Nixon Was a Terrible Human Being

[jbg]

This started as a response to a post by BC 2004 on this thread (link). Since it had little to do with Canadian politics, I opened this thread.

I submit that it is not possible to be "balanced" about Nixon. I will not equate Nixon with Hitler, but it is hard to find mitigation for his lesser brand of evil and opportunism. Even his "accomplisments" were actually negative.

No, history will be kinder to Nixon and the country is actually stronger, damage or not. In any event, he was spot on about Trudeau, and others apparently agreed. We know of Dick Nixon's foibles....they are not carefully hidden like PM Trudeau's.

And Nixon's accomplishments were:

1. Wage and price controls;
   
2. Hyperinflation;
   
3. Bargain wheat sales to the USSR?;
   
4. A totally unnecessary rapproachmen with Communist China and the USSR;
   
5. Highly divisive campaign tactics in the 1970 mid-term elections and the 1972 campaigns;
   
6. Watergate;
   
7. Congressional actions taking advantage of weakness, such as:
   1. 
      War Powers Act;
      
   2. Chaotic Congressional methods of assigning Committee chairs;
      
   3. A dysfunctional budget process which President can no longer ameliorate; and
      
   4. Total loss of trust by people in goodness of government.
      

[*]Two recessions, both accompanied by inflation.

Off topic, but surely you have a more balanced understanding of Nixon's presidency. For instance, do you know when the USA last had a real budget surplus (1969 - Nixon/Johnson)?

That "surplus" was the result of the 1968 (or maybe 1967) income tax surcharge, which expired by its own terms (or maybe, I forget, Nixon had it repealed) in FY 1970. Also, we had surpluses at end of Clinton era.

Nixon ran away with the '72 election....the "goodness" of government ranks equally with the Tooth Fairy.

I campaigned for McGovern along with my father in that race. That being said, the McGovern candidacy was a fluke. Basically, others in the race, i.e. Humphrey, Muskie, Scoop Jackson had long passed their "best before" dates. Muskie broke down crying in the New Hampshire snow after his wife was falsely accused of penning a letter using a derogatory term for Canadians. McGovern was way to the left in the US political spectrum, and experience shows that only centrist to conservative Democrats ever win. Carter had to dress up as one, Clinton was one, JFK either dressed up as or was one, FDR had a certain patrician background that no one worried that he was a class warrior (ditto Woodrow Wilson), and the others (Grover Cleveland and further back) politicked in a different era, where left/right was not part of the debate. Leftist and/or populist Democrats have always imploded. Examples are William Jennings Bryan (populist), Al Smith (too urban, suspected of being leftist, and worst in those days, Catholic), Adlai Stevenson, Carter (his leftist tendencies known by re-election race), Mondale, Dukakis, Gore and Kerry.

Future presidents routinely asked Nixon for advice on foreign affairs. I wonder if PM Trudeau enjoyed the same?

Probably Chretien did. Remember from whence Chretien came, and advice was probably on other issues too.

BC 2004, I went to the trouble of reading Nixon's autobiography, in order to gain a more sympathetic view of him. I came away angrier. He conceded many of the worst things people thought of him, and added some I didn't know.

[M.Dancer]

I've read a few books by Nixon. He may have been a dishonet prick but when it came to international relations, he was a master.

His impact is so great, in the future , a race of super logical beings will use Nixon in a proverb.

"Only Nixon could go to China"

[bush_cheney2004]

This started as a response to a post by BC 2004 on this thread (link). Since it had little to do with Canadian politics, I opened this thread.

True... I responded on topic with a Nixonian epressed opinion about PM Trudeau. This sent you off into the weeds to rail against President Nixon, still licking wounds from '72.

I submit that it is not possible to be "balanced" about Nixon. I will not equate Nixon with Hitler, but it is hard to find mitigation for his lesser brand of evil and opportunism. Even his "accomplisments" were actually negative.

And I submit that your bias and admitted alegiance to McGovern leads to an obvious myopia. Nixon is a towering figure in American politics despite his failures and foibles, so much was his impact. From Pakistan to the Moon, from the Democrat's Vietnam (the real thing) to complete overhaul of US strategic forces, from the gold standard to EPA. No one says Nixon was a lovable human being, but from his humble beginnings as a Quaker he rose to fight, lose, and fight again.

I am a sucker for such lovable "pricks", my current favorite being Vice President Cheney.

[jbg]

I've read a few books by Nixon. He may have been a dishonet prick but when it came to international relations, he was a master."Only Nixon could go to China"

He was a master at giving away. It's easy to reach an "agreement" when you have something to give and your negotiating partner has something to take. It's akin to the business that a gas station would do selling fuel at $0.40 CDN per litre. They'd do lots of business but go broke in the process.

The Chinese rapproachment had one purpose only; to make Nixon a near-G-d figure heading into the 1972 campaign. China has done nothing to help American interests since helping Nixon get re-elected.

True... I responded on topic with a Nixonian epressed opinion about PM Trudeau. This sent you off into the weeds to rail against President Nixon, still licking wounds from '72. And I submit that your bias and admitted alegiance to McGovern leads to an obvious myopia.

I am hardly "still licking wounds from '72". Actually, my starry-eyed 15 year old belief in McGovern took a steep plunge from the Eagleton debacle (link). I wrote:

The excerpts from the New York Times obituary (link) show the depravity of these people. This sorry episode is part of what started my path away from believing that liberals are necessarily good people. I had thought they really believed in love, help and compassion before that. I was 15 at time, and had bought into the "peace, love and helping hand" myth the liberals and Democrats presented themselves as adhering to. I believed strongly then, and still do believe, that people are capable of making something of themselves after facing obstacles. To have unceremoniously tossed such a person off the ticket showed a total lack of spine and leadership we see all too often.

My feelings on the rights of people who have undergone treatment to be given the benefit of the doubt is deeply personal, and is at the core of my personal and religious beliefs in people taking charge of their destiny, in their ability to improve and make something of themselves. If anyone wants details on my feelings, my PM, e-mail and MSN are often open.

These are hardly the statements of someone who idealizes McGovern and McGovernites.

Nixon is a towering figure in American politics despite his failures and foibles, so much was his impact. From Pakistan to the Moon, from the Democrat's Vietnam (the real thing) to complete overhaul of US strategic forces, from the gold standard to EPA. No one says Nixon was a lovable human being, but from his humble beginnings as a Quaker he rose to fight, lose, and fight again.

I am a sucker for such lovable "pricks", my current favorite being Vice President Cheney.

I happen to like Cheney, and don't find him to be, in the least, Nixonian. Let's look at the items you listed:

1. Pakistan - What did the "tilt" in favor of Pakistan accomplish? Did the Muslim community love us for siding with the people who were butchering fellow Muslims in Bangladesh? Would you now want to live in Pakistan?;
   
2. Moon - Landing was exactly six months into his term. That had been in the works for about 8 years by then, if not longer. If longer, I don't think anything he did as Vice-President helped us get to the moon;
   
3. Viet Nam - A barely honorable surrender dressed up, for the benefit of the 1972 election, as peace;
   
4. Overhaul of US Strategic forces - Fill me in. I must have missed it;
   
5. Gold standard - Departing from it, in order to reflate in time for 1972 election, unleashed the first peacetime double-digit inflation in US history;
   
6. EPA - Probably a necessary idea, forced on him by almost unanimous public opinion. It has now outlived its usefulness;
   
7. Humble beginnings as Quaker - used his accomplishments to smash and destroy rather than build.
   

[gc1765]

I happen to like Cheney...

Please tell me this is another example of your sarcasm

[bush_cheney2004]

Let's look at the items you listed:

[*]Pakistan - What did the "tilt" in favor of Pakistan accomplish? Did the Muslim community love us for siding with the people who were butchering fellow Muslims in Bangladesh? Would you now want to live in Pakistan?;

Yes.....I work with Pakistanis every day. They still love the USS Enterprise.

[*]Moon - Landing was exactly six months into his term. That had been in the works for about 8 years by then, if not longer. If longer, I don't think anything he did as Vice-President helped us get to the moon;

Several more after that, not to mention JPL's greatest Grand Tour missions. Thanks Dick!

[*]Viet Nam - A barely honorable surrender dressed up, for the benefit of the 1972 election, as peace;

Screw "peace"....it sure tasted a loot better than what McGovern was peddling.

[*]Overhaul of US Strategic forces - Fill me in. I must have missed it;

See "SIOP" and NSDMs....the rest is classified...sorry..I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you.

