Posted on 06/08/2005 7:58:25 AM PDT by worldclass
I came to believe beyond any reasonable doubt that Nixon did not lie or direct a cover-up, and that if he had gone to trial in the Senate, he would have survived. Why did he then resign? Because he knew a Senate trial would take a year of the nation’s energy at a time when our economy was falling apart underneath him and we were at a point in the Cold War in which the Soviet Union seemed to be winning.
(Excerpt) Read more at wanniski.com ...
"Nixon never put his own political interests over the interests of our country. RATS (Clinton, Gore, Kerry, etc.) could take a lesson from that."
That is quite true as he proved after JFK stole Illinois yet Nixon didn't take it to court.
Nixon was a great President in many ways, esp. with regards to foreign policy. Like Bush, however, he was too much of a domestic spendthrift in some ways.
We should not give up hope yet.
1. Nixon was no conservative, so we have no need to stretch the truth to try to exonerate hime.
2. If Nixon did not behave unethically, there would have been nothing to leak. Therefore, Deep Throat, Watergate, and all the consequences thereof are the fault of Nixon, not Felt.
3. A lot people complain that Republicans are judged by a double standard. For example, Nixon vs. LBJ. This is true. We are. Rather than complain about it, we should welcome it. We should loudly proclaim that we wish to be judged by the highest possible ethical standards, because we are capable of meeting them. Not only it is good politics, but it makes for good government when we are in power.
4. Wanniski goes from Saddam's #1 man to Nixon's. WTF is he thinking?
I believe perceptions are shifting about Watergate. The press has desperately tried to revive the old anti-Vietnam peace marches against Bush, and they have failed. They have also tried to use the old propaganda techniques first used during the Watergate crisis (loud shouting on TV, huge headlines in the papers, the same lies repeated every day and incrementally expanded) and that has failed too.
It has failed with the chads, it has failed with Enron, it has failed with Bush's National Guard service, it has failed with Iraq, it has failed with Abu Ghraib, it has failed with Guantanamo, it has failed with weaponsgate.
Now they have gone back and revived Watergate itself, and that, too, is failing, right in front of them. At most, everyone is yawning.
When they pulled off Watergate, the press had credibility and the Democrats had credibility. Now, they are both known to be worn-out pimps and liars. Who cares what they say, other than their fellow ranters?
"Nixon was a great President in many ways, esp. with regards to foreign policy"
I disagree with you his foreign policy. Nixon
1. Sucked up to China, a policy for which we will pay for generations
2. Supported a dictator in Pakistan who killed at least 1 million Bangladeshi's.
Not sure what I should reply to someone who calls himself Rodney King.
Nevertheless, there is a difference between behaving unethically and breaking the law. Jude makes the point that Nixon did not lead a cover up which would be breaking the law.
By the way, if there wasn't anything to lead Woodstein would have not had a story....and when is the last time a propagandist...er, reporter...wanted a nice boring factual story?
"if there wasn't anything to lead Woodstein "
oops...leak, not lead
Well, you're right about China. I didn't think about that.
Those that I know on the left just would love to revivce the "good old days" of anti war peace marches. Most of them are living in a 1970 time warp although they talk about current issues.
OK, that's wierd.. I was actually replying to another thread and it showed up here.....
I think that a very simple perusal of the Watergate tapes leads to the conclusion of very unethical behavior. While it may be the case (although I don't beleive it) that Nixon is not technically guilty of the one charge, none of it would have come to light if not for rampant unethical behavior in the White House.
Looking back on Nixon, you are correct. He really was no conservative at all. But he was President before there was talk radio, Fox News, and the internet (particularly FreeRepublic). Being a rock-ribbed conservative made it pretty hard to win elections back then. Just ask Barry Goldwater. The best thing about Nixon was his staunch opposition to the spread of communism, both at home and abroad.
"JFK stole Illinois yet Nixon didn't take it to court."
True, though that would not have affected the outcome. Texas AND Illinois would have made a difference.
Felt was a power hungry vindictive weasel. Nixon had one heck of a mess. Is it possible that he just had enough and wanted out? For you future republican leaders there is one good lesson in this whole Watergate affair. When you take over an executive office move as quick as possible to get the top three people out of each management team if they are not in tune and are on your sheet music. Cover your six!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.