Do you think President Reagan should've been impeached for Iran-Contra? Why or why not?
I think by law he probably should've been--But I'm happy he wasn't. I don't think the country deserved another decade of political turbulence, tension and distrust like the 60s and 70s. The 80's was the decade of excess, and I think everyone tried to bury the trauma and tragedy of the past two decades in materialism and partying, and in that sense it was the healing decade that America needed--And for better or for worse in the long run, the '80s was a point of much needed stability, both politically and as far as that there were no major wars.

I don't America could've taken another Watergate-esque case; I mean JFK's assassination, Vietnam, Watergate and Jimmy Carter all shook America's trust in their government..I think having another huge scandal, especially with such a well liked and trusted leader, would've destroyed it completely. I think that was a possibly subconscious reason why the Democratic congress didn't go after Reagan--They too were probably just tired of the scandals and didn't want another and so let it go.

EDIT SORRY WRONG SECTION

The problem with impeaching Reagan is that in the subsequent Senate trial, nobody woulda pointed the finger towards him and he woulda been acquitted. 

The players in Iran-Contra did a pretty good job of "taking one for the team" and did not point the finger at Reagan.  So I am not sure that an impeachment proceeding would have produced a subsequent guilty verdict in the Senate, certainly not with a 2/3 majority vote rule.

Note that "impeachment" does not equate to "throw out of office".  Rather, the term refers to the charges having formally been placed (by the House of Representatives on a majority vote).  Once impeached, an official is then subjected to a trial by the Senate.  A conviction results only with a two-thirds majority vote of guilt.

I do believe that if Nixxon had been impeached, he WOULD have been convicted in the Senate.  He had so much cr@p going on that the conviction was almost certain, and he knew it.  Thus his resignation...

The problem with impeaching Reagan is that in the subsequent Senate trial, nobody woulda pointed the finger towards him and he woulda been acquitted. 

The players in Iran-Contra did a pretty good job of "taking one for the team" and did not point the finger at Reagan.  So I am not sure that an impeachment proceeding would have produced a subsequent guilty verdict in the Senate, certainly not with a 2/3 majority vote rule.

Note that "impeachment" does not equate to "throw out of office".  Rather, the term refers to the charges having formally been placed (by the House of Representatives on a majority vote).  Once impeached, an official is then subjected to a trial by the Senate.  A conviction results only with a two-thirds majority vote of guilt.

I do believe that if Nixxon had been impeached, he WOULD have been convicted in the Senate.  He had so much cr@p going on that the conviction was almost certain, and he knew it.  Thus his resignation...


Plus, Nixon during his Presidency (before Watergate) was incredibly antagonistic to both the media and Congress, and thus neither group really liked him nor would've cared much had he fell--In fact, I'm sure many in the media and some in congress were happy that they finally ''got'' him. Whereas Reagan was generally well liked by Congress and beloved by most of the media--He didn't have the personality issues, nor the paranoia of Nixon. It was easy to hate Nixon, and easy to love Reagan.

Yeah, he was a dirty rotten crook and a traitor, but LB is right.  There were sooooo many people in Congress with the same sh*t on their hands, nobody could ever get clean.  Our republic was already dead by 1984 thanks Ford saying, "That's okay, Dick!"  Not sure if there should be a comma in that sentence.
8-P

And Lyricboy, what's with the extra X in Nixon?

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/naughty.gif

And Lyricboy, what's with the extra X in Nixon?

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/naughty.gif


That was the fashion back in my high school days.  The two "x's" were drawn like swastikas at an angle.

That was the fashion back in my high school days.  The two "x's" were drawn like swastikas at an angle.


=/ Nixon wasn't like Hitler.

=/ Nixon wasn't like Hitler.


For one thing, Hitler had a mustache.  For another, if Hitler sent you to do a job and you effed it all up, like Watergate, you didn't live to tell about it (like John Dean on one side and G. Gordon on the other).

:o

The Iran Contra affair was more of a bush move.  I still shake my head in wonder that anyone would vote for him, then vote for his spawn. 

The Iran Contra affair was more of a bush move.  I still shake my head in wonder that anyone would vote for him, then vote for his spawn. 


Well, Bush #I ran against Michael Dukakis. After Big D did that ridiculous photo shoot wearing the big ear muffs, pretty much ANYbody woulda beat him in that election.

Both Reagan and Bush, should have been impeached!

>:(

Well, Bush #I ran against Michael Dukakis. After Big D did that ridiculous photo shoot wearing the big ear muffs, pretty much ANYbody woulda beat him in that election.


Dukakis wore a funny hat.  bush1...where do I start, the whole Panama thing, what a load of crap that was, and it was during his very short tenure in the CIA that "covert" drug smuggling by the CIA became an art, Iran Contra, and now he is working as a lobbyist for the Carlysle Group(they can call it anything they want, he is a lobbyist).  I'll take the funny hat.

Dukakis wore a funny hat.  bush1...where do I start, the whole Panama thing, what a load of crap that was, and it was during his very short tenure in the CIA that "covert" drug smuggling by the CIA became an art, Iran Contra, and now he is working as a lobbyist for the Carlysle Group(they can call it anything they want, he is a lobbyist).  I'll take the funny hat.


Apparently most of the American voters took the guy who had two distinguished flying crosses over the guy in the funny hat, though.

What's wrong with Bush #1 being a lobbyist or otherwise tryuing to influence legislation?  He's been out of office nearly 17 years now.  Most lobby/ethics type rules usually limit lobbying for 1 or 2 years after somebody leaves office.  Besides, Carter and Clinton do their fair share of of this too.

Dukakis wore a funny hat.  bush1...where do I start, the whole Panama thing, what a load of crap that was, and it was during his very short tenure in the CIA that "covert" drug smuggling by the CIA became an art, Iran Contra, and now he is working as a lobbyist for the Carlysle Group(they can call it anything they want, he is a lobbyist).  I'll take the funny hat.


The funny thing about that was Daddy Bush did the same photo op the week before in the same tank with the same funny hat...and he looked just about as menacing as the Duke!

I gotta admit, Daddy Bush can sure jump out an airplane, I just wish he'd do it without the parachute!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/nut.gif

The only thing I don't like about Bush1 is...he's part of the CIA. (Why do you think his son got Dick Cheney)?

But for Reagan...he didn't know that he was someday part of the blame for the War on Terrorism with Iran-Contra (That was funded by terrorists...or so I heard).

So I ask...was Reagan part of the blame for 9/11?

For one thing, Hitler had a mustache.  For another, if Hitler sent you to do a job and you effed it all up, like Watergate, you didn't live to tell about it (like John Dean on one side and G. Gordon on the other).

:o

B-b-but I was just pointing out the ways Nixon wasn't like Hitler, so why you gotta be frontin'?

Nixon wasn't interested in killing the Jews, he just didn't like them.  He was whatchmacall your run-of-the-Milhouse  anti-Semite!
:-\\

And plus y'all made me click on a photo of the Fuhrer, which I don't like to do 'cos you never know when Morris Dees is taking notes!

http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/11/confused1.gif

Nixon wasn't interested in killing the Jews, he just didn't like them.  He was whatchmacall your run-of-the-Milhouse  anti-Semite!
:-\\


He sure had a lot of them as his highest advisors, including Dr. Kissinger and William Safire.  And he was always a staunch supporter of Israel.

I am not sure if I would call him (or many others) as an "Anti-Semite", as much as untrusting of people with radically different views.  And you have to admit, there is something to be said for trusting people that maintain their beliefs, even after 4,000 years of persecution.

He sure had a lot of them as his highest advisors, including Dr. Kissinger and William Safire.  And he was always a staunch supporter of Israel.

I am not sure if I would call him (or many others) as an "Anti-Semite", as much as untrusting of people with radically different views.  And you have to admit, there is something to be said for trusting people that maintain their beliefs, even after 4,000 years of persecution.


Well my guess is that as individuals, Jews are no more (or less) likely to "maintain their beliefs" than your average menber of the (fill in any religion's name here) religion.

Nixxon was indeed a complicated man.  As you mentioned he had several high-ranking Jewish members of his administration, and yet he was tape-recorded making generalized derogatory remarks about "The Jews".  I read an article somewhere that Nixxon is highly regarded in Israel as a historic figure because of his staunch support for Israel, despite the antisemitic remarks.  My guess is that he did not support Israel because he did or did not care about Jews, but rather he saw support of Isarel in the best interests of the USA.  Which is how a president should make decisions anyway.

Well my guess is that as individuals, Jews are no more (or less) likely to "maintain their beliefs" than your average menber of the (fill in any religion's name here) religion.

Nixxon was indeed a complicated man.  As you mentioned he had several high-ranking Jewish members of his administration, and yet he was tape-recorded making generalized derogatory remarks about "The Jews".  I read an article somewhere that Nixxon is highly regarded in Israel as a historic figure because of his staunch support for Israel, despite the antisemitic remarks.  My guess is that he did not support Israel because he did or did not care about Jews, but rather he saw support of Isarel in the best interests of the USA.  Which is how a president should make decisions anyway.