[*]Gold standard - Departing from it, in order to reflate in time for 1972 election, unleashed the first peacetime double-digit inflation in US history;

A stroke of brilliance...much better than Bretton-Woods.

[*]EPA - Probably a necessary idea, forced on him by almost unanimous public opinion. It has now outlived its usefulness;

But the tree huggers would weep. Go Snail Darter!!!

[*]Humble beginnings as Quaker - used his accomplishments to smash and destroy rather than build.

Therein lies his greatness.

Edited September 8, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

Please tell me this is another example of your sarcasm

Not in the least. And what sarcasm?

[jbg]

1. Yes.....I work with Pakistanis every day. They still love the USS Enterprise. -

   But you didn't work with the dictator that yielded after the Bangladesh debacle to Zulkifer Ali Bhutto (sp);
   

2. Several more after that, not to mention JPL's greatest Grand Tour missions. Thanks Dick!

   - ??????
   

3. Screw "peace"....it sure tasted a loot better than what McGovern was peddling

   - I gave my opinions, amply, on McGovern. I've changed my mind on that. Need a 50 year old believe the same way he did when he was 15? That's called stupidity or refusal to learn in many cases. I may be stupid but I'm not unwilling to learn;
   

4. See "SIOP" and NSDMs....the rest is classified...sorry..I could tell you, but then I would have to kill you

   - You'd have to find me first;
   

5. A stroke of brilliance...much better than Bretton-Woods

   - In what way?The West had unparelleed prosperity under Bretton Woods;
   

6. But the tree huggers would weep. Go Snail Darter!!!

   - I think we agree here;
   

7. Therein lies his greatness

   - Needless destruction of opponents (link) is still unwarranted. He left behind ruined people, not merely election losers.
   

Edited September 8, 2007 by jbg

[gc1765]

And what sarcasm?

exactly

[bush_cheney2004]

1. But you didn't work with the dictator that yielded after the Bangladesh debacle to Zulkifer Ali Bhutto (sp);
   
2. - ??????
   
3. - I gave my opinions, amply, on McGovern. I've changed my mind on that. Need a 50 year old believe the same way he did when he was 15? That's called stupidity or refusal to learn in many cases. I may be stupid but I'm not unwilling to learn;
   
4. - You'd have to find me first;
   
5. - In what way?The West had unparelleed prosperity under Bretton Woods;
   
6. - I think we agree here;
   
7. - Needless destruction of opponents (link) is still unwarranted. He left behind ruined people, not merely election losers.
   

Say what? More Americans died or were maimed by war during Lincoln's presidency....terrible human too?

[jbg]

Say what? More Americans died or were maimed by war during Lincoln's presidency....terrible human too?

I am not particularly against the Vietnam war. I was only against it to the extent that I have never believed in "limited war" Either you're fighting to win or not fighting. Occupation, i.e. the Afghanistan or Iraq operation are different.

[bush_cheney2004]

I am not particularly against the Vietnam war. I was only against it to the extent that I have never believed in "limited war" Either you're fighting to win or not fighting. Occupation, i.e. the Afghanistan or Iraq operation are different.

Not any different than over 100 years of American power projection and gunboat diplomacy around the world. Presidents should not leave home without Master Card and a Big Stick.

http://navysite.de/cvn/cvn71.jpg

Edited September 8, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[August1991]

Nixon? Where to start.

I leafed through Conrad Black's book in the bookstore the other day and I kinda liked what I read. Black writes well even if he is verbose and pompous at times. I think I'll read it though, as well as Mulroney's memoirs. I'm a sucker for political (auto)biographies. I read Six Crises.

I will not equate Nixon with Hitler, but it is hard to find mitigation for his lesser brand of evil and opportunism. Even his "accomplisments" were actually negative.

....

I campaigned for McGovern along with my father in that race.

In the very good movie Primary Colors where John Travolta does a very good Bill Clinton, the Kathy Bates character talks about meeting Bill & Hillary in 1972. "We were all so young and naive and f**k, we actually thought McGovern would win!"

McGovern is how youngsters imagine politics to be. Nixon is how politics are.

Nixon, when he released his tapes, made a reference to the "political horse-trading that goes on to get a vital bill through congress" in his speech to the public. He was lamely trying to excuse what he'd said. Democratic politics is the art of the possible. And Nixon was an artist of pragmatism. And yet, he did alot of good.

Like any human being who has lead a life worth living, Nixon was contradictory. Here's one contradiction to ponder. Nixon pursued the Vietnam War, and conducted his foreign policy, with a primary objective. He wanted to ensure that the US would maintain its reputation abroad. He wanted to maintain America's credibility with foreigners. And yet, Nixon destroyed his own credibility with Americans.

Nixon was born dirt poor. Maybe for this reason, he understood Khrushchev and the Soviets better than the Ivy League, State Department preppies. I don't know.

Along these lines, here's another thought, an experiment that I've conducted in my mind sometimes. The experiment certainly applies to Nixon's efforts, later in life, to become an elder statesman, a man of the world.

If Nixon had met Hitler, what would Nixon have thought? The general impression of most politicians at the time was that Hitler was a good leader of Germany. Here's what Mackenzie King said after meeting Hitler in 1937:

King was impressed by Hitler. He wrote, "My sizing up of the man as I sat and talked with him was that he is really one who truly loves his fellow-men, and his country, and would make any sacrifice for their good." (Diary, June 29, 1937) Hitler appeared to be "a man of deep sincerity and a genuine patriot." (Diary, June 29, 1937) King saw similarities between himself and Hitler, writing, "As I talked with him, I could not but think of Joan of Arc. He is distinctly a mystic .... He is a teetotaller and also a vegetarian; is unmarried, abstemist in all his habits and ways." (Diary, June 29, 1937)

Link

Churchill, born into a family unlike Nixon's, saw Hitler for what he was from the very start. I wonder if Nixon would have done the same.

Edited September 9, 2007 by August1991

[jbg]

Like any human being who has lead a life worth living, Nixon was contradictory. Here's one contradiction to ponder. Nixon pursued the Vietnam War, and conducted his foreign policy, with a primary objective. He wanted to ensure that the US would maintain its reputation abroad. He wanted to maintain America's credibility with foreigners. And yet, Nixon destroyed his own credibility with Americans.

And what did Nixon receive for the United States in exchange for his craven giveaways to the USSR and PRC?

[bush_cheney2004]

And what did Nixon receive for the United States in exchange for his craven giveaways to the USSR and PRC?

Nixon received several geopolitical things that the American public never inderstood at the time. These linkages (wheat was only one concession) gave us SALT I with US MIRVs, Cienfuegos subs settled without a JFK style world crisis, pressure on North Vietnam in Paris, Jewish immigration from the FSU, Mideast concessions, etc., etc.

Bilateral trade with China for wheat and cotton led to increased trade and markets for US surpluses. The rest, as they say, is history.

August1991 is correct....when examining Nixon and his presidency, think reality...not fantasy.

Edited September 9, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

Nixon received several geopolitical things that the American public never inderstood at the time. These linkages (wheat was only one concession) gave us SALT I with US MIRVs, Cienfuegos subs settled without a JFK style world crisis, pressure on North Vietnam in Paris, Jewish immigration from the FSU, Mideast concessions, etc., etc.

Bilateral trade with China for wheat and cotton led to increased trade and markets for US surpluses. The rest, as they say,

1. SALT I - Allowed USSR to reach nuclear parity with US. Prior to that they were far behind;
   
2. Cienfuegos - To be honest I don't remember much about that and I'm not about to become a google or wikipedia-fueled expert;
   
3. Pressure on North Vietnam in Paris - To what end, a staggered surrender, without peace for South Viet Nam or Cambodia, and without accounting for POW's and MIA's?
   
4. Jewish immigration from the FSU - Yes, from May 1972 to September 1973. The Soviets reneged with the start of the 1973 war, from what I recall;
   
5. Mideast concessions - Which ones? The fact that Sadat booted the Soviets out when they proved to meddlesome? Or a green light to their mischief that led to the Yom Kippur War?
   

I contend that we got little and gave much as a result of Nixon's electioneering in Moscow and Peking (its correct name).

[sharkman]

Personally I've never cared enough to study his legacy to figure out if he was as bad as advertised, but your list is indeed damning. It supports my theory regarding politicians, that power corrupts. History sure would have been different though if deepthroat hadn't blabbed.

[bush_cheney2004]

I contend that we got little and gave much as a result of Nixon's electioneering in Moscow and Peking (its correct name).

So what? Would you have preferred nuclear fried Moscow or Washington D.C.?

