Richard E. Nixon (yes I know his middle name was “Milhous”, I am using the “E” the way Archie Bunker used to refer to him as “Richard E. Nixon”) in addition to being a creep, was one of the worst presidents we ever had. Nixon was no conservative, in fact he was the last of the New Deal presidents. Nixon set the blueprint that people such as Bush 41, Bush 43, McCain, and Romney followed – tossing out red meat meaningless rhetoric to the “base” all the while governing (or as in the case of McCain and Romney) as a Republican progressive. Mr. Tobin points out that just because the Left hates you, does not necessarily mean that you are a conservative. LBJ would concur if he were alive as would George W. Bush. Mr. Tobin also makes a very interesting point that Nixon’s detente with the U.S.S.R. enabled the Soviet expansion of the 1970′s and probably allowed the Soviet Union to survive longer then it should have. Nixon’s most favorable foreign policy decision was his resupply of Israel during the Yom Kippur War – an action to which all freedom loving peoples should be forever grateful. As we note the 100th anniversary of Richard Nixon’s birth (January 9), we need to reflect on the deeper legacy of the influence of Richard Nixon in today’s Republican Party.
by Jonathan S. Tobin
For many people, Richard Nixon’s centennial is yet another excuse for trotting out Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein and reliving one of the great triumphs of 20th century liberalism. Richard Nixon was the bête noire of a generation of Democrats and the process by which he received what they believed were his just deserts seemed to vindicate every epithet that had ever been thrown at a man who first came to the country’s attention as a dedicated opponent of Communism. As Politico notes, unlike other former presidents who have their fans, the tribe of Nixonians is pretty small. That’s because Republicans as well as Democrats associate him primarily with Watergate, rendering any good or bad done during a long political career to the margins of history.
Yet there is more to his legacy than the tapes and the break-in. The more one thinks about his record as president the less there is to like. That’s because the 37th president is someone who teaches us that character is a fungible quality in politics. The lack of it not only allows a president to violate the law and to misuse his power. It also can lead to the abandonment of principle with regard to political issues. Though there is always the temptation for conservatives to take up the cudgels for anyone liberals hate (a factor that helped Nixon retain the loyalty of many Republicans during his career) he also ought to be remembered as an example of a Republican who betrays the voters in a vain attempt to gain popularity. [........]
Evaluating Nixon’s presidency is hard work for anyone who wants to talk about anything but Watergate. But as much as Nixon provided liberals with a target, it should also be remembered that he gave conservatives an example to avoid too. That’s because Nixon’s principle domestic achievements as president were important milestones in the descent of America into the malaise of big government liberalism.
While his creation of the Environmental Protection Agency is most often cited as an interesting historical irony, it was just one of many excursions into the creation of the superstate that conservatives of our own day are struggling to cut back. Nixon’s willingness to use his war powers was seen as an “imperial presidency” by his liberal opponents, but the same tendency led him to breach every principle of conservative governance to impose wage and price controls on the economy. [.......]
[......] His trip to China and the establishment of ties with Beijing are rightly praised as a bold stroke that discomfited the Soviets. But the abandonment of his anti-Communist roots was not limited to that initiative. It was Nixon’s championing of détente with Moscow that kept the evil empire alive for longer that it should have. It was also primarily responsible for the dark decade of Soviet expansionism and proxy wars around the globe that followed. Far from being a foreign policy genius, as some would have it, his cynical realpolitik approach did as much damage to the world as his liberal economic schemes did at home.
Nixon isn’t the only example of a Republican who abandoned conservative ideas when he got personal control of the federal leviathan. But there is no better example of the consequences of such folly. Nixon’s presidency will always be seen as a tragic failure because of his resignation in disgrace. But even if we leave that aside, his presidency ought to remain a toxic example for future generations of conservatives.
Read the rest - The Lessons of Nixonian Politics
Tags: detente, Jonathan S. Tobin, Watergate
I saw a news clip where they reveal Nixon was a close personal adviser of Clinton’s
@ waldensianspirit:
Nixon was no Conservative.
nor could he hold his liquor…a monumental failure
Nixon was a progressive and a thug. And he still isn’t one tenth the criminal that O and Klinton are.
Just because the Left hates you, does not make you a Conservative.
Nixon was no Conservative….but the alternatives at the time were worse.
there needs to be an historic investigation regarding Nixon’s Fruit Of The Loom stock
@ Mars:
JFK was more Conservative than he was.
Was it his policy or Kissenger’s?
Xeon wrote:
That’s a fair point.
One thing I will give Nixon credit for, he did know how to win Presidential elections. Something Republicans have forgotten.
Rodan wrote:
no but you must be doing something right.
eaglesoars wrote:
I don’t knee jerk believe that…visiting China was epic at that time and cooled a growing hostility…what came later is another subject
@ brookly red:
Not always. The Left hated LBJ, he did nothing right.
Rodan wrote:
“Dirty tricks”, “enemies list” if you want you can compare Nixon to Obama and there are some similarities…
@ brookly red:
Yes there are similarities.
Rodan wrote:
at the time yes but without his “great society” there would be a lot less libs around today.
nor am I claiming that Nixon was a foreign policy genius, but that his gig with China was inevitable…I’m not sure what he thought of it I have not read a memoir…but Rosemary Woods was blowing him at the time so maybe she has a more clear insight
Rodan wrote:
give him a break…he conquered Viet Nam
@ brookly red:
LBJ was a scumbag.
@ heysoos:
Rodan wrote:
I’ll drink to that! and a racist scumbag at that.
The Republicans of the Eisenhower-Nixon-Ford era were not Conservatives. But they won elections. This is something today’s GOP has forgotten to win. Both the Establishment and Purists are to blame. They refuse to adapt to the times or even fight effectively.
@ brookly red:
His war on poverty was intended to make Blacks slaves again.
@ eaglesoars:
Lengthy reply to you, bottom of last thread.
Rodan wrote:
if LBJ was a scumbag, the McNamara was the devil himself…he knifed LBJ, consider that
@ heysoos:
McNamara was the worst Dec of Defense.
Rodan wrote:
events dictate winning…the re-election of BO is astounding in that regard…you knew that tho
Rodan wrote:
but only for 200 years
Rodan wrote:
58k dead guys n his dime…fucking liberal that tossed those boys away for some perverted ideology…58 thousand
Rodan wrote:
it is amazing how much damage was done in so little time… kinda echos Rome.
Nixon was a creep and paranoid -- when he was in office.
@ heysoos:
It’s a shame that Conservative today have adopted the Progressive Nation Building Ideology. If most Conservatives read up on the origins of Nation Building Interventionism, they would realize how they have been had. As much as some Conservatives bitch about the establishment, when it comes to foreign policy, they do not question.
Rodan wrote:
He certainly was no conservative. He was however a good adviser with a lot of common sense -- when he was not running for election. In a way he was one of our better ex-presidents.
