Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Vietnam War’

Hollywood Starlet/New-Left Activist

Hollywood Starlet/New-Left Activist

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

I think there really are two Jane Fonda’s. The great sexy beautiful baby-faced adorable actress, who is arguably the greatest actress of her generation. With perhaps only Liz Taylor being better. And then there’s the New-Left political activist, that emerges on the American political scene in the late 1960s and is there throughout the 1970s. Who U.S. Military veterans see as The Devil. Who the New-Left/Far-Left in America, see as one of their heroes. Perhaps right of there with Karl Marx and many others. And I think its hard to cover both sides of Jane’s career in one post. But she’s made a huge mark in both careers that she’s had, I’m going to give it a shot.

Its not being against the Vietnam War, that made Jane Fonda controversial. I mean, the country up until the early 1970s, was split on that issue. Its still the worst war that America has ever been in. As far as all of the pain, suffering and deaths and how its effected future president’s and Congress’s and how they go to war. Its how Jane was against this war that really sets her apart. And puts in the anti-war movement in America that makes it easy to portray her as anti-American, if not Un-American. When you accuse the President of the United States of being a war criminal and you take a picture with the enemy and you call Americans soldiers murderers, its easy to see how people who love America would hate you.

The positive side of Jane Fonda’s career. Again, perhaps the best actress of her generation, The Silent Generation, Americans born in the late 1920s and 1930s, primarily. I think only Liz Taylor would be better than Jane. And you look at Jane’s movies like Walk on The Wild Side, The Chase, The China Syndrome, some of the best movies ever and she had a great part and was great in all of them, its easy to see why she’s had such a great career. And inheriting Henry Fonda’s genes, doesn’t hurt either. But as a political activist and I’ll go concentrate on the Vietnam War, perhaps some of her other activities, I probably agree with her on, she stands out as a real New-Left, or Far-Left radical, that has pissed off a lot of Americans. Who by in large would probably like and love her a lot otherwise.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Tom Hayden
This post was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

I was hoping this interview would be about if not mostly about if not the whole thing being about the 1960s. The New Left, anti-war movement, the Vietnam War and everything else from that period. Especially since Allan Gregg was interviewing Tom Hayden. One of the key leaders of Students For a Democratic Society and the New Left in this period. Before Occupy Wall Street was literally born, but the late 1960s version of OWS. But at least half of this interview is about the current Iraq War and 2008 in general. Especially since this interview was done in 2008.

Being that as it may, what Iraq and Vietnam have in common is they are both wars by choices. At least from America’s point of view of getting involved in something that at the very least could be argued had no business being involved in, in the first place. And for what, to build a liberal democratic utopia in a country that doesn’t have any type of democracy up until new pre-2003. And this liberal democratic utopia was supposed to be put together by Neoconservatives in the Bush Administration of all people. Which isn’t that different from what Neoconservatives wanted to do in Vietnam in the 1960s.

The anti-war New Left of the 1960s, were middle-age yuppie Baby Boomers by 2002-03 when the drive for the 2003 invasion of Iraq was put together. When Congress gives President Bush the authority to go into Iraq. Most of the New Left of the 1960s grew up and moderated and became spouses and parents and working good middle class jobs and even starting their own private business. They became capitalists and private enterprisers in the 1980s and 90s and so on. Which was one thing they were trying to get rid of in the 1960s and 70s. People tend to moderate with experience and knowledge.

Read Full Post »

 

Attachment-1-532

Source: David Hoffman

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat Plus

The 1960s was truly a revolution for American culture and politics. We go from a very conservative collectivist period from the 1940s and 50s to a period where all sorts of groups of Americans were standing up and demanding their freedom. And the freedom to live their own lives for the very first time in their lives. And from that sense at least the 1960s was a very positive time with so many new Americans now wanting and obtaining freedom over their own lives. And a bad time for the conservative establishment that wanted to keep things as is.

The 1960s you have the civil rights movement which was very positive. And not just for African-Americans, but for Latin-Americans, women of all races and ethnicities, as well as gays. And for Americans of all backgrounds now being able to live their own lives the way they want to. And no longer feeling the need or having to live the lives of their parents and grandparents. The 1960s you also have the anti-war movement which led to America finally seeing that the Vietnam War was wrong and that we couldn’t win it.

The negative aspects of the 1960s was of course the violence. We lost two great political leaders in John F. Kennedy and Robert F. Kennedy. We lost two great civil rights leaders in Martin L. King and Malcolm X. The rise of crime in that decade, the rioting and division of that decade. Things fifty-years later we’re still going through and haven’t recovered from. But revolutions tend not to be all peaceful. There tends to be some casualties in revolutions and the 1960s was no exception to that.

We go from a very stagnant and status quo decade of the 1950s to a revolutionary decade of the 1960s. Where not a lot of new things seemed extreme, except to the establishment that again wanted to keep things as is. Because they benefited most from that America and also believed that was the way for all Americans to live. And if America had to do all over again I believe it would and that it would’ve needed to be done. Because of all the Americans who were denied freedom in America simply because of who they were.
David Hoffman: How The 1960s Changed America

Read Full Post »

Archie Bunker

Why Not, Look at the Other Candidates

Source: This piece was originally posted at The New Democrat

Oh the 1970s, a decade about sacrifice and millions of Americans learning about their government and their politicians and that they didn’t like a lot of them. But of course as George Carlin always said, “no one put a gun to your head and forced you to vote for. A or B or reelect A or B”. That we get the politicians and the government that we vote for. So who do voters who vote for the wrong people have to blame.

The 1970s starts off radically enough with the Vietnam War and millions of Americans wanting to get the hell out of there. And can you blame them with all the people we lost. To Vietnam War demonstrations with a crime family running the White House. Because they didn’t trust their own country and their own people and a lot of them voted for Richard Nixon. To Watergate and the Nixon team breaking into Democratic headquarters. That didn’t have a January heat wave in Alaska’s chance of defeating President Nixon for president. To a president essentially being forced to resign as president or be fired by Congress.

We go from Tricky Dick Nixon as president. To stumbling bumbling Gerry Ford as president, our own president who was never elected president or vice president. It gave Americans a taste of what communist rule looks like and they spit that out by voting for a peanut brain, I mean peanut farmer in Jimmy Carter for president. Whose idea of leadership was to blame America for the country’s problems.

It is a good thing I was only alive for four years of the 1970s. Because if I had to go through that whole decade and old enough to remember all of it, I might have ended up being institutionalized for depression. Because the 1970s was a depressing decade. Sure the women’s designer denim jeans revolution of the late 1970s helped and was great for men to see, but most of the rest of the decade was depressing.

Great on Yak: Archie Bunker on The 1970s

 

Read Full Post »

img_0659

Source: FRS Daily Journal Plus– Hollywood Goddess Jane Fonda, on The Phil Donahue Show, in 1972

Source: The New Democrat

Jane Fonda at her highest peak as an anti-war New-Left political activist. Calling members of the American military criminals, murderers, including the President of the United States Richard Nixon and perhaps President Nixon’s predecessor Lyndon Johnson as well. The wing of the American Left the New Left people who are called McGovernites for their support of U.S. Senator George McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign took over the Democratic Party in the late 1960s and early 1970s. And gave the Democratic Party a real bad name for over twenty-years.
Jeremy Richey: Phil Donahue Show- Jane Fonda 1972 Vietnam War Interview

Read Full Post »

Telling it The Way it Was

Telling it The Way it Was


Still the best news anchor America has ever seen. Walter Cronkite, was the CBS Evening News, as great of a title that would have been if that is what he represented. He wasn’t CBS News, again as great of an honor that would have been. He was network news. He was the gold standard for how good real news anchors are judged by. People who anchor real news shows and real news stories. Stories that have real importance to the country. Perhaps that don’t draw the best ratings, or are the most entertaining. But real-life stories that effect everyone in the country. A true news anchor and not an entertainment news anchor, covers current affairs and national affairs. Issues involving the entire country. Like our foreign policy, national security and economy, to use as examples.

Like the death of the President of the United States. A war where millions of Americans are stationed thousands of miles away in another country fighting someone else’s civil war. Or the death of a great civil rights leader, or political leader. Or a political scandal involving not just the White House, but the President of the United States and his involvement in that scandal. Or a national energy shortage that effect every single American and effects the national economy. Or the Great Deflation of the 1970s. That resulted in two recessions in that decade and led to the economic malaise of the late 1970s and early 1980s. Or peace treaties involving two major Middle Eastern countries. Or a hostage crisis involving several Americans being held hostage in a Middle Eastern country.

Walter Cronkite, anchored the coverage of all of these stories and issues that I mentioned. And I believe it’s very clear which issues and stories that I’m talking about exactly.Were there what would be called fluff stories on the CBS Evening News, like a panda being born at the National Zoo, or a major sports story, sure. All network newscasts have done that. And Cronkite wasn’t above that and perhaps shouldn’t have been. But Americans watched his newscast, because they wanted to know what was going on in the world especially in their own country. Get the latest economic news, news about the latest war we might be involved in. Issues that the President and his administration are pushing. What’s going on in Congress and the latest political news in and outside of Congress. And Cronkite was the best at this.

Read Full Post »

92093

Source: Melody Cat– CBS commercial 

Source: Melody Cat: CBS Evening News 12-26-1972

I believe Harry Truman was one of our top 3-5 presidents in American history, but certainly in the top ten. Because of how he managed post-World War II especially in Europe and put America in position to successfully win the Cold War. With the buildup of the national security state to deal with Russia, as well as the NATO.

Harry Truman was the man not many people respected until they saw him in action. I don’t know of an American politician, especially a great American politician that was more underestimated than Harry Truman. A fairly unknown U.S. Senator who had only been a Senator for ten-years, where all of his Congressional service was served, becomes Vice President of the United States in 1945. Who didn’t have much of a professional resume at all before he was fifty-years old, not just becomes President of the United States, but achieves that within days of becoming Vice President. And becomes one of the best President’s in American history.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »