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

Skip to comments.

In Depth: Robert Caro (Three Hours of LBJ on C-SPAN2)
C-SPAN2

Posted on 04/07/2002 9:12:26 AM PDT by leadpenny

C-SPAN Schedule

Started at Noon (Eastern)


TOPICS: Announcements; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: caro; cspan2indepth; lbj

1 posted on 04/07/2002 9:12:26 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Phone calls begin in about 10 minutes.
2 posted on 04/07/2002 9:15:07 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I've read Caro's tomes on LBJ and admittedly, Caro is a very gifted biographer. However, I can't stomach the idea of spending three hours learning what most of us already know about LBJ, to wit, LBJ was your typical dimocrat: corrupt to the core.
3 posted on 04/07/2002 10:33:52 AM PDT by AdvisorB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Smorch
I couldn't handle watching it either. I have a new television and I don't feel like tossing a brick at it or urinating on it.
4 posted on 04/07/2002 10:59:57 AM PDT by roachie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: roachie;Mr.Smorch
LOL from you two. He does avoid all questions about LBJ's relationship with J. Edgar. Says it will be in the next book. We're all going to be gone by the time someone finally reveals that Hoover's and LBJ's fingerprints are all over Dallas in November 1963. JMO.
5 posted on 04/07/2002 11:23:37 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Johnson stole the senate election with 10s of thousands phoney votes.
6 posted on 04/07/2002 11:25:10 AM PDT by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: breakem
The descendants of the LBJ Democrats in TX are coming to the polls in the April 9 party runoff to choose a senatorial candidate, ironically to fill the Senate seat once held by LBJ himself. The Johnson political descendants are divided -- into black and brown camps. The "blacks" favor Ron Kirk, liberal former mayor of Dallas and secretary of state and "like a son" to former liberal Governor Ann Willis Richards. The "browns" favor gadfly school teacher Victor Morales of the Dallas area. Almost forgotten are the "whites," sitting on the sidelines and unsure what to do. Some of them are probably longing for a new LBJ to emerge. People outside TX don't understand the admiration many traditional liberals have in this state for LBJ. Even those who opposed his Vietnam policies, like Doris Kearns Goodwin, still revere him. It's a peculiar attachment. This year the Democrats actually think they can regain the Senate seat that LBJ vacated to become vice president in 1961 -- the seat held for 41 years by two Republicans, John Tower and Phil Gramm. It could be that the overconfident Republicans are facing an unexpected defeat in the fall, as improbable as such a scenario might otherwise seem. John Cornyn, the Republican nominee, is practically a stealth candidate at this point of the campaign. I don't think he has sufficient name recognition, though he has been a low-key attorney general, to expect to win the Senate seat without a fight with the Democrats, whose morale is the greatest in TX in 20 years.
7 posted on 04/07/2002 2:20:30 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
I think many liberals will always revere LBJ. He was their last great push. Clinton couldn't hold a candle to him. I will never forget his address to the nation when he said he wouldn't run. Shakespeare would have taken pen in hand.
8 posted on 04/07/2002 2:27:31 PM PDT by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
I don't have the stomach to sit through one hour of anything concerning LBJ, let alone three hours.
The vast majority of names engraved on that black granite wall in Washington DC were put there by that man.
And that will always be his legacy to me.

And a lot of others of my generation.

9 posted on 04/07/2002 2:38:46 PM PDT by Pompah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pompah
You're preaching to the choir, my friend. LBJ is such a fascinating failure. I fear that the truth will never be told because he ensured so many degrees of separation from it, but I'm convinced that he set something in motion (read J. Edgar) to do away with Kennedy. November 23, 1963 was followed by his strong-arming (maybe blackmailing) Warren and others into NOT looking for the truth. When the dust settles on the 20th Century, LBJ and x42 are going to be tied for 1st place as the worst President, with FDR running a close second. JMO
10 posted on 04/07/2002 3:00:43 PM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
"Landslide" Lyndon was such a great guy, such a tower of integrity, that he was bedding down one of his best friends wife. He was a clintonoid before clintonism was cool.
11 posted on 04/07/2002 3:21:49 PM PDT by AdvisorB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
That would be a "Surething"Trifecta no doubt.
And just think, we lived through all three of those sons-a-bitches.
12 posted on 04/07/2002 3:40:08 PM PDT by Pompah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: breakem; PJ-Comix; plummz
In LBJ's time, it was still possible for people of some intelligence and honesty to believe in liberalism. Even the leaders of the movement, like LBJ, with half their minds believed in their cause, even if they were con men in the other half of their minds (And there were people like Hubert Humphrey who were almost entirely sincere, even if deluded.) Their followers were not really aware of their leaders' partial duplicity.