@ heysoos:
You and I get reality.
@ Speranza:
he actually knew how to win. Something Republicans have forgotten about.
Mars wrote:
I agree, however he was also poorly served by Spiro Agnew who by the way was a liberal Republican governor of Maryland, someone whom many here would refer to as a “RINO”.
Rodan wrote:
you know how I feel about, so I won’t go into it..but the feds have blood on their hands, from then til now
Rodan wrote:
He was a very good political strategist and gave Reagan some excellent advice when he was running in 1980 and running for re-election in 1984. His detente policy vis a vis the USSR was disastrous.
heysoos wrote:
Nor do I. It’s like trying to untangle a plate of spaghetti.
heysoos wrote:
I don’t think that. He gave an interview shortly before he died that revealed how tormented he was over Viet Nam. His problem was that he was a technocrat
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
responded
Speranza wrote:
yet, few died from those policies
Rodan wrote:
Ron Paul
Speranza wrote:
No, not a RINO. A crook. Totally corrupt crook.
heysoos wrote:
Nothing is more important then winning something many of the posters at Weasel Zippers seem to ignore. Winning takes precedence over everything. I am not into this “Well we at least stand for something” argument -- the only thing you will “stand for” is defeat. The Democrats play to win, what we play for I am not all that certain of.
eaglesoars wrote:
too little, too late…when it counted, he failed
heysoos wrote:
No argument.
eaglesoars wrote:
He really was one of the worst examples of the so-called “Best and the brightest”.
@ brookly red:
Not Ron Paul at all, he’s an isolationist. What I am calling for is the Reagan Doctrine, Peace through strength. Reagan rejected Nation Building. But today, The GOP Establishment and many Conservatives want unlimited war and nation building. They even want to go to war in Syria to help al-Qaeda.
@ Speranza:
That’s why Democrats have won the popular vote in 5/6 elections.
eaglesoars wrote:
Likewise.
Rodan wrote:
Don’t be ridiculous. That’s not WHY they want to intervene -- it may be the end result, but it’s not the rationale.
Speranza wrote:
More Harvard crapola.
I think one problem we have were it involves war is that ever since Kronkite and the Dem treason caucus lost us Viet Nam, we have stopped trying to win wars and only look for how to best “manage” them.
GHWB had a victory in hand in a fairly popular war. He could have destroyed Bagdhad and killed Saddam. It would have taken the Iraqis 50 to 100 years to go to Al Qaeda style nastiness if we had done things right.
Instead he pulled out without finishing the job. We did just exactly as much as the Saudis wanted us to do and not one iota more.
And that now seems to be the blueprint. Afghanistan and Iraq 2, were both “managed” wars. Politicians were allowed to conduct and decide the outcomes.
Only the military leaders on the ground know the situation, and they are now ignored at every step.
eaglesoars wrote:
Spiro Agnew was a horrible pick for V.P. By the way the more I replay the Biden-Ryan debate the more convinced I am that Paul Ryan was not a good choice to be the running mate, in fact he SUCKED. He is a brilliant guy but his wonkishness and his coming across like a community college economics professor was not what we needed. He should have pointedly called Biden out on his boorish rudeness instead of showing him the deference that he did.
Rodan wrote:
a little isolationism might be a good thing these days. Build a nation? start with this one. Syria? wtf let them kill each other
eaglesoars wrote:
with Obama I am not so sure…
Mars wrote:
Could it be that modern wars are prosecuted to achieve something other than military objectives?
Mars wrote:
The Bush family being a completely owned subsidiary of the House of Saud did what their Wahabi masters told them to do.
Mars wrote:
funny that
brookly red wrote:
The Assad Baathist/Alawite loyalists with their Hezbollah/Iranian allies killing and being killed by the al Qaeda lead rebels is a win-win situation if there ever was one.
Brick wrote:
Yeah.
Wars are about body counts and strategic locations, not hearts and minds or press polling.
@ eaglesoars:
Yeah the excuse is “Democracy” or “Human Rights”. Either way It’s not a Conservative principle, It’s Progressive and I wish Conservatives would wake up and resist the Establishment on this.
@ Rodan:
You’re right…Tricky Dick is a SAINT compared to the SCOAMF.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
The same Harvard/Yale/Colombia/Stanford/Wharton MBA geniuses helped create the 2008 economic meltdown too.
@ Speranza:
This is like Nazis vs. Communists minus a world war. Grab the popcorn and enjoy!
Mars wrote:
Goes back farther than that: to the Korean War, where we did not win but merely agreed to a cease-fire.
I blame this on the abolition of the War Department and its replacement with the “Department of Defense”: a “War Department” knows what business it’s in, and knows that the choices are victory or defeat. A “Defense Department” merely fends off, and kicks the can down the road by removing the immediate threat. A “Defense Department” is not concerned with victory; the shift from “War” to “Defense” broadened the mission of the Department while at the same time diluting that mission.
Speranza wrote:
All because of a teeny tiny difference between the two sides over just how to sing The Muslim National Anthem™!
@ Mars:
Now they want to intervene in Syria. Some people do not learn.
Brick wrote:
well that goes back to Sun Tzu…
@ buzzsawmonkey:
One thing I recall you criticize Bush on was his not doing a FDR style WWII fireside chat. That way he could have weekly rallied the public to his wars.
Mars wrote:
1. I believe in the cliche “Grab them by thier balls and pull, their hearts and minds will follow:” philosophy
2, Nothing does so much for public morale then photos of scores of our dead enemies lying along the road. (See photos of Nazi dead a the Falaise Gap, August, 1944.)
brookly red wrote:
I was taking issue with Rodan’s characterization of the GOP.
As to your comment -- I am absolutely sure. If it hurts America, Obama is all for it.
Benghazi was a gun-running operation directly to AQ. Chris Stevens was sacrificed to shut him up.
@ Brick:
Yes, do the bidding of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood to establish a Caliphate. Our elites who claim to be smart are so stupid and are used by Arab Muslims.
Speranza wrote:
This.
Rodan wrote:
For some odd reason he decided to live his Christian faith as president which meant being overly modest, turning the other cheek, and not fighting back against the most vile criticism. How did that work out for ya’ W. (you dunderhead)?
Rodan wrote:
The mindset of the left on this issue is covered really well in my new article.
Rodan wrote:
On that we are in total agreement. They are misguided but not venal.
Rodan wrote:
Bush didn’t do shit to put his side of the argument over. He was pathetic.
Not only should he have done outreach on a regular basis to the country, there should have been an Office of War Information that put maps of Iraq and Afghanistan into the public schools and made them available to the newspapers. There should have been a blizzard of press releases which explained where we were going and why, what our objectives are, who we were fighting, how many of them we killed. Instead, he ceded all of this to the media, and all we got were our own body counts with no sense of context or objective.
