Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why is LBJ's name NEVER mentioned by liberals?
July 11, 2006

Posted on 07/11/2006 6:14:32 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch

Why is the father of The Great Society ignored? Sure, he messed up with Viet Nam, but that's blamed on W anyway, but he made sure to transfer zillions of dollar$$$ from your back pockets to the back pockets of other people. What's up with that?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: greatsociety; lbj; verygoodquestion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last
Always wondered.
1 posted on 07/11/2006 6:14:34 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Good question... perhaps because he was a corrupt uncooth Texican? A necessary evil on the ticket of Camelot-Boy?


2 posted on 07/11/2006 6:16:30 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

LBJ isn't mentioned because they want to pretend that the Vietnam War was thought up by Nixon.


3 posted on 07/11/2006 6:18:13 AM PDT by ko_kyi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Vietnam.


4 posted on 07/11/2006 6:18:25 AM PDT by johnny7 (“And what's Fonzie like? Come on Yolanda... what's Fonzie like?!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

I've always believed it was Vietnam.

As much as the Dems wanted everyone to believe that Vietnam was "Nixon's War", it really wasn't. It was Johnson's.


5 posted on 07/11/2006 6:18:36 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Liberals like to blame Nixon, and, they will never face reality if facing reality causes them to give up a beloved fantasy. Mentioning LBJ would take them too close to reality, so they avoid him.

Simple as that.

Regards,


6 posted on 07/11/2006 6:19:01 AM PDT by The Liberal Whisperer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Also, becuae his Presidency was short and ended almost 40 years ago. He is long dead and his term was sorounded by other significant Presidencies (Roosevelt to Reagan). He was also a crude Texan which Lib's don't like (they prefer crude manhattanites). Hard to believe but his term of office was as far back as Coolidge's was then, and Keennedy's as far back as Harding's.


7 posted on 07/11/2006 6:19:08 AM PDT by bilhosty (to hell with ABCNNBCBS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

Because it's "common knowledge" that he was behind the JFK assassination?

And if he wasn't, he was the one who benefitted the most from his death.


8 posted on 07/11/2006 6:19:24 AM PDT by Let's Roll ( "Congressmen who ... undermine the military ... should be arrested, exiled or hanged" - A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MplsSteve

Kennedy and Johnson.


9 posted on 07/11/2006 6:19:26 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ko_kyi
"LBJ isn't mentioned because they want to pretend that the Vietnam War was thought up by Nixon."

I have a "progressive" friend that truly believes that Nixon started the war.
10 posted on 07/11/2006 6:20:12 AM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

Yes, that's true.

I neglected to mention Kennedy.


11 posted on 07/11/2006 6:20:35 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Halliburton.

He and his wife where, and his children are the biggest founding stock owners.


12 posted on 07/11/2006 6:20:57 AM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

My $0.02:

-He isn't FDR
-He isn't a Yankee
-He took over from JFK (through no fault of his own)
-He is a Southerner (Texans may dispute that tag - fair enough)
-He waged and escalated a huge war
-He remained an adult during the everyone-back-to-their-childhood 1960s
-He didn't give it the bit-lip, wipe-a-tear routine when talking about poverty, even though he wrote some huge gummint checks.


13 posted on 07/11/2006 6:21:04 AM PDT by relictele
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Same reason we don't often mention Nixon.


14 posted on 07/11/2006 6:22:42 AM PDT by Notwithstanding (OEF vet says: I love my German shepherd - Benedict XVI reigns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Let's discuss here. If LBJ was a liberal, then what was up with his involvement in Vietnam?

Compare to today's liberals where they are rejecting Lieberman for his strong national defense stance.

15 posted on 07/11/2006 6:22:56 AM PDT by MinorityRepublican (Everyone that doesn't like what America and President Bush has done for Iraq can all go to HELL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Reminds me of one of the old stories about LBJ(there were many and who knows which ones were true).

He's tooling around the Johnson Ranch in his station wagon with a host of Secret Service agents in pursuit. Finally, he stops, gets out and proceeds to unzip his fly to relieve himself. Instinctively, the agents circle around the president while he's making his bladder gladder. The wind kicks up and moves his stream against the leg of an agent. The agent says "Mr. President, you're peeing on me!" The president replies, "son, that's my privilege."


16 posted on 07/11/2006 6:24:33 AM PDT by RexBeach ("There is no substitute for victory." -Douglas MacArthur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dljordan

"I have a "progressive" friend that truly believes that Nixon started the war."

Your progressive friend is an idiot. But then, aren't most of them?


17 posted on 07/11/2006 6:24:47 AM PDT by brownsfan (It's not a war on terror... it's a war with islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

Sometimes they mention his name to pay tribute to Medicare, Voting Rights Act, etc., but they hold him at arm's length because they're scared of his many failures in Vietnam and the so-called "War on Poverty".


18 posted on 07/11/2006 6:24:47 AM PDT by blitzgig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

You couldn't be more right about this & it's an excellent question, because he did more to advance the reach of the all-powerful nanny-state so near & dear to the heart of those who call themselves "liberal", although there's nothing remotely liberal about the idea that average citizens' lives have to forcibly managed from cradle to grave by those who fancy themselves more enlightened, than anybody. But I think Tijeras Slim is on to something: there seems to be the taint of sainted Kennedy blood on the man, at least in their eyes.


19 posted on 07/11/2006 6:24:53 AM PDT by leilani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Let's Roll
Because it's "common knowledge" that he was behind the JFK assassination?

And if he wasn't, he was the one who benefitted the most from his death.

Libs are combatting that one with Nixon was behind JFK's assasination. A book is coming out saying that Nixon knew about JFK being on the mafia hit list for his war on organized crime. Oh brother!!

20 posted on 07/11/2006 6:26:00 AM PDT by paltz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson