Presidential Comparison 4 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 11:37:52 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  Presidential Comparison 4 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Who did you like more as President?
#1
Lyndon Johnson
 
#2
Herbert Hoover
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 22

Author Topic: Presidential Comparison 4  (Read 5045 times)
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« on: June 05, 2008, 06:43:19 PM »

LBJ.  Hoover did nothing to respond to the Depression, while the Great Society was one of the greatest pieces of social legislation in history.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2008, 03:29:59 PM »

Hoover, he tried to protect the values of small government.  LBJ expolited Kennedy's death to try and expand the federal government.

He tried to get equal protection for blacks, and make sure poor people can have decent lives.  How awful of him Tongue
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2008, 03:36:51 PM »

Hoover, he tried to protect the values of small government.  LBJ expolited Kennedy's death to try and expand the federal government.

He tried to get equal protection for blacks, and make sure poor people can have decent lives.  How awful of him Tongue
Equal protection for blacks has nothing to do with expanding the federal government.  However, if you were trying to help homeless people, fighting a meaningless war was not a good way to increase the cash flow to them.

The war was certainly a mistake, that is true.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #3 on: June 08, 2008, 10:17:26 AM »

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2008, 10:38:57 AM »

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.
Not on American soil

That is irrelevant, though.  We did not provoke them, and they still attacked us.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2008, 11:35:11 AM »

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.
Not on American soil

That is irrelevant, though.  We did not provoke them, and they still attacked us.

What? Absolutely nonsensical.

It doesn't matter that we weren't attacked on American soil; we were still attacked without provocation.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2008, 11:41:22 AM »

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.
Not on American soil

That is irrelevant, though.  We did not provoke them, and they still attacked us.

What? Absolutely nonsensical.

It doesn't matter that we weren't attacked on American soil; we were still attacked without provocation.
WITHOUT PROVOCATION?  We were in Vietnam

We were defending South Vietnam.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2008, 11:45:58 AM »

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.
Not on American soil

That is irrelevant, though.  We did not provoke them, and they still attacked us.

What? Absolutely nonsensical.

It doesn't matter that we weren't attacked on American soil; we were still attacked without provocation.
WITHOUT PROVOCATION?  We were in Vietnam

We were defending South Vietnam.
Explain again how that is not provoking them.  "Oh yea, don't attack us we're just defending your enemy."

If they would just stay where they were supposed to be, and not invade another country, then we don't have a problem.  We didn't attack them, they attacked us first.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2008, 11:49:57 AM »

If they would just stay where they were supposed to be, and not invade another country, then we don't have a problem.  We didn't attack them, they attacked us first.
And what business did we have entangling ourselves in their civil war?  You basically admitted they were attacking S. Vietnam and not the US

The policy of containment.  They attacked an ally of ours.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2008, 11:56:44 AM »

If they would just stay where they were supposed to be, and not invade another country, then we don't have a problem.  We didn't attack them, they attacked us first.
And what business did we have entangling ourselves in their civil war?  You basically admitted they were attacking S. Vietnam and not the US

The policy of containment.  They attacked an ally of ours.
No one is disputing that, that does not mean we did not provoke them.  Helping someone's enemy on their home turf seems like the textbook definition of provocation

We stayed in S. Vietnam, so it wasn't their turf.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2008, 01:34:02 PM »

We stayed in S. Vietnam, so it wasn't their turf.
Didn't you argue in the other thread that the Union had every right to invade the Confederacy?  So its okay to invade soverign nations when it floats your boat?

The Confederacy had no right to secede in the first place.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2008, 01:41:04 PM »

We stayed in S. Vietnam, so it wasn't their turf.
Didn't you argue in the other thread that the Union had every right to invade the Confederacy?  So its okay to invade soverign nations when it floats your boat?

The Confederacy had no right to secede in the first place.
What right did South Vietnam have to be apart from North Vietnam?

They were divided up, and it was agreed to.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2008, 01:44:21 PM »

We stayed in S. Vietnam, so it wasn't their turf.
Didn't you argue in the other thread that the Union had every right to invade the Confederacy?  So its okay to invade soverign nations when it floats your boat?

The Confederacy had no right to secede in the first place.
What right did South Vietnam have to be apart from North Vietnam?

They were divided up, and it was agreed to.

By whom? De Gaulle?

The Geneva Agreements; although things would have been so much better if those elections had taken place.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


« Reply #13 on: June 13, 2008, 02:33:29 PM »

We stayed in S. Vietnam, so it wasn't their turf.
Didn't you argue in the other thread that the Union had every right to invade the Confederacy?  So its okay to invade soverign nations when it floats your boat?

The Confederacy had no right to secede in the first place.
What right did South Vietnam have to be apart from North Vietnam?

They were divided up, and it was agreed to.

By whom? De Gaulle?

The Geneva Agreements; although things would have been so much better if those elections had taken place.
You have, thankfully, acknowledged the accords were broken

Of course; you cannot argue with the facts.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 11 queries.