this results in many voices saying the same things, and the spectrum of political discourse is severely limited as a result.

[StandUpGuy]

58. while I agree

I think in the past it was easier to spin stories locally to meet the local sensibilities.

A story could be spun in Kansas differently than say NY.

Today with the Internet and news wires a BS spin job on page 14 in Kansas can be page one in NY highlighting the contradictions.

Thanks for your reply.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

66. Do some reading on the Tonkin Gulf, in particular the book written by....

the late Admiral Stockdale who was one of the pilots associated with the event:

<http://campus.northpark.edu/history/WebChron/USA/GulfTonkin.CP.html>

Excerpt:

"In an attempt to possibly lure the North Vietnamese into an engagement, both the Maddox and the C. Turner Joy were in the gulf on August 4. The captain of the Maddox had read his ship’s instruments as saying that the ship was under attack or had been attacked and began an immediate retaliatory strike into the night. The two ships began firing into the night rapidly with American warplanes supporting the showcasing of the American firepower. However, the odd thing was that the captain had concluded hours later that there might not have been an actual attack. James B. Stockdale, who was a pilot of a Crusader jet, undertook a reconnaissance flight over the waters that evening and when asked if he witnessed any North Vietnamese attack vessels, Stockdale replied: 'Not a one. No boats, no wakes, no ricochets off boats, no boat impacts, no torpedo wakes-nothing but black sea and American firepower.' <1>

The entire event was purposely misconstrued when presented to Congress and the public by President Johnson and his administration, and on August 7, the 'Tonkin Gulf Resolution' passed, 416 to 0 by the House and 88 to 2 by the Senate. The resolution stipulated that the President of the United States could 'take all necessary measures to repel armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression.' <2>


Does any of that sound VERY similar to more recent events?

[rman]

20. what myth? that he was a saint?

no president ever was a saint, yet some did more good things and less bad things then others.

[Steely_Dan]

28. Let's Not Forget

I liked LBJ - In many ways he represented the true heart of the Democratic party.

But let's not forget that he was considered one of the most ruthless politicians ever to hold office. Some of the tricks he used would amaze most of us here.

-P

[rastignac5]

32. Only the white hippies burned him in effigy

Minorities knew he was responsible for the sea change that swept America.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

61. I was at those demonstrations and there was no lack of minorities.

LBJ sold out to appear to be a good anti-Communist.

[lastliberalintexas]

55. Utter bullshit

Unless of course, by carrying forward the policies of JFK you were referring to our involvement in Vietnam. Afterall, Johnson didn't START that war. You can blame him for allowing the MIC to escalate yet another failed Red Scare Offensive, but he didn't start the damn thing. Neither he nor Kennedy got us OUT, either.


John F. Kennedy had 2 and 1/2 freaking years to do something about the civil rights movement, but sat on his ass because he was too afraid of the consequences. The CRA of 1964 and 1965, MEDICARE, and the other Great Society and War on Poverty programs are also parts of the Johnson legacy- not just Vietnam.

Kennedy's legacy is what? The Bay of Pigs?

Minorites down South by and large LOVE LBJ (and of course RFK, but that's another thread). But most of them don't give a tinker's darn about that other Kennedy, the one most holier than thou Northeasterners shout about. LBJ was a son of a bitch, but his programs continue to help people today. Can't exactly say the same for the mythology of Camelot.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

65. LBJ was utter bullshit, but he fooled a lot of people....see my post #63..

And Kennedy didn't get us into Vietnam either, if that's what you're trying to imply. Eisenhower (President: 1952-1960) sent the first U. S. military advisors to Vietnam in 1954, and we took our first combat deaths in 1956. By the time of JFK's assassination on November 22, 1963, roughly 12,000 advisors were operating in Vietnam. That number increased dramatically by the end of 1964.

For people that you claim the Blacks didn't like, I've walked into a lot of houses in Southern states OUTSIDE of Texas that STILL have pictures of JFK, RFK, and MLK, Jr, side by side on the wall. LBJ's photo is nowhere to be found...wonder why that is, exactly?

[lastliberalintexas]

76. Nope, I'm not blaming JFK for Vietnam either

I blame the majority of Americans of the time, our country that bought into the Red Scare Domino Theory Paranoia that ruled the day. I know that Eisenhower got us into Vietnam- I have to tell repubs that all the time. I just have a problem with the absolution of Kennedy, given that the people LBJ listened to were all/mostly Kennedy advisors!


And I was simply responding to a poster who at the very least implied that LBJ's domestic policies resulted from him being nothing more than JFK's water carrier. THAT is what was utter bullshit. JFK had plenty of time to try to do something to help the civil rights movement, but was too afraid to do so. He and RFK (pre-conversion to empathetic human being) held a great deal of antipathy towards the civil rights issues and leaders, and he sat on his ass while the battle raged.

