I love how he references the Peloponnesian War and doesn't feel like he has to explain the allusion to anyone! Society has lost a lot by neglecting the study of the Classics since the '60s.
Holy crap! I knew the interviewer looked familiar: Moses Znaimer when he had hair long ago. Watch and learn George Strombo... Stop with your unfunny celebrity jokes.
McCarthy always said the Kennedy promised that if McCarthy took on Johnson Kennedy would not enter the race. The Kennedy's crushed anyone who impeded their ambitions.
vidal is, as always, wrong, but not for the reasons the 9-11 conspiracists here believe. RFK would have lost to nixon, even worse than humphrey did.go back and check the poll numbers pre-california primary...
I wonder how Gore feels now that we have 911. He knows it's an inside job and a media job. He couldn't end the interview on an optimistic not in 1968.
@drrobotnik999 It's time to wake up. the 911 Mega Ritual did not use Boeings. And no building in the world fall like the WTC w/o Tons of help, so to speak. Try "ae911truth" for startes. DavidSChandler, Genghis6199 and his 911Taboo. Thats All I have to say to you.
@drrobotnik999 Obsessions and paranoia are part of the creative process in this grotesque crime against all civilization, and it wasn't diaper headed troglodytes with rusty razors, running amuk and slamming huge planes in the 3 big buildings. With Impunity. Wake up
nearly no one believes that 9/11 was an inside job. it's interesting that you would prefer to believe that this consensus is the result of a massive conspiracy rather than islamofascist terrorists.
i'm wide awake. take your medication and simmer down. you're not smarter than everyone else, although i'm sure that idea pleases you.
@drrobotnik999 Some of us sleep longer than others, I understand. I woke up in 2007.I also made 15 video tapes of the event. I went back and watched them... Not a pretty picture. No pun intended. We've been had. Go to "ae911truth" for some good physics. Its Architects and Engineers..... Try 911Taboo. But I am right. Wake up readers.
I have to chuckle when the Truther set claims that buildings "like the WTC" required controlled demolition to collapse. Can any of you tell any of us "sleepers" what you're basing that hypothesis on? I'm sure there are a whole bunch of 100+ story office towers of the exact same construction into which you've flown large passenger airliners at full speed and at peak fuel storage to test this hypothesis--you just haven't chosed to share those tidbits of data with us...yet.
@bman342 The truth is out there and it's obvious. But you'll have to look for yourself. "aer911truth" may help. Or easier:: I have playlists like "WTC Construction Techniques" "911 Documentaries", "Pentagon hit", etc. There is a wealth of information on them and the first 20 portray my ranking their importance +/-. No 757 could ever cause such an event. We have been had and it's time to wake up. but I understand, my brother said "shove off", a friend with a phd in Vision won't look at it!
@theonemanparty7 Just research it and discover the truth. 911 was an inside job and a media job. And we are in a lot of trouble. It's time to wake up and grow up. and any state of people voting for Kennedy's and Barney and Mitt the Mormon shall get what they deserve. And now they have a Republican! Too late. Maybe they woke up in time to watch themselves die.
Have you ever been to a convention of Creationists/Intelligent Designers? They would easily convince the weak-minded such as yourself that the world was created 6000 years ago, as was everything in it. They have a "scientific" explanation for everything and it would have you thumping bibles on any street corner. More's the pity.
How irritating. JFK was removed from the Presidency in a cruel and abrupt way. If his brother did not even consider the idea that perhaps he should take up his brother's causes and bring them to fruition, he wouldn't be normal. Did Vidal ever think that maybe one of the reasons he wanted to be President (besides the issues) was to investigate his brother's murder ?
By the way vidal, Bobby Kennedy was NOT an obscure senator. He was one of the most famous senators, not just because he's a kennedy but because his ideology and dreams of a better america won the hearts of many americans. No doubt bobby would have been won the democratic ticket. BTW Gore, there is no way bobby wanted to be VP with Lyndon. The two hated each other. He'd rather die than serve under the man he loathed.
Good comment. But I think the obscure senator he is referring to is Eugene McCarthy. Gore Vidal has never had a good word to say about RFK. He never forgave him for some fight they had several years before. He would never admit that RFK grew or evolved into a better person. Bobby was more qualified, appealed to a broader constituency, than McCarthy . His comments about JFK are interesting. Once he expressed resentment that JFK didn't hang out with him more.
I would question whether RFK was more qualified than McCarthy. He might have had broader appeal, but not that much. Remember, Carter and Clinton came out of nowhere to win the election.
Moot point, as I don't think he was going to win the nomination, Humphrey had the delegates
Funny calling Kennedy a oppurntunist.Who isn`t in politics.Kennedy was in for the long run.Would he have won who knows.He had to go thru Humphrey then Nixon.I think Gore Vidal ate his words after Kennedy beat McCarthey.Joe Kennedy wasn`t calling the shots on this one.
I never thought I'd see Gore Vidal bashing the Kennedys...Of course we all know what happened......he recently said Hillary should have been president.
well in that case, congratulations! we humans need more humans like you in this world...next time just comment on the video you're watching, & not on the grammatical errors of others' comments. that is all.
Robert Kennedy didn't like Gore Vidal. This led Truman Capote to say Vidal was thrown out of the White House -- practically deposited, drunk, on Pennsylvania Ave. Here, Vidal mentions RFK. He considered Bobby to be a manic-depressive who made bad decisions. There was a dual side to Bobby -- he was the most compassionate man sometimes -- and the most obstinate, mean SOB you could imagine. I like Gore and wish he'd become President.
My God... A comment on a YouTube video that's over twenty words long and without a single gratuitous spelling error. We should be friends. Maybe we could throw a baseball around some time. Or maybe just get pizza. Or root beer. Hi, I'm Ken.
Jackie Kennedy was not a sister of Gore Vidal. Vidal's mother was at one time married to Jackie's stepfather; they were never siblings. Interestingly enough, Gore was a Kennedy groupie until Bobby threatened to break the arm Gore had draped too near Jackie's ass at a White House function, thus engendering Vidal's waspish enmity forever.
(Off topic: Noam Chomsky has the lowest opinion of McCarthy EVER, he thinks he just seized the anti-war platform as a vehicle of self-promotion while letting his base get hit by nightsticks by police outside the DNC. Then afterward, he went home to write poetry and "talk about baseball". Vidal, on the other hand, liked McCarthy because he was witty and made him laugh. ...Not sure who to believe there. Maybe Gore has a blind spot.)
Hmm, I read both of his memoirs and he seems to seriously have thought Bobby was evil incarnate, total fake and a possible psycho in the making.
He definitely had issues with the dynasty "ambitions" of the Kennedys, and skeptical that Bobby could switch from ruthless attorney general to a buddy-buddy philanthropist who loved peace.
Who knows. My mom is still a huge Bobby groupie. *shrugs*
im a fan of the kennedys, minus teddy but i wouldnt compare bobbys move to a vulcher. i do enjoy that he says what he feels and even at the end says i dont see good times ahead. thats needed in hard times.. the truth is a valuble thing. i think bobby and jfk were 2 very dif people privately. jfk was more patient and knew how to play the system a little better. bobby seemed like he never made plans just went out on a whim. ive heard he was on a suicide mission and his fam opposed him running idk
Well, it's true that Gore Vidal thought Kennedy was one of the worst presidents. Simply, for the same reason everyone else didn't like him. He started all that in Cuba, the missle crisis.. etc..
But he stated that Kennedy was one of the most witty and extravagant presidents ever and had a great personality.
ah, me too i've only found Gore vidal tonight. i love the older vidal but he's truely real, don't really know who he is, but i'm sure i will by the end of the night . I g5ew up reconiszing his name. i think hes great a real free thinker.
Yes and I am sure if there had been a youtube then all the usual right wing nutters would be shouting him down as a fag librul,sad ,we get the country we deserve
In addition to a demonstrably unsympathetic personality, Gore Vidal is an ordinary writer and an extraordinary fool. A miserable character, he looks down on everybody. He has no sense of reality. And his talent for political analysis is hardly above that of the average paranoid schizophrenic
I remember this as a kid and was very much into the political scene..I have to agree that Kennedy was not all that he said he was...and Vidal does bring that to a head. 1968 was a bad time in our history.i remember all of its horrors..It was a time for change...that is what scares me now cause that is all I hear with this new group in power. Change,change To what? One must always remember the great ignorance of the electorate.They love to be told what to think, and always will..sadly...