He was a disaster in this regard.
@ Mars:
I never tire of pictures of
1. dead Nazis (particularly Waffen S.S. but any Germans will do)
2. dead World War II Japanese soldiers
3. dead Muslim/Arab terrorists be they Hamas, Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Taliban, PFLP, KLA, Islamic Jihad, Fatah, etc.
@ eaglesoars:
Don’t they realize that Americans are tired of nation building? The GOP used to be against that, now it’s their foreign policy doctrine. ARe they really in a bubble?
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
George W. Bush (basically a very good man) demoralized the Republican Party and eased the way in for Barack Obama and the current nightmare we are living under.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
That is exactly what you were writing circa 05-07. It’s stuck in my head.
Rodan wrote:
They sure are. Look at the state our nation is in.
Rodan wrote:
I don’t know that they do this out of stupidity, I suspect prostitution.
Rodan wrote:
It’s still true. I should add, too, that there should have been morale posters, and there should have been, if not “scrap drives” (though why not? It would just be repurposing the recycling people are already doing), something of that sort to make the population at large continue to feel that it was part of the war effort, instead of letting that “Marines went to war, America went to the mall” mentality flourish.
This is so basic, you have to wonder what these people were on to not know it instinctively.
Speranza wrote:
That is one of the most historically mis-understood tenents of Christianity.
Striking a Roman citizen was a capitol crime. But a Roman citizen could strike anyone who was not with no consequence. The instruction to turn the other cheek was about that scenario. A Roman soldier just smacked you across the face. Turn the other cheek. DARE him to strike you again and make him think twice about your status -- because if he fucks up, he’s dead.
It was not meant as a posture of humility.
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
I didn’t like his father, but I have to admit that was an area he excelled at. A day didn’t go by where he didn’t have one general or another on the news channels with a map showing exactly what was happening and how it was happening. He also didn’t shy away from showing the videos and photos of what we did to our enemies. He could have flattened Baghdad without anyone raising an ounce of fuss. He had things communicated and detailed that well.
Mars wrote:
Too bad he promoted Colin Powell way above his abilities.
@ eaglesoars:
That’s correct!
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
The videos of Danny Pearl’s and Nick Berg’s beheading and every other atrocity should have been on the whitehouse.gov website.
eaglesoars wrote:
The Roman legions were the perfect killing machines. The only way they could be beat was if you got them onto terrain in which they could not deploy as they did on open ground -- such as in a forest (Teutoburg Forest, in Germany in 9 A.D.) or in a mountain valley (Beth-Horon in Judea in 66A.D.).
@ Rodan:
Hi Rodan, just a reminder, are you going to put Calo and me in touch with one another?
Speranza wrote:
Very true. But, I never did like Powell to the degree that I liked Schwarzkopf. Powell just seemed to politically motivated. Norman reminded me of the WW2 generals in his bluster and straight talk.
@ Speranza:
I take objection to that. I am the most thoughtful man in America.
Mars wrote:
I never was a huge Powell fan even before he turned out to be a back stabber.
eaglesoars wrote:
The visuals of people jumping to their deaths from the Towers should also have been shown, instead of hidden away on the grounds they were “too graphic.”
We have a nation that goes to splatter movies for fun. Seeing the real thing is very different—and yes, it is disturbing. It should be. We are creating a nation of wimps where real life is concerned who nonetheless amuse themselves with violence porn. That is a very bad trend.
Show the damn footage and let people see what we are really fighting in the real world.
Colin Powell wrote:
Well General you did not act with honor in the Valerie Plame “kerfuffle” when you allowed Scooter Libby to be falsely accused of things that we know your “man” Richard Armitage was the guilty party.
Libs and the media never forgave him for exposing that commie Alger Hiss.
I like Nixon because unlike Bush he fought back against the media.
Moe Katz wrote:
Check your mail!
@ The Osprey:
That is a very valid point and I mentioned that above. Despite my issues with Nixon’s Liberal policies, he did actually fight to win elections. Alger Hiss was his original sin, hence why the Left never accepted Nixon despite his Liberalism.
The Osprey wrote:
Nixon fought like a 4th grade jerk and shot himself in the head. Nixon was emotionally immature (and as he was a liberal that is not surprsing).
Rodan wrote:
More like a time-warp. They think the U.S. still carries a big stick.
Look at the Benghazi report. Mistakes were made. But nobody made them.
Speaking of the Nixon admin I remember that Saturday Night massacre -- where men of good conscience actually resigned instead of carrying out orders that would have comprimised their integrity as public servants.
That’s gone.
Rodan wrote:
Helen Gahagan Douglas was the other Nixon “sin”.
@ Rodan:
Tx!
Ray Price one of Nixon’s speechwriters said “The Left could forgive Nixon for being wrong on Alger Hiss, but they could never forgive him for being right” -- which he was.
Colin Powell wrote:
How have you spent your 30 pieces of silver?
Speranza wrote:
What always has impressed me was their engineering skills. Masada being a prime example.
Speranza wrote:
He got elected twice so he must have been doing something right.
There is only one Ray Price.
httpvs://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4oFrXx8ogI
httpsv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4oFrXx8ogI
eaglesoars wrote:
Great fighters, great engineers.
The Osprey wrote:
He barely won in 1968 (Wallace took votes away from Humphrey) and anyone could have beaten McGovern in 1972.
More Arab Spring goodness:
Had Nixon won the California governorship in 1962 there would have been no Governor Reagan in 1966 and most probably no President Reagan in 1980.
@ lobo91:
Those Egyptian Islamists are a real fun bunch.
Speranza wrote:
And if my grandmother had runways she’d be an airport.
This is something we have written in many comments here at the Blogmocracy. EPA, QE, Affirmative Action, Wage and Price Controls, Caps on gasoline prices, and many more. He out Democrated the Democrats, and all it got him was an increase in Vitriol.
Donald Trump making a hellof a lot of sense on Hannity although I wish Sean Hannity would stop stroking Trump’s ego.
Trump (paraphrasing “Romney’s son saying that his dad really did not want to be president was a slap in the face for all those who worked so hard for Mitt”.
“Romney won the first debate and then was told by his handlers ‘dont be so hard the next debates, take it easy on Obama’, was just plain stupid as he virtually disappeared”.
“Romney failed to resonate because Obama played the ‘rich man/poor man’ strategy on him”.
“Hurricane Sandy although not the end all, really hurt Romney”.
BWAHAHAHA!! Another high capacity ammunition moment from the MSM.
These people have never fired a weapon with or without a silencer.
Flyovercountry wrote:
As I wrote, he was the last of the New Deal presidents.
@ Rodan:
For how much he was despised by the media, he got great press in both 1968 and in 1972. Our current group of guys and gals need to read how he did it, and copy that technique. And the thing is this, there is a book in print that is a step by step guide on exactly how this worked.
eaglesoars wrote:
No joke. All it does is change the sound profile of the weapon. I’ve only ever heard one gun actually silenced and it was a bolt action rifle.
Speranza wrote:
I’m not sure that’s true
Moe Katz wrote:
And if mi madre had cojones she would be mi padre.
eaglesoars wrote:
Oh I believe it. He went on cruise control and had a terrible second debate. That whole town hall format with Candy Crowley moderating revived Obama. Stupid assholes for agreeing to that format and that moderator. Where was Bret Baier????
Romney should have brought up Fast & Furious and the BP Oil spill. The Left always brought up Hurricane Katrina.
@ Speranza:
There was sooooooooooooo much left on the table in terms of winning issues it is still making me sick. Obamacare, F and F, Pigford, XL Pipeline, Solyndra, Benghazi, Drill baby Drill, WOT and the loss of Islamic Terrorism from our language, Welfare Reform, Budget, Not having a Budget forever, Spending deficits like water, ……………….
Trump also said that the GOP should have allowed things to go “over the fiscal cliff, the GOP would get blamed anyway but the Obama voters would really feel some pain”.
Speranza wrote:
Trump nailed it.
Mars wrote:
Target velocity/subsonic .22LR can be shot indoors without hearing protection. No need for a can. CCI quiet, or CB caps for the win.
Flyovercountry wrote:
Yeah and we here at blogmocracy were talking about it constantly, who was advising Romney, John McCain?
Rodan wrote:
I was impressed by his analysis, I really was.
@ Brick:
I wish I could remember what this rifle is. I saw a video at the CATM range while I was in Germany. Very small bolt action rifle, the sound suppresor was integrated, and all you could hear was the bolt slamming forward.
The gun was chrome with wooden stock. Shorter than a normal rifle too.
Speranza wrote:
The final GOP candidates for the last 2 elections did NOT want to win. The ones that did -- were destroyed/vetted out early by the MSM and the ridiculous primary system. It’s all for appearances now.
Mars wrote:
Not sure what it could have been, but it sounds pretty neat. I like the suppressed .22lrs I’ve seen pictured used by the Israelis for crowd control. Modified 10/22s I believe.
@ eaglesoars:
What utter crap:
http://www.newsmax.com/US/walsh-civil-disobedience-obamacare/2013/01/10/id/470913
Ladies and Gentlemen we have a winner.
@ eaglesoars:
Supressors are not only readily available but are actually required in some European countries.
There’s absolutely no reason they should be regulated under the NFA in the first place.
lobo91 wrote:
Hey kids look at the strawman. That way we don’t have to confront the actual facts.
@ lobo91:
yeah, I know. Projection much? We’d much prefer our kids just pull a pin.
Mars wrote:
Greta just covered a radio interview our attorney general (Virginia) Ken Cuccenelli gave yesterday. He’s Catholic. He said he was talking to his bishop who told him “I’m ready to go to jail”. Cuccenelli told him “Don’t take this personally but you NEED to go to jail. People need to see this stuff going down”
I’m afraid he’s right.
@ Speranza:
I wish more in the GOP thought like him.
@ eaglesoars:
So am I.
lobo91 wrote:
Do suppressors also reduce concussion? I’m recovering from retinal tear/detachment and will need to be careful about the amount of concussion I subject the eye to. I’m thinking a suppressor on the AR may be a means of being able to keep shooting. Hmmm, maybe there’s an access argument to be made against outlawing suppressors.
lobo91 wrote:
I think it was on the thread downstairs I posted that the Catholic Church will NOT back down. When they cart Timothy Cardinal Dolan off to jail, things are going to get really REALLY weird.
@ AZfederalist:
Are you talking about recoil or muzzle blast?
A supressor in and of itself won’t reduce felt recoil, but in order for it to work properly, you have to use it with subsonic ammo, which would probably have lower recoil.
AZfederalist wrote:
Not by much. The decibel level is decreased by only 25% or so, so even if the concussive force were decreased by that amount, I wouldn’t risk my eyesight for it.
@ eaglesoars:
I seem to recall another regime doing similar things. Back in the 30′s IIRC. Soviets did similar things starting in the late teens.
AZfederalist wrote:
I read a quip the other day and I’m sorry I can’t remember where.
“I saw a movie once where only the police and the military had guns. It was called Schindler’s List.”
lobo91 wrote:
Concussion from muzzle blast. I don’t think recoil will be an issue. So subsonic ammo is needed for a suppressor to work properly? I did not know that. I need to see what my 223 ammo is rated at for muzzle velocity.
AZfederalist wrote:
The question is…if it happens…will anyone see it? A media sympathetic to the regime’s cause -- would give it the same air time it gave F&F.
AZfederalist wrote:
lobo’s point about the ammo is well taken. also keep in mind -- outside or in an enclosed space? I’ve only stood next to a silenced weapon and that was outside.
@ AZfederalist:
It would have to be less than 1126 fps. Standard .223 ammo is well above that. Usually around 3,000 fps.
Found it! Except the one I saw was chrome.
lobo91 wrote:
Yep. You could work up a handload to do that…but it’s tougher I think to work velocity down, than up.
@ eaglesoars:
There’s a reason the most common pistol round used with a suppressor is a .45ACP. It’s all subsonic.
9mm subsonic ammo is readily available. There is subsonic 5.56, and even 7.62x51, but it’s less common.
eaglesoars wrote:
Oh, believe me, I have no intention of taking that kind of risk. If this third surgery has been successful, I will thank The Lord for his grace in healing this eye and will not be taking anything for granted.
That’ why I’m asking questions; I’m trying to find out what safe options may be available. I won’t be doing anything without consulting with my ophthalmologist.
@ Brick:
Biggest problem using subsonic 5.56 in an AR would be getting the action to cycle reliably.
Mars wrote:
.45acp….that’s pretty slick.
eaglesoars wrote:
This will be outside. What impact does a suppressor have on range and accuracy?
@ eaglesoars:
A local cop was firing an MP-5SD at the indoor range where I shoot one afternoon. That has an integrated suppressor.
On full auto with subsonic ammo, it sounded like a sewing machine.
Brick wrote:
When you hear it without the background firing it is unbelievable. I’ve heard other guns with silencers and they just sound different. That thing all I can hear is the bolt.
AZfederalist wrote:
Hubby had his twice before it ‘took’. Just be patient. However if YOU were Hubby, I’d tell you to knock it off until you are completely healed.
{AZ}
@ Brick:
Apparently the new repros use an unmodified 1911 magazine.
lobo91 wrote:
I was thinking bolt action. The extra strength in the receiver would give a little more buffer. I’m just paranoid of light loads going kaboom.
@ AZfederalist:
Significantly decreased velocity is going to reduce range some.
Accuracy shouldn’t be affected from one round to the next, but subsonic ammo isn’t going to hit the same point as standard ammo with the same gun, so you’d have to sight it in using that ammo. Might be affected more by crosswinds, too.
@ eaglesoars:
Thanks.
AZfederalist wrote:
No clue. I’ve only observed, never used.
lobo91 wrote:
Oh, yeah, that’s EXACTLY what I want! pfft.
Nope, even if I miss, yer gonna shit your pants.
Interesting, but I don’t get the point of something like that. Unless there is pre-existing hearing damage.
@ eaglesoars:
The MP-5SD is widely used by special ops, SWAT, etc. Sometimes it’s nice to be able to not alert the whole building full of bad guys at once.
lobo91 wrote:
Oh, ok, you’re talking battlefield conditions. I’m talking about protecting the Fat Beagle -- and my own skinny ass
eaglesoars wrote:
If shooting indoors, quiet is better. It’s hard to have a conversation with the 911 operator when all you can hear is a high pitched ringing.
@ eaglesoars:
You can’t buy one of those, anyway. You can get a standard MP-5, if you’ve got a truckload of cash (or maybe a nice truck to trade for it). Last one I saw for sale was $17,000.
lobo91 wrote:
All the cool toys are always way out of budget.
Brick wrote:
That particular scenario has been considered and dealt with. I push a button. If I’m home alone, it’s worn around my neck.
lobo91 wrote:
Did I tell you about the last time I was in Nordstrom’s? No?
If I had $17K to toss, it would be for mink.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/01/17000-linux-powered-rifle-brings-auto-aim-to-the-real-world/
Here you go.
@ eaglesoars:
If I win the lottery, I’ll buy one. German submachine guns are just as nice as their cars.
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2013/01/09/building-a-generation-of-im-all-that/?subscriber=1
Expansion on todays hipster article. We are now in the age of narcissism. No wonder they want to remove NPD from the DSM, it’s not considered a mental illness anymore it’s a way of life for far too many people in this country. They vote for the won because they see themselves in him.
Mars wrote:
Earlier today someone -- I think it was unclassifiable -- suggested that article for a thread. I think it’s a good idea.
@ Mars:
I saw that coming years ago. We have a generation of kids who have been told that they’re “special” since the day they were born, played sports where nobody kept score, and think that cutting and pasting from the internet equals learning.
@ Mars:
I have to agree with you Mars…there are too many people who are self-centered and have no idea of thinking about someone else before themselves. It is a shame really that this is going on.
@ eaglesoars:
I agree.
@ lobo91:
When my sons were playing sports it was the parents that was more concerned about being fair. The kids wanted to win and knew when they were losing or winning and they didn’t want to lose. This is the adults fault in my opinion.
lobo91 wrote:
Will you buy me that SUB-2000 carbine? I’ll cook dinner……….
(Look yer gettin off easy -- if dorian wins the lottery I’m asking for a ‘vette -- in canary yellow)
@ lobo91:
Blasphemy!@ eaglesoars:
And to you as well.
@ Mars:
Where I saw a huge problem was the emo teenagers they were all about themselves and their parents let them wallow in this stage. They cut themselves, they wore nothing but black and then wondered why people stared at them. The emo’s in my opinion was the worst. Because it was all about themselves. What I couldn’t understand was parents allowing this type of behavior. They just chalked it up as a stage they were going through. Wrong, it stuck.
Lily wrote:
From what I’ve seen -- and I mean observed personally, as I don’t have children -- this comes from parents competing among THEMSELVES. My kid is more special than yours.The kids are proxy trophies. If they get into Harvard, the credit rebounds on the parents.
Dammit…talking about emo’s and again I have killed the thread. Well I must be getting better, my mojo is back.
Calo wrote:
WHAT?! What did we do wrong? Oh, crap, Calo is pissed…….
Lily wrote:
Reposted from this morning.
eaglesoars wrote:
Indeed in a lot of cases this is what is going on. Adults living through their children…but there was also adults letting their kids get away with anything too. So you had a couple of things going on with the adults.
@ eaglesoars:
For not being a parent, you are very astute.
Lily wrote:
Sorry…I was distracted. I actually got a response to an email I sent someone on Match.com.
That’s a rare occurence…
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/01/10/call_from_a_real_live_hero
@ Mars:
@ lobo91:
WOW! Congratulations!!!! Hope it works out!
@ Lily:
Ditto.
Would like to see nothing more for you, Lobo.
hey ya’ll
just something to make you go hmmmm
then i’m out
been a long week and I am beat up, sore and tired
http://ricochet.com/main-feed/Tocqueville-in-China
the People’s Republic embarked on a path to commercial development that flew in the face of the indoctrination that the Communist Party in China had drummed into the long-suffering people of that country for the previous four decades. The contradiction between what the party had preached and what it came to practice could not have been more flagrant, and it seemed to me that it was, in the process, subverting its own legitimacy.
All that it would take, I argued, would be an economic downturn — and the place would blow up. Beneath the surface, deep resentment of the inequalities that came with economic growth was becoming pervasive, and this resentment was bound to be reinforced by the fact that — given the level of government control and the profound familial orientation of traditional Chinese culture — the party would quickly turn into a crony-capitalist cabal, as the descendants of famous communist revolutionaries enriched themselves and displayed their ill-gotten lucre in ostentatiously obnoxioux ways. All of this might be tolerated as long as rapid economic growth continued and nearly everyone profited. But, I contended, if and when a contraction takes place, if and when unemployment grows, if and when the dreams of ordinary Chinese are dashed, there will be hell to pay.
I mention all of this — not only because I think and have long thought the analogy apt, but because I am clearly no longer alone. The article to which I linked above indicates that Tocqueville’s minor masterpiece is now the rage in China and that senior figures in the Communist Party there are recommending that party functionaries read it.
Take this piece of information and ruminate on it, and consider it in light of the recent scandals — which threatened to reach into the Politburo itself. If Tocqueville’s book is being read, it is because at least some of the men who rule China are wondering whether their country is near a tipping point — in which a seemingly minor event (the self-immolation of a Tunisian street vendor, for example) sets off a conflagration.
Twenty-three years ago, at the time of Tiananmen Square, China very nearly came apart. Some Chinese, who know a lot more than I do about the state of affairs in their country, evidently think that it may do so again, and the very fact that are contemplating such a nightmare suggests that it may be on the horizon. If and when such a regime stops delivering the goods — even if only for a short time — there will be a fury unleashed.
yeah, we aint the only country in the world and we ain’t the only ones
who have troubles
From the article:
On Facebook, young people can fool themselves into thinking they have hundreds or thousands of “friends.” They can delete unflattering comments. They can block anyone who disagrees with them or pokes holes in their inflated self-esteem. They can choose to show the world only flattering, sexy or funny photographs of themselves (dozens of albums full, by the way), “speak” in pithy short posts and publicly connect to movie stars and professional athletes and musicians they “like.”