So it may be true that liberalism in LBJ's time was a more dangerous movement (because people could believe in it,) but liberalism in the Clintons' time has become a much clearly evil force. People who are both intelligent and honest can still be leftists, but I do not think that anyone who is both intelligent and honest can any longer support the palpably corrupt version of institutionalized liberalism that is Clintonism. I.e., you can tell whether a leftist is honest by whether he opposes Clintonism, even if only from the left.

I believe Caro's own politics are liberal, and the excerpts from the new volume that have so far appeared in the New Yorker suggest that the new volume may be more favorable to LBJ than its predecessors, perhaps because Caro is going to want to support the civil-rights and Great Society aspects of LBJ's presidency once he gets around to dealing with that.

Did Caro indicate whether his projected fourth volume will deal with both LBJ's vice presidency and presidency, or only with the vice presidency (or maybe the 1960-64 term, as another possible dividing line)?

Anyway, however favorably Caro may deal with the later stages of LBJ's political career, the man is irredeemably damned by the LBJ tapes that C-SPAN is running (at least on C-SPAN Radio -- I don't have cable, so I can't say whether they're also on one of C-SPAN's TV channels.) The sycophancy and duplicity on display in those tapes can never be erased.

13 posted on 04/07/2002 3:43:17 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
My brother, who worked in Washington at the time, tells me that in 1963-4 all of in-the-know Washington privately believed LBJ was behind the JFK assassination.
14 posted on 04/07/2002 3:45:01 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
My brother, who worked in Washington at the time, tells me that in 1963-4 all of in-the-know Washington privately believed LBJ was behind the JFK assassination.

Yeah, but they were also all patrician Kennedy butt-kissers that almost literally considered LBJ to be subhuman because he was from Texas.

15 posted on 04/07/2002 4:07:22 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
I just thought my brother's report was worth posting. You may be right that mere snobbishness explains Washingtonians' opinion at the time. I don't know.

What I think is clear is that, whatever JFK's faults may have been, LBJ was a far worse president.

16 posted on 04/07/2002 4:59:17 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Jack Valenti says that LBJ had him sit in the bedroom while LBJ and Lady Bird slept for several weeks after November 22, 1963 Why? Because LBJ was afraid that an assassin would come after him; therefore, LBJ wanted the protection of his friend Valenti, whom he implicitly trusted. Valenti could be making this up, but I always thought Jack was among the more fair-minded liberals, if there is such a thing as a "fair-minded" liberal. There is about as much evidence that LBJ was behind the death of JFK as there is that George Corley Wallace ordered the shooting of MLK, Jr.
17 posted on 04/07/2002 5:03:23 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: leadpenny
Wasn't Hoover "close" to LBJ politically and "distant" from JFK and Nixon?
18 posted on 04/07/2002 5:05:01 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
LBJ WAS subhuman, read both of Caro's book on him, & you'll see. You will also see that LBJ had Kennedy killed. He had to, it was the only way he would ever become president, & he HAD to be president.
19 posted on 04/07/2002 6:07:12 PM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Caro made a big point about voters rights saying it was LBJs cornerstone. Said best president for blacks since Lincoln. Hope Clinton doesn't get jealous.
20 posted on 04/07/2002 6:32:41 PM PDT by breakem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Smorch
However, I can't stomach the idea of spending three hours learning what most of us already know about LBJ, to wit, LBJ was your typical dimocrat: corrupt to the core.

Sorry but you DON'T already know everything about LBJ. True the man had his faults but despite my disagreement with most of his politics he was a master politician. In addition, Caro has found much new (or forgotten) information about LBJ. His article in the current New Yorker is an example. It shows the complexity of LBJ in regards to Civil Rights. Did you know about Johnson's private Chauffer? I think not. Did you know the episode about the burial of a Mexican-American veteran in Arlington Cemetary that LBJ had to back away from after initially instigating it? I think not.

Your attitude seems to be "I don't like LBJ so I won't read a bio of him even though it is masterfully written."

This attitude is like reading only feel-good news. Much can be learned by reading about LBJ and others that you (and I) might not agree with.

21 posted on 04/07/2002 9:48:04 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Pompah
I don't have the stomach to sit through one hour of anything concerning LBJ, let alone three hours.

Ignorance is Bliss.

22 posted on 04/07/2002 9:51:12 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
You will also see that LBJ had Kennedy killed.

Caro never stated this. Despite the efforts of the conspiracy theorists, what happened is that Lee Harvey Oswald, the LONE gunman assasinated JFK. Where the conspiracty theories find nourishment is that Oswald himself loved to think of himself as part of some espionage network. I knew someone like this so Oswalds delusional thinking is nothing surprising to me. The funny thing is that a lot of folks buy into Oswald's delusions. But enough on oswald, let's get the discussion BACK to Caro and his book.

23 posted on 04/07/2002 9:57:50 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I KNOW Caro never said Oswald killed Kennedy, it was a conclusion I made after seeing LBJ up close while reading Caro's books. He was VP, close, but still so far away. He HAD to be president & it was his only way.
24 posted on 04/08/2002 1:05:51 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Sorry, I meant to say Caro never said "LBJ" killed Kennedy it was my own conclusion after reading Caro's books. When does the next one come out?
25 posted on 04/08/2002 1:29:55 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
He was VP, close, but still so far away. He HAD to be president & it was his only way.

It can't be said any better. Those words should be chiseled on any permanent monument to LBJ.

Again, JMO, but he had to have something to do with any conspiracy, even with eternal deniability. If I had proof, I wouldn't be posting here - I'd be talking to a publisher.

26 posted on 04/08/2002 3:54:14 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Where the conspiracty theories find nourishment is that Oswald himself loved to think of himself as part of some espionage network.

I think the conspiracy theories also get nourishment from the fact that Oswald couldn't have fired so many bullets from so many different directions in such a small space of time by himself.

27 posted on 04/08/2002 4:04:17 AM PDT by krb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: aristeides
Anyway, however favorably Caro may deal with the later stages of LBJ's political career, the man is irredeemably damned by the LBJ tapes that C-SPAN is running (at least on C-SPAN Radio -- I don't have cable, so I can't say whether they're also on one of C-SPAN's TV channels.) The sycophancy and duplicity on display in those tapes can never be erased.

I've listened to a lot of them while in the car on weekends. Don't know why but I always feel like I need a shower when I turn the ignition off.

28 posted on 04/08/2002 5:23:25 AM PDT by leadpenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
Sorry, I meant to say Caro never said "LBJ" killed Kennedy it was my own conclusion after reading Caro's books.

If you read more about Lee Harvey Oswald you would see that he acted alone. The reason for all the conspiracy theories is that Oswald loved to play spy. He fantisized that he was an agent then a double agent etc.. Basically he wanted to think of himself as a player. The KGB came to this conclusion as well. After Oswald defected (with very little info to offer the Soviets) they concluded that Oswald was living in fantasyland. A nutcase. I've known folks like Oswald. One guy in particular who fantasized that he was in the CIA but also working in a maze of conspiracies as well. I could never really follow it all but basically he, like Oswald, wanted to play spy. The difference is that Oswald also assassinated a President. This was also part of his games. Also the fact that his wife was about to leave him and he wanted to impress her that he was a big man.

When does the next one come out?

Hopefully we won't have to wait another dozen years.

29 posted on 04/08/2002 5:49:35 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I agree with all you say about Oswald but he was incompetant. My husband is a lifelong rifle shooter & after visiting the Texas School Book Depository he agreed with me that Oswald had help. He passed up an easy shot at JFK & waited until the very hardest shot. He was shooting a clunker of a gun, not very accurate & he wasn't a very good shot, according to people at the range where he went to practice. It would have been almost impossible to get off that many shots in that length of time & have them hit their mark. Add to that the fact that the back of JFK's head was shot off with the bullet entering his throat. I have seen many deer shot & the entry wound is very small & the exit wound is big. All of thoes things add up to conspiracy with Oswald the patsy just like he said. The person who shot JFK was in front of him (the grassy knoll) not behind him (book depository) LBJ was there to direct the Warren Commission & you were told that Oswald acted alone & you believed it, I don't happen to believe it.
30 posted on 04/08/2002 7:19:22 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I agree with all you say about Oswald but he was incompetant. My husband is a lifelong rifle shooter & after visiting the Texas School Book Depository he agreed with me that Oswald had help. He passed up an easy shot at JFK & waited until the very hardest shot. He was shooting a clunker of a gun, not very accurate & he wasn't a very good shot, according to people at the range where he went to practice. It would have been almost impossible to get off that many shots in that length of time & have them hit their mark. Add to that the fact that the back of JFK's head was shot off with the bullet entering his throat. I have seen many deer shot & the entry wound is very small & the exit wound is big. All of thoes things add up to conspiracy with Oswald the patsy just like he said. The person who shot JFK was in front of him (the grassy knoll) not behind him (book depository) LBJ was there to direct the Warren Commission & you were told that Oswald acted alone & you believed it, I don't happen to believe it.
31 posted on 04/08/2002 7:37:14 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
How about if we keep the discussion to the Caro book to LBJ's years in the Senate? I'm afraid that all future discussion on Caro's book will end up in a debate on the JFK assassination. I would prefer to stick to Caro's book for the discussions. And he is a GREAT writer!
32 posted on 04/08/2002 9:04:10 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Mr.Smorch
However, I can't stomach the idea of spending three hours learning what most of us already know about LBJ, to wit, LBJ was your typical dimocrat: corrupt to the core.

I can't speak to any phone conference, but Caro's volumes are more than just LBJ. Caro's first book was a detailed discussion of Texas political history in the early 20th Century. While I haven't read the third volume yet, I suspect it will be a detailed discussion of Senate politics.

33 posted on 04/08/2002 9:06:55 AM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
It could be that the overconfident Republicans are facing an unexpected defeat in the fall,

I would hope that you don't actually believe this since it is BS. In truth Daffy Duck could run on a statewide Republican ticket and still win. First of all, Morales is going to win the primary Tuesday since 1) he will get more of his supporters to the polls and 2) the Texas RATs who think they are the Democrat establishment in Texas (even though there isn't one) believe that Morales has a better chance against Cornyn than Kirk. Second, Morales' campaign will be limited to this summer because his wife won't let him quit his teaching job. That's how far the RAT party has fallen in Texas. Cornyn could win this race without spending half a million, since that's about all Morales will have.

34 posted on 04/08/2002 9:12:44 AM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1L
I just do not share your extreme overconfidence. I hope you are right, but if you are right, conservatives will be left at the door and told they were unneeded to the Perry-Cornyn "victory," which has yet to happen!
35 posted on 04/08/2002 9:30:49 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
He is a great writer & I can't wait to discuss his new book, just as soon as I read it.
36 posted on 04/08/2002 12:04:42 PM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Ditter
He is a great writer & I can't wait to discuss his new book, just as soon as I read it.

I can't believe how long we've had to wait for the third book...But I'm glad it's on the way.

