Author Topic: JOHN EISENHOWER commentary  (Read 982 times)

Offline AKcurly

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1509
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« on: October 11, 2004, 02:38:35 AM »
http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=44657

 THE Presidential election to be held this coming Nov. 2 will be one of extraordinary importance to the future of our nation. The outcome will determine whether this country will continue on the same path it has followed for the last 3˝ years or whether it will return to a set of core domestic and foreign policy values that have been at the heart of what has made this country great.

Now more than ever, we voters will have to make cool judgments, unencumbered by habits of the past. Experts tell us that we tend to vote as our parents did or as we “always have.” We remained loyal to party labels. We cannot afford that luxury in the election of 2004. There are times when we must break with the past, and I believe this is one of them.

As son of a Republican President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, it is automatically expected by many that I am a Republican. For 50 years, through the election of 2000, I was. With the current administration’s decision to invade Iraq unilaterally, however, I changed my voter registration to independent, and barring some utterly unforeseen development, I intend to vote for the Democratic Presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry.

The fact is that today’s “Republican” Party is one with which I am totally unfamiliar. To me, the word “Republican” has always been synonymous with the word “responsibility,” which has meant limiting our governmental obligations to those we can afford in human and financial terms. Today’s whopping budget deficit of some $440 billion does not meet that criterion.

Responsibility used to be observed in foreign affairs. That has meant respect for others. America, though recognized as the leader of the community of nations, has always acted as a part of it, not as a maverick separate from that community and at times insulting towards it. Leadership involves setting a direction and building consensus, not viewing other countries as practically devoid of significance. Recent developments indicate that the current Republican Party leadership has confused confident leadership with hubris and arrogance.

In the Middle East crisis of 1991, President George H.W. Bush marshaled world opinion through the United Nations before employing military force to free Kuwait from Saddam Hussein. Through negotiation he arranged for the action to be financed by all the industrialized nations, not just the United States. When Kuwait had been freed, President George H. W. Bush stayed within the United Nations mandate, aware of the dangers of occupying an entire nation.

Today many people are rightly concerned about our precious individual freedoms, our privacy, the basis of our democracy. Of course we must fight terrorism, but have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so? I wonder. In 1960, President Eisenhower told the Republican convention, “If ever we put any other value above (our) liberty, and above principle, we shall lose both.” I would appreciate hearing such warnings from the Republican Party of today.

The Republican Party I used to know placed heavy emphasis on fiscal responsibility, which included balancing the budget whenever the state of the economy allowed it to do so. The Eisenhower administration accomplished that difficult task three times during its eight years in office. It did not attain that remarkable achievement by cutting taxes for the rich. Republicans disliked taxes, of course, but the party accepted them as a necessary means of keep the nation’s financial structure sound.

The Republicans used to be deeply concerned for the middle class and small business. Today’s Republican leadership, while not solely accountable for the loss of American jobs, encourages it with its tax code and heads us in the direction of a society of very rich and very poor.

Sen. Kerry, in whom I am willing to place my trust, has demonstrated that he is courageous, sober, competent, and concerned with fighting the dangers associated with the widening socio-economic gap in this country. I will vote for him enthusiastically.

I celebrate, along with other Americans, the diversity of opinion in this country. But let it be based on careful thought. I urge everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, to avoid voting for a ticket merely because it carries the label of the party of one’s parents or of our own ingrained habits.

John Eisenhower, son of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, served on the White House staff between October 1958 and the end of the Eisenhower administration. From 1961 to 1964 he assisted his father in writing “The White House Years,” his Presidential memoirs. He served as American ambassador to Belgium between 1969 and 1971. He is the author of nine books, largely on military subjects.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2004, 02:48:59 AM »
Baaahhhh, shock outrage!  Welcome to several days or weeks ago curly...

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #2 on: October 11, 2004, 03:09:19 AM »
Wow it's John CHIRAQ Eisenhower speaking ?

