Presidential Comparison 4

[GPORTER]

I think that they were not great Presidents. I am going with Johnson.

What do you think? Who do you like more.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

LBJ.  Hoover did nothing to respond to the Depression, while the Great Society was one of the greatest pieces of social legislation in history.

[dead0man]

Hoover.  He might not have done the right things to prevent the depression, but it certainly can't be blamed on him.  LBJ's handling of Vietnam easily trumps anything you could remotely blame on Hoover.

[Хahar 🤔]

LBJ. Hoover wasn't as bad as some make him out to be, but Vietnam does not trump civil rights.

[War on Want]

LBJ. Hoover wasn't as bad as some make him out to be, but Vietnam does not trump civil rights.

[JSojourner]

Lyndon.  Who, if it had not been for his stupid pursuit of Vietnam might be the second-greatest President of the last century.

(You may call me Comrade Sojourner if you must.)  <grin>

[DownWithTheLeft]

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

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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

[DownWithTheLeft]

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

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.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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

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.

[dead0man]

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Do you dismiss the war in Iraq that easily?

No, at least in Vietnam, we were attacked first.

Not on American soil, and the only reason we had any interaction with them was because we refused to help them.  It seems to a historical consensus that if we had helped Ho Chi Mihn, they never would have become communists.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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.

I notice you choose to ignore the second part of the statement.  You also choose to ignore that they attacked us b/c we were THERE.  Obviously if they attacked us there, if we had not been there they wouldn't have been able to attack us.

[Хahar 🤔]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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.

What did you expect?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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."

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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

[Kaine for Senate '18]

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.

[DownWithTheLeft]

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