37 posted on 04/08/2002 12:09:16 PM PDT by Ward Smythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: 1L
It has been 20 years since the TX "democracy" swept all constitutional offices. That was 1982, when Phil Gramm won his last election to the House as a Democrat, and Gramm's one-time intraparty rival Lloyd M. Bentsen, Jr., was elected again to the U.S. Senate. One of those Democrats elected that year was Treasurer Ann Willis Richards, a loud-mouth who went on to higher office. The Democrats are very confident in 2002. Ann Richards has endorsed Ron Kirk, saying he is "like a son" to her. Kirk was also once an aide to Bentsen and now has the enthusiastic endorsement of the Bentsen family. Surprisingly, many Texans consider the Bentsens "conservative." It could be because of Lloyd's Texas accent. All the Democrats are uniting behind Tony "Moneybags" Sanchez for governor. Meanwhile, the Republican slate seems oblivious that its members even have opposition. I was wondering who the people on the forum see as the strongest single Republican candidate this year. Could it be Comptroller Carole Keeton Rylander? Just my guess.
38 posted on 04/08/2002 12:37:19 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Ignorance may be bliss, PJ, but arrogance isn't. You need to lighten up, friend.
39 posted on 04/08/2002 4:36:15 PM PDT by AdvisorB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 1L
I can't speak to any phone conference, but Caro's volumes are more than just LBJ. Caro's first book was a detailed discussion of Texas political history in the early 20th Century. While I haven't read the third volume yet, I suspect it will be a detailed discussion of Senate politics.

BINGO!!! You hit the nail on the head. Although the books are bios of LBJ they are also much much more than that. For example, in the first volume Caro has an incredible chapter on what electrification meant to people living in rural areas. We also learn quite a bit about Texas politics such as about the colorful Pappy "Pass the Biscuits" O'Daniel and Texas style ballot stuffing. We also find out what it is like to be a congressional aide. I'm sure the third volume will let us know how the Senate operated back then. I have learned more about how politics REALLY works from Caro's two LBJ volumes than any other books. Poly-sci courses only touch the surface of politics. Caro's books gets into the nitty gritty of politics.

This is what irritates me about folks who say they won't read Caro's books about LBJ because they don't like LBJ. So what do they want? To read simplistic Happy Face type books that makes them feel good but gives them no idea of how the real world works? Yes, LBJ was corrupt and had many other faults but he is also fascinating to read about. (Can't wait to read Master of the Senate.

40 posted on 04/08/2002 7:10:59 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 1L
One more thing. I get the feeling that politics in Texas is somewhat different than in other states. I mean there is no way the Texas State House would be like a legislative branch in Iowa. Maybe the politicians in Texas are somewhat more eccentric than in other places. And LBJ certainly was eccentric.
41 posted on 04/08/2002 7:14:16 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
One more thing. I get the feeling that politics in Texas is somewhat different than in other states. I mean there is no way the Texas State House would be like a legislative branch in Iowa. Maybe the politicians in Texas are somewhat more eccentric than in other places. And LBJ certainly was eccentric.

I've only lived in Texas and haven't studied other states too much, but keep in mind that you are dealing with governments that went through reconstruction after the civil war with in many cases tyrannical government institutions. For example, in Texas the Governor position is relatively weak. The Gov. appoints some 300+ people to various agencies, and has line item veto, but other than that, there isn't too much there. Understanding political history of 1940's Texas gives a great insight to Texas today. Then there was no Republican party, only 3 solid wings of the Democratic party. Soon, the situation will be totally reversed.

42 posted on 04/08/2002 7:41:11 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Your analysis isn't even close. For Sanchez to win, he has to win 100% of the valley, and 50% of the rest of the state. That won't happen. As far as the Bentson family "enthusiastically" supporting Kirk, have you actually read the papers since the primary? Kent Bentson did not come out and support Kirk until a week or two after the primary. Bentson was totally embarrassed that he couldn't beat a relative novice (Kirk, having only been a mayor) and a school teacher who has been creamed in 2 past runs. The RAT party in Texas has some broad named Molly Beth Bubblehead (or something like that) that is truly one of the stupidest party officials I've ever seen on TV. No one could truthfully have her as a leader and it not be a joke.

Your doom and gloom worry is exactly what Rush always preaches against: the notion that success must have been luck, that it won't last and to be defeatest is the only way to go. If you are truly concerned, get out and work, but save the doom and gloom rap because I'm not buying it.

Remember, too many RAT constituents don't vote in off year elections. If Congress or Bush doesn't do something that pisses off the Republican base, Texas will be another state wide sweep and we might even get the state House along with 3-5 more Congressional reps.

43 posted on 04/08/2002 7:51:25 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: 1L
It's Molly Beth Malcolm, and she calls herself a "former Republican," meaning she must have voted in some TX Republican primaries in the past. Your optimism, 1L, is nearly as great as that of the Democrats statewide this year. It's Republicans who are ignoring their base; the Democrats have their troops fired up, it seems to me. The Democrats in TX are tired of losing, and they intend to reverse their previous defeats -- by any means possible. If GOP prospects were as bright as you say, then the Democrats would be gloomy, instead of jubilant at their chances in November.
44 posted on 04/09/2002 9:19:39 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Please read my message about your doom and gloom attitude. You can sit around in your self pity if you want to, but I refuse to. You haven't shown anything you said to be true, only unsupported speculation based on how YOU think the RATs are doing. Explain to me how the Democrats are going to reverse all statewide trends and win this year, just by having their "base" energized. While you are at it, provide proof that the base is indeed energized. It sure didn't show during the primary season, otherwise Victor Morales wouldn't have won the plurality he won in the Senate and a no name with a fairly serious ethical problem wouldn't have won the Gov. primary.

I don't know where you get your stuff, but you need to provide sources before I will accept anything. The only thing I can figure is that you simply want to have a bad attitude and are going through with it.

45 posted on 04/09/2002 12:37:36 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 1L
I just don't think the Democrats would be so jubilant if they did not sense a turnaround in their fortunes in TX. They may be thinking that Sanchez's money, Kirk's machine, and Sharp's appeal with "moderate" whites will put the whole ticket over, particularly in that Perry, Corny, and Dewhurst have not yet launched much of a campaign. We shall see just what the Republican ticket has in mind -- or at least I assume they will campaign some and not just take their "elections" for granted. I can tell you in South Texas that every fourth car sports a "Sanchez -- Governor" sign. Some may even think he has already won!!!!
46 posted on 04/09/2002 7:37:54 PM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
If you believe Seymour M. Hersh, The Dark Side of Camelot, Johnson blackmailed his way on to the ticket in 1960 (JFK had intended to offer the VP slot to Stuart Symington). Evelyn Lincoln, JFK's personal secretary, was convinced that Hoover was in on it, supplying LBJ with the information he needed to box Kennedy in. Lincoln told Hersh: "Jack knew that Hoover and LBJ would just fill the air with womanizing."
47 posted on 04/09/2002 7:51:32 PM PDT by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Verginius Rufus
I read the Hersh book but do not remember the part about LBJ "demanding" to be on the ticket. I think the PR line was that LBJ "answered" the call of service to his party and country and gave up his majority leadership post to serve in the powerless vice presidency. I don't think LBJ was involved in the events of November 22, 1963, any more than I think RN was involved. Remember, RN flew out of Dallas on the morning of November 22, having been in town for a convention.
48 posted on 04/10/2002 7:17:58 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
I just don't think the Democrats would be so jubilant

I asked for a source for these blind assertions.

They may be thinking that Sanchez's money, Kirk's machine, and Sharp's appeal with "moderate" whites will put the whole ticket over,

They also think abortion is a right, tax cuts harm the economy, pornography is protected speech, but prayer isn't, etc. So what? Who gives a rip about what they think?

particularly in that Perry, Corny, and Dewhurst have not yet launched much of a campaign.

Since they didn't have any challengers, there was no reason to launch a campaign.

or at least I assume they will campaign some and not just take their "elections" for granted.

You act like a football fan with the game one week away, and you are complaining that your team hasn't scored yet. Your ramblings are absurd.

I can tell you in South Texas that every fourth car sports a "Sanchez -- Governor" sign.

And South Texas makes up what percentage of likely voters?

Some may even think he has already won!!!!

Only you.

49 posted on 04/10/2002 7:57:04 AM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: aristeides; breakem; PJ-Comix
They've played a few short clips from the LBJ and Nixon tapes here and there on TV, but not as regular programming. c-span radio is also on the web and the new XM radio service if anyone outside of DC is interested. The tapes usually air Monday nights with a replay Sat afternoon, iirc.
50 posted on 04/15/2002 6:35:57 AM PDT by Plummz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

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