<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A progressive for our times</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/</link>
	<description>Think.  It ain&#039;t illegal yet...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 03:16:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frost/Nixon: The rehabilitation of Tricky Dick and what it says about the soul of modern America &#124; Scholars and Rogues</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-118380</link>
		<dc:creator>Frost/Nixon: The rehabilitation of Tricky Dick and what it says about the soul of modern America &#124; Scholars and Rogues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:20:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-118380</guid>
		<description>[...] years ago, during the run-up to the 2008 election, I wrote an article recalling some of the high spots in the actual Nixon record and inviting readers to compare what the.... The conclusion was unmistakeable, and for many perhaps a bit shocking: &#8220;If he were a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] years ago, during the run-up to the 2008 election, I wrote an article recalling some of the high spots in the actual Nixon record and inviting readers to compare what the&#8230;. The conclusion was unmistakeable, and for many perhaps a bit shocking: &#8220;If he were a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: What America needs now is Tricky Dick Nixon (no, I&#8217;m not joking) &#124; Scholars and Rogues</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-99480</link>
		<dc:creator>What America needs now is Tricky Dick Nixon (no, I&#8217;m not joking) &#124; Scholars and Rogues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2011 14:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-99480</guid>
		<description>[...] June of 2008, I wrote a piece here (using my Dr. Sidicious Bonesparkle alter-ego) arguing that were he alive today, former president Richard Nixon would be deemed far too liberal to even be consi.... That post was brief and its point wasn&#8217;t to laud Tricky Dick, but to make a point about how [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] June of 2008, I wrote a piece here (using my Dr. Sidicious Bonesparkle alter-ego) arguing that were he alive today, former president Richard Nixon would be deemed far too liberal to even be consi&#8230;. That post was brief and its point wasn&#8217;t to laud Tricky Dick, but to make a point about how [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conservatives, Progressives and the future of representative democracy: what would an American Parliament look like? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-96070</link>
		<dc:creator>Conservatives, Progressives and the future of representative democracy: what would an American Parliament look like? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 17:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-96070</guid>
		<description>[...] As Noam Chomsky told a sold-out Mackey Auditorium crowd in Boulder Friday night, &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; No doubt &#8211; American politics has slid so far to the right in my lifetime that were he alive today, Nixon would be too liberal to even get nominated. By the Democrats. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As Noam Chomsky told a sold-out Mackey Auditorium crowd in Boulder Friday night, &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; No doubt &#8211; American politics has slid so far to the right in my lifetime that were he alive today, Nixon would be too liberal to even get nominated. By the Democrats. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Will you vote for Obama (again)? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-95125</link>
		<dc:creator>Will you vote for Obama (again)? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:02:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-95125</guid>
		<description>[...] is objectively and demonstrably to the right of Richard Fucking Nixon and short of bomb-bomb-bombing Iran it&#8217;s hard to imagine what President McCain could have [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is objectively and demonstrably to the right of Richard Fucking Nixon and short of bomb-bomb-bombing Iran it&#8217;s hard to imagine what President McCain could have [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: An open letter to President Barack Obama: congratulations &#8211; now, how will you spend your political capital? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-92816</link>
		<dc:creator>An open letter to President Barack Obama: congratulations &#8211; now, how will you spend your political capital? &#124; Scholars and Rogues</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 04:07:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-92816</guid>
		<description>[...] I have not been your biggest fan, Mr. President, because I am not in the habit of confusing what a person says with what he or she does. Your record, to date, is objectively to the right of Richard Nixon&#8217;s, and it&#8217;s hard to argue with Noam Chomsky, who said, in a speech several days ago, that &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; Cynical, but true. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I have not been your biggest fan, Mr. President, because I am not in the habit of confusing what a person says with what he or she does. Your record, to date, is objectively to the right of Richard Nixon&#8217;s, and it&#8217;s hard to argue with Noam Chomsky, who said, in a speech several days ago, that &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; Cynical, but true. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Conservatives, Progressives and the future of representative democracy: what would an American Parliament look like?</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-92470</link>
		<dc:creator>Conservatives, Progressives and the future of representative democracy: what would an American Parliament look like?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2011 21:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-92470</guid>
		<description>[...] As Noam Chomsky told a sold-out Mackey Auditorium crowd in Boulder Friday night, &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; No doubt &#8211; American politics has slid so far to the right in my lifetime that were he alive today, Nixon would be too liberal to even get nominated. By the Democrats. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As Noam Chomsky told a sold-out Mackey Auditorium crowd in Boulder Friday night, &#8220;Richard Nixon was our last liberal president.&#8221; No doubt &#8211; American politics has slid so far to the right in my lifetime that were he alive today, Nixon would be too liberal to even get nominated. By the Democrats. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scholars and Rogues &#187; Shootout at the DC Corral</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-77740</link>
		<dc:creator>Scholars and Rogues &#187; Shootout at the DC Corral</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:14:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-77740</guid>
		<description>[...] there are the Blue Dogs and some other assorted moderate Democrats (to the extent that anybody to the right of Nixon can be called a moderate, anyway). Now, they came up here to the corral with me. They fought with [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] there are the Blue Dogs and some other assorted moderate Democrats (to the extent that anybody to the right of Nixon can be called a moderate, anyway). Now, they came up here to the corral with me. They fought with [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: iowaheretic</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-76373</link>
		<dc:creator>iowaheretic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:44:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-76373</guid>
		<description>Nixon was also the first one to start the fake &quot;energy crisis&quot;,which isn&#039;t much different that today&#039;s fake &quot;global warming&quot;. They are both diversions for other agenda&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nixon was also the first one to start the fake &#8220;energy crisis&#8221;,which isn&#8217;t much different that today&#8217;s fake &#8220;global warming&#8221;. They are both diversions for other agenda&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scholars and Rogues &#187; Democrats to Progressives: we&#8217;re just not that into you</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-67102</link>
		<dc:creator>Scholars and Rogues &#187; Democrats to Progressives: we&#8217;re just not that into you</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-67102</guid>
		<description>[...] the recent revelation that he was in favor of abortion in the case of half-breed fetuses, posted a record that would make him pretty darned progressive by 2009 standards. (Good thing you dodged that bullet, huh Mr. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the recent revelation that he was in favor of abortion in the case of half-breed fetuses, posted a record that would make him pretty darned progressive by 2009 standards. (Good thing you dodged that bullet, huh Mr. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SadButTrue</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44609</link>
		<dc:creator>SadButTrue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 06:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44609</guid>
		<description>I was around for Nixon and Watergate and remember them well - and I agree completely with this post. I would add that Tricky Dicky, so crooked that he had to screw his pants on, was less corrupt than any current Republican and about 80% of today&#039;s Democrats.

Nixon took great pains to hide things that the Bush administration does openly, defying anyone to stop them. The big difference is that today&#039;s media is completely complicit in the corporatocracy&#039;s crimes against the people.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was around for Nixon and Watergate and remember them well &#8211; and I agree completely with this post. I would add that Tricky Dicky, so crooked that he had to screw his pants on, was less corrupt than any current Republican and about 80% of today&#8217;s Democrats.</p>
<p>Nixon took great pains to hide things that the Bush administration does openly, defying anyone to stop them. The big difference is that today&#8217;s media is completely complicit in the corporatocracy&#8217;s crimes against the people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44514</link>
		<dc:creator>jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 20:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44514</guid>
		<description>I can make a perfectly logical case that Nixon was a liberal.  In fact, it tends to infuriate my friends on the left, as they don&#039;t know how to respond.  When they reach down and mention Nixon&#039;s crookedness, I can bring up an equal amount of shady dealings from members of the left that cancels out that argument.

I&#039;ve always thought that Nixon was a paranoid....and liberal.

However, he was a helluva poker player.

Jeff</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can make a perfectly logical case that Nixon was a liberal.  In fact, it tends to infuriate my friends on the left, as they don&#8217;t know how to respond.  When they reach down and mention Nixon&#8217;s crookedness, I can bring up an equal amount of shady dealings from members of the left that cancels out that argument.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve always thought that Nixon was a paranoid&#8230;.and liberal.</p>
<p>However, he was a helluva poker player.</p>
<p>Jeff</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ingrid</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44505</link>
		<dc:creator>Ingrid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:58:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44505</guid>
		<description>circle of hell?? psah! I haven&#039;t slept through the night (but many once or twice or hmm even thrice) for the last five years, so that little circle of hell means nothing! and ok ok.. sparkles doesn&#039;t sound as &#039;manly&#039; as calling yourself dr.. so..I&#039;ll retract..
BUT.. not because of aforementioned designation to that circle of hell, I got one of my own already..[g]

Ingrid</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>circle of hell?? psah! I haven&#8217;t slept through the night (but many once or twice or hmm even thrice) for the last five years, so that little circle of hell means nothing! and ok ok.. sparkles doesn&#8217;t sound as &#8216;manly&#8217; as calling yourself dr.. so..I&#8217;ll retract..<br />
BUT.. not because of aforementioned designation to that circle of hell, I got one of my own already..[g]</p>
<p>Ingrid</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Russ Wellen</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44493</link>
		<dc:creator>Russ Wellen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:21:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44493</guid>
		<description>You&#039;ve truly surpassed yourself in deviousness this time, Bonesparkle. I just can&#039;t face the implications of what this means for Obama.

Question: Has Ingrid just consigned herself to a circle of hell for calling you &quot;Sparkles&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;ve truly surpassed yourself in deviousness this time, Bonesparkle. I just can&#8217;t face the implications of what this means for Obama.</p>
<p>Question: Has Ingrid just consigned herself to a circle of hell for calling you &#8220;Sparkles&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ingrid</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44430</link>
		<dc:creator>Ingrid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 02:25:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44430</guid>
		<description>&quot;I was pretty clear about what Nixon was in the post, I think. The question isnâ€™t what Nixon was, itâ€™s what McCain and Obama and the Dems and GOP are&quot;

sparkles, that&#039;s what I meant.. I&#039;m too tired a mom to dig for issues so I was selfishly asking for a convenient split screen type deal {s}

however, it sounds like there really hasn&#039;t been any President the previous century who hasn&#039;t had skeletons in his closet..although what would/do you think about Carter?

Ingrid</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I was pretty clear about what Nixon was in the post, I think. The question isnâ€™t what Nixon was, itâ€™s what McCain and Obama and the Dems and GOP are&#8221;</p>
<p>sparkles, that&#8217;s what I meant.. I&#8217;m too tired a mom to dig for issues so I was selfishly asking for a convenient split screen type deal {s}</p>
<p>however, it sounds like there really hasn&#8217;t been any President the previous century who hasn&#8217;t had skeletons in his closet..although what would/do you think about Carter?</p>
<p>Ingrid</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: johndoraemi</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44422</link>
		<dc:creator>johndoraemi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 00:31:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44422</guid>
		<description>Wellllllllllll,

Let&#039;s not forget that R. Nixon sent Henry Kissinger to Paris in 1968 to sabotage the Viet Nam peace talks.

Nixon/Kissinger basically promised the N. Vietnamese that they would get better terms under his administration than under the Democrats, and so they should wait to end the war.

This worked (illegally?) and helped give the election to Nixon who was talking peace, yet making war behind the scenes.  The deaths of tens of thousands of American GIs, several million V.Namese, Cambodian and other civilians followed.  

The warmonger Nixon is directly responsible for numerous war crimes, and should be considered as any other war criminal, like Bush today, Clinton yesterday, and pretty much every US president you can name.

Vote for a criminal warmonger like that?  

No thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wellllllllllll,</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s not forget that R. Nixon sent Henry Kissinger to Paris in 1968 to sabotage the Viet Nam peace talks.</p>
<p>Nixon/Kissinger basically promised the N. Vietnamese that they would get better terms under his administration than under the Democrats, and so they should wait to end the war.</p>
<p>This worked (illegally?) and helped give the election to Nixon who was talking peace, yet making war behind the scenes.  The deaths of tens of thousands of American GIs, several million V.Namese, Cambodian and other civilians followed.  </p>
<p>The warmonger Nixon is directly responsible for numerous war crimes, and should be considered as any other war criminal, like Bush today, Clinton yesterday, and pretty much every US president you can name.</p>
<p>Vote for a criminal warmonger like that?  </p>
<p>No thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mikeb302000</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44391</link>
		<dc:creator>mikeb302000</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44391</guid>
		<description>Interesting idea, but I&#039;m still hoping Obama will change things.
http://mikeb302000.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/barak-is-the-man/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting idea, but I&#8217;m still hoping Obama will change things.<br />
<a href="http://mikeb302000.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/barak-is-the-man/" rel="nofollow">http://mikeb302000.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/barak-is-the-man/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JS O'Brien</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44390</link>
		<dc:creator>JS O'Brien</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:01:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44390</guid>
		<description>Well, there&#039;s no question in my mind that the country has moved far to the right since Nixon was in office.  What I remember about those days, and I was pretty young at the time, is that Nixon was elected because of LBJ&#039;s unpopularity and the fact that he was running against LBJ&#039;s vice president, Hubert Humphrey, who also had the misfortune of being a very physically unattractive man.  Nixon also ran on code-worded states rights language that convinced most of the South to abandon third-party candidate George Wallace and cross over to the Republican Party, which was a big deal at the time because the post-Civil War South had been solidlly against the party of Lincoln.  Outside the South, his message was about law and order which, in 1968, played well to a lot of people who thought the country was going to the hippies and commies, and wanted them locked up.

Nixon would begin the process of turning the party of Lincoln into a party Lincoln would have abhored.

Nixon was not a peacemaker.  He came to the presidency on having a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam, but &quot;end&quot; meant &quot;win&quot; in most people&#039;s minds.  Maybe even in Nixon&#039;s, considering that he escalated the war considerably before finally conceding it.  

