Comments on Left Bank Blog: More Miscellany

The thing about Nixon is, even most of the America...

2006-03-01T22:52:00.000-05:00

The thing about Nixon is, even most of the Americans who share the negative viewpoint about him have absolutely no idea how truly bad he was. He routinely subverted the law and the Constitution. When he received memos about foreign states that didn't conform to his every slight whim, he would make the notation "Bomb them" in the margin. He made criminal investigations of his biggest campaign donors go away, and trumped up investigations that would suit him politically. And while it seems more and more that Bush has done the same, Nixon demonstrably used the executive branch as his own personal Gestapo.

Reagan was an incompetent fool, but he was downright lovable next to Tricky Dick.

</rant>

Agreed that Nixon to China was a big deal. I actu...

2006-03-01T16:51:00.000-05:00

Agreed that Nixon to China was a big deal. I actually don't react so violently about Nixon. For some reason, it's mostly Kissinger and Reagan that make me angry. I think it's because history's verdict on Nixon is already negative, but most people still don't realize how awful Reagan and Kissinger were.

I understand. It's the same feeling I get anytime ...

2006-03-01T16:37:00.000-05:00

I understand. It's the same feeling I get anytime I have to admit that Richard Nixon's trip to China really was a diplomatic milestone.

Interesting. The more I've thought about this, th...

2006-03-01T12:22:00.000-05:00

Interesting.

The more I've thought about this, the more I think I'm wrong.

Still, I can't get past the visceral reaction that the mere mention of Henry Kissinger creates.

His point is who cares about the author of the art...

2006-03-01T10:08:00.000-05:00

His point is who cares about the author of the article if the case it makes is interesting and valid.

Josh is correct. You, Joe, are engaging in an ad hominem argument, not so far removed from "Who cares what Bill Clinton says? The man's an adulterer!" That is not on the scale of Kissinger (and you didn't even mention his REAL war crime, Cambodia), but it's still attacking the messenger and not the message.

It's the kind of tactic that Rush Limbaugh is famous for. From you, Joseph, I expect better. The argument should be taken on its merits, not its source. If you had read it without knowing who it was and agreed, would you have discarded it entirely when you found out it was Kissinger?