Anti-War Movement Takes Control Of Democrat Party

[Woody]

Quote:

The White House is so deep into selective memory as a defense it is absurd.

In the US we are well experienced with selective memory ever since President Clinton. I think he invented it. So ... it has been a habit ever since.

[Bravus]

dingdingding

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

So basically you're saying that the principled thing to do in a democracy is to vote for someone who will do as he thinks is right, not do as we think is right?

No, I was not trying to say one way is right and the other is wrong. I was just trying to frame the debate. I respect the perspectives of both sides. One of the biggest criticisms of of President Clinton was that he governed by the polls. One of the biggest criticism of President Bush is that he doesn't.

However even if we agree that the we should vote for someone who will do what he believes if right, what he believes is right becomes crucial issues. However if the politician is one that can do commercials for a waffle house, the his character isn't so important since he changes his positions according to the polls.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Viet Nam was a HUGE BLUNDER - as is widely acknowledged

The whole domino theory was faulty. It was the same logic that was behind the Korean War and South Korea today probably wouldn't say that was a blunder. The domino theory was also behind the Marshall Plan and Turkey probably wouldn't say that was a big blunder. So while the theory was faulty, the perceived fear of communism spreading was real. I will not fault my country on an error in judgment given the circumstances. If we hadn't cut the funding of the South Vietnam government, there is a chance they would have been able to succeed.

Quote:

they know that governments and presidents tell lies and make mistakes.

What about the lie that Mexicans attacked Americans on Texas soil? That didn't happen. The Americans were in disputed territory. But that lie by President Polk started the Mexican War. Over 13,000 Americans died.

What about the lie that the Germans sunk the Lusitania unprovoked? They had just reason to sink it because President Wilson loaded the passenger ship up with arms for the UK when the US claiming to be neutral. That got the US into WW1 (over 100,000 Americans died) that led to WW2 (over 400,000 Americans died).

I don't think Americans needed Vietnam to learn that politicians lie to start wars. The difference with Vietnam and today is we have a much freer press so politicians cannot get away with lying. So the reason it is easier to trust the government today is because of the press, not the nature of government.

Quote:

most of the people who grew up in the USA in the 1960's

generation are now hard-working parents of teenagers

This is true. Many of them are Republicans and moderates. It is the pot-smoking, Vietnam War protesting segment that have caused the Democrat Party to become anti-war. And not all Democrats are anti-war in general. Many average Democrats supported the Iraq invasion initially and have become anti-Iraq War because how it has been run but they are not anti-war in general.

Let's remember that President Clinton did not run as an anti-war candidate and when elected he kept the military in Somalia much longer that was expected and got the US involved in the Balkan War. While few Republicans will admit it, Clinton was a moderate democrat even though he was a pot-smoking, anti-war, hippie in his youth.

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

In the US we are well experienced with selective memory ever since President Clinton.

To be fair to Clinton, politicians have a long history of selective memory. I find it difficult to recall things sometimes myself which is why I keep through records and file. But even then sometimes I have trouble remembering where I filed something.

It was a bit of SPIN in this thread though to turn the focus from the individual who is President onto his staff or even worse, the vice president's staff. One doesn't have anything to do with the other.

BTW: what is the price of tea in China anyway?

[bevin]

Quote:

If we hadn't cut the funding of the South Vietnam government, there is a chance they would have been able to succeed.

and the way things are going, the Viet-Namese are succeeding. If we had simply left them alone after they kicked the French out, the country would be about where it is today politically and better off economically, and Cambodia and Laos would be probably be better off also.

Just look at where China is today...

Quote:

Mexico .. WW-I .. WW-II .. The difference with Vietnam and today is we have a much freer press so politicians cannot get away with lying. So the reason it is easier to trust the government today is because of the press, not the nature of government.

Yes - I agree. That, plus a voter pool that is much less naive about politicians and prepared to do something about them.

Quote:

It is the pot-smoking, Vietnam War protesting segment that have caused the Democrat Party to become anti-war

The Republicans have war-mongerers and looters plus moderates under their tent. The Democrats have moderates and spenders and anti-war's under theirs.

It doesn't matter which party gets in, it matters which faction of that party gets in. We need the moderates. Here is hoping one of the parties picks a moderate candidate.

Quote:

While few Republicans will admit it, Clinton was a moderate democrat

And led a White House that did a good job - and Reagan also led a successful White House. It is not the party, it is the faction.

/Bevin

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

If we had simply left them alone after they kicked the French out, the country would be about where it is today politically and better off economically, and Cambodia and Laos would be probably be better off also.

That is pure conjecture. One only hurts their own credibility with such proclamations. It is also ignoring the political realities of the day.

We need to understand that a perceived reality is a form of reality even thought it isn't real. A woman that believes her husband is cheating on her is going to have to deal with certain emotional issues even if her husband is actually loyal to her. The perceived reality of his infidelity is in itself a reality she has to deal with. The husband too has to deal with the perceived reality that his wife believes him to be unfaithful.

In the same respect, the domino theory was a perceived reality that many western nations believed in. Communism had not been around long enough for the theory to be proved false. Likewise, the belief that Saddam had WMDs was a perceived reality. Perceived reality cannot be ignored.

Imagine if in our infidelity example the wife was found condoms in her husbands' jeans. He had a vasectomy and never used condoms so she assumes he is cheating and trying to protect himself from STDs. The condoms were actually for their teenage son who had confided in his dad that he was sexually active but didn't want mom to know. The wife, thinking she has inside information, is not willing to tell her husband how she knows he is cheating. Thus the perceived reality is in itself a form of reality. The wife cannot ignore what she believes her husband is doing. The husband cannot ignore that his wife believes he is cheating.

So it is in politics. Ignoring the perceived communist threat would have been like the wife in our example ignoring the fact she found condoms in her husband's pockets. Ignoring intelligence that led the world to believe Saddam had WMDs would have been like the husband ignoring that his wife suspects him of adultery. Hindsight is 20/20 but perceived realities don't come with it.

Quote:

It doesn't matter which party gets in, it matters which faction of that party gets in.

Exactly. The point of this thread has been that the anti-war faction has taken over control of the Democrat party.