Many of the civil rights issues you enumerate were already well underway before Nixon took office.  Remember that the man had a Democratic Congress to work with (I&#039;m pretty sure), so he had to compromise on nearly everything.  School desegregation was already well down the road.  He took office at the beginning of &#039;69, and my school district, and most others near me, desegregated in September of that year.  But it was a done deal by the time he entered the White House.

I don&#039;t think Nixon meant to appoint anyone who supported Roe v. Wade.  At the time, the papers were abuzz with how often conservative appointees turned liberal on the bench.  I think Nixon got burned that way.

The wage and price controls were in response to high inflation, and were a throwback to what politicians of that day knew pretty well:  World War II.  I don&#039;t think it was really a liberal move as much as a move of some kind to try to tame inflation at a time when no one really knew the mechanisms for doing that.

I&#039;d say that 1970 was about the high water mark for progressives of that era.  Protests on college campuses seemed to drop off quite a bit after Kent State and the general student strike of 1970.  The country started to swing slowly to the right, gaining momentum with Ronald Reagan, who made it cool to be a bigot again when he launched his campaign on a states rights speech in Philadelphia, Miss. -- the place where the Civil Rights workers were murdered and the police covered it up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, there&#8217;s no question in my mind that the country has moved far to the right since Nixon was in office.  What I remember about those days, and I was pretty young at the time, is that Nixon was elected because of LBJ&#8217;s unpopularity and the fact that he was running against LBJ&#8217;s vice president, Hubert Humphrey, who also had the misfortune of being a very physically unattractive man.  Nixon also ran on code-worded states rights language that convinced most of the South to abandon third-party candidate George Wallace and cross over to the Republican Party, which was a big deal at the time because the post-Civil War South had been solidlly against the party of Lincoln.  Outside the South, his message was about law and order which, in 1968, played well to a lot of people who thought the country was going to the hippies and commies, and wanted them locked up.</p>
<p>Nixon would begin the process of turning the party of Lincoln into a party Lincoln would have abhored.</p>
<p>Nixon was not a peacemaker.  He came to the presidency on having a secret plan to end the war in Vietnam, but &#8220;end&#8221; meant &#8220;win&#8221; in most people&#8217;s minds.  Maybe even in Nixon&#8217;s, considering that he escalated the war considerably before finally conceding it.  </p>
<p>Many of the civil rights issues you enumerate were already well underway before Nixon took office.  Remember that the man had a Democratic Congress to work with (I&#8217;m pretty sure), so he had to compromise on nearly everything.  School desegregation was already well down the road.  He took office at the beginning of &#8217;69, and my school district, and most others near me, desegregated in September of that year.  But it was a done deal by the time he entered the White House.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think Nixon meant to appoint anyone who supported Roe v. Wade.  At the time, the papers were abuzz with how often conservative appointees turned liberal on the bench.  I think Nixon got burned that way.</p>
<p>The wage and price controls were in response to high inflation, and were a throwback to what politicians of that day knew pretty well:  World War II.  I don&#8217;t think it was really a liberal move as much as a move of some kind to try to tame inflation at a time when no one really knew the mechanisms for doing that.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d say that 1970 was about the high water mark for progressives of that era.  Protests on college campuses seemed to drop off quite a bit after Kent State and the general student strike of 1970.  The country started to swing slowly to the right, gaining momentum with Ronald Reagan, who made it cool to be a bigot again when he launched his campaign on a states rights speech in Philadelphia, Miss. &#8212; the place where the Civil Rights workers were murdered and the police covered it up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bonesparkle</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44387</link>
		<dc:creator>Bonesparkle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44387</guid>
		<description>I was pretty clear about what Nixon was in the post, I think. The question isn&#039;t what Nixon was, it&#039;s what McCain and Obama and the Dems and GOP are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was pretty clear about what Nixon was in the post, I think. The question isn&#8217;t what Nixon was, it&#8217;s what McCain and Obama and the Dems and GOP are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. Denny</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44349</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. Denny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:22:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44349</guid>
		<description>I dunno. Does rampant paranoia leading to the creation of an &quot;enemies&quot; list and a squad of plumbers equal progressive thought?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I dunno. Does rampant paranoia leading to the creation of an &#8220;enemies&#8221; list and a squad of plumbers equal progressive thought?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nebris</title>
		<link>http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2008/06/24/a-progressive-for-our-times/comment-page-1/#comment-44278</link>
		<dc:creator>Nebris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jun 2008 00:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/?p=2318#comment-44278</guid>
		<description>Laid out like that in black and white makes for a rather depressing read.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laid out like that in black and white makes for a rather depressing read.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

