From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sun Mar 16 2003 - 22:16:44 MST
Michael Dickey writes
> [Lee wrote]
> > Recently, I have listed as the *top* priority of executives in modern
> > democracies the object of getting re-elected. Though true, (and I'm
> > wondering if I have been too cynical), it's also very likely that the highly
> > partisan individuals who succeed to high office deeply believe that almost
> > the worst thing that could befall their nation would be to let the
> > political opposition start running things!
> Since the topic here is Nixon, and Lee proposes to Judge one's action by
> their motivations,
I never said that, and I'm sorry if people would infer
that from my remarks. We must almost always judge by
results (or actions), just as is done in law.
> and not on the actions themselves, and then further
> suggests that executives in modern democracies focus
> solely on getting re-elected, I thought it would be
> prudent to post this.
Thanks!
> For those following this thread and following Lee's
> comments, read through this speech of Nixon and see
> if you feel his primary motivation is indeed to get
> re-elected.
Matus has excerpted the following from Nixon's speech
that Michael provided.
I must admit that Nixon sounds persuasive (insofar as
my curiosity about executives' motives goes). Of course,
when humans are involved---and especially those humans
like Nixon, Clinton, and Bush who are very effecting in
small and large groups of their fellow politicians---
idealistic motivations can sometimes trump other realities.
I leave it to those more perceptive than I to offer their
analyses of Nixon's motivations here. (I do respect Charles
Hixson's warning that speeches are designed to appear to be
sincere.)
Lee
The excerpt of Matus:
> "I have noted, for example, that a Republican Senator has said that this
> action I have taken means that my party has lost all chance of winning the
> November elections. And others are saying today that this move against enemy
> sanctuaries will make me a one-term President.
>
> No one is more aware than I am of the political consequences of the action I
> have taken. It is tempting to take the easy political path: to blame this
> war on previous administrations and to bring all of our men home
> immediately, regardless of the consequences, even though that would mean
> defeat for the United States; to desert 18 million South Vietnamese people,
> who have put their trust in us and to expose them to the same slaughter and
> savagery which the leaders of North Vietnam inflicted on hundreds of
> thousands of North Vietnamese who chose freedom when the Communists took
> over North Vietnam in 1954; to get peace at any price now, even though I
> know that a peace of humiliation for the United States would lead to a
> bigger war or surrender later.
>
> I have rejected all political considerations in making this decision.
>
> Whether my party gains in November is nothing compared to the lives of
> 400,000 brave Americans fighting for our country and for the cause of peace
> and freedom in Vietnam. Whether I may be a one-term President is
> insignificant compared to whether by our failure to act in this crisis the
> United States proves itself to be unworthy to lead the forces of freedom in
> this critical period in world history. I would rather be a one-term
> President and do what I believe is right than to be a two-term President at
> the cost of seeing America become a second-rate power and to see this Nation
> accept the first defeat in its proud 190-year history."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 16 2003 - 22:17:15 MST