It was a time of Change. It was a bad year because all of those who were trying to bring it were killed. And change to what? All three heroes made it clear: Peace, racial equality, tolerance, a better world. Obama same: Change in our attitudes to the world, which he has done. The world LOVES this guy, the same way the world LOVED bobby, Jack and Martin. Foreign leaders have high praise for Obama and we are looking very good in the world. Sounds like change to me.
"Obama same: Change in our attitudes to the world, which he has done"
What kind of a nut are you? Obama is just another fascist warmonger. He's been killing people since he took office. He gave trillions to corrupt bankers, foreign banks. He's taken over industries. He's a freakin' tyrant.
You're living in a fantasy. Why don't you look at facts for a "change", and stop worshiping evil politicians.
Obama is wildly popular around the world, but of course in America there are a few nuts who have a problem with him for no good reason. He's definitely FAR from a warmonger. He's trying talks with Iran, trying to close Gitmo, is getting ready to sign a nuclear disarming treaty, is bringing Iraq to a close. Even afghanistan will be a short affair. He wants to get bin Laden not nation build. Bush started nationalizing industries and giving money to corrupt bankers. Obama did not. Tyrant=Bush.
Perhaps if he dropped a bomb on your family, you'd have a different opinion. He is expanding Bush's illegal wars, adding more troops to Afghanistan (at least 17,000), bombing Pakistan and killing civilians.
"Obama did not."
Flat out lie. Obama voted for or signed all those bills, supports the Federal Reserve in stealing from us.
Wake the hell up!
Where in the Constitution does he get the authority to tax Americans to pay for bankers losses?
You don't have to lecture me on that. I am aware of what is happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan. For a while bombs were killing Pakistani civilians and he stopped that. By the way, he only wants to get bin laden on matter of principle. If you look at the number of troops that are in Afghanistan, there aren't enough to fight a full blown war. And he shouldn't fight one either, considering that Bin laden was created by us. Obama is much different from Bush, but change comes slow.
"For a while bombs were killing Pakistani civilians and he stopped that."
Oh, the bombs were killing people? Not those who ordered them dropped?
He stopped nothing. What are you talking about? They just killed "dozens" (according to the news I heard on the radio today) more civilians in Afghanistan.
What do you call people who set off bombs and kill innocent people for political purposes? It's on the tip of my tongue.
I understand your anger. And I'm with you on the banks thing. Why banks are being bailed out is beyond me. I'm not a big fan of the bailouts in general, but jobs are in trouble. Although I don't know how much jobs will be helped with the bailouts. Aside from that , however, he is trying to make change. We will see what happens. This is a country in which you have to bring change slowly. Him talking to Iran is in itself a huge deal.
I don't think so. You just don't want to face the truth.
"This is a country in which you have to bring change slowly"
He's spent more money already than all previous presidents combined! He's ramming bill after bill through on everything! Do you even realize what you're saying? Are you kidding me with "slowly"??? He couldn't act any more fast and loose than he already has. It's absolutely disgusting how they are looting and destroying us.
Why don't you calm down sir? You and i have the same concerns. He' spending it on clean energy, new jobs, scientific research, etc. pretty much all long term things that will bear fruit for us in the future. The republican governors of several states appreciate his stimulus package which they say will help build schools, etc. This may prolong the recession, but we will emerge stronger. FDR may have prolonged the depression but america had a middle class boom after he signed the GI bill.
"He' spending it on clean energy, new jobs, scientific research, etc"
None of which he has any legal authority to do.
Not that that matters, of course. He can do whatever the hell he wants to . He can KILL DOZENS OF UNARMED CIVILIANS, and most news outlets won't even mention it because the lives of those people are not important. Hell, he doesn't even have to say "oops"!
Yet people like you will talk about how he's bringing "change".
Actually the news the other day reported that Hillary Clinton had given an official apology to the Pakistan ppl because of all the bombing happening there that has killed civilians. I'm not saying "Sorry" is a charm, we might never be forgiven, but it shows a change in attitude this administration has. As for legal authority, we live in a 21st century world, which is going to have some 21st century demands. By the way, he taught constitutional law so he's not going to be another Bush.
You listen to Alex Jones and now you know the real deal...Obama has not spent more money than all previous presidents combined. You're thinking of the record deficits that are reflective of the illegal war of choice that Bush started but didn't include in the budget. Obama actually decided to include the costs of war in the budget so people realize what we are doing. If you don't like what we are doing in Afghanistan than you should talk to the majority of americans who agree with it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Bore Vidal was always a pseudo-intellectual egotist.
