|
Edited on Mon Nov-12-12 11:16 AM by No Elephants
And then both parties eventually put the hoods out of sight.
As for Eisenhower, he is far from the man or the President today's Democrats seem to assume he was, when they mention him wistfully.
"See Earl, these people are not bad people. They just don't want their little girls sitting next to some big gorilla." (Eisenhower to Chief Justice Earl Warren, who presided over the Brown v. Bd of Ed. school integration court, at a social gathering of Southerners, as reported in Earl Warren's autobiography.)
Eisenhower also called appointing Earl Warren to the Supreme Court the biggest mistake of his administration. And, he ignored the integration decision until a public outcry occurred, included Eleanor Roosevelt, then still vert popular with the American people, went to White House and begged him to intervene.
When Herbert Hoover wanted the veterans' bonus occupation ended, Generals MacArthur and Eisenhower obliged mercilessy.
When crazy McCarthy, in part as front man for J. Edgar and in part simply because he was indeed crazy, ran rampant over people's lives, reputations and careers and liberties, Eisenhower left the American people to their own devices, but protected himself and his circle by expanding Presidential Privilege to a dangerous degree.
He thought the sun rose and set on the likes of General Motors and Standard Oil.
Then, after a long career starting in West Point and ending with 8 years as President, during which he did nothing to reign in the MIC besides suck at its teat for all he was worth, he says we should be wary of it ON HIS VERY LAST DAY IN OFFICE? And then retires on his military pension and Presidential pension, also without ever doing a thing about the MIC?
Eisenhower would have been very at home with today's Republicans, or at least with the very worst of today's Republicans.
Goldwater, too, another one today's Democrats seem to see in their rear view mirrors with a halo around his "states' rights," McCarthy supporting head.
I apologize for the rant. I've just seen Democrats speak semi-longingly about one or both of those two just too many times.
But I digressed. Back to the subject:
The biggest trouble with today's Republicans, IMO, is that no other Party strongly opposes them and their ideas. So, you defeat Mourdock, who opposes choice, even in cases of rape, while Democrats demand Romney denounce him. But, it was Donnelly who defeated Mourdock. Donnelly, who opposes choice, but makes an exception for rape, and Democrats stay silent about anyone denouncing him.
And therein lies the rub: When the Democrat is anti-choice, there is no one to oppose him or her. So, Republicans who act like Democrats are, IMO, the real problem with Republicans today. If todays Democrats opposed today's Republicans the way that New Deal Democrats opposed Hoover Rerpublicans, we'd hold Congress forever, IMO.
I wish I could remember where I read it, but the statement is along the lines that politics is no longer about issues, but about tribalims. And, reading the posts of Democratic voters or of Republican voters bears that out.
Obamacare is a great example. The Heritage Foundation comes up with it. Hillary tries to get it adopted and fails. Romney adopts it and Gingrich praises him. Obama adopts it and Gingrich and Romney both attack him. Meanwhile, it's probably the crappiest national health plan on the planet, aside from what we had prior to Obamacare.
|