You have no idea (by your own admission) what was at stake for all US interests, and we were hardly put out because of wheat and cotton deals. Nixon set the stage for SS20 deployments and counterforce spending, which ultimately led to Reagan's challenge in Europe with GLCMs and Pershing IIs.....which broke the Soviet Union's back.

The Soviets did not have "parity" after SALT I, because their CEPs sucked while we could most definitely hit hardened targets with an order of magnitude better accuracy. I know this because it was my job to do it.

US foreign policy during the Cold War was a continuum, and nobody gives a rat's ass about bushels of wheat now.

Edited September 10, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

Personally I've never cared enough to study his legacy to figure out if he was as bad as advertised, but your list is indeed damning.

Many "conservatives" forget that Nixon, though a Republican, was hardly conservative. As a Congressman, his voting record was similar to Helen Gahagan Douglas', who he trashed as a "pink lady" during Nixon's 1950 Senate campaign (or maybe 1948, I'm not sure). As President, he undertook the following "liberal" actions:

1. Rapproachment and de factor recognition of Communist China;
   
2. Presided over the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency;
   
3. Presided over the formation of the Occupational Health and Safety Administration;
   
4. Imposed wage and price controls;
   
5. Jawboned the Federal Reserve into an irresponsible expansion of the money supply;
   
6. Devalued the dollar and ultimately took the country off what remained of the gold standard; and
   
7. Exited Viet Nam in largey the manner demanded by antiwar protesters
   

. His "conservative" accomplishments consisted of:

1. Rearming Israel during 1973 war (but support was bipartisan on that one;
   
2. Supreme Court appointments of Burger and Rehnquist (he also appointed reputed "moderates" Lewis Powell and Harry Blackmun and the latter turned out to be surprisingly liberal);
   
3. Attempted infiltration of Democratic Party headquarters;
   
4. Infiltration of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrists's office;
   
5. Giving a conservative Second Inaugural Address; and
   
6. Siccing Vice President Agnew (who later resigned after pleading no contest to accepting construction bribes as Maryland governer) on the media (a job Harper did far more ably in Canada for similar reasons)
   

Which actions do you think predominated as far as what he left behind?

It supports my theory regarding politicians, that power corrupts. History sure would have been different though if deepthroat hadn't blabbed.

Nixon's personality was highly self-destructive. He would have imploded from some high-wire act at some point. Nixon could not help himself, given his deep and abiding paranoia.

[sunsettommy]

Nixon received several geopolitical things that the American public never inderstood at the time. These linkages (wheat was only one concession) gave us SALT I with US MIRVs, Cienfuegos subs settled without a JFK style world crisis, pressure on North Vietnam in Paris, Jewish immigration from the FSU, Mideast concessions, etc., etc.

Bilateral trade with China for wheat and cotton led to increased trade and markets for US surpluses. The rest, as they say, is history.

August1991 is correct....when examining Nixon and his presidency, think reality...not fantasy.

The Russians never lived up to those treaties.

That is a reality you need to remember.

[bush_cheney2004]

The Russians never lived up to those treaties.

That is a reality you need to remember.

Doesn't matter....the US didn't "live up" to NAFTA either according to Canada. It's not how you play the game, but whether you win or lose. Nixon and Kissinger helped to set the stage for a BIG win. The alternative was Jimmy Carter....yuk-yuk!

Edited September 10, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

So what? Would you have preferred nuclear fried Moscow or Washington D.C.?

Better red than dead eh?

[bush_cheney2004]

Better red than dead eh?

Neither red or dead....while you were goofing on McGovern, Nixon and Kissinger were doing their thing. The voters apparently agreed. Sorry, but your disapproval can't change that. The two subsequent admins (Ford/Carter) couldn't hold Nixon's jockstrap.

[jbg]

Neither red or dead....while you were goofing on McGovern, Nixon and Kissinger were doing their thing. The voters apparently agreed. Sorry, but your disapproval can't change that. The two subsequent admins (Ford/Carter) couldn't hold Nixon's jockstrap.

And Nixon couldn't hold the jockstrap of the true greats in this game; Reagan and Bush Jr. Edited September 10, 2007 by jbg

[bush_cheney2004]

And Nixon couldn't hold the jockstrap of the true greats in this game; Reagan and Bush Jr.

Wrong again....remember who invented the "southern strategy"? It was Atwater...executed by Nixon and Agnew...imitated by Reagan and Bush. Rove learned from the best.