Doug Kanter wrote:

Nixon *needed* to do it, to put some kind of positive
spin on his work at the time.

How old are you?

Old enough to remember it was the radical wing of the Democratic party
that started the modern day politics of personal destruction. They blame
Republicans for all their blundering. And let's not forget the subject
here, Carter has done more real damage to America than any other
President.

--
Skipper

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/docs/jc/790101.htm

"The United States of America and the People's Republic of China have
agreed to recognize each other and to establish diplomatic relations as
of
January 1, 1979."

Article's right. You're wrong.

Oh. I forgot. You need simplicity, so you point to the date when a piece
of
paper was signed. You don't want to know that the Chinese put on a
banquet
for Nixon in 69 or 71 - somewhere in that range, and that we were also
sending diplomats (and ping pong players) back & forth constantly in
those
days.

One really can't dismiss the damage Carter has inflicted on the US when
he gave away the Canal, turned his back on our Middle East allies, and
allowed China to become today's predominant power. History will record
Carter as the worst President and ex-President in US history. And that's
saying something considering LBJ.

Stick with the subject of when diplomatic relations were restored with
China. That was the late 1960s. The book "Kissinger", by Walter Isaacson
would be helpful to you, if you can find someone to read it to you.

Doug Kanter wrote:

http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/docs/jc/790101.htm

"The United States of America and the People's Republic of China have
agreed to recognize each other and to establish diplomatic relations as of
January 1, 1979."

It appears you're the one on drugs.

That's your definition of when the serious dancing began? The piece of
paper? Not the 10 years' of work which began with Nixon & Kissinger?

Obfuscation, the refuge of a scoundrel.

--
Skipper

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Nixon *needed* to do it, to put some kind of positive
spin on his work at the time.

How old are you?

Old enough to remember it was the radical wing of the Democratic party
that started the modern day politics of personal destruction. They blame
Republicans for all their blundering. And let's not forget the subject
here, Carter has done more real damage to America than any other
President.

--
Skipper

I'm going to need an actual number for your age. Go ask your mom.

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...

The Constitution is a "piece of paper"... do you have as much contempt for
it as for the Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic
Relations Between the United States of America and the People's
Republic of China?

I don't have any contempt for the diplomatic document you're describing.
But, I'd like to learn from you, so perhaps you can explain where you got
the idea that I have contempt for that document.



Nixon *needed* to do it, to put some kind of
positive spin on his work at the time.

So you're saying it's OK for a President to bypass Congress and the
Constitution and take unilateral action with regards to foreign policy in
order to prop up flagging poll numbers?

In order to properly answer your question, I'm going to need a list of the
types of activities which, in your opinion, are OK for a president to
undertake secretly, and which are not.

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

http://hongkong.usconsulate.gov/uscn/docs/jc/790101.htm

"The United States of America and the People's Republic of China have
agreed to recognize each other and to establish diplomatic relations as
of
January 1, 1979."

It appears you're the one on drugs.

That's your definition of when the serious dancing began? The piece of
paper? Not the 10 years' of work which began with Nixon & Kissinger?

Obfuscation, the refuge of a scoundrel.

--
Skipper

Ignorance of history. The refuge of an idiot.

Doug Kanter wrote:
"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...

The Constitution is a "piece of paper"... do you have as much contempt for
it as for the Joint Communique on the Establishment of Diplomatic
Relations Between the United States of America and the People's
Republic of China?

I don't have any contempt for the diplomatic document you're describing.
But, I'd like to learn from you, so perhaps you can explain where you got
the idea that I have contempt for that document.



Nixon *needed* to do it, to put some kind of
positive spin on his work at the time.

So you're saying it's OK for a President to bypass Congress and the
Constitution and take unilateral action with regards to foreign policy in
order to prop up flagging poll numbers?

In order to properly answer your question, I'm going to need a list of the
types of activities which, in your opinion, are OK for a president to
undertake secretly, and which are not.

If you are secretly illegally wiretapping the American public, that's
OK. If you are secretely getting a blow job, that's not OK.

Doug Kanter wrote:

Stick with the subject of when diplomatic relations were restored with
China. That was the late 1960s.

Apparently, some are unfamiliar with the phrase, "hold your friends
close and your enemies closer", eh, Kanter?

--
Skipper

"Skipper" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Stick with the subject of when diplomatic relations were restored with
China. That was the late 1960s.

Apparently, some are unfamiliar with the phrase, "hold your friends
close and your enemies closer", eh, Kanter?

--
Skipper

What makes you think Nixon considered the Chinese to be enemies in 1970?
Where did you hear that?

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...
"Doug Kanter" wrote in
:

"Fred Dehl" wrote in message
...

The Constitution is a "piece of paper"... do you have as much
contempt for it as for the Joint Communique on the Establishment of
Diplomatic Relations Between the United States of America and the
People's Republic of China?

I don't have any contempt for the diplomatic document you're
describing. But, I'd like to learn from you, so perhaps you can
explain where you got the idea that I have contempt for that document.

You're dismissing it and trivializing it by referring to it (more than
once) as "that piece of paper", in a manner recalling your idol's referral
to "that woman, Miss Lewinsky".

The document was just a formality. Let me ask you this: Before the document,
how many years' of effort went into making it happen? I'm guessing you'll
say 2, but I could be wrong.



Nixon *needed* to do it, to put some kind of
positive spin on his work at the time.

So you're saying it's OK for a President to bypass Congress and the
Constitution and take unilateral action with regards to foreign
policy in order to prop up flagging poll numbers?

In order to properly answer your question, I'm going to need a list of
the types of activities which, in your opinion, are OK for a president
to undertake secretly, and which are not.

No, in order to properly answer my question, you're going to need the
ability to think.

Every president we've ever had has either used unilateral and/or secretive
tactics, or authorized (in writing) others to do so in his place. If you
don't believe this, back up your belief with facts.