President Richard Nixon: The Slime of American Bureaucracy (1992)

"RN on the Slime of Bureaucracy" 

Source:Richard Nixon Foundation with a look at President Richard M. Nixon (Republican, California) 37th President of the United States (1969-74) in 1992.

From the Richard Nixon Foundation

From Note: 

"Any change is resisted because bureaucrats have a vested interest in the chaos in which they exist.”

From Note

In case what President Nixon was talking about in 1992, sounds familiar with how President Trump is governing in 2025: 

"Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE): Trump established DOGE, led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, to spearhead government reform efforts.

Reducing the Federal Workforce: Trump implemented measures to reduce the federal workforce, including a hiring freeze, buyout programs, and a "one-in-four-out" hiring policy (hiring one new employee for every four departures).

Eliminating and Consolidating Agencies and Programs: Trump aimed to streamline government by eliminating unnecessary agencies, advisory committees, and programs, as well as consolidating others.

Deregulation: Trump pursued a "10-to-1" deregulation initiative, requiring the elimination of ten regulations for every new one implemented, to reduce bureaucratic burden.

Reclassifying Federal Employees: Trump sought to reclassify certain federal employees, particularly those in policy-related roles, to make it easier to remove them, according to the White House (.gov).

Modernizing Federal Technology: Trump aimed to modernize federal technology and software to improve efficiency and productivity, potentially through DOGE...

So if you are a political history junky like myself and you are pushing 50, (give or take) what President Richard Nixon was talking about in early 1992 with CSPAN anchor Brian Lamb, sounds very familiar. 

So go up 3 years from when this Lamb-Nixon interview was done in 1992: 

Republicans win back complete control of Congress in November of 1994, take over the Congress during the first week of 1995 (House & Senate) and are already talking about as part of their Contract With America, for the 104th Congress, about: 

streamlining this agency and that department 

eliminating this agency and department 

cutting the Federal Civil Service by this much and eliminating all these Federal jobs, as part of their plan to "return the government to the American people". 

And now that MAGA controls both The White House and Congress, they're trying to put in their own vision of the U.S. Government into place, something that President Nixon was talking about, as President, 55 years ago. 

So I guess my only question for people who believe in this chainsaw approach to government (to paraphrase Elon Musk) would be: what would you do instead? 

In a good year, Congress'a approval ratings is 20%. So you really want to make the Assistant Attorney of the Criminal Division and elected position? Perhaps not that position, just everybody who work for that person? Maybe the Ass. AG's chief of staff, or executive secretary? If you are from my generation, or are older, you remember when Republicans used to claim that America is not a democracy, but a republic. Which is like saying: 

A truck is not a car, it's an automobile. 

Beef is not chicken, it's meat. 

The Atlantic Ocean is not a lake, it's a body of water. 

Well, just like a man could be husband and a father, a country can be both a republic and a democracy. And both cars and trucks are automobiles. Both chicken and beef are meet. And both lakes and oceans are bodies of water. Hopefully these are not newsflashes for anybody who sees this. 

Since really the civil rights movement of the 1960s, we've been a democratic republic. And really since the founding of the American Federal Republic, we've been a democratic republic, according to our Constitution. And just because a country is democratic, doesn't mean that every position in the government is an elected position. 

The thing about American democracy, is accountability. Which means just because a person comes to office, even with a big victory, doesn't mean that person gets to do whatever they want, simply because they were elected. 

And I hate to say this, because I actually have a lot of respect for Richard Nixon when it comes to his intelligence, his vision, the fact that he really is the last of the Progressive Republicans, when you are talking about how he governed as President, (well, George H.W. Bush as well) but President Nixon founded out the really hard way what type of democracy with all our checks and balances, that America really is. 

You can follow me on Threads and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CNN: Race For The White House: Richard Nixon vs John Kennedy (1960)

Source:CNN- the 1960 Democratic National Convention.