Social media didn’t flower until long after the self-esteem movement took hold. It simply acted as an accelerator on an already lit fire.
Case in point: social media has contributed to an increase in bullying and teen suicide as a result of that bullying.
Bullying is not new. When I was in school -- before god started making dirt -- there was something called ‘slam books’. Every page had someone’s name at the top and anonymous snarky comments written on the remainder of the page. They got passed around during lunch in the cafeteria and on the school bus. ONLY THE GIRLS DID THIS.
The difference I see is that a slam book died at the end of the term. The internet is forever. These kids see no light at the end of the tunnel.
@ Lily:
@ Calo:
Hopefully, she’s not crazy.
Why is it that I seem to attract that type?
@ rain of lead:
Hey rain! No need to run off too soon! Hope everything is going well with you and your family!
@ lobo91:
maybe she’s only just slightly crazy
that would be ok.right?
night all
Calo wrote:
I didn’t say I didn’t raise any, now did I? I had a stepdaughter from when she was 11 thru 18. I learned a lot just from watching her scum bag parents -- until I divorced her dad. She and I stayed in touch for awhile.
@ lobo91:
My brother is the same way. LOL! Just take it slow so you can get to know her..is the best way to see if she is crazy. But I’m guessing she isn’t!
@ Lily:
hey lily
yeah we’re good
the young lady (can’t call her a girl anymore) got her report card
today straight a’s as usual and free krispy kreme doughnuts
@ rain of lead:
Night Rain
Kiss your better half like you mean it.
@ Calo:
nite all
@ eaglesoars:
This is the new reality and can be very hurtful and dangerous too. Plus it can be too much of putting their selfs out there for all to see. Kids now days are too plugged in and tuned out also. Some live in their own made up world. I’m glad the internet didn’t exist when I was a teenager….I can just imagine the hell I would have gone through. The phone was enough. Not to mention was outside more than I was inside.
rain of lead wrote:
Not all crazy is bad, I suppose…
@ rain of lead:
You must be very proud!!!! I would be! Glad to hear things are going well too!
lobo91 wrote:
I could probably count off the reasons but I’d have to take my socks off.
eaglesoars wrote:
Article now written and in pending.
eaglesoars wrote:
Hmm…
rain of lead wrote:
I was a pretty good student but I never pulled that off…kudos to the young lady
Mars wrote:
Oh good -- that will be fun. I’ll check in tomorrow morning -- have to go to bed soon.
@ lobo91:
Never know lobo….and boy this song brings back memories for me when I was in my late teens!
Well, there certainly aren’t going to be any outdoor activities this weekend.
Saturday’s high is supposed to be 16.
eaglesoars wrote:
Your student days hark back a few eons ago?
I forget these things.
Yep, last day with my kids, have to send them off to school and they get picked up by their mother in the afternoon.
Just not looking forward to the med battle tomorrow with my youngest. Just started ADHD meds and somehow finds himself unable to swallow even half a tiny little pill.
Night all.
@ Mars:
Looking forward to it. I love those types of articles.
http://thelookingspoon.com/index.php/january-2013/4339-the-greatest-irony-of-why-liberals-are-free-to-be-wrong
@ Mars:
Nite Mars….my oldest was like that. He would throw-up any and all meds when he was in elementary school. I had to get creative when he got sick.
@ Mars:
Try peanut butter.
//Works for Leia…
Calo wrote:
heh. I’m 60 yrs old
@ lobo91:
You are very astute for not having kids.
eaglesoars wrote:
I feel like I’m 60 lately…
Feel like music for some reason.
@ eaglesoars:
Just teasing you tonight eagles.
Thank you for taking it in stride.
Mars wrote:
see if he can drink it down -- swallow the liquid, not the pill.
Calo wrote:
Dogs…kids…same thing
@ lobo91:
Exercise, discipline and then love.
In that order.
Calo wrote:
And peanut butter-filled pretzels.
lobo91 wrote:
Dear heavens lobo! You are younger than me!!!!! The doctor said the outside of me looks like 30 but my insides are in their 70′s! Oh yeah that was a pick me up. I’m 53 ….try and enjoy what you can…look for the little things that will pick you up you don’t want to have to go through some life altering event to remind you trust me. One day at a time. I was reading my Bible the other day…the definition of LOVE hit me hard. Love is the most powerful. Healing. Patient. Doesn’t hold grudges. Erases many sins. Is healing. After I read it..I really took notice of things I hadn’t before. It meant something very powerful. And in my opinion was the single main reason for me still being here.
lobo91 wrote:
I know people think aging is so much more difficult for women than it is for men. I don’t think so.
For women the expectations are so much lower than they were when we were young and drop-dead pretty or just too cute. There is a huge release in that. We’re done with that crap. If I need help getting something off a grocery shelf I go find the cutest guy in the store and ask -- and nobody thinks I’m hitting on him. If I yell at high school kids on their lunch break at Wendy’s, they know I’m serious and I WILL kick their ass. I’m everybody’s mother/grandmother and that’s not a bad cultural slot to be put in.
@ Lily:
Crap, Lily is trying to pick up Lobo.
Lobo loves Leia.
And Leia only wants peanut butter and kicked Lily to the curb.
And,Eagle is kicking all our asses across the room tonight.
Where is Bunk?
@ Calo:
Got my rear kicked again didn’t I????
Calo wrote:
she’s secretely married to heysoos…..they have the best fights EVEH
@ eaglesoars:
When I wrote that, I was mostly thinking about joint pains and stuff, mostly related to my time in uniform. There’s a reason military personnel can retire after 20 years. Of course, they screwed me out of that…
I know that a lot of women over 40 or so feel like they become “invisible” to men, somehow. I pretty much feel the same way most of the time, so I understand the concept.
An oldie from my teens again…
eaglesoars wrote:
Hush your mouth! OMG!!!!!!!!!!
/but I must admit looks like a good business venture…maybe we could sell tickets? It’s a thought. LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL!
@ eaglesoars:
Did you get a chance to watch the season premiere of Justified yet?
My life would be much better with Elmore Leonard dialogue…
Is it just me and lobo????
@ Lily:
ROLFLMAO
lobo91 wrote:
And these are the women who do not know how to appreciate men. Far too many women think of men in terms of validating THEM instead of thinking of men as the most fascinating creatures on the planet.
Which, frankly, they are.
I was disgusted at the faux outrage over that sports caster’s comments about the Alabama quarterback’s girlfriend being beautiful. Find me a man who doesn’t get knocked off his feet by that woman or is afraid to say so. I want and admire unrepentant testosterone. Hubby comments frequently how stunning he thinks Andrea Tanteros is. He’s 72. When he stops noticing or stops caring I hope it’s because he’s not breathing.
@ lobo91:
Just be you. Your smart. Your kind. Those are things you don’t see all the time.