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #3 on: October 11, 2004, 08:17:29 AM »
I heard one of Regans relatives is gonna vote for kerrie too.   Pretty hard to fight that swell of enthusiasm.

lazs

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #4 on: October 11, 2004, 09:18:16 AM »
Interesting how the three Bush defenders above chose to respond to an intelligent criticism of Bush's policies:  they didn't.  Instead, each one makes a short, silly, sarcastic statement, as if their "genius" wit could somehow nullifiy the well-reasoned comments of a man whose understanding of politics is miles beyond their own.

And I expect their responses to this criticism to be more of the same.  

Can any of you actually put together an argument that refutes what Eisenhower has to say?

Sad that when the level of political discussion is raised by someone like Eisenhower, so many others have to come along and drag it back down again.


MRPLUTO
« Last Edit: October 11, 2004, 09:28:16 AM by MRPLUTO »

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18112
when someone thinks this about skerry
« Reply #5 on: October 11, 2004, 09:24:23 AM »
Sen. Kerry, in whom I am willing to place my trust, has demonstrated that he is courageous, sober, competent, and concerned with fighting the dangers associated with the widening socio-economic gap in this country. I will vote for him enthusiastically.

I do not care who he is and what else he has to say about this election ...
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12681
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2004, 09:36:09 AM »
I took my son to see "In the Face of Evil" yesterday. The unpopularity that Reagan encountered when he uncompromisingly faced down the Soviet Union is very much a reason for me to remember the past and vote for the one that will stand steadfast in opposing the tyranny of terrorism.

Rather than be "unencumbered by habits of the past" I'll observe and learn from the past and hope we don't repeat the same mistakes.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2004, 09:37:12 AM »
Eagler's post above is another way to avoid having to face this challenge: simply point one's nose in the air and declare you don't care what anybody says.

Clearly, Eisenhower's criticisms are on the mark, so methods other than reasoned discussion must must be quickly found to fight (or ignore) him.

MRPLUTO

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27251
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2004, 09:50:49 AM »
When it comes to a choice of Dumb or Dumber...I choose Bush (Dumb).

Once the 60's generation of candidates dies off (Peace, Love, Dope), we should (hopefully) have some decent candidates running for the POTUS.

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2004, 09:54:20 AM »
eisenwho?

BUSH/CHENEY 2004
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2004, 10:03:46 AM »
More of the same...no Bush defender will take on Eisenhower, some just insult him, but even then without any wit or imagination.

MRPLUTO

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12681
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2004, 10:15:33 AM »
"Of course we must fight terrorism, but have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so?"


I guess that depends on how you see the threat. Many thought that détente with the Soviets was the preferred way to go. Many thought that the Soviets could not be defeated. Reagan proved them wrong. Many say that terrorism cannot be defeated. I believe they are wrong.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline MRPLUTO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 644
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2004, 10:54:50 AM »
AKIron--

The issue isn't whether we can defeat terrorism, it's "have we irresponsibly gone overboard in doing so?"

I don't know what Reagan and the Soviet Union have to do with this; the conflicts are very different.  Also, in the context Eisenhower was writing, he was refering to personal freedoms, not international conflict.  

But bringing up Reagan's name in a pinch sure helps.  But that's another post...let's stick to what Eisenhower said.

Can anyone refute Eisenhower's criticisms of the Bush-Republicans?  I mean refute--not just say, "Well, I disagree."

MRPLUTO

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12681
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2004, 10:59:48 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MRPLUTO
But bringing up Reagan's name in a pinch sure helps.  But that's another post...let's stick to what Eisenhower said.

MRPLUTO


If you can bring up Eisenhower's name I guess it's only fair to let me bring in Reagan's.

However, I did so because there is a parallel in fighting communism and terrorism. The price in defeating the USSR was hefty. Sounds like Eisenhower is not willing to pay the price to defeat terrorism. Foolish IMO cause we'll pay the price later if we don't pay it now.
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Torque

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2091
JOHN EISENHOWER commentary
« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2004, 12:09:27 PM »
Odd you'd bring up Reagan's name, the only American prez to be condemned by the World Court for sponsoring international terrorism.