US Presidents

[Stefan Haertel]

Hey, could anyone provide me with biographies of all the US presidents from Nixon to Bush I.?
I confess I don't really like these guys, but I'd like to read something somewhat more extensive on them to support/change my opinions on them.
They may be biased, whatever, I don't really mind. If anyone here could give me a direct description of the president from their point of view, that'd be gratefully accepted as well. Thanks.

Nixon and Ford are't really neccessary, but Carter, Reagan and Bush are.

 

[Alcibiaties of Athenae]

Try this, bios of EVERY US president

http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/prescont.html

 

[donsig]

They may be biased, whatever, I don't really mind. If anyone here could give me a direct description of the president from their point of view

Boy, that's an open invitation if I ever heard one. Ok, here goes:

I first voted in the 1980 election when Reagan challenged and beat the incumbet, Carter. Those two were really different personalities and at opposite ends of the ideological scale as well. To me, Carter represented peace and liberalism (i.e., we all help each other) while Reagan represented war and conservatism (i.e., it's every man for himself). I opted for Carter. I can still remember that election night. Went to bed knowing that Reagan had won and I dreamt about ICBM's flying around... Watched Bedtime for Bonzo the first night Reagan was President.

In '84 (Reagan vs. Mondale) I was pretty complacent. Since we had made it through four years without ICBM's and things were happy I was actually going to vote for Reagan. he came to Rochester for a campaign stop and I went to see him. I could not agree with anything the man said. he gave the speech at the War Memorial and I sat there surrounded by five thousand cheering people but as I listened to what the man said I just could not agree with him. I left not wanting to vote for him. That same afternoon I went to see Jessie Jackson at Monroe Comm. College and his speech not only convinced me to vote for Mondale but to register as a democrat as well. (I had not been affiliated with a party before then.)

Growing up I never did beleive that Russians wanted to come over and conquer America. I figured they were just people trying to live their lives. I doubted they though about attacing America anymore than I thought about attacking Russia. Reagan played up the Evil Empire line and many American's fell for it. In reality I think it was an economic thing - Reagan kept the defense contractors afloat and he kept people working. Given half a chance I think Carter could have done the same only we wouldn't have produced as much in the way of armaments.

Reagan won the Cold War by out spending Russia. The consequences of this aren't even known yet. Carter may have been able to peacefully end the Cold War. He did get Egypt and Isreal talking I found that amazing at the time - and still consider it to be so.

By the time '88 rolled around i was losing interest. Both Carter and Mondale disappeared from the scene after their losses. That I could never understand. I'm sure they both had much to contribute. Sure, Carter has done alot of peace work but that has all been behind the scenes. He has had no part in the policy debates that have been on-going since his presidency.

'88 was Bush vs. Dukakis. I lived in Florida at the time and remember using paper ballots to vote. I still consider that primitive compared to the voting machines used in New York. Anyway, I voted democratic on principle. Neither candidate impressed me and I knew Bush had been director of the CIA. Not a plus in my book. Bush did all right against Iraq but I still think he never considered peace seriously. He intended right along to go into Iraq. we needed to use some of those arms Reagan had bought - so we could buy more and keep everyone working in those defense plants. i don't think Bush deserved the ridicule he got but then he didn't deserve high praises either...

Carter is the greatest President in my memory (and I can remember as far back as Nixon!)

 

[Stefan Haertel]

Sorry for not answering so long...

AoA: Thanks a lot! That link is great, it was exactly what I was looking for.

