You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #51: A Couple of problems with your thread [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #38
51. A Couple of problems with your thread
The first problem is the significance of RFK's win in California. One of the "Reforms" of the 1968 Democratic Convention was that in future conventions (1972 and afterward) the primary method of delegate selection would be in primaries, but that was NOT the case in 1968. RFK could have won every primary in 1968 and still be denied the nomination. The actual Nominee, Humphrey, Johnson's VP, did not even run in ANY PRIMARIES in 1968m yet won the nomination (The main reason was LBJ wanted Humphrey and at that time that was all the nominee needed to get the nomination, it would have been hard to name as a nominee anyone a Seating President of the US and of the same party did not want, the last time that happened was 1896). Thus RFK win could not propel him to the nomination, LBJ opposed RFK and that was enough to deny RFK any chance at the nomination (LBJ still had massive support within the Democratic Party in 1968, something Cleveland did NOT have in 1896 when the Democratic Nomination went to Bryan against the wishes of the then Sitting Democratic President Cleveland).

A second problem is JFK did agree to the overthrow of Diem. Anyone who looked into Vietnam was that Diem understood what was needed to defeat the Viet Cong, but that included NO US TROOPS, even at the increase possibility of the Viet Cong winning the war. The Military situation was deteriorating in Viet Nam, Diem policy was to strengthen his supporters, attack both the Communists and any other opponents (including the Buddhists) and thus survive till a better situation develops. The CIA just saw a Viet Cong Victory without massive US intervention. JFK agreed to the over throw of Diem, only LBJ opposed it (On the ground one does NOT kill a friend, given the hatred the Kennedys and LBJ shared to each other, LBJ's opinion was ignored). With Diem's overthrow the US was going into Vietnam after the 1864 election no matter who won the Presidency.

LBJ was a constant poll watcher, when the Majority of Americans, for the first time, started to believe it would be better to pull out of Vietnam, LBJ actually started to pull troops out. LBJ still viewed Viet Nam as his "Who Lost China" issue and thus wanted to show he did all he could to win the war ("Who Lost China", was the slogan used in the 1950s by the GOP against the Democratic Party, blaming Truman and the Democrats for the Red Chinese taking over China in 1949, it was still the Slogan of choice even during the 1968 campaign, it was 1972 when Nixon went to China and killed the slogan he had run on for over 20 years by that date).

Thus LBJ was trying to resolve a problem even Solomon would have had a problem resolving, how do you get US troops out of Vietnam (as the Majority of Americans wanted by the Summer of 1968) while staying in power so his Great Society programs could be maintained and expanded AND not be blamed for losing Vietnam? IF RFK had won the Presidency he would have had the same problem (Through RFK;s commitment to the Great Society Program was less then Nixon's). How do you solve that problem? LBJ saw the demand for withdraw from Viet Nam as a sure sign of Defeat for the Democratic Party. LBJ appears to have accepted as early as 1963 that Vietnam was un-winnable, but in 1963 the vast Majority of Americans were still following JFK's call to fight communism every where including Viet Nam.

Thus the dilemma, any President who won in 1968 would have faced. Nixon ended up winning the Presidency, but LBJ was able to keep the House and Senate solidly Democratic. This saved the "Great Society Program" till Reagan. When Nixon had to make a choice, end the war in Viet Nam or let the US Dollar go above $35 to an ounce of gold (The price since 1934), Nixon decided Viet Nam as worth it, thus you had the inflation of the 1970s, do to Nixon's refusal to keep LBJ's last year tax increase (Which balanced the budget) and went into deficient spending (Which had the side affect of strengthening the Presidency as oppose to Congress).

Second problem is the number of "bullets" fired. Glass reflects sounds thus some of the bullets heard and recorded could be echos of earlier firings (i.e. within seconds hearing two or three firing when only one round was fired do to echos). The weapon used was NOT a Magnum, thus some of the so call "bullet holes" reported could be from other causes, i.e. some one used a pencil to make a similar holes. Some of the "Bullet holes" could be just defective parts of the wood the holes were found in. Thus the number of bullets fired is hard to determined by mere sound or holes, actual bullets would have to be recovered. Thus no conclusive evidence has come out to show that Shooter could NOT have fired ALL of the bullets.

Furthermore all of this is a minor issue as to this shooter, for under California law, even if a Victim, acting in self defense, shots and kills an attacker, any co-attacker is guilty of that other attacker's murder. i.e. you and your partner robs a place, and your partner gets shot by the owner, you can be tried and convicted of Murder of your partner in California, even if neither of you fired a single shot. Thus if the gun that actually killed RFK had been the gun of one of his body guards, Sirhan would still have been guilty of murder under California law. California has one of the broadest reaching Felony-Murder rule in the Nation.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC