Presidents Nixon and Reagan?

Question

Even tho Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan were born on different years they were both presidents of similiar belief and policies.

Do u think the policies and beliefs of Richard Nixon and Ronald Regan were correct?

Answer 1

Nixon and Reagan were not of similar beliefs and policies. Watergate and paranoia aside, Nixon was a pragmatist. His beliefs were not closely held beliefs. They were expedient. He was known as a tough anti-communist in the 40's and 50's. But in the 70's he went to Russia and China and began the politics of detente. That is pragmatism at its finest.

Reagan was a Cold War warrior. He was an idealist. He wavered not one iota from his ideals. Take the Iran-Contra situation. Reagan's view was there were Communists who needed to be stopped and he was going to do whatever he could to stop them.

If you look at the body of work with all of the Presidents from FDR to Reagan, you will see the Communists took over more territory in each administration until ... Reagan. Eight Presidents in a row watched as the Communists became stronger, Republicans and Democrats alike. Reagan ended it and Communism has been slowly falling away since.

Domestically, both were different as well. Again, the difference was pragmatism versus idealism. Reagan had a few beliefs and they were unshakeable. They were: stop Communism, build the military, cut taxes and shrink the government. He succeeded in all but the last.

Nixon had no closely held beliefs. He would shed an idea and try something else. There is no way Reagan would have adopted price controls as Nixon did. Reagan viewed that as government interference in the private sector. Nixon viewed it as a way to get the economy kick-started, personal beliefs aside.

So I beg to differ that they were of similar beliefs and policies. Nixon was neither a conservative nor a liberal. Reagan was a conservative. The two men weren't as different as Ted Kennedy and Fred Thompson. It would be more like as different as Fred Thompson and Rudy Guiliani.

Answer 2

For an exact answer to your question, I believe Reagan's were correct, and Nixons were not.

As for the "similar beliefs and policies", I would have to disagree.
Reagan took an extremely hardline stance against communism during his 8 years in office. That can Hardly be said about Nixon
Nixon was the first President to visit communist China ever, and in so doing, ushered in an era of relations that had the effect of intertwining our two ecomomies over time.
Reagan, in a startegy to outspend the Soviet Union, started a major arms race to defeat the Soviets financially.
Nixon pulled our troops from Vietnam and turned a blind eye to congressional military budget cuts, and was constantly trying to negotiate arms reduction treaties with the Soviets (SALT I & II)
Note: Many people are critical of Ronald Reagan's strategy to defeat the Soviets, but in reality, it was brilliant. Personally, I can't believe it took so damn long for a smart enough US president to come around and recognize that we could easily take advantage of the Soviets horrible economic condition.

There is also the issue of economics. Durng Nixons administration, Nixon let the economty stagnate and continue on the slump it had been in since Johnson's administration. He did almost nothing to try to remedy this. Then during Carter's administration, it finally blew up. Inflation went through the roof and the Stock Market was as sick as hell. Those two idiots were too dumb to look at the economy and try to fix it. They stood by watching go to hell wringing their sweaty little hands. Oh, yeah, Ford is just as responsible and dumb in my opinion.

When Reagan entered office, the first thing he did was attack the destroyed economy. Yes, this is partly because it was so obvious something needed to be done, but Reagan had been saying for a long time before hand exactly what he wanted to do. Many people still scoff today at his tax cuts, but even economists that rejected Reagan's plan were forced to admit by the end of the decade that it worked! Any economic ills left over from his administration were from his defense spending, which was both necessary and replenished in the next few years.

Reagan, finally, was a much more hard hitter on the international scene. He always kept the American people's best interest in mind first over international agreements or treaties. (This may sound stupid and arrogant to some, but that is EXACTLY what he was elected to do.
Nixon was much weaker on the international scene and often caved in to international pressure.

That's how I see things

Answer 3

Amasing how people have already forgotten the Soviet Union and the Cold War.

Amasing how a lot of people now look at Reagan in the present tense now that there is no communist Soviet Union. Short memories about the Contas being Communists Allied with the Soviet Union and Cuba. People tend to forget that part of the equation. We were in the middle of a cold war with the Soviet Union when that was going on.
Iran was fighting for it's life against Saddam Hussein and Iraq who were also allied with the Soviet Union in large part. So in said case it was having to chose the lesser of two evils.

