Nixon actually put the country first twice. In 1960 it was widely believed that extreme voter fraud was perpetrated in Chicago, giving Kennedy the victory. Nixon could have challenged it and maybe would have won the election, but he didn't
In 1973 he resigned a broken man, however, when you look back at Watergate, it doesn't seem so bad compared to today's dirty tricks. And Watergate gave us Jimmy Carter, perhaps the single worst president in the history of the republic. --- Kristyne McDaniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Madigan, > > > I agree completely. I did not believe at the time > he > > should have been removed from office. But, he > should > > have resigned gracefully. That would have put > Gore > > into the presidency, and he would have, being the > > incumbent president, beaten George Bush easily. > > That's what I thought at the time. In the beginning, > I thought Clinton was > just waiting for the 2-year mark to pass in his > second term, but then it > became obvious he was never going to resign. I like > Clinton, but we would > have all been so much better off if he had resigned > instead of allowing the > country to go all the way through an impeachment > trial. I'll never forgive > him for that. Never. Not any more than I'll forgive > the Republicans that > pressed charges. It was a big mess. Entirely > predictable, and entirely > preventable. > > > But Clinton is a narcissistic gas bag who didn't > give > > a crap about Gore. > > It is tough to give up the presidency. Nixon had > more class when he gave up > office rather than put the country through an > impeachment, and Ford had more > class when he pardoned Nixon. Back then I was a > Republican, and I was never > a Nixon basher. I still am not. > > He got caught in a cover-up, and took the honorable > way out. I think he will > be vindicated over time. I am like many thinking > Democrats that simply do > not and never did hate Nixon. > > Please understand that my unwillingness to give > Clinton a pass on his > selfish retention of the Oval Office does not mean > that I think Bush was a > reasonable alternative. I have thought all along > that Bush was in over his > head and that he was too dumb to know he was in over > his head -- IOW, the > most dangerous combination. > > Reagan was in over his head too but was not dumb > enough to think he was OK > on his own. He was reachable. Bush I was an > intelligent guy. Bush II is an > arrogant dumb-ass who is unreachable with reason. > > Kristyne McDaniel > www.mcstyles.com > www.shamrocktrails.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Post Messages to: [email protected] > Subscription Maintenance: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox > OT-free version of this list: > http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech > ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, > are the opinions of the author, and do not > constitute legal or medical advice. This statement > is added to the messages for those lawyers who are > too stupid to see the obvious. > Mark Foley Gear http://www.cafepress.com/rightwingmike _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