Lily wrote:
Leia’s still here, too.
I’m watching a Poison show from a few years ago.
Leia doesn’t want to dance.
@ eaglesoars:
Have to agree…let men be men. Of course with some manners. But not girly manners …men manners.
lobo91 wrote:
YESS!! I LOVED it! The only thing I’m missing is ‘place’. I picked up -- I think -- Harlan County. Is this taking place in Kentucky?
I’m here, but being the /lurk /galt doesn’t add up to much.
/galt
@ eaglesoars:
Megyn Kelly had Kirstin Powers and Monica Crowley on yesterday to talk about that.
All three of them thought the whole thing was nuts.
Calo wrote:
Perfect song….for that comment!
@ eaglesoars:
Ditto eagle.
Men appreciate and are biologically attuned to appreciate beauty.
Women are wired a bit differently.
@ eaglesoars:
You haven’t seen the first 3 seasons?
Yes, it’s Harlan County.
@ CynicalConservative:
A 3 peat please, before I ask you about which nail polish to use tonight.
@ Calo:
Women are supposed to be wired to appreciate someone who would be a good provider.
But feminists have spent the past 40 years reprogramming them.
Lily wrote:
Nah, the rest of us are just watching.
As far as pretty women, on a whim, Mrs Federalist and I decided to take a peek at Double Divas since nothing else was on that we haven’t seen already (when you are stuck in one position for weeks on end, you watch lots of TV). They were fitting some dude with something for his moobs. We got out of that one quick and moved on to Rocket City Rednecks.
@ eaglesoars:
I loved the scene where the hooker shot the judge who was wearing the bear costume.
Calo wrote:
Well the answer of course would be red.
/and you know I live by that.
I’ve decided that I want to be Raylan Givens when I grow up.
But I don’t want to live in eastern Kentucky.
@ AZfederalist:
Oh my!!!!! I saw previews of that show but they never showed a man! Yeah I know the feeling. I’m stuck on the couch. Let’s see…I have gone through all 5 seasons of Sons of Anarchy (excellent show..but not for the faint of heart)…I have gone through all 7 seasons of The Shield (very good I must say)….now something for you and your wife an excellent show which I’m watching now just one season but wraps up real well Moonlight (my husband loved it and so did I) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0955346/
Tonight I giving a whirl on the computer.
Calo wrote:
Bullshit. The definition of beauty in terms of instinct/biology may be different.
‘Feminists’ have given us the ‘metro-sexual’ -- who get their chests waxed blah blah blah.
The triggers are different -- that’s all. I want a thread on the destruction of masculinity by commie feminists.
Does anyone really think of Obama as terribly masculine? No. Zip once posted a side-by-side photo of Reagan jumping a horse next to Obama riding a girl bike, in mom jeans, wearing a helmet. I printed it and framed it. It’s on my desk.
@ lobo91:
Might be the problem tonight, you want it all and will give up nothing.
lobo91 wrote:
Oh Kentucky is a pretty state now.
/at least you aren’t wanting to grow up to be a Ninja Turtle.
lobo91 wrote:
Nope. I’m going to order the DVD. Way too good to pass up. This stuff is on the order of Lonesome Dove.
lobo91 wrote:
There is no providing w/o protection.
@ eaglesoars:
eaglesoars wrote:
Pretty much my favorite show since Miami Vice.
@ eaglesoars:
What are you talking about?
I like metrosexuals because I said women were wired to like things in men different than beauty?
Calo wrote:
@ lobo91:
Some of the actors in that show were in the Shield.
Calo wrote:
Sorry -- I wasn’t clear I guess.
Metrosexuals are de-masculine-ized. They are not feminine -- they are just neutered.
@ Lily:
Thanks, we’ll have to look into that. The iPad has been really good for this since I can read and post while still properly positioned; it is kind of hard on the arm using the keypad from laying on my side, so postings are slow, but do-able.
Calo wrote:
Yep…real women like real men. Men are attracted by looks…women are attracted by different things…how the man handles himself…looks too but not in the way men do….the arms or the legs or the way the man carries himself. Women want someone who is gentle but tough at the same time. Men go straight for looks and sometimes go for women that just aren’t right for them. Women too do this…but smart women know that when looking for a man they need to not only go with their hearts but also use their brains. Personality also matters to a woman. Men well ….will always shoot for a beauty queen …..until they realize that isn’t the real deal at times.
I love this promo from last year’s Superbowl:
AZfederalist wrote:
Don’t know what type of shows you like but if you haven’t seen these 3 shows ….wow you are in for a treat. And there is 3 seasons of Justified too out there. Good show also. I have months until I get better. I’ll be really onto a lot of shows.
@ Lily:
I’d just like to find someone reasonably attractive who isn’t evil. Or crazy.
I don’t need a beauty queen.
@ lobo91:
Then look for personality. If a woman has a great one…they look beautiful despiste their faults. Someone is out there for you!
Lily wrote:
Have youtried 24? I got addicted.
Lily wrote:
have you seen Vegas on CBS?
Michael Chiklis is in that.
@ Lily:
Wife likes CSI. I’m more into Duck Dynasty, Storage Wars, etc for fun and Military Channel type shows for information. Also Velocity channel shows. But they haven’t been showing their usual fare lately. They’ve been doing nature shows instead; not sure what’s up with that. Have also been using some NetFlix.
Lily wrote:
I’m fairly certain they’re all crazy.
Or way too young for me.
@ lobo91:
Lobo, you have a wicked sense of humor.
That is what makes me respond to you most nights, your sense of humor.
Use it wisely, never maliciously.
lobo91 wrote:
Nope but my mom mentioned it. I need to look into it! Thanks for reminding me.
lobo91 wrote:
Good thing. My sister and my 3 girlfriends all thru school were beauty queen material. It sucks. Only one came thru it to early adulthood sane. It took about a decade for the other 3 to adjust appropriately. When people are so distracted by your looks, it’s very difficult to connect in a healthy manner. I remember my sister didn’t wear makeup for about a year, she got so tired of it.
Some never make it.
@ Lily:
Michael Chiklis…Dennis Quaid…Jason O’Mara
And for the non-metrosexuals among us, there’s Carrie-Anen Moss and Sarah Jones
lobo91 wrote:
Check into someone a little older. You might be surprised and Calo is right…your sense of humor is awesome. A older women isn’t insecure. A older women doesn’t care if you watch your baseball. A older women cooks like a chef. A older women doesn’t have to be like a child and consume you …… there are a lot of lonely older women. And they aren’t hurting for money either. Just saying.
@ Lily:
I’m ideally looking for someone a few years younger than I am, like early-mid 40s.
I’ve run across several in my classes recently who really made me wish I was 20 years younger, though…
AZfederalist wrote:
The shows I mentioned are a bit different than these. You might like them…..Moonlight I think you should try first and your wife will like it. I had my misgivings about it…until I watched it. Way cool.