donsig: Interesting reading, truly. I must say that a lot of what you wrote is pretty much my speech. I hope this isn't off-topic political discussion, but this is the closest opinion to mine I've ever heard from an American (this not to be meant as any sort of offense).
I find it quite interesting however, that in comparrison, the political positions in the USA and in Germany are so very different. Of course, there are conservative and liberal parties here as well, but it's not really the same. The major conservative party in Germany is the CDU (Christian-Democratic Union) with a sepparate fraction for the Bavarians (as usual ), the CSU (Christian-Social Union, usually in the 30s or 40% in the elections). The most important liberal party, or at least the one that claims to be, is the FDP (Free/Liberal German Party, less than 10% regularly). Then there is also the SPD (Social Democratic Party of Germany, same as CDU) which is the actual opponent of the conservatives, being a more leftist (but not much) party. Interestingly enough, the liberals are always ready to go into coalition with the more promising major block; it was alongside with Adenauer (CDU), Erhardt (CDU), and then Brandt (SPD), Schmidt (SPD) and then again Kohl (CDU). In the history of the federal republic, only two governments were without it, that of the grand coalition (SPD/CDU, 1966-69, with Kurt-Georg Kiesinger being chancellor), and the recent one (SPD/Greens). The Greens of the recent government (same as FDP, but only since '94) are yet further left than the SPD. As a matter of fact, in comparrison with what the US-Government is and was made of, the recent german government appears almost a communist one (f.e. the color of the SPD is red, and their politicians frequently use the word "comrades"; Oskar Lafontaine, the first financial minister of this government, who resigned in 1999, is quoted saying "my heart beats left"). The most successful communistic party in Germany is the PDS (Party of German Socialists, up to 6 or 7% last elections), continuously named successors of the SED (the governmental party of former East Germany). I cannot but agree with this, but also say that it is definately not the same party anymore. As a matter of fact, their head, Gregor Gysi, is the german politician I have the highest opinion of.

I just wrote this to point out the differences between the US and the german party system I personally feel.

Any other opinions welcome.

 

[Kublai-Khan]

Stefan, can you provide me with some information or links about the general situation of eastern Germany nowadays, more than ten years after the reunification.
I mean, standard of life, comparison between the eastern and western Germany.

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by donsig


Boy, that's an open invitation if I ever heard one. Ok, here goes:

I first voted in the 1980 election when Reagan challenged and beat the incumbet, Carter. Those two were really different personalities and at opposite ends of the ideological scale as well. To me, Carter represented peace and liberalism (i.e., we all help each other) while Reagan represented war and conservatism (i.e., it's every man for himself). I opted for Carter. I can still remember that election night. Went to bed knowing that Reagan had won and I dreamt about ICBM's flying around... Watched Bedtime for Bonzo the first night Reagan was President.

In '84 (Reagan vs. Mondale) I was pretty complacent. Since we had made it through four years without ICBM's and things were happy I was actually going to vote for Reagan. he came to Rochester for a campaign stop and I went to see him. I could not agree with anything the man said. he gave the speech at the War Memorial and I sat there surrounded by five thousand cheering people but as I listened to what the man said I just could not agree with him. I left not wanting to vote for him. That same afternoon I went to see Jessie Jackson at Monroe Comm. College and his speech not only convinced me to vote for Mondale but to register as a democrat as well. (I had not been affiliated with a party before then.)

Growing up I never did beleive that Russians wanted to come over and conquer America. I figured they were just people trying to live their lives. I doubted they though about attacing America anymore than I thought about attacking Russia. Reagan played up the Evil Empire line and many American's fell for it. In reality I think it was an economic thing - Reagan kept the defense contractors afloat and he kept people working. Given half a chance I think Carter could have done the same only we wouldn't have produced as much in the way of armaments.

Reagan won the Cold War by out spending Russia. The consequences of this aren't even known yet. Carter may have been able to peacefully end the Cold War. He did get Egypt and Isreal talking I found that amazing at the time - and still consider it to be so.
...snip...
Carter is the greatest President in my memory (and I can remember as far back as Nixon!)

Just looking to add some equal representation after the fact

Even back to the days of Kruschev (and his pounding shoe speech at the UN indicating he intended to bury us) there were valid Soviet idiologists and plans to attempt to "hasten the collapse" of the decadent western democracies.

If you feared ICBM's then you actually had more to fear from Mr. Carter who refused to invest in a conventional defense necessary to support our committment to NATO at a time that the USSR was building up huge forces in East Germany.

The mismatch near the Fulda Gap in the late 70's was so bad that most liberal analysts felt that NATO could hold out for 5-7 days at best against the offensive force deployed by the Warsaw Pact.

During this time, your favorite President, officially made US policy announcements that said that the US would counter any conventional attack by the WP in europe with nuclear weapons. This was an act of desperation given the situation.

The cold war would never had ended peacefully under a Carter lead regime. The Soviet economy was collapsing, they had two internal struggles and choices to make, either let it collapse or fight to bring down the west.

If the build up to reasonable levels of military force had not been made under Reagan, I fear they would have chosen the five day solution and called Carter's bluff.

Much like the current Palenstinian situation, it really doesn't matter what the Soviet people themselves would have wanted, they had zero say in the matter. Reagan simply built up forces that are necessary to defend the interests of the US. Something badly mishandled, among other things by Mr. Carter. There are bad people in this world, we have to face that.

Carter is undoubtedly our greatest ex-President though. His humanitarian work with Habitat for Humanity and election observations in central america are quite admirable, and compare more than favorably to Reagan (who admittedly is limited by Alz disease), Ford (who can't even play golf right), Bush I and Clinton (who are both on the money grubbing path).

Just a different view

Bill

 

[Mats Norrman]

Originally posted by donsig
Carter is the greatest President in my memory (and I can remember as far back as Nixon!)

As I understand had it not been for the Watergate Scandal Nixon would have had good chances as being remembered as a very good president. But how should one else expect that the soft fascist phalanx in USA will treat a president that put their war (Vietnam) to an end?

Mats Norrman
mats.norrman@home.se

 

[Mats Norrman]

Originally posted by Stefan Härtel
Hey, could anyone provide me with biographies of all the US presidents from Nixon to Bush I.?

I am not going to engage in why you need the biographies of these specific presidents, but I wanted to say that in general I enjoyed reading the biographies of the U.S. persidents as there are so many oddbirds among them.

I guess you have read the essentials about Father Abraham, but another very interesting is James Garfield who was murdered in 1881. The guy learnt himself classic Greek and Latin at age 4 and as adult he could write differnt things in Greek (with one hand) and Latin (with the other) simultaneously. Probably the most intelligent in a bunch of very bright people (though that doesn't say he was the best president).

Mats Norrman
mats.norrman@home.se

 

[donsig]

Poor Garfield. Would have lived had the doctors left him alone!

What do you know, it has been ten years since Germany reunited. I just saw a book titled "Ten years of German reunification." (I work at a library.) Seems like only yesterday though. Time flies when your having fun.

Well, I've gotta reply to my friend Bil_in_PDX:

Well, sure there were Soviets who wanted to hasten America's demise - just like there were American's who wanted not only to contain communism but rid the world of it. Overall though there was no real thought of one country conquering the other.

Fulda Gap sounds familiar but I'm not up on my history. I can still hear President Ford saying there's no Soviet domination of Poland. Anyway, suppose the Soviets could have over run Europe at the time. That wouldn't have been the end nor would it mean ICBMs would fly. American forces world wide would still have been formidable not to mention any new friends America would have gained as a result of the USSR taking western Europe.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the USSR and USA really had nothing worth fighting about. It's that and not ICBMs or military build-ups that prevented a Hot War.

 

[Richard III]

Donsig, don't worry, the reference to the Fulda Gap is futuristic history, not real history.

The Fulda Gap is a wide east-west valley in central Germany, on the old inter-german border. Since it was both the easiest route for Russian tank divisions to take to get to the Rhine and also the best place that NATO could hope to choke off such a spearhead in the central sector, it was widely expected to be the site of a major tank battle in any hypothetical Third World War.

R.III

 

[Stefan Haertel]

The Fulda Gap is a wide east-west valley in central Germany, on the old inter-german border. Since it was both the
easiest route for Russian tank divisions to take to get to the Rhine and also the best place that NATO could hope to
choke off such a spearhead in the central sector, it was widely expected to be the site of a major tank battle in
any hypothetical Third World War.