The Great Society and War on Poverty programs were LBJ's own, and didn't have a damn thing to do with Kennedy. LBJ was a jackass- I'm not disputing that. Probably one of the meanest SOBs to ever occupy public office, in fact. But JFK was ineffective and failed to push for any cogent agenda during the almost 3 years he was in the WH, much less actually get programs passed that continue to help people today. The revisionist history that has followed the Myth of Camelot is ridiculous. There's no need to lionize a man simply because he was assassinated.

But if you and Rummy believe that the Great Society/War on Poverty was a creation of JFK, well, then I have this bridge for sale...


As I've said before, Jackie's work in creating the Myth of Camelot has not been wasted. JFK is still thought of by the public in the same vein as FDR, despite a glaring absence of actual policy and/or program successes.


And over the years I've seen the pictures of MLK and RFK. But the pictures I've seen of JFK tended to be in the homes of rural whites or Cajun Catholics. Different parts of the world, I guess. I don't have a problem with people who like Kennedy, just those who've essentially nominated him for sainthood.

[JohnnyRingo]

5. If you like vintage campaign....

Check out these old campaign commercials.

http://livingroomcandidate.movingimage.us/index.php

1952-2004

Especially fun hearing Buxh warning that Al Gore is going to spend the budget surplus, and more in 2000:

http://livingroomcandidate.movingimage.us/election/index.php?nav_action=election&nav_subaction=overview&campaign_id=177

[Robbien]

6. That was before corporations were given the same rights as individuals

That was when we had rules against corporations owning our government.

When coporates rules, the Great Society drools.

[thebigidea]

9. on the other hand...

... listening to Humphrey, I feel a kinda visceral nausea and suddenly understand all those venemous words Hunter Thompson wrote about him.

[sandnsea]

11. We had REAL poverty then

People either have no idea or have simply forgotten. We had large numbers of people who had never even been to a doctor, EVER. We had people without running water or refrigerated food. We had real dirt floor, tar paper shack, poverty.

What people forget about welfare reform is that alot of what was implemented were things moms had been wanting for a long time. They couldn't get off welfare or they'd lose their kids' medical care. That has changed. There was very little child care assistance, no help to buy a car or pay for transportation to work, not much of anything. People went on welfare and there was no way out. The bad things about welfare reform was the 5 year cap and the sometimes difficult work requirements. Still, alot of what was implemented was actually the exact things people on welfare had wanted for a very long time.

[ParisFrance]

15. LBJ Killed Kennedy

indirectly of course. Watch The Men Who killed Kennedy, segment 4.

[TeacherCreature]

18. no, the cia and pentagon killed Kennedy

because he refused to bomb cuba.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

68. Poppy Bush, Nixon, and J. Edgar Hoover were all in Dallas that day...

...and they needed LBJ to take control immediately, which he was more than happy to do.

Nixon needed plausible deniability so he was actually flying out of Dallas at almost the exact same moment that JFK was being killed.

The CIA team that probably did the shooting was probably the same team that had been trained at No Name Key in Florida to assassinate Castro. The military took control of the autopsy, and the rest is history, as they say.

[John_H]

24. Hey! Scotty McClellan's dad is a DUer!!!!!!

Lyin' Scott's daddy wrote a book, which was laughed out of print by even the wackyest tinfoilers, arguing that LBJ killed JFK. Welcome to DU Mr. McClellan, and please thank your son for helping the chimp become dislike by a majority of Americans!

[bread_and_roses]

19. We have real poverty now

and welfare "reform" is increasing it. Sure, when the economy is good and there are jobs available people move off welfare to work - but that has always been the case.

The "good" things that are available under welfare "reform" were available at least in NY prior to welfare reform. When I went to work for DSS in the early 80's, day care was available for Mom's trying to get off welfare, a substantial portion of their wages were not counted against their benefits for a time to allow the family to gain some stability before losing support, a Mom could go to school and become skilled enough to find living wage work while receiving welfare, and job-hunting assistance was available.

The current "reform" is punitive and for most people, creates a worse poverty trap than the old system. A welfare recipient must work at McDonald's instead of going to school, and mother's of infants are trying to get the child to Daycare (if it's available) on a bus then take the bus to work (a trek that easily take two hours each way) for minimum wage jobs that they often lose because of transportation/child-care/illness problems.

