I’m with ya. In this euphemism happy country no one is ever (or rarely, anyway) “thrown out of office”, even if effectively he is thrown out of office. They always “resign”, to “spend more time with the family”. CEOs and politicians. So, to a humorless and clueless pedant, Nixon “resigned”, when in fact, right or wrong, justifiably or not, he was hounded out of office.
“In this euphemism happy country no one is ever (or rarely, anyway) ‘thrown out of office’, even if effectively he is thrown out of office. They always ‘resign’, to ‘spend more time with the family’. CEOs and politicians.”
There’s more wrong with these statements that can be efficiently addressed, but suffice to say that the very reason so many people take the option of resigning is that there is, in fact, a huge difference between it and being forced out. For whatever reason—didn’t want his name dragged through the mud, didn’t want to continue the long national nightmare, etc.—Nixon chose resignation over impeachment and trial for a reason. A very good reason. Don’t rob him of that noble act (he had so few).
“So, to a humorless and clueless pedant, Nixon ‘resigned,’ when in fact, right or wrong, justifiably or not, he was hounded out of office.”
Notice, if you will, that the description has changed from the definite “thrown out” to the milder “hounded out.” Consciousness on your part of the weakness of the thrown out argument, I presume.