Who cared what he thought or said? What did he ever DO for anyone else except blather on endlessly about the wrongs of the world while others were trying to change them (with their lives).
A person like that is not worthy to speak the name Robert Kennedy.
Wrong on the second point. Johnson's early pledge, and this was also a major slogan in his campaign in '64, was "We Seek No Wider War"(Phil Ochs actually used that phrase as the basis for one of his songs).
fuckOisiam0666: you say that Kennedy was the last bastion against the military-industrial complex. However, was he not the guy who got the US military into Vietnam?
Never could stand the Kennedys RFK never transformed I remember him as an anti-labor scumbag Vidal is wrong about McCarthy also--he was a good guy but he basically liked getting drunk and writing poetry with Robert Lowell. Once you vote you are lost only pressure from the outside changes things.
You know what David Icke has this stuff just about down pat. I mean if you read any of his research on the New World Order, Vietnam and other wars. He ties it up. The other fantastic *real* journalist is a guy called John Pilgar watch his documentaries about USA aggression. It is not the American people apart from their willful ignorance, but the evil, sick, Nazi fascist government that is run by as they say "the owners".
This is pure fantasy. THERE WAS N WAY RFK would win the nomination. Absolutely, no way. Just like Hillary, the math wasn't there. Humphrey had about 33% more delegates going into the convention, and Johnson controlled the convention. Even RFK said a number of times if he didn;t get McCarthy and his people on side, AND get some delegates to defect from Humphrey, he wouldn;t win the nomination. This is just more Kennedy myth, and not backed up by facts.
Humphrey entered the race but did NOT go for states; instead he went straight to the convention and started trying to get delegates. Out of the candidates who were actually running the race (you know winning states, ppl voting for them) RFK was winning, and would have easily wooed the Humphrey's delegates over to his side at his convention, especially since Humphrey had no votes and RFK did.
I know it is on here someplace, but there a couple of clips of RFK saying he needed Humphrey delegates or they wouldn't make it. I know the romantic notio is to think RFK would've won, but the Democratic machine was behind Humphrey, not to mention LBJ.
He may have, but when him and McCarthy competed for California, each one knew that California was "make or break." Sure, I'm also not a big fan of that war machine that was running the party at the time, but McCarthy and Kennedy both had the vote of the people, and if Humphrey had won anyway if Kennedy had lived, then the dems would have still lost the election, like they did. Ppl would be furious that their voted were ignored. Plus, the last name Kennedy is a powerful name in politics.
See, this is an example of the myths surrounding the Kennedys, no offence intended to you. A majority of Americans were against the war, but a majority of Americans were NOT in favor of pulling out at that time. Just either win it, or quit it, and about half in favor of staying the course. Eugene McCarthy, much like McGovern four years later, would have been slaughtered. It would have been child's play to paint him as Neville Chamberlain revisited.
Why do you think Kennedy decided to enter? He was seen as a stronger candidate than McCarthy, that's why he entered, because of what you just said. This is no myth. MLK even said that there was a huge majority against the war, and that most of that majority was for a full pullout. McCarthy slaughtered, I'm with you there. But not Bobby. Plus, McCarthy's voters would have come over to Bobby's side. Many had already jumped ship when Kennedy entered the race and others would have too.
I'm second to nobody in my admiration for Mr. Vidal, but he didn't realize the transformation that happened with RFK when he ran for President; RFK captured the imagination of the public at large, would have been nominated and probably elected, would have ended the VietNam disaster. Of course RFK scared the crap out of the owners of America, and was shot to death for his efforts.
He's been wrong in many things but here, he was bang on : Kennedy 68 was a desperate, opportunistic move......although "Vanity Fair" magazine now choses to print the fairy story.
Gore is a poor a prognosticator here as ever...predicting LBJ was going to declare war so as to continue as a wartime President, like FDR. The following year he was on David Susskind, saying Nixon was probably going to escalate the war in Viet-Nam.
Good Lord NO, it was Lyndon Johnson who bombed the North incessantly...at least until just before the '68 election, on behalf of the Paris talks and the Humphrey candidacy. (This is when John McCain became a POW.)
