Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I recall, and I was there, it was the so-called left wingers that drove Johnson out of office. As I recall, and I was there, it was the right that insisted that without the defense of the corrupt government of the Republic of Vietnam that we would be fighting communist on the shores of Malibu (wow, that reminds me of another conservative slogan of recent vintage).
Yes, without a doubt Johnson, McNamarra, and Westmoreland were responsible for the loss of tens of thousands of American lives, which is why the left has not nor will not place him in the pantheon of "great" presidents. But that is only a partial portrait of Johnson's accomplishments. The fact also remains that Johnson, Texan of meager background, a former school teacher understood the plight of the poor and disadvantaged and as President of the United States did more to to reduce structural poverty, and to advance equal opportunity than any President before or sense. Absent, the war, we on the "left" would regard him as one of the greatest presidents.
He was a champion of civil rights and at least "tried" to make this country a better place. You cannot blame the man for trying, can you? He was a masterful, skilled politician who knew how to play "the washington game". I wish that our current POTUS had that kind of talent.
He was the best politician of his day. No doubt about it.
So, when Bush says in his book that HE made the decision toi invade Iraq, he's lying? How's the weather there in FantasyLand today?
Only the Commander in Chief can make the decision to commit troops. We were attacked and Bush did the right thing by responding to ALL threats from that region.
Don't get snippy with me. I responded to nothing that was in your quote. My response was to the statement I referred to. You quoted something else and then make inferences about what I was saying.
Perhaps you should pay attention to what you are saying and what you are saying it in response to before you embarass yourself so horribly again. Now back to the sandbox.
Unbelievable.
This is really ironic, considering that you don't even recognize the post that the person you were responding to was themselves responding to. I don't quite understand why you're unable to comprehend why moionfire said what they did. Nowhere did moionfire claim that there was a single cause, and in fact that was the entire purpose of their post, to point out that LBJ was not "100%" responsible for black poverty. I don't really know how it could be spelled out more easily for you.
LBJ helped to rename slavery .. if you're so interested in learning about him, simply look up his voting record while he was in Congress .. especially the time around and during the Eisenhower Presidency ..
It goes on and on .. just go to Google and do some research
Yeah, I'm still waiting on that "research" about LBJ renaming slavery, which was long dead by the time he was born, and I'm still wondering what this has to do with anything I've said. A 19 second youtube video linked on "thewrap.com" does not constitute research, nor do I see how white supremacist policy is linked to his social policy.
Thank You ! ... At last somone who knows factual history regarding the thread subject matter !
Perhaps a select few others here on good old CDF should actually take the time to read ... yes "Read" a good , reliable, & factual history book before making such postulated statements about LBJ and his era of history.
GregW has set an excellent example for some of the blokes on here !
Don't waste it !!! It's never to late to get some smarts !
Thanks / Old Sgt. Lamar
Just wondering......do you ever make any posts with original thoughts, or do you just enjoy cheering others? Do you have any specific information about LBJ which you could add which has not been brought up already, since you advocate reading "good, reliable & factual" history books?
Actually poverty DECLINED signficantly during the Kennedy-Johnson Administration. This administration has the BEST RECORD in reducing poverty of any two term adminstration since 1960.
Bush 43
Americans Below The Poverty Level
2001 - 32.907 million 2008 - 39.829 million - increase 21.04%
Overall Population Growth
2001 - 281.475 million 2008 - 301.041 million - increase 6.95%
During the Bush 43 Administration poverty INCREASED three times faster than rate of population growth.
Clinton
Americans Below The Poverty Level
1993 - 39.265 million 2000 - 31.581 million - decrease 19.57%
Overall Population Growth
1993 - 259.278 million 2000 - 278.944 million - increase 7.58%
During the Clinton Administration poverty DECREASED 2.5 faster than the population grew.
Reagan
Americans Below The Poverty Level
1981 - 31.822 million 1988 - 31.745 million - increase 0.24%
Overall Population Growth
1981 - 227.157 million 1988 - 243.53 million - increase 7.21%
During the Reagan Administration poverty was relatively flat compared to population growth.
Nixon-Ford
Americans Below The Poverty Level
1969 - 24.147 million 1976 - 24.975 million - increase 3.43%
Overall Population Growth
1969 - 199.517 million 1976 - 212.303 million - increase 6.41%
During the Nixon - Ford Administrations poverty INCREASED about half as fast as the population grew.
Kennedy-Johnson
Americans Below The Poverty Level
1961 - 39.628 million 1968 - 25.389 million decrease 35.93%
Overalll Population Growth
1961 - 181.277 million 1968 - 197.628 million increase 9.02%
During the Kennedy-Johnson Administration poverty DECREASED about four times faster than the population grew.
You might do some research before you post your assertions. Also on another note poverty among Black Americans has DECLINED significantly in the past 50 years.
Because he's not the worst, not even close. Your point about the Great Society being "100% responsible for the poverty that exists in the black community," is extraordinarily incorrect and I'd love to see you find a scholarly source which argues in favor of such a claim.
the great society was what broke down the family structure in both white and black families. to the point of not trying to work out marital problems a woman could file for food stamps sec.8,health care,basically man was no longer needed to harvest the crop only to plant the seed so to speak
by asking about finding a scholarly person, do you mean one of the liberal college Profs. that tried to brainwash me? aren't they kind of on a welfare type gig called tenure themselves?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