I still work in human services, though thankfully not at DSS, and I cannot even begin to recount the stories of the hardship this mis-named "reform" has created. States trumpet the numbers of people off welfare, but in most cases no one is tracking where those people are or what has happened to them. Homelessness and Food Bank usage are at all time highs, child poverty rates remain a disgrace, and private agencies find their resources inadequate to meet the needs increasingly unmet by the inadequate safety net.

Clinton's welfare "reform" was a nice big juicy steak tossed to the poor-bashers and boot-strappers; more than anything else it defines him as an old-fashioned "moderate" Republican rather than a Democrat in the mold of FDR or Johnson on the Domestic front. Hell, Richard Nixon even considered the idea of a guaranteed National Income.

We have drifted so far to the Right that we scarcely even recognize the degree to which we have allowed the terms of the debate to be defined by Reagan economics.

[Kanary]

25. And Clinton assured us last night that Kerry was solidly behind

that "reform" of welfare, so guess what we have more of to look forward to.

Poverty isn't something that is even on the radar of the party anymore, except to keep giving ground to the RW. Mention it on DU, and it sinks like a stone. Try to get DUers interested in writing letters or making phone calls, and you find writing on behalf of Whoopi is much more important.

Try to get poverty issues on the platform, and you practically get laughed out of town.

Yet, we're told over and over to work for the party, and be sure to vote.

People like me don't have much hope.

Yes, I wish we had Johnson back.

Thank you for your strong words......... it's rarely heard anymore.

Kanary

[Lorien]

46. Poverty, education, the environment

all issues that have slipped through the cracks in recent years. Yes, they all get some meaningless bit of lip service from time to time, but no changes for the better have been made in any of these areas in the past several years (or even past decade). Even Dems REPEATEDLY parrot RW talking points; the poor are just lazy and need to "pull themselves up by their bootstraps", education is poor because "teachers aren't accountable", the environment is unimportant because "jobs and people matter more" (you won't have either if it gets much worse)! We MUST go on the offensive with these issues; WE need to create the memes, not just react to absurd RW talking points. And yes, that means real ACTIVISM (an issue that will kill almost any thread).

I've lived in a ghetto on $80 a month, and I've lived in a suburb on $10,000 a month (back in the Clinton era, but no longer). I've ALWAYS had to work hardest when I was being paid the least! One of the worst paying jobs I ever had was as a college teacher. $2000 per credit hour per semester. If I wanted to make more, I needed a Master's degree-how could I afford it? My time would only allow me to teach 3 credit hours (20 hours of work per week). Teaching is very fulfilling personally, but you can't pay basic bills doing it!

And the environment? A good friend has been studying climate change in Antarctica for forty years. When he says we're in deep, deep shit, I listen. His information is the reason I never had children. If we make it another 50 years, it will be a mircle...and if you don't think a crumbling ecosystem on a global level will effect the economy, jobs, child welfare, poverty, health issues, global tensions...well, there's a BIG wake up call for us all coming around the bend!

[Kanary]

53. meaningless lip service, indeed

I was at a candidate meeting tonight, and finally took a deep breath and spoke up about the Section 8 housing issue. Nobody wants to talk about it, nobody wants to hear about it, nobody wants TO DO ONE DAMNED THING ABOUT IT. I've posted her about it, asked people to PLEASE write and call, and get hardly any responses at all. Yet, as I've posted many times, there is a big hue and cry about Whoopi, and all kinds of emails go out about that. Does Whoopi somehow need more suport than people who are getting cut out of the only homes they have a chance to have?????

I got some lip service again tonight, but when it came down to it, there won't be ONE person who will so much as make one 2 minute phone call. The candidate talked strongly about it, but it won't be put on the website with directions on how to speak up about it. So, wasted effort on my part. And it scares the hell out of me, makes me angry and just plain feeling hopeless.

All the other issues you raise are, of course, important. Many of those issues have quite a bit of attention paid, and lots of suporters, and lots of money given. I've been involved since the late 60's, and I've supported so many issues that had nothing to do with me, because I really believe that what keeps one of us down, keeps all of us down. But, no more. When I can't get even a teeeny bit of support from others in other issues, I just can't muster up the energy for their issues. That's just how it is. Until/unless we all start working together for each other, I finally have to say, "Me, first". And I REALLY resent being put in that corner.

Thank you for speaking up, and understanding that this is such a neglected but important issue. I'm tired of bieng brushed aside, and vilified here for it.

Kanary

[Lorien]

72. Honestly, I think all truly "liberal" issues are vilified

peace, poverty, education, the environment, gun control, no death penalty, human rights, healthcare for the uninsured...our candidates are really only focusing on the last of those issues, and that's only because healthcare is becoming unaffordable for the middle class as well as the working poor.Heck, they even use RW terms and stratagies; instead of backing "renewable energy development" (heaven forbid energy becomes affordable for all) they say "ending our dependance on foreign oil" (i.e.-drill in Alaska and off our coasts). It's very disheartening.