That is pretty much true.  Personally, I believe that everybody is Prejudiced in one way or another.  The difference is how they act on those prejudices.

And one thing that people tend to forget is President Noxon's religion.  Born a Quaker, he served in the US Navy in WWII as a Conscientous Objector (serving as a Supply Officer).  He was a strong supporter of Civil rights, and during his first term in office he enacted Executive Order 11478.  Section 1 as originally written is as follows:

It is the policy of the Government of the United States to provide equal opportunity in Federal employment for all persons, to prohibit discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, or age, and to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency. This policy of equal opportunity applies to and must be an integral part of every aspect of personnel policy and practice in the employment, development, advancement, and treatment of civilian employees of the Federal Government.

All to often, people concentrate on the negative things of people they are politically opposed to, and ignore any positive things they may have done.  This is always something that sickens me, and I feel shows a remarkable amount of ignorance.

***

And yes, the Jews that are left are the remnants of one of the largest religions in the world.  It is unique in that it is a religion that does not endorse "Conversion".  In fact, the only "Kingdom" that ever converted that was not originated in the Middle East was Khazaria in what is now Russia.

Since 70AD, they have been persecuted by Romans, Arabs, Muslims, Christians, the Spanish, the Tszars, and of course the Nazi's.  Millions of Jews in Poland were slaughtered because the Poles did not want them.  In Russia the attacks was so systematic that a word was created to describe them (Pogram).

Those that were less sure in their faith long ago converted to Islam and Christianity.  What we have left now have survived 2,000 years worth of resistance.

He was a strong supporter of Civil rights, and during his first term in office he enacted Executive Order 11478.  Section 1 as originally written is as follows:

It is the policy of the Government of the United States to provide equal opportunity in Federal employment for all persons, to prohibit discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, or age, and to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency. This policy of equal opportunity applies to and must be an integral part of every aspect of personnel policy and practice in the employment, development, advancement, and treatment of civilian employees of the Federal Government.

No inclusion for Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, Cross Dressing, or Bi?

Clearly Nixxon was also a homophobe.  ;)

He sure had a lot of them as his highest advisors, including Dr. Kissinger and William Safire.  And he was always a staunch supporter of Israel.

I am not sure if I would call him (or many others) as an "Anti-Semite", as much as untrusting of people with radically different views.  And you have to admit, there is something to be said for trusting people that maintain their beliefs, even after 4,000 years of persecution.


As Archie Bunker would say, "I'll sicc my lawyers on you, Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz, and Sons, seven savage Jews that'll pick your bones clean."

There is such a thing as praise in prejudice a la Awchie and Rabinowitz and Nixion and Kissinger!
:o

"Staunch supporter of Israel, indeed!"

That is pretty much true.  Personally, I believe that everybody is Prejudiced in one way or another.  The difference is how they act on those prejudices.

And one thing that people tend to forget is President Noxon's religion.  Born a Quaker, he served in the US Navy in WWII as a Conscientous Objector (serving as a Supply Officer). 



I think we would be remiss if we looked to his being born a Quaker to have much relevance.  After all, his administration wasn't known to treat conscientious objectors any better than they had ever been treated, and seemingly, much worse than he himself was treated.

I think we would be remiss if we looked to his being born a Quaker to have much relevance.  After all, his administration wasn't known to treat conscientious objectors any better than they had ever been treated, and seemingly, much worse than he himself was treated.


The press asked Hannah Nixon how her son's policies in Indochina could possibly jibe with his Quaker background.  Mrs. Nixon, 75, replied,
"No, Dick was never a Quaker."

I wish I had a citation on hand for that, but I don't.  Even so, I think it says something significant about the Quakers and the Nixons (not so much the Vietnam war, which went against the foundations of all religious faiths). 

Anyway, when Nixon talked about the dirty Jews, he meant the New York Times and the liberal Jewish intelligentsia -- the same types certain Republicans hate so much today. 

Safire wasn't a "liberal" and he made up Agnew's "nattering nabobs of negativism," so the fact that he was Jewish and his name would become synonymous with "New York Times columnist" did not negate his status as one of the good guys.  Not sure you'd call Safire in 1970 terribly "conservative" by today's standards, but by today's standards, Nixon was a liberal and Ann Coulter says so, and that's good'nuff for me!
:)