"CNN Race for the White House 1of6 Nixon vs JFK"

Source:Charlemagne Dumdum Calotes

1960 between Richard Nixon and John Kennedy, was one of the last presidential elections in America that was about ideas, vision, experience, and qualifications. Instead of having two unlikable candidates who know they're unlikable and unpopular and use that to defeat their opponents. Going back to really 1996 and perhaps 1992, American presidential elections have been about destroying the other side instead of winning the election. And telling American voters, "we know you don't like us, but you should hate our opponents more and this is why." Where winning presidential elections has become about and has been about for a generation now negative adverting and campaigning. The campaign that runs the best negative ads and makes the best negative arguments agains their opponent, tends to win.

Instead of winning elections because your opponent is more qualified, has better experience, better ideas, better vision, more forward looking, more likable as an individual. In 1960 America had two great choices. Two very bright well-educated presidential candidates, who both wanted to be President and both knew why. Both had something positive to offer Americans. And of course there was negative advertising and campaigning between Dick Nixon and Jack Kennedy. but that wasn't what their campaigns was about.

Vice President Nixon offered American four more years of what was already working from the Eisenhower Administration. Senator Kennedy was offering Americans a new generation of leadership and new way of thinking. That the U.S. Government needed to new leadership to deal with the challenges of the 1960s. Americans had a real choice of either sticking with what was working ( according to the Eisenhower Administration ) or move in a different direction and deal with issues like civil rights for all Americans, health care for senior citizens, and other issues.

1960 to me is what presidential elections should be about, at least within the two-party system. Putting the two best candidates that America has to offer, or at least the best Democrat and Republican against each other. With both candidates offering why they should be President, instead of arguing why their opponent shouldn't be President. And because America is so divided not just politically, but culturally, and now even ethnically and racially, having a positive presidential election doesn't seem possible anymore. At least not with the two-party system.

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger.

Patrick J. Buchanan: '1968: The Year The Silent Majority Was Born'

Source:Richard Nixon Foundation- talking to Patrick J. Buchanan, about his book about Richard Nixon.

"Pat Buchanan recalls the tumultuous year of 1968 and Richard Nixon's remarkable comeback to win the presidential election."

Source:Richard Nixon Foundation

I believe you have to understand the 1960s and 1967-68 especially to understand the great political comeback of Richard Nixon and the rebirth of the Republican Party. Once you know what this time was and what it was about and how it benefited Richard Nixon, you'll also understand how brilliant of a politician and political strategist that Nixon really was. 

Richard Nixon is in the same class as Lyndon Johnson, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Franklin Roosevelt, when it comes to great politicians in American history. Perhaps smarter than all of then including FDR and Bill Clinton.

Where I agree with Pat Buchanan is that in 1967-68 America did feel like it was falling apart. The whole country seemed like it was pissed off. Riots and protests all across the country. Dr. King's nonviolent civil rights movement seemed to be going out-of-style, even within the African-American community with the rise of the militant socialist Black Panthers. 

In 1968, millions of Baby Boomers of all races and ethnicities coming of age in the 1960s and seeing an America they didn't want and stood up to demand change across the country. People who tended to agree with Dr. King on the issues that his movement was addressing, but were primarily campaigning against the Vietnam War and what they saw was a self and racist American capitalist economic system.

By the time we get to 1968 the late 1950s is only ten years before 68 and yet America was and looked completely different as a country and not just because of color TV, but the music was not recognizable from the 1950s, the movies and the language and culture in the movies was completely different. Protesting and especially rioting in the streets and doing it in big cities like Detroit, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, just wasn't done in 1957 or at any point in the 1950s for the very most part. But you also didn't have a huge generation of angry Americans ( the Baby Boom Generation ) who were angry and wanted a different country and different system.

And during this whole period in the 1960s, you had one political party in charge in America and in most of the country. Similar to what we have today, but with large majorities in Congress. A Senate with 64 Democrats in 67-68, 243 or Democrats in the House, a Progressive Democrat as President in Lyndon Johnson. 

But also in 1968, we had an angry Baby Boomers of all racial, ethnic, economic, and cultural backgrounds and the angry African-American community for good reasons, you also had the parents and grandparents of the Baby Boomers who were also angry, but they weren't angry at America. Just the leadership and party in power, as well as the new Counter Culture that seemed to be taking over America.

What we would call Reagan Democrats in the 1980s and today, we're Nixon Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s. Southern and Midwestern Democrats who voted Democratic most of their lives until 1966, 67, and 68 came around when they were looking for different political leadership. 

Back in 1968, the Republican Party even with their big gains during the 1966 Congressional midterms when they won 45 seats in the House and 4 in the Senate, was still primarily a Northeastern party, with some support in the Midwest and conservative-libertarian West.

And to get to why Richard Nixon was such a brilliant not just politician but political strategist which is just as important, Nixon understood that for the Republican Party to come back they were going to have to make gains in the Democratic Dixie South, while holding their ground in the Northeast, Midwest, and Mountain West, they were going to have to win over right-wing Southern Dixiecrats who opposed the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s and the Cultural Revolution of the 1960s.

Not just the Nixon comeback, but the Republican comeback, started in 1966 with Congressional Republicans winning back over 40 seats in the House and a lot of them in the South and winning back 4 seats in the Senate, allowing Congressional Republicans along with Dixiecrat Democrats, to block partisan, Democratic legislation, that was proposed by President Johnson and the Congressional Democratic Leadership. 

And in 1968, thanks to the Vietnam War and the socialist New-Left that emerged in the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party was a huge house that was hugely divided and their grand political coalition that kept them in power since the Hoover Administration in the late 1920s when they won Congress back, finally broke.

With Richard Nixon again being the great politician and political strategist that he was being there to take advantage of all this political and cultural chaos that was going on in the country. Richard Nixon is a big reason why the Republican Party is southern and rural based in America. He's also a reason why Republicans struggle to win in big cities and big metro areas, because they're base is so dependent on right-wing Fat-Right in many cases Southern Anglo-Saxon Protestant aging men. 

But pre-1966, the Republican Party simply wasn't big enough to compete nationally with the Democrats and Richard Nixon changed that. 

You can also see this post at The FreeState, on Blogger.

Robert Batson: Video: Frost/Nixon Interviews: The Second Term

Source:The New Democrat

As far as messing around with other people’s elections, that is something that the United States shouldn’t be involved with. If that kind of thing happened here and you could make a strong case that it did in 1996 with President Bill Clinton’s reelection from the People’s Republic of China, we would be freaking out in America over that and did. Congress actually investigated that election both in the House and Senate in 1997. Let other countries elect their own people and then make the best of it as far as how you relate with them. In defending your own interests and standing up for human rights in other countries. That is how you build up credibility with other countries and their people.

As far as Vice President Spiro Agnew, it always brings a big smile to my face every time I hear that. And not because a fellow Marylander made it to the Vice Presidency of the United States. But how would someone of a Spiro Agnew’s limited experience in and out of government makes it that far in this country. One thing you can say about the Richard Nixon White House and before that their political campaigns that ran Dick Nixon’s 1968 and 72 presidential campaigns, is that they didn’t do their homework on their own people. Spiro was already suspected of being corrupt when he was Governor of Maryland in the mid and late 1960s. You can see why President Nixon didn’t give his Vice President a lot of work and didn’t keep him very busy. Because he wasn’t very impressed with him and didn’t see him as much of an asset.

President Nixon was investigated for more than just Watergate in Congress, when the House of Representatives looked into his financial affairs as President in 1974. They reported that the President owed taxes to the IRS that he by law of course was obligated to pay back. But a lot of people owe back taxes that they haven’t paid back. And in most cases they’ve put that off because they can’t afford those taxes because they’ve run up debt. And are looking to put their tax payments off. I’m sure President Nixon had the money to pay his taxes assuming that the only income he earned while as President was his presidential salary. So I don’t know why he had back taxes to begin with.