As far as Nixon his mistake was trying to cover it up. John Kennedy was caught doing the same thing and he came straight out saying they did it and they all did it because it was part of politics.
And he was the one who got us out of Vietnam not the one that got us in Vietnam, that was Kennedy and Johnson.

Answer 4

Reagan, among other things, intentionally and flagrantly thwarted the will of the people, as expressed by Congress, when he continued to support the Contras. Congress cut off funding for his dirty little war in part because the side he was backing was using tactics like raping and killing nuns to terrorize the ppl of Nicaragua against populist reforms like free education and land redistribution. When the funds were cut off, he and his cronies funded the war through cocaine smuggling into the US, and armed them additionally via secret, and prohibited arms deals with Iran.

Nixon was paranoid and ordered the break-in of offices of the Democratic National Committee in an effort to secure political power, and kept us in Vietnam longer than was necessary.

Both men abused their power and treated the constitution like toilet paper. However, I would add that their abuses pale in comparison to those of the current administration - the worst, and most criminal in this country's history. But hey, almost half the country voted for the bafoon - TWICE!

Addendum: I'm too beat to give those answers defending Reagan and/or Nixon the point-by-point dissection they deserve, but since there's one thing they all have in common, I'll address just that: regardless of the situation they were in, or their personal beliefs, the fact remains that this nation is SUPPOSED to adhere to the rule of law, NOT the rule of men. That means that, whatever the aims of the administration, they are to be pursued pursuant to THE CONSTITUTION, you know, that silly little piece of paper upon which all other laws, and indeed, our entire governmental system is based. It is NOT a document that can be followed when convenient, and ignored when it gets in the way of a particular president's agenda. That's essentially what set this nation apart from all others when it was formed - the kings that ruled our forefathers' homes could pretty much make the rules up as they went along. That's NOT how it's supposed to happen here, though you wouldn't know it by studying the history of corrupt presidents like Nixon (who was by far the least offensive of this list), Reagan or, especially Dubya.

As for defeating communism, to say Reagan did anything more than hasten its demise is to, by extention, claim that it is a viable system. Communism failed not because of any one individual or outside policy. It failed because it fails to capture the power of human self-interest. Capitalism succeeds because it so directly rewards this trait, but suffers other innate problems that one would expect when greed is valued above all else and is not checked by careful oversight and limits, such as the anti-trust rules governing monopolies that have been steadily eroded under Republican leadership. The most disgusting example of late is the lining of pockets we're seeing today in the prosecution of the war in Iraq, where it's more important to give no-bid contracts to the friends of the administration than it is to assure that our military is given the proper equipment it needs, or, more importantly, a well-defined mission, a plan to carry it out, or a commander in chief that isn't bordering on retardation.

Oh, and as for our good friends the Contras that were raping nuns in the name of fighting the supposed 'commies @ our doorstep' in Nicaragua - wake-up new guy - the Soviets were using the Sandanistas to gain a foothold, it's true... how do you think we would've reacted had the Soviets places nuclear missiles just across our border as we did all over Europe? And btw, the 'commies' were not idealogues wanting to spread communism. They were peasants that wanted a fair shake and to break away from the military dictatorship that kept a tiny, rich minority of land-owners in power, gave sweet-heart deals to our corporations, and squashed any attempt @ reforms w/ brutality. Had we supported the values upon which our nation was based, those farmers would've MUCH rather have done business w/ us, than make friends of convenience w/ the Soviets. But that would've threatened the profit margins of agribusinesses here, so, by ignoring our traditional values, we set the stage for Soviet influence on our border.

But you're right. Torturing innocents to bolster the bottom line and violating our own constitution is a much better plan. See how well it's working in Iraq?? DumbAsSes.

p.s. thanks for the "thumbs down"s - it shows how pissed you fools are that I've exposed your lack of logic and historical knowledge. And for those still on the fence, remember, these are the same idiots that voted Dubya into office - how's THAT workin' out? Oh, right, lowest sustained approval rating in this nation's history - BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!