I don't really have "my" issue-I've never been a single issue voter or activist because I see most liberal issues as being highly connected; We cannot prosper and thrive without good educations, a healthy environment and renewable resources, good and accessible healthcare, peace and global stability, and safety nets for those who cannot help themselves.The only way any of us will see "our" issues addressed is by speaking proudly and forcefully with one voice, as LIBERALS.

[sandnsea]

26. We have education programs

And I should remind myself that Oregon got some kind of waiver program on welfare. Our program buys moms cars and helps with education. We also have some pretty good job training programs. And I should have added that day care and the rest aren't funded adequately. My point is that some of the goals of welfare reform are good. As usual, there just isn't enough funding or side programs to make it really effective.

[candy331]

30. Very true Kenzee 13 I too worked in DSS until last year (when I left to

start my own business) saw this on a regular basis. The food banks can't keep up. If the average persons are having financial troubles(more bankruptcies, credit card debt to high heaven to keep going from job losses etc)surely the welfare to work folks along with other low end workers with Walmart and McDonald's jobs are struggling against uphill winds. For people who are not out in the real world it is easy to fall for what the news media presents, a healthy America with a growing economy but that is just not the case for so many.

[Only Me]

16. It was just after the Depression...

people were seriously starving and people died. My Grandparents were was born in 08 and 17, my grandmother lost a son because they literally didn't have enough food to eat. Typically farm families, rural and inner city folks had it really hard. Many people around here didn't have plumbing or running water, they couldn't afford ice even for an icebox. They lived in shacks or crammed large numbers of people in one and two room houses or apartments because they couldn't afforded to pay rent. I am sure there were probably many people that were homeless for the same reasons. My grandmother used to say she had never since felt fear or felt the heartbreak and helplessness she had during that time. I think it was something, depending on were you lived and the circumstances of your life, that was life changing. We have never had a time as bleak economically as then and real recovery was slow coming to the people that lived it.

[Bridget Burke]

21. That's the environment Johnson came out of.

He heard the message of FDR, against fear & hopelessness. He was inspired to go into politics and even hoped to end poverty. He used all his political powers to ram through Civil Rights legislation, although he knew it would hurt the Democratic party in the South.

But he believed JFK's bright boys about Vietnam. Macnamara has lived long enough to realize he was wrong. LBJ gave up on re-election & retreated to his ranch--a real ranch. He probably did die early because of guilt or despair. Can we imagine the current "president" caring that much about anything?

I was a young adult in those days & I remember. Next: we got Nixon.

[Only Me]

34. Really, I can't ever remeber a Republican president that REALLY

cared about the plight of the poor. Not to say they didn't. But I don't think it has every been very high on their agenda. Our party has so much to be proud of. It was never perfect but it has always strived for a better way for the people. I guess that is why I
am so loyal to it.

[lastliberalintexas]

57. Believe it or not,

I think Hoover actually cared. Although Hoover gets blamed for the Great Depression because Black Tuesday was on his watch, Coolidge was actually the one who set everything in motion. Hoover can be blamed for refusing to step in to try to fix things and believing that the market would self-correct, though.

But I think Hoover had more personal compassion than he showed politically, and he did help with the Food for Europe programs during and following both World Wars.

He and Truman became great friends later in life, as well. No one is perfect, of course. But I don't think even Hoover would be a repub today.

[Jose Diablo]

22. The moderate center used to be progressive

It shows dramatically how far right in the 'spectrum' this country has traveled with Reagan and the two Bush's.

Progressives need to take back the center and make this country more humane.

[John_H]

23. You're forgetting a major reason why Kerry CAN'T talk like LBJ

Keep in mind that LBJ had and Humphry would have had veto-proof majorities in congress. They actually could have tried to pass programs to end poverty. How on earth could Kerry ever promise that with Frist and De Lay in charge of congress?

Vis a vis LBJ's legacy: Even Caro, who always asumes the worst of LBJ, admits that without Viet Nam, his presidency would have often been mentioned in the same sentence with Lincoln's and FDR's, that would have been rememberd as carrying on the work that they began.

[Selwynn]

27. You were not familiar with The Great Society?

[Feanorcurufinwe]

29. How old are you?

Just wondering.

[roguevalley]

35. I grew up with them and combined with MLK, that was the time to be alive

and hear good stuff.

[Sugarbleus]

78. You are sooooooo right...it was an EXCITING and hopeful time.

[resist]

38. Thank the DLC

Me, too. I think thats why I get so frustrated by the Third Way dems who have taken over the party with their moderating gibberish. You just long for a speech that makes your heart sing. Yes, Virginia, once upon a time the democratic party was a progressive party, and not the RNC in sheeps clothing. Sad, huh?

[Cleita]

39. LBJ and Humphrey couldn't really bring their ideas

to fruition with a happy, white middle class. That white middle class couldn't understand that an underclass needed help. I still run into this BS, the "you work really hard to get what you need and want" definition of white America. Of course this is why we are where we are today.

[HarveyBriggs]

43. LBJ suffered from "Texas Disorder"

Common to men from Texas who reach the Presidency by dubious means, LBJ felt compelled to send soldiers to their deaths in a war based on a lie.

Yes, the War on Poverty would have been a great thing, but it is obscured (and righfully so IMHO) by a thing called The War in Vietnam. Killed 50,000 poor people -- some war on poverty.

Now comes another Texan, with the same disease.

And in a very haunting manner, both Rummy and McNamara coif themselves the same way.

I suppose death has its own haberdasher.

Harvey Briggs

[onecitizen]

45. You must be young.........

but I won't hold that against you. :-)

LBJ would surprise someone just by looking at him. But we can thank LBJ for doing the right thing on a few issues. Civil rights first of all. Medicare for another. Yes, he was liberal and it wasn't a dirty word. It shouldn't be a dirty word now.

[Bo]

49. yes,the best tv

that was a time when we ment something to one another, we counted as humans, not a dollar sighn. I saw the kennedy Thank you as well to lbj in 60, sheer brilliance.

[elperromagico]

50. Humphrey's speech beat LBJ's in a walk.

Doris Kearns Goodwin has said that LBJ would rap his fingers impatiently whenever Humphrey was talking. I can see why.

[Tommythegun]

52. Shades of a different country...

One that never saw stagflation or gas crunches.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. "Let's nail that coonskin to the wall." "I will not accept.."

LBJ to the troops in Vietnam. And, next, to the people of America who were going to throw his sorry ass out.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

63. LBJ was yesterday's Zell Miller....might as well have been a GOPer....

The only reason LBJ pushed Civil Rights through Congress was to try to keep the lid on the growing discontent of Blacks that were dying in disproportionate numbers in Vietnam. Additionally, Civil Rights was JFK's program originally, but LBJ had no problems taking credit for it.

As far as Vietnam goes, when LBJ signed NSAM 273 on November 26, 1963, he was effectively escalating that war.

<http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM273.html>

NSAM 273 replaced NSAM 263, which had been signed by JFK on October 12, 1963. This NSAM was the beginning of JFK's plan for the withdrawal of all U. S. troops from Vietnam.

<http://www.jfklancer.com/NSAM263.html>

And yes, I was around when LBJ was president...my observations of the man are first-hand, except for information revealed over the last 15 years or so.

[JohnKleeb]

67. I hear that LBJ pushed the great society and that was his idea not Kennedy

[Media_Lies_Daily]

69. Nope. That was JFK's concept.

[JohnKleeb]

70. didnt know that

[lastliberalintexas]

79. You didn't know it

because it's not true. Do a little research into LBJ, and pay particular attention to the policies advocated/pushed/introduced by LBJ when he was in Congress. On domestic issues, LBJ was *far* to the left of the Kennedys.

And on foreign policy issues, they were all hawks. The Red Scare ruled the day, ya know. on edit- Not that I'm defending them as hawsk, just acknowledging that it was unfortunately so.

[FredScuttle]

74. New Frontier = JFK

Great Society = LBJ

[FredScuttle]

75. SNARF!

Let me see if I'm understanding you....LBJ signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the most important piece of civil rights legislation in our nation's history because too many blacks were dying in Vietnam? You do realize, of course, that LBJ signed the bill in July 1964, a full month before the Gulf of Tonkin incident and passage of the resolution authorizing LBJ to wage war on North Vietnam without a formal Declaration of War from Congress, right? Or that the first combat troops didn't set foot in country until 1965?

Also, how do you explain LBJ's integral role in the passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Act? Was he worried about all the blacks that were going to die the next decade?

There's plenty to bash LBJ about...recognize what a towering figure this man was in achieving legislative miracles for blacks and other minorities in the 20th century.

[Sugarbleus]

77. Yes, that is why I keep posting threads about those issues...I

lived through those times when our leaders actually, IN PUBLIC, talked about this, pursued these policies. It all of a sudden took a right hand turn and things just spiraled out of control ever since.

Like Peter, Paul, & Mary sang yesterday.......'How many years must a man wait......'