Robert Batson: Video: Frost/Nixon Interviews: The Vietnam War

Source:The New Democrat

First of all, I believe that Richard Nixon already knew by 1968, or at the very latest in the early days of his presidency in 1969 that the Vietnam War was already lost. Just from his own knowledge about the war, his own advisers and from things that people around him have said. Now that doesn’t mean that you declare that the war is lost in public. He personally wasn’t ready to do that and it would’ve been bad policy as well. Because it would’ve send the message to South Vietnam to stop fighting. And to the North Vietnam to go stronger and see what that can get out of the South and from America.

So when Nixon comes to office in 1969, his strategy about Vietnam was exactly how the hell to get out of there and do it the best way possible. To continue to defend the South as best possible so the North couldn’t simply overwhelm those people and kill millions of innocent Vietnamese. While at the same time negotiate with the Communist North about how to end the war. And this went on forever. The war was officially over by late 1972 early 1973, but American troops and other government personal were still in Vietnam until early 1975 when we finally got out of there.

Robert Batson: Video: Frost/Nixon Interviews: Full Interview About Watergate

Source:The New Democrat

I covered this last week, but the White House coverup of Watergate was about ending a story that the Nixon White House thought could explode in their faces. Which was an attempted burglary of Democratic National Headquarters. Even though the President, Vice President or White House Chief of Staff weren’t directly involved in the operation. But they were worried that this story would play in the media as if the Nixon Campaign in 1972 was involved in the Watergate burglary. When what they should’ve done was to say, “here’s this local Washington burglary of Democratic National Headquarters, lets let the Washington Police handle it. Because we’re not involved.”

Had Richard Nixon had a sounder more sober mind, not as far as intelligence, because he was really a brilliant man and perhaps the smartest president we’ve ever had, but a more sober mind in the sense that he could see things for what they are and act accordingly, he would’ve said, “Watergate is not our problem. And even if some of our people on the campaign are involved in it, the police will find those people and act accordingly.” Now President Nixon didn’t know that his own Attorney General John Mitchell was involved in Watergate. And I and others believed he ordered the operation when he was running the reelection campaign. But again the police would’ve figured that out and the President would’ve fired him.

But that is not what President Nixon and his White House team did. They played it like they were ones who not only knew about the Watergate operation, but ordered it. They acted as if they were the criminals in this story and because of their behavior they became the criminals and defendants in this story. All of the career lawyers and some of them former prosecutors who became defendants in this case and did time in prison. Like John Erlichman, John Dean, Chuck Colson and perhaps some others. Instead of just letting the story play to its natural conclusion and moving on with the business of the country.

Robert Batson: Video: Frost/Nixon The Complete Interviews: Foreign Policy

Source:The New Democrat

The real genius of the Nixon Presidency was the foreign policy. President Nixon and his National Security Director, could simply see things happening twenty-years in advance. I don’t believe we’ve ever had two people that high up in the U.S. Government that knew so much about foreign policy and national security than Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. But President George H.W. Bush and his National Security Adviser, perhaps come close. Nixon/Kissinger, looked at both the world that they wanted and the world the way it was. And based on those two things tried to make the world as safe as possible.

Nixon/Kissinger, saw the Soviet Union, a country back then of around four-hundred-million people and physically the largest country in the world and the People’s Republic of China, already with a billion people back then and physically the fourth largest country in the world, just behind the United States, as trading partners. Even though we were enemies with both of them. But they believed the way you get bad guys to behave well is for their people to see what your country has to offer and how other countries govern themselves. I don’t believe the democratic awakening in the Slavic States in Eastern Europe like Poland happens in the late 1970s and 80s, without Russia being opened up in the early 1970s.

Nixon/Kissinger saw a day without the Soviet Union in the early 1970s. It happened twenty-years later, but they saw the end of the Soviet Union by the early 1970s. And wanted to open a relationship and dialogue between the two government’s and people’s before that day came and if anything to speed up that transition. While everyone else Left and Right was talking about containment of Russia in the early 1970s, President Nixon was interested in actually defeating Russian communism politically and economically. Let the Russian people know how bad their form of government and economic system is. And give them incentive to look at other systems around the world.

Ronald Reagan did not win the Cold War. No one President can win a war like that by themselves. President Reagan presided over the end of the Cold War in the 1980s and put in policies to see that happen. Like continuing with the military buildup, which actually started under President Gerald Ford and continued with President Jimmy Carter. And with the nuclear arms agreements with Russia. And with President Mikhail Gorbachev of the Soviet Union, putting in economic polices to move Russia passed Marxism economically.

The ending of the Cold War started under the President Nixon. And even Russia did have a military buildup in the late 1970s and were on the move in the Middle East and Central Asia, like in Afghanistan, they weren’t economically strong enough to sustain that. Their economy was already collapsing then because they were spending so much on defense and were going through economic shortages as a result. Not saying that President saw all of this happening, but opening up a country that huge and letting their people see your country, gave the Russian people a chance to see what a wealthy free country looks like. And President Nixon and Henry Kissinger deserve a lot of credit for that.

Robert Batson: Video: Frost/Nixon The Complete Interviews: Watergate

Source:The New Democrat

Richard Nixon being the very smart if not brilliant politician that he was, knew about the dangers of Watergate as soon as he heard about it and what the burglars were breaking in to. I mean think about it, you have Republican operatives who are at the very least connected with the Nixon reelection campaign accused of breaking in to the Democratic National Headquarters. Richard Nixon is President of the United States at the time of course and obviously a Republican, so of course the media is going to want to know what involvement did the Nixon White House have if any in the burglary.

So what President Nixon wanted to do at least early in the story, was to get the story finished and over with. So no one could make it look like someone in the White House ordered the operation, especially the President. And that the Nixon Campaign wasn’t breaking into Democratic Headquarters illegally to steal information and use it against the George McGovern Campaign. President Nixon saw Watergate as a time bomb that could blow up his reelection campaign and turn what was a runaway blowout victory, into a close election with Senator McGovern and perhaps even hurt his presidency.

So when President Nixon tells his Chief of Staff Bob Haldeman to tell the FBI, “not to go into Watergate any further, period”, he was trying to put an end to the story and get the country passed Watergate and back to the issues that his administration was focusing on. And his reelection campaign and back on pace to his forty-nine state victory and winning 3-5 of the popular vote in 1972. The facts are, Watergate didn’t hurt President Nixon at all in 1972. Its early 1973 when Watergate becomes a big story and when Congress gets involved in it starting in the Senate with their bipartisan investigation of the story in the summer of 1973.

The Washington Post led by Ben Bradlee, Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were focused on Watergate from the beginning. And to a certain extent CBS News and The New York Times. But The Post was really where the action was in this story from the beginning. And when they started breaking stories and getting hard information about the story, the other major national news organizations, network news and the papers and Congress as well started looking into this story. And the more facts that came out about it and the fact that the White House was trying to cover it up, the worst President Nixon looked.

Henry Higgins: Video: BBC's Who Was Richard Nixon

Source:The New Democrat 

With all due respect to BBC, I don’t think you can explain who was Richard Nixon in under an hour. To explain someone as the narrator in this film said is one of if not the most fascinating American politicians whose ever lived, you probably need a mini-series. A three or four-hour film. If you try to cover Nixon and just focus on Watergate or the criminal conspiracies inside of the Nixon White House, or the checkers speech, the House Un-American Activities Committee, you’ll only get part of his life story and not even half of that. And to cover those things alone, you would probably need three hours to do that.

And for the admirers of Dick Nixon and people from the outside looking in who are simply interested in learning about the man, focusing on his rags to riches story and being born in the valley and rising to the top of the mountain, to paraphrase President Nixon, again you would need probably weeks of reading and watching films about the man. Nixon’s public service career goes from World War II in the early 1940s serving in that war, all the way up to leaving the White House in 1974. With Congress, the Vice Presidency, his role of the GOP comeback of 1966 and 68 and even winning the Presidency in 1968 in between.

You could read series of books and watch series of documentaries about the man’s foreign policy accomplishments including ending the Vietnam War alone. Or his push to move America off of foreign oil with a national energy policy in 1973. His push to reform Welfare in 1969 that became Welfare to Work in 1996. His push to reform American health care and health insurance in 1974, that became the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Even if you watch this entire film about Dick Nixon, again you may get part of his story, but ending it with so much more to learn about the man.

Max Power: The Kitchen Debate: Richard Nixon vs. Nikita Khrushchev

Source:The FreeState

The friendly TV debate that then United States Vice President Richard Nixon had with then Soviet Union President Nikita Khrushchev, was entertaining and important to the extent, that at least America and Europe could see some of the differences between the superpowers. That America wasn’t just a Superpower when it came to our military and diplomatic power. But we were an economic power as well. And that Russia was basically a third world nation, behind the rest of the Developed World in a lot of areas. 

That Russia's living standards were much lower than Europe, Canada and America. And this had to do with the fact that Russia was a communist state and America is a liberal democracy. The main reason why America, Canada, Europe and Japan were so far ahead of Russia during the Cold War and now, has to do with the fact, that we are free. We are all democracies economically and socially. We all have plenty of freedom to live our own lives. 

And in America especially where Europe tends to be more generous with their safety nets, Americans tend to be held responsible with the decisions that we make in life. Wheres the Soviet Union, most of the power in the country was centralized with the State. They were held with most of the authority to govern the country and responsible for looking after their people. Providing them with jobs, education, healthcare etc.

Vice President Nixon did an effective job in this debate of laying out some of the differences between America and Russia and where we were ahead of them and with space. Where Russia was ahead of us, which we turned around in the 1960s and debates like this are important. Especially if they are done in a respectful way.

PBS: American Experience, Richard Nixon- The 1962 Last Press Conference

Since graduating from college in I believe 1935, Richard Nixon had been a winner his entire professional career up until 1960 when he lost that presidential election to John Kennedy. So he was going through a very difficult stage in his life that lasted from losing that election until probably as late as 1966 when he had a lost of success in 1966 campaigning for Congressional Republicans. Even though by 1963 he went back into the private sector as a New York lawyer and public speaker. But politics is what made him very happy.

Because of all these things and the mounting frustration that had built up of not only being out of public office for the first time since 1946 when he left the Vice Presidency in early 1961 and losing his second major election in 1962 in just two-years, Nixon just sort of went off and took his frustrations out on the press and let them have it. Calling this press conference his last, which of course it wasn't. I just don't think he put a lot of thought into what he was going to say here and went off instead.

NBC: The Jack Paar Program- Richard Nixon in 1963

Source: NBC- Jack & Dick-

Source:NBC 

Richard Nixon actually showing a human side of him. A likable funny side that if he showed more people in public and in private, especially with his taping system, instead of coming off as a mean old, well dick (pun intended) he would've been more popular in public and in the media and would've had an easier time politically. And would've gotten more positive attention for his laundry list of accomplishments and Watergate probably never happens, let alone needed to be covered up, or brought out in the open. Because he would've ended up liking and trusting more people with the same feelings towards him from others.

Patrick J. Buchanan: President Richard Nixon Before Watergate

Buchanan Brigade: Opinion: Patrick J. Buchanan: President Richard Nixon Before Watergate

Pat Buchanan who is definitely a true loyalist to Richard Nixon, but who does make some good points about President Nixon pre-Watergate and what the man and his administration had accomplished. But that just makes Watergate and the Nixon White House's involvement including the President himself that more tragic and just backs that up even more. You have the great side of Richard Nixon as far as the visionary thinker and his intelligence that allowed for him to accomplish everything he did as President. But then you have the destructive side of the man that somewhat at least overshadows what he accomplished as President of the United States.

Los Angeles Times: Doyle McManus: What's the Secret of Richard Nixon's Unpopularity?

Source:Los Angeles Times

If all due respect to Doyle McManus who is a very knowledgable Washington political insider and very intelligent about Washington politics: There is no secret to why Richard Nixon is unpopular. "Go to the videotape" as the old sports broadcast saying goes. Or in President Nixon's case go to his tape recordings. You hear the countless remarks having to do with the Watergate coverup and his criminal activities inside of the White House. His ethnic cracks and smears about Italians, Jews, the Irish. The Irish slurs are kind of funny to me since Dick Nixon was an Irishman himself. But his cracks about Latinos as well.

Putting all of that aside however (even if it takes you years to put all of that aside) President Nixon looks better to me forty years later because of what he accomplished as President. And I would take him over President George W. Bush who as far as we know never committed any crimes as President (at least in America) because of what Dick Nixon accomplished as President. In foreign affairs, environmental policy and what he tried to do for the country, but came up short as it related to Welfare reform, health care reform, creating a national energy policy, his federalism program.

PBS: Frost-Nixon Interview- The First Show

Source: PBS-

Source:PBS

What I like most about the Frost/Nixon interviews is that we got to see the inner side of Richard Nixon. He was very protective about his personal life and his feelings. But David Frost got him to open up a little bit and perhaps President Nixon wanted to open up as well. And you got to see in this first interview Dick Nixon giving a little about what his philosophy on life is. And what makes people happy and how he feels about these issues.There wasn’t many times in Dick Nixon’s public life at least where we got to see him as the man. And not as a politician or president and that is one reason why the Frost/Nixon interviews were a success. Because Frost brought out Nixon the man in these interviews as we got to see him purely as a human being.

KKD: Civil Rights at The 1960 Republican National Convention

Source:KKD- President Dwight D. Eisenhower (Republican, Texas) at the 1960 Republican National Convention.

Source:The Daily Times 

“Now that the 2008 Republican National Convention has concluded, I thought I would go back into my old film clips & kinescopes to give everyone a sample of what old-time politics was like 48 years ago!

The 1960 Republican National Convention was held from July 25 – 28th, 1960 in Chicago, IL at the International Ampitheatre. Vice President Richard Nixon nearly had the nomination sewed up but he still had two contenders: NY Governor Nelson Rockefeller and Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. Civil Rights was in the forefront and Rev Martin Luther King was in Chicago for the event. We also briefly see former President Herbert Hoover as he addresses the Convention. (An expanded view of his comments is seen in an earlier upload of mine.)

As the Convention continues, we’ll see Gov. Rockefeller withdraw from the race and into Day Three with an address from the President, Dwight D. Eisenhower.

Part Two is posted which contains a statement by Barry Goldwater and finally Richard Nixon as he accepts the nomination.

July 1960”

From KKD

Nelson Rockefeller, was a politician without a national political party in the 1960s and 70s, because he was an Right-Progressive (Center-Right Progressive) in a party that was moving right on economic policy. And Republicans were moving far away from progressive programs. Especially ones that were centralized at the Federal level. And we’re looking for politicians that were in favor shrinking the Federal Government and decentralizing power at the Federal level and giving more power to the states and individuals.

Nelson, was essentially a Theodore Roosevelt Progressive Republican, but who was also a Federalist and someone who believed in public infrastructure, public education, aid to the poor, but who was also a Federalist and wanted these social investments run at the state and local levels. Who was also a big believer in a strong defense and law enforcement and tough law enforcement, as well as equal rights.

Nelson was Progressive on economic policy and equal rights and even national defense. Who was able to win as a Republican, because he was a Northeastern Republican that had a strong Progressive faction, even into the 1960s.

And this debate or discussion about civil rights in the Republican Party in 1960s, is the perfect example of what type of party they were back then. You had the Progressive-Federalists, led by Nelson and others, but you also had a growing Conservative-Libertarian wing, led by Senator Barry Goldwater and other Republicans in Congress. That were strong economic Conservatives and didn’t want big government in people’s personal lives either. But we’re such believers in property rights that they believed that individuals had the right to deny service people even based on race. And Vice President Richard Nixon, trying to please both factions.

EFAN 2011: Richard Nixon's 1968 GOP Presidential Acceptance Speech: The Silent Majority

Source:The FreeState

The 1960s was actually a pretty good time for America even though we were very divided as a country over Vietnam, civil rights and the Great Society. The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 which outlawed racial discrimination under law in the United States. The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. Which meant no longer would be people be denied their right to vote based on their race. The Fair Housing Law was passed in 1968. Which meant no longer would people be allowed to deny other people housing based on race. Medicare was passed in 1965, which meant seniors would always have guaranteed health insurance in America.

The economy boomed in that decade. The Federal Government was actually able to balanced its budget during this decade. But this was also one of the most turbulent and divisive decades we've ever had in America. Four political leaders were assassinated in this decade. President Kennedy, Malcolm X, Rev. Dr. Martin L. King and of course Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968. King and Kennedy in 68, within two months, April and June. Hundreds of thousands of Americans dying or injured in the Vietnam War, the South moving from solidly Democratic to solidly Republican in 1968.

Richard Nixon understood the mood of America about as well as any politician we've ever produced. And understood where the country was and where they were going and how he could fit in that into his politics. As far as what he believed and what he wanted to accomplish. And he could make that work politically for him and the Republican Party. This whole speech is a perfect example of that, where he says, ;that a country thats run by the rule of law, has lawlessness throughout the country.' He's talking about the riots in our big cities like Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles and others.

'When the a country with the greatest military in the world gets bogged down in a civil war in a third world country.' He's talking about the Vietnam War. 'When these things happen its time for a change in leadership in the greatest country in the world.' Meaning the United States. Dick Nixon was laying out where the country was, all the divisiveness that the country was going through. And what wasn't working in the country and saying its time for a change in leadership in America. And saying he's the one meaning who will bring that new leadership that will move America forward.

Battle Cry For Freedom: Richard Nixon on Democratic Failures in Leadership

Source:The FreeState

If there was ever a perfect time for someone to run for President of the United States and I guess I would add Ronald Reagan in 1980 to that list, but the person I'm thinking of would be Richard Nixon in 1968. One of the most divisive years at least in the 20th Century. America seemed to be going through both politically as well as a Cultural Revolution in the 1960s. The Democratic Party had all of the power in the Federal Government for eight of the first nine years. And there was this feeling that America was sort of coming apart.

Whether that was true or not and Richard Nixon, who had been running for president at least since 1965 after sitting out in 1964, sensed this being the great politician that he was. President Lyndon Johnson was very unpopular especially with the Vietnam War. The Hippie Revolution was going on and there was this feeling with Conservatives and perhaps Independents as well, that liberalism at least social liberalism had gone too far. I disagree with that as a Liberal, but that was the feeling from Conservatives. With the civil rights laws, anti-war movement and the Hippie Revolution of that decade as well. And there was this feeling that America needed a change a new direction and Dick Nixon picked up on this.

Dick Nixon had already paid his dues with the Republican Party so to speak. He was already a known name in the party. Serving in Congress from 1947-53, Vice President from 1953-61. And losing one of the closest presidential elections in American history to Jack Kennedy in 1960. Nixon was smart enough not to run for president in 1964 where Senator Barry Goldwater lost in a landslide to President Johnson. But Senator Goldwater did manage to win some conservative Southern states in that election. That the Democratic Party used to own which also helped set up Dick Nixon's 1968 presidential campaign.

And Nixon also campaigned for Congressional Republicans in the 1966 mid-term elections. Where the Republican Party picked up around forty seats in the House and four in the Senate. The Democratic Party still had large majority's in the House and Senate. But these gains also helped set up the 1968 campaign for the Republican Party. Which made Nixon look like the clear frontrunner in the Republican Party in 1968. Because a lot of Republican politicians owed Nixon favors. Dick Nixon saw that America was divided and that he would be candidate to try to unite the country. Or at least unite part of the country behind him and the Republican Party. The people who he called the "Silent Majority", the people who weren't part of the Hippie Revolution or the anti-war movement. And 1964 and 68 was the start of the Republican Party taking over the South and winning more offices. Where over forty years later they basically own that region politically.