Why was Nixon the nation's choice ahead of the decent, competent Hubert Humphrey (or, for that matter, able to run neck and neck in the popular vote against the very attractive, war hero, Pulitzer-winner, wealthy, extremely well-spoken John F. Kennnedy?)

I think that the same tendency to vilify everything Nixon ever did (and I hate him with the fury of a thousand suns, don't get me wrong) gives us a tendency to gloss over the almost equally unforgettable sins of his political opponents.

Kennedy was a privileged political pragmatist who cynically manipulated a non existent missle gap for personal ends in the 1960 election, and doesn't seem to have been much more interested in domestic affairs than Nixon was, really. The remarkable thing about that election is how cosmetic the differences were between the two.

And as for being well spoken, remember that most of the people at the time who listened to the debates on the radio thought that Nixon had won. Kennedy was a presence and a charisma that Nixon sorely lacked, but he was no saint and no savior.

Humphrey was the VP and heir to Johnson's escalation of the war in Vietnam, and in many ways was torpedoed by his own party.

As far as Johnson, who I think is the most interesting of all of these figures, think of all the lies he told during the buildup of the American troop levels in Vietnam. And I don't mean misdirection of the enemy type of misleading, I mean outright bald faced lying to the American people about how, where, when, and why you are sending American troops to die on foreign soil against the better judgment of many of your own advisors.

One good example of just how close to Nixon some of these guys are:

The Church Committee in the 70's turned up all of the FBI domestic spying crap and the COINTELPRO files on MLK and the Chicago 7 and all that. Because Watergate had already happened, and there was so much public consciousness of the Plumbers and the Dirty Tricks and all, much of this tends to get blamed on Nixon, or at least lumped in with his other crimes and misdemeanors. But Nixon didn't assume office until Jan 20,1969. MLK was already dead. Most of the 60's were done. Your liberal heroes, LBJ and Kennedy (aided, or led on by, J. Edgar Hoover, who was appointed by FDR), were the ones spying on the Civil Rights movement, blatantly misusing the resources of the federal government to keep tabs on unpopular or provocative political opponents and friends alike.

The fact that some of what happened during Nixon's reign ... errr ... administration ... wasn't completely fucking horrible in no way vindicates, alleviates, or releases him from condemnation for the horrible violence he perpetuated on the American Psyche. But that doesn't mean that those some things weren't, in fact, really good (the EPA is pretty damn good, I think). Nor does it mean that the policies of liberals who opposed him were, by definition, good. I can't stand that whole "enemy of my enemy" thing. I think we just started arming Sunni insurgents that they might fight Al Qaeda for us.

At any rate, I hated this article, but I was glad to read it and rant for a second.

One of the recurring memes that keeps on getting raised in the letters section of Glenn Greenwald's blog is that of Nixon's Golem - the staff that continues to function (Cheney and Rumsfeld, and I forget his name - Fred Fielding) and the fact that he just won't fucking die - his story just seems to keep on going.

I don't think I have ever been more disappointed then when they had Nixon lay In State for mourners to come by. But I am pretty convinced that someone did some voodoo during those days. Stole a button off his suit or clipped a small lock of hair off the wolf patch on his back or something ...