Even in a WWIII scenario, that would (have) be(en) hypothetical. While Germany, perhaps alongside with Austria, would have definately been the major battlefield of a war between the states of the NATO and those of the Warsaw Pact, the question is wether it would have actually come as far as that. Yes, Fulda is very close to the border between Hessen and Thüringen (Hessen being part of the former FRG, Thüringen of the GDR), but the truth is, that "Western" nuclear missiles were situated in New-Ulm, Schwäbisch-Gmünd, Neckarsulm and Wüscheim, while soviet missiles were in East Berlin, Bernsdorf, Milovice and Temelin (the latter two in the former CSSR), and that plans existed to fire these immediately when necessary. The one or other would have landed in Germany. I believe this scenario would (have) be(en) more realistic than any kind of "tank battle".

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by donsig

Well, I've gotta reply to my friend Bil_in_PDX:

Well, sure there were Soviets who wanted to hasten America's demise - just like there were American's who wanted not only to contain communism but rid the world of it. Overall though there was no real thought of one country conquering the other.

Fulda Gap sounds familiar but I'm not up on my history. I can still hear President Ford saying there's no Soviet domination of Poland. Anyway, suppose the Soviets could have over run Europe at the time. That wouldn't have been the end nor would it mean ICBMs would fly. American forces world wide would still have been formidable not to mention any new friends America would have gained as a result of the USSR taking western Europe.

One other thing to keep in mind is that the USSR and USA really had nothing worth fighting about. It's that and not ICBMs or military build-ups that prevented a Hot War.

Hail Donsig!

I am glad we are still friends

I agree that the USA and Russia have nothing to fight about. In fact, they would make the perfect global alliance But the USA and USSR would have had much to fight about, that being the spread of global ideology that was designed to bring down the governement of the US.

Now, I don't think that the marxist/communist/leninist (whatever it's supporters call it now in apology) would have succeeded any more than Osama's actions will, but nevertheless, a prudent country prepares and defends against it.

Oh, and I agree, had the Warsaw Pact invaded West Germany, they would have done so claiming unification, and France would have joined their side. Would Carter had fired those ICBM's? Very doubtful, but the risk was real. We are fortunate that the USSR didn't decide to find out.

I always find it entertaining that many will ascribe evil intent on all US actions and policies, yet feel that the opponents of the US are full of virtue even as they deployed over 200 combat ready divisions in eastern europe.

Bill

 

[Bill_in_PDX]

Originally posted by Richard III
Donsig, don't worry, the reference to the Fulda Gap is futuristic history, not real history.

The Fulda Gap is a wide east-west valley in central Germany, on the old inter-german border. Since it was both the easiest route for Russian tank divisions to take to get to the Rhine and also the best place that NATO could hope to choke off such a spearhead in the central sector, it was widely expected to be the site of a major tank battle in any hypothetical Third World War.

R.III

I don't understand the point of your response Richard. Obviously I didn't say there had been a tank battle at Fulda. I'm pretty sure we all would have remembered that, it would have been on the news...even CNN, who's correspondants would blame the NATO tanks for blowing up and hurting the environment while doing so.

The deployment of combat ready mobile, not defensive only, forces in east germany was quite real as I am sure you are aware, from reading your posts elsewhere.

Bill

 

[donsig]

But the USA and USSR would have had much to fight about, that being the spread of global ideology that was designed to bring down the governement of the US.

So, who had more guys trying to bring down the other's government? Our very own CIA was trying to topple governments here and there. I think we (the US) did contribute to toppling the communist government, especially during the Reagan years by playing up the 'Evil Empire' and upping defense spending. Are we justified in doing that because they were trying to topple our government? More importantly COULD they have toppled our governemnt through either subterfuge or direct military power?

@Bill_in_PDX: Of course we are still friends! Back in the day some of my best friends were rabid Reaganites. I never blamed them for having such silly ideas.

I think I was born about ten years too late. I would have made a great hippy in the sixites. I hear what you're saying about defending our selves. I've had these type of conversations with my little brother over the years. (He was in the marines for about ten years.) I just wish the world was a nicer place, that's all and I refuse to stop hoping it will be someday.