@ Lily:
Vegas is loosely based on the exploits of the actual sheriff who was in office there from the early ’60s to the 80s.
lobo91 wrote:
Well if you are striking out in that area…go older. Not a lot older just a few years older. You will be really surprised. Trust me.
@ eaglesoars:
Beauty fades…
Personality lingers on like a pair of sandals gone wrong. WTF?
@ Lily:
I thought you were talking about Moonlighting at first.
I have most of that on DVD.
lobo91 wrote:
You know that isn’t much different than The Shield….because The Shield was loosely based on a group of cops that were in the Rampart area of Los Angeles…they are in jail now.
lobo91 wrote:
Oh no the show. It’s a good show. It lasted only one season but it wrapped itself up in one season too. I was really surprised with that show. I loved it.
@ Lily:
Where they belong.
Michael Chiklis plays a mob-connected casino boss in Vegas. Dennis Quaid is the sheriff, who was an MP in WWII (the show is set in 1961 or so).
Calo wrote:
keeee-RIST woman! You have way too much time on your hands.
Now I’m going to have nightmares……..
Calo wrote:
Oh my! Shoes should enhance the foot….this is abuse of shoes and feet. I could only peek at that. That is horrible!!!!!!!!!!
@ Lily:
I’ll look into Moonlight. After all, I’ve got time.
@ eaglesoars:
I just sit at home and scour the web everyday for weird stuff.
Night eaglesoars!
lobo91 wrote:
Sounds like a show I would like. As far as The Shield…..rogue team of cops….not sure they committed the crimes that are in the show though…but they did over-step the line big time.
AZfederalist wrote:
I do too! Small world heh?
@ Lily:
Nicholas Pillegi is one of the producers.
He wrote the stories that were made into Wiseguys and Casino.
@ lobo91:
Sounds good! I’ll look into it.
@ Lily:
And I just like looking at Sarah Jones. She looks surprisingly good in the period costumes.
bedtime. nite all.
Sarah Jones
@ eaglesoars:
Night
@ lobo91:
Wow! Yeah a much younger lady there lobo!
@ eaglesoars:
Nite!!!!
Lily wrote:
As I said, I sometimes wish I was 20 years younger.
I had a 25 year old Air Force officer in my class the other day. I really felt old that day.
@ lobo91:
Yep, and I wish I was 20 years younger some days too.
But I am not and neither are you.
Now, move along and forward, Lobo.
Oh well, as someone mentioned earlier, looking just means I’m not dead.
I’m grounded enough in reality to know that nobody like that would ever be interested in me.
Well, bed time here. Good night all
Calo wrote:
No kidding! I do wish I was 20 years older…even though I know what is in store for me in my future. Maybe I’d be better prepared.
@ Lily:
Make that younger….damn not older.
@ lobo91:
@ lobo91:
Whatever Lobo.
You are throwing a lot of good women your age away who might be single instead for a young hottie who is good for what? A roll in the hay for a few years?
Meh, you might as well stock up on peanut butter pretzels instead.
@ Calo:
Yep! Lot’s of lonely women out there in their late 40′s and earlier 50′s! Not bad looking either if you give them a chance…and oh by the way they are what shall I say …..educated well?
@ Lily:
Whaaat?
@ Calo:
LOL! Said as it as softly as I could.
/you know it’s the truth.
@ Calo:
Plus came straight from a guy who was dating a older woman and that’s the truth. I swear.
@ Lily:
My hubbie is sound asleep, and I made it so, even though it is only Thursday night.
Night Lily.
Enjoyed the dialogue tonight.
@ Calo:
Nite Calo! Time for me to hit the hay myself. Hope you have a good day tomorrow!
Day late and a dollar short again, I see. Nothing on the last few subjects, as I’ve been married for what is now starting to be a long time, and I don’t watch TV.
Back on topic, Nixon was one of the best when fighting the spread of communism, despite Speranza’s ill-informed rant against Republican Presidents. Nixon was straddled by a liberal democrat-controlled congress, a mess in VietNam and Cronkite’s propaganda machine. Nixon was not charismatic, but he was not evil.
The name of this game is called “Ain’t no one good enough.”
In other words, this post should be retitled “The 100th Birthday Of Richard Milhous Nixon -- Let’s Give Him A Load Of Crap.”
Gee -- what a surprise.
Not.
@ Bunk X:
Well, at least it a change from campaigning against W. Personally, I’m waiting until we get back at least as far as Adams.
Lily wrote:
Divorbce #2 is about to be finalized. Tell me more!
Mike C. wrote:
I took last night off to play with my new TV but it seems I didn’t miss much -- a thread devoted to trashing a dead Republican (yeah, he wasn’t a conservative-no shit!) who hasn’t been in office for nearly 40 years. Seems kinda pointless, except that I’m sure it afforded some the occasion to give every Republican before and after Reagan their dose of abuse, with an extra dose for the execrable Bush (take yer pick).
Before long, we’ll all be on a thread lamenting how we don’t have the cohesion to present a “united front” like the Democrats. Sheesh.
Rodan wrote:
JFK was also a speed (in the drugs sense) addict.
@ MacDuff:
Ayup. A subsidiary of the Democratic Party -- “It’s all W’s fault.”
Oh, sorry -- I didn’t mean to worship him. My bad.
The GOP needs this, the GOP needs that. What some need is to stop fighting campaigns long past. There’s somewhat more pressing issues to deal with at the moment.
Short day at work. I’m taking 2 hours off this afternoon for a doctor’s appointment and my better half’s insistence. She dragged me over to the immediate care place about 5-6 weeks ago because of leg pain- she was worried that it might be more blockages like I had with my heart. They said it was just a pulled muscle, but it’s still bothering me, so I’m going to my regular MD to see what he says.
@ Mike C.:
100% on target there. We’ve GOT to work to fight what’s destroying America. Reagan was a great leader, but we need to find a Reagan for today, who can articulate values that will strengthen us as well as he did. And we need someone who’ll fight, and not give in like (sadly) Reagan did when he went along with Tip O’Neil with the ‘I’ll raise taxes today if you’ll cut spending tomorrow’ deal. We need to learn our lesson, that the left will never be willing to cut spending except the military.
On Fox’s site, written by a liberal, Douglas Schoen: Richard Nixon — the last great liberal
It’s pretty spot-on. Now, let’s let the man rest in peace and move on to the task at hand.
Bunk X wrote:
You really are a Nixonian. I guess we can no longer talk about the Carter administration either?
Bunk X wrote:
Horseshit. Nixon gave so much to the USSR in the great grain robbery and ultimately he lead to Jimmy Carter.
By the way do your own political threads. Now wonder why I come on less frequently anymore, carp, carp, carp.
I will give Nixon credit on one thing. He was against nation building!