POLL: Bush vs. Nixon

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-03-29 10:52pm

So how does Bush really compare with the to-date low point in American presidential history, Richard Milhous Nixon? Not as bad, as bad, or worse?

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-03-29 10:57pm

I say they`re equaly bad,Nixon lied about what he done and Bush lied when he claimed he wanted to freed the Iraqi people,when in fact he only wanted to free the Iraqi oil.

Post by **Vympel** » 2004-03-29 10:58pm

I'd say they're as bad as each other.

Cornelius · Post by **Cornelius** » 2004-03-30 12:19am

Why are they bad? Subjectively they believe they are in the moral right. Anyone who supports subjectivism cannot really say anything about them

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-03-30 12:53am

Cornelius wrote:Why are they bad? Subjectively they believe they are in the moral right. Anyone who supports subjectivism cannot really say anything about them

That makes no sense. There is no question that people can believe they're doing good while in fact they're doing great evil.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-03-30 12:56am

Cornelius wrote:Why are they bad? Subjectively they believe they are in the moral right. Anyone who supports subjectivism cannot really say anything about them

That's pure sophistry, not to mention a total red herring and evasion of the point. And you're a moron.

Anyway...
I don't think Bush is as bad as Nixon quite yet. You've got the same dishonesty and willingness to resort to dirty tricks, but he hasn't fired the attorney general for refusing to play ball or engaged in any high-level coverups (that we know of). I think it may just be a matter of time, though, the administration is looking worse all the time.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2004-03-30 01:19am

Bush is a fundamentalist clown, but Nixon was a fucking first degree one-size-fits-all, Washington-knows-best statist. On the basis of domestic policy alone, Nixon is worse.

Crown · Post by **Crown** » 2004-03-30 04:56am

Pablo Sanchez wrote:That's pure sophistry, not to mention a total red herring and evasion of the point. And you're a moron.

And this is why I love Pablo, he doesn't leave people any wiggle room.

Don't clutter up the thread with SPAM, consarn it!
~Pablo

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-03-30 05:59am

RedImperator wrote:Bush is a fundamentalist clown, but Nixon was a fucking first degree one-size-fits-all, Washington-knows-best statist. On the basis of domestic policy alone, Nixon is worse.

Oh really? And Nixon created a Department of Homeland Security when exactly...?

PrinceofLowLight · Post by **PrinceofLowLight** » 2004-03-30 08:50pm

I like more things about Nixon than I like about Bush.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-03-30 09:17pm

Bush is far worse, simply because of the large amount of people who are now dead due to his orders.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-03-30 09:27pm

Seggybop wrote:Bush is far worse, simply because of the large amount of people who are now dead due to his orders.

Nixon authorized increased bombings of North Vietnam and Cambodia. The bombing of North Vietnam killed an unknown number of people and at best prolonged the war for three years. The bombing of Cambodia at best killed many people with dubious or no connections to the war, and at worst it gave the Khmer Rouge a massive increase in credibility and indirectly led to the massacre of millions.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-03-30 09:33pm

The Vietnam War was already going on, whether or not so many people would continue to be killed in it if he wasn't in charge can't be determined. But it's pretty clear that without Bush being in now there would be no Iraq war and none of the thousands of deaths it caused.

Straha · Post by **Straha** » 2004-03-30 09:37pm

Nixon was not a bad president. What happened with him was that he got remembered for one thing, and not for the whole of his relatively good admnistration. Much like some of the media was/is trying to do to Clinton and Monica.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-03-30 09:40pm

Seggybop wrote:The Vietnam War was already going on, whether or not so many people would continue to be killed in it if he wasn't in charge can't be determined.

A less aggressive and egoistic president probably would have written off South Vietnam in 1972 instead of trying to keep the corpse alive.

You also did not address the Cambodian issue, which in and of itself defeats Bush's kill count and has the added bonus of being perpetrated mainly against innocents and being a war crime.

But it's pretty clear that without Bush being in now there would be no Iraq war and none of the thousands of deaths it caused.

True.

Straha:
It is true that Nixon was not a bad president except for one or two things. But the one or two bad things that he did were very bad and tend to weigh heavily on people's perception of him.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-03-30 09:59pm

You also did not address the Cambodian issue, which in and of itself defeats Bush's kill count and has the added bonus of being perpetrated mainly against innocents and being a war crime.

Although the entire Cambodian incursion deal was a horrific blunder, its supposed aim was to support the ongoing SE Asia war. It was a really stupid thing to do, but it was at least related to the war that was already going on, as opposed to the useless Iraq fight.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-03-30 10:02pm

Straha wrote:Nixon was not a bad president. What happened with him was that he got remembered for one thing, and not for the whole of his relatively good admnistration. Much like some of the media was/is trying to do to Clinton and Monica.

Ahem... A few Nixon quotes that really get to me.

"I'd rather use the nuclear bomb...Does that bother you? I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christ's sake." [to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on escalating the Vietnam War]

"Look at the Justice Department, it's full of Jews...The lawyers in government are damn Jews."

"You're so goddamned concerned about the civilians, and I don't give a damn." [to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on civilian casualties in Vietnam]

As for the vote? I dunno, I'd say Bush and Nixon are about the same. If not, then Bush is worse.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-03-30 10:04pm

Oops, forgot one:

"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2004-03-30 10:34pm

Fuck, when you're berating Kissinger for being too concerned about civilian casualties, that should be a clue that you're fucking wacko.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2004-03-30 10:46pm

The decision to bomb Cambodia was made on the grounds that it was a major route of unharassed logistical support for the Viet Cong. It wasn't an incorrect assessment, either.

Nixon can be blamed for not getting out - in fact, we lost tens of thousands of men because of it -, but you must remember that the American people by and large supported "peace with honor." Today, we remember anti-war protestors. They were loud, but most Americans thought we should go the route Nixon wanted in Southeast Asia.

Andrew J. · Post by **Andrew J.** » 2004-03-30 10:51pm

"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

Wow. Just...wow. Didn't he ever hear the principle of the rule of law?

Anyway, Bush vs. Nixon. Stupid and well-meaning versus smart and evil...I'll go with Bush being worse. I'd rather have a tricky, conniving bastard in charge than a soft-hearted simpleton.

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2004-03-30 11:00pm

Andrew J. wrote:
"When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

Wow. Just...wow. Didn't he ever hear the principle of the rule of law?

Anyway, Bush vs. Nixon. Stupid and well-meaning versus smart and evil...I'll go with Bush being worse. I'd rather have a tricky, conniving bastard in charge than a soft-hearted simpleton.

Jeah. same here. Further more, i'd rather have an evil smart bastard than a stupid idoitic fundie fucktard.

Pablo Sanchez · Post by **Pablo Sanchez** » 2004-03-30 11:11pm

Axis Kast wrote:The decision to bomb Cambodia was made on the grounds that it was a major route of unharassed logistical support for the Viet Cong. It wasn't an incorrect assessment, either.

That was the justification at the time. But the fact and reality is that
many innocent civilians died
the bombing was an illegal attack upon a sovereign nation
and in any case traffic along the Ho Chi Minh trail was not significantly disrupted.

So in summary, Nixon killed thousands of innocent people in the illegal pursuit of a dubious objective which he failed to achieve. Hooray.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2004-03-31 12:32am

Ma Deuce wrote:
Straha wrote:Nixon was not a bad president. What happened with him was that he got remembered for one thing, and not for the whole of his relatively good admnistration. Much like some of the media was/is trying to do to Clinton and Monica.
Ahem... A few Nixon quotes that really get to me.

"I'd rather use the nuclear bomb...Does that bother you? I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christ's sake." [to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on escalating the Vietnam War]

"Look at the Justice Department, it's full of Jews...The lawyers in government are damn Jews."

"You're so goddamned concerned about the civilians, and I don't give a damn." [to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on civilian casualties in Vietnam]
As for the vote? I dunno, I'd say Bush and Nixon are about the same. If not, then Bush is worse.

You provide all that and still vote for Bush being worse? *Cocks an eyebrow, Spock style.*

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-03-31 12:51am

Rogue 9 wrote:You provide all that and still vote for Bush being worse? *Cocks an eyebrow, Spock style.*

That was actually in response to Straha's comment that Nixon "was not a bad president"...

But yes I believe that overall Bush is probably worse, and for the same reason given by Andrew. Bumbling idiots can often be more dangerous intelligent, malicious plotters. Look at Kreuchev's moronic decision to put nukes in Cuba, an act which almost resulted in a nuclear war. I doubt Stalin, for all his malevolence, would have been so stupid as to try something like that...

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

POLL: Bush vs. Nixon

How bad?

POLL: Bush vs. Nixon