|
13 Feb 06 - 01:42 PM (#1667363) Subject: BS: wanted From: kendall I'm looking for one of those Eisenhower action figures. You wind it up and it sits on its ass for 8 years. |
|
13 Feb 06 - 01:55 PM (#1667380) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Stilly River Sage It's on the shelf near the Michael "FEMA" Brown inaction figure. |
|
13 Feb 06 - 05:38 PM (#1667593) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: leftydee Actually, I'd give a lot to get Ike in the White House now instead of the thugs that are there. Ike's politics included keeping out of people's personal lives and fiscal responsibility. That would sure be a breath of fresh air in Washington today. It was also Ike that first warned us about a military-industrial complex. If he were around today, Karl Rove would be finding ways to discredit his military record. I'm quite sure that Ike wouldn't be on the same page as the Bushies. The pedulum of American politics has swung so far right that today's brand of Republican-ism would be unrecognizable to him. |
|
13 Feb 06 - 06:08 PM (#1667618) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Liz the Squeak Actually, I think a mate of mine married it.... his partner had done sod all for at least the last 7years..... LTS |
|
13 Feb 06 - 06:25 PM (#1667632) Subject: RE: BS: wanted-Ike and maybe Tina From: Severn Omar Bradley's brother Milton was trying to reissue the Eisenhower action figures and games, but the Patton's still pending..... |
|
13 Feb 06 - 07:13 PM (#1667679) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: autolycus It sits on its ass for 8 years and you call it an "action" figure? Does that mean Eisenhower was the first U.S. President to be a taoist (closet?)? Now how would that be , taoist world leaders? Auto. |
|
13 Feb 06 - 07:51 PM (#1667732) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: kendall Actually, Einsenhower was the first president to get my vote. |
|
13 Feb 06 - 10:28 PM (#1667845) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Once Famous Eisenhower terms was one of the most peaceful in American history, coupled with huge economic growth. Must be a hard life to hate everyone. |
|
14 Feb 06 - 04:55 PM (#1668503) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: kendall Huge economic growth? What about Sputnik? What about the growth in the Soviet military ? That's what got Kennedy elected. As I recall, the St. Lawrence seaway was opened during the Eisenhower years, and the interstate highway system also goes in his success column. As Nixon said at his funeral, "Dwight D. Eisenhower was not only a great man, he was a good man." Man, could we use some of that today... |
|
14 Feb 06 - 05:03 PM (#1668512) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Little Hawk What got Kennedy elected was his good looks as compared to Nixon's five o'clock shadow. (Plus a little vote fixing by Daley and the Mob.) Eisenhower, on the other hand, was neither responsible for the prosperity and peace of that historical period, nor was he to blame for it being bland and sort of tacky, culturally speaking. He just happened to be there at the time, that's all. ;-) He was, I think, basically a good man. |
|
14 Feb 06 - 05:12 PM (#1668525) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Little Hawk When I think "Eisenhower" I picture a few things... Archie comics Elvis and Buddy Holly hula hoops girls with pony tails black men who wore nice suits and spoke very politely and articulately, like Sydney Poitier Sputnik cold war paranoia and HUAC soda stands beatniks motorcycle gangs like in "The Wild One" Brando drive-in movies cars with big fins kids with crew cuts white sneakers "The Honeymooners" and "I Love Lucy" Culturally speaking, it was possibly the silliest decade in all history...but it could be a lot of fun too, aside from the Cold War paranoia. |
|
14 Feb 06 - 10:31 PM (#1668825) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Ron Davies Ike warned against getting involved in a land war in Asia. I suspect a land war in the Mideast would also not be his cup of tea. As I recall, there was no US invasion at the time of the Suez crisis. The interesting thing is that there are still 2 sizable strands of Republicanism which oppose Bush's "excellent adventure" in Iraq. Moderates would like some justification for Americans killing and being killed overseas. And the Pat Buchanan branch, which is against "nation-building"-- (as Bush himself stridently was during the 2000 campaign)-- and against foreign entanglements generally. Bush's so-called foreign policy is more a perversion of Wilsonianism than anything Republican. LH is also, it appears, right about the 1960 election. But another factor, I've read, is that Kennedy exploited the anti-Communism mania by loudly proclaiming a "missile gap" which he knew actually did not exist, since he had been briefed about the defense posture of the US. |
|
14 Feb 06 - 10:40 PM (#1668842) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: number 6 Kennedy got elected because of his father's mob connections in Chicago. sIx |
|
14 Feb 06 - 11:10 PM (#1668919) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: Ron Davies The "missile gap" was a huge issue at the time. |
|
15 Feb 06 - 08:02 AM (#1669223) Subject: RE: BS: wanted From: GUEST,Whistle Stop I think Eisenhower was a great man and a good President. But he gets far too much credit for his one brief comment about the military-industrial complex (which leftydee cited above). The fact is that he issued that warning in January of 1960, in his farewell address -- in other words, at the very moment when he would no longer have any responsibility for keeping the military-industrial complex in check. As for the whole "land war in Asia" thing, he was concerned about the difficulties of that in the abstract, as were most military men at the time. But, revisionist history notwithstanding, Eisenhower was very much in favor of our military efforts in Vietnam, and advised Kennedy to increase troop levels and push on to victory there. It should also be noted that Eisenhower was the man most responsible for basing our military strategy against the Soviets on nuclear deterrence (which subsequently evolved into the concept known as "Mutually Assured Destruction," or "MAD"). This was primarily a matter of economy, since basing nukes in Europe was cheaper than maintaining large standing armies there. There was much debate about this among military men at the time, and historians are still debating the wisdom of that approach. |