Johnson escalated the war 1965-67; Nixon ended our involvement 1969-1973; the South Vietnamese lost the war, 1974-75, when the Democrat Congress refused to honor our treaty obligations to the South Vietnamese, and cut off funding.
Good Lord Yes, there was massive bombing of North Vietnam during the Nixon presidency also.You are buggering history when you claim that this did not happen. Thank God that the Democratic congress cut off the funding to this quagmire and huge mistake. The Vietnamese are fine now without any foreign intrusions.
Were you alive when LBJ and Nixon were President? LBJ DID wag war on Vietnam, although technically not called that; Nixon DID escalate that war. Millions of dead innocents later, we STILL have not learned our lessons. Gore Vidal is one of the only truth-tellers in the world today!
But that the Kennedys only goal was to win, regardless of any reason WHY they might want to win - is a correct perception, I think. Supreme, vintage Vidal arrogance on display here, hehe.
Its clear Vidal hated RFK, probably for personal reasons. Vidal could hate anyone at the drop of a hat. MY guess is, RFK didnt coddle Vidal, didnt defer to him. This would piss the holy hell of an a vain egocentric genius like Vidal. RFK had far more empathy with the poor, and blacks, than Jack did. To say RKF was a fake just trying to be president, is looney. That was Nixon.
My understanding is that Gore Vidal put his arm around his cousin, Jackie, and Bobby said, "get you-ah a-hm off of he-ah you fag!" And it went down from there. (I'm not kidding.)
Yes, thats fits, as I said below -- probably for personal reasons, such as that. Why would Vidal hate RFK so? Just wacked out. The only thing that made sense - RFK pissed him off on something personal. Still, Vidal's historical fiction books were great. Too bad he can't rise above his own ego, he had the ability to be great. He didn't make it, just another vain fukk head.
As it happens, I only a few years ago finished Vidal's memoir "Palimpsest," in which he discusses the RFK incident. The roots went back further, according to Vidal, than his having touched Jackie's shoulder at a White House dinner. On balance -- and I'm by no means a Vidal defender -- I'd tend to believe his version of things. Not that there's really any other version, considering that RFK never went public with it. Nor, apparently, were there any witnesses.
To continue for a moment longer: RFK may well have had empathy for the poor, but he was also the product of a political family with axes to grind, beginning with its "lower station" as Boston Catholic Irish, to father Joe's perceived humiliation at the hands of FDR. And the bones of Bobby's career lay in his being a McCarthy henchman. Idealism and opportunism are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Ambition can, and does, unite the lofty and the low.
McCarthy henchman? Surely he was Gene McCarthy's opponent in '68? Oh you mean Joe McCarthy, when Bobby worked as an assistant counsel on the Senate subcommittee. Anyway, how was he a "henchman"? Did he do anything at all.
First of all, on another point altogether, in my original post I wrote, "[...] only a few years ago [...]" when I'd meant to write, "[...] only a few days [...]." Ridiculous to address now, I know, but I hate making typos.
Beyond that, RFK's association with Joe McCarthy, whatever he did or didn't do, nevertheless strikes me as careerism, which was the point I was trying to make. It also seems a might cynical to go after organized crime figures, given all we know of his father's bootlegging.
i have to disagree with markdouglasC. I have always been a skeptic of kennedy liberalism vs. kennedy opportunism. it was leaders like humphrey, gene mccarthy, lyndon johnson (even eisenhower adm somewhat) who waged war against poverty and racism while they risked political careers. the kennedy's entered the battles kicking and screaming in the 4th quarter.
Well, it is actually...though not on an individual level, but on a global-political-economic-social level. Politicians were fronting businesses since the dawn of wealth and later corporation. Since presidents doesn't last, the men of candidacy usually are favored by their party factions before they are allowed to perform. I like JFK in his speeches, and wonder about the Kennedy assassinations.
I see this thread leans to the very far left. I am with you in many aspects, folks, but I just don't subscribe to extremist views. Our country has faults and many problems, but it is nowhere near as bad as Vidal makes it out to be....
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
For a far-left nut like Vidal to dump on Bobby Kennedy like he does in this piece is the height of arrogance. McCarthy was an insane ultra-leftist as well, and as bad as Nixon was, McCarthy wouldn't have been much better as president. This snob Vidal seems to feel nothing but contempt for America and anything good within it...
McCarthy lockedup/extradited/blackballed anyone he perceived as left and was an ultra right wing fascist simaler to a lot of people today. If you did not support there views you were an enemy of the state. In future have a clue about what you are typing about before you type
You are right to call me on that one. I was thinking about McGovern, not Senator McCarthy from Wisconsin. You are absolutely right about McCarthy, but that does not take away from Vidal being one left-wing nut. Vidal is as much an extremist as McCarthy was, just on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum...
Dear god, you're both wrong. The Senator Joe McCarthy that you're thinking of dies 11 years before this interview. He's talking about Gene McCarthy who was the bold anti-war democrat that ran in the 68 primaries.
Joe McCarthy was the super conservative demagogue of the immediate Post WWII.
They are talking about Eugene McCarthy, the progressive late sixties movementarian. Rockinraffi, you have been posting negatively on many Gore Vidal videos. Considering you don't know the difference between Joe and Gene McCarthy, I suggest you stop slandering your intellectual superiors (ie Vidal).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I insist. Vidal may be an intellectual, but he is anti-American, and a shame to his country. He is as bad as witch-hunter Joe McCarthy from Wisconsin, but on the other radical end of the spectrum. If being intellectually inferior means being a proud American who wants to improve our country instead of attacking it at every turn, then I am most decidedly intellectually inferior to Vidal, and proud of it...
All Joe McCarthy wanted to do was be famous. He wasn't even a good redbaiter, missing the actual Communists who had government jobs while hounding people who'd never been within miles of the CP.
When Joe McCarthy was planning to go into politics, he decided he'd tie his career to some sort of cause, and he didn't really care what that cause was. In the end, he narrowed it down to anticommunism, or flood control. Think how bad Katrina might have been if he'd gone the OTHER way on that.
Ejatz, mi abuelo paterno era Espaniol, de Castilla. Yo soy hijo de Mexicano criollo y Norteamericana, pero mi familia tiene raices en Espania. Te mando un saludo, a pesar de nuestro desacuerdo acerca del traidor Vidal...
Pues vale, jaja, un saludo a ti tambien! Pero el desacuerdo es este: Una distincion importante es que Vidal, desde mi punto de vista, no anti-american, para nada. Vidal es contra los que misrepresentan America, y los en el gobierno que usan el poder del EEUU para dominar, tanto la gente americana como la mundial. ps, de hecho soy Americano, solamente vivo en Espana.
What I find to be un-american, as I think does Vidal, is the behavior of the political and business elite of the nation using their power in such a way as to make America a weaker nation, simply for personal gain. Attacking American policy and attacking America are vastly different, though politicians have meticulously and painstakingly constructed this false parity. This a fundamental assertion of Vidal, and I think you are confusing his position by calling him anti-american.
I agree with you and completely understand the distinction you point out. However, listening to Vidal rant, you'd think he is the one that can't see the fine line. I am with you in that interest groups and lobbies have pretty much taken the system over, but Vidal could suggest a constructive solution instead of taking such an ugly turn...
Although, when Eugene McCarthy's volunteers were canvassing in New Hampshire in '68, they ran into a number of people who thought their candidate WAS Joseph McCarthy, the redbaiter, and were prepared to vote for him as a result of that confusion. This was particularly strange considering that Joseph McCarthy had been DEAD for eleven years by then.
And I've heard that a fair amount of people who did end up voting for George Wallace would have voted for RFK had he lived and been nominated. I think the idea was that both of them would shake things up, although in very different ways.
Another reason to mourn what happened in the Ambassador Hotel kitchen and curse whoever was responsible.
wow, if you truly believe that Robert Kennedy is a smarter or more good-hearted man than Gore Vidal. you obviously are affected by the government's shot of "bliss". Good-bye to you then, absolutely no chance for you until you stop lying to yourself. even then you'll only be able to see you were too late.
Love those cutaways to the reporter. It's a guy named Moses Znaimer, who went on to be dusted by Burt Lancaster in "Atlantic City" before turning into Canada's creepiest media baron.
Thank you for posting this. The president's demagogic attacks on anti-war people, as described by Mr. Vidal, are similar to those of today's president.
wow he really sounds like he's talking about Bush when he's talking about LBJ
but why was he son anti-Kennedy?
Claronium780 3 months ago
I love how he references the Peloponnesian War and doesn't feel like he has to explain the allusion to anyone! Society has lost a lot by neglecting the study of the Classics since the '60s.
mgayford 1 year ago
America - the bully on the block for now.
JohnnyRock2000 1 year ago
Holy crap! I knew the interviewer looked familiar: Moses Znaimer when he had hair long ago. Watch and learn George Strombo... Stop with your unfunny celebrity jokes.
fuferito 1 year ago
Comment removed
fuferito 1 year ago
Comment removed
fuferito 1 year ago
McCarthy always said the Kennedy promised that if McCarthy took on Johnson Kennedy would not enter the race. The Kennedy's crushed anyone who impeded their ambitions.
nicmart 1 year ago
vidal is, as always, wrong, but not for the reasons the 9-11 conspiracists here believe. RFK would have lost to nixon, even worse than humphrey did.go back and check the poll numbers pre-california primary...
jawmo1 1 year ago
Was there ever a time when Gore Vidal did not see "dark times ahead" ???
docpivot 2 years ago
I doubt there was, but he was right at every stage. Just because he has always seen it does not mean it is not so.
NathanPBridle 2 years ago
No, but then dark days were ahead and are ahead now. Did you experience 1968 as an adult?
Vidal predicts a military dictatorship now. I hope this one is not accurate.
lancer89032 1 year ago
Who is interviewing Gore Vidal?
jpstenino 2 years ago
@jpstenino I'm almost 100% positive that's the, then, very young, and media-mogul-to-be, Moses Znaimer.
fuferito 1 year ago
USA needs a new Vidal
BeppeSapone 2 years ago
@BeppeSapone Gore Vidal is still alive.
drd32 2 years ago
I wonder how Gore feels now that we have 911. He knows it's an inside job and a media job. He couldn't end the interview on an optimistic not in 1968.
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
@IExposeMormonism inside job? idiot lol
drrobotnik999 2 years ago
@drrobotnik999 It's time to wake up. the 911 Mega Ritual did not use Boeings. And no building in the world fall like the WTC w/o Tons of help, so to speak. Try "ae911truth" for startes. DavidSChandler, Genghis6199 and his 911Taboo. Thats All I have to say to you.
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
you should see a doctor. obsessions and paranoia aren't healthy.
drrobotnik999 2 years ago
@drrobotnik999 Obsessions and paranoia are part of the creative process in this grotesque crime against all civilization, and it wasn't diaper headed troglodytes with rusty razors, running amuk and slamming huge planes in the 3 big buildings. With Impunity. Wake up
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
nearly no one believes that 9/11 was an inside job. it's interesting that you would prefer to believe that this consensus is the result of a massive conspiracy rather than islamofascist terrorists.
i'm wide awake. take your medication and simmer down. you're not smarter than everyone else, although i'm sure that idea pleases you.
drrobotnik999 2 years ago
@drrobotnik999 Some of us sleep longer than others, I understand. I woke up in 2007.I also made 15 video tapes of the event. I went back and watched them... Not a pretty picture. No pun intended. We've been had. Go to "ae911truth" for some good physics. Its Architects and Engineers..... Try 911Taboo. But I am right. Wake up readers.
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
I have to chuckle when the Truther set claims that buildings "like the WTC" required controlled demolition to collapse. Can any of you tell any of us "sleepers" what you're basing that hypothesis on? I'm sure there are a whole bunch of 100+ story office towers of the exact same construction into which you've flown large passenger airliners at full speed and at peak fuel storage to test this hypothesis--you just haven't chosed to share those tidbits of data with us...yet.
bman342 2 years ago
@bman342 The truth is out there and it's obvious. But you'll have to look for yourself. "aer911truth" may help. Or easier:: I have playlists like "WTC Construction Techniques" "911 Documentaries", "Pentagon hit", etc. There is a wealth of information on them and the first 20 portray my ranking their importance +/-. No 757 could ever cause such an event. We have been had and it's time to wake up. but I understand, my brother said "shove off", a friend with a phd in Vision won't look at it!
IExposeMormonism 2 years ago
go put your tin hat on. . .
theonemanparty7 1 year ago
@theonemanparty7 Just research it and discover the truth. 911 was an inside job and a media job. And we are in a lot of trouble. It's time to wake up and grow up. and any state of people voting for Kennedy's and Barney and Mitt the Mormon shall get what they deserve. And now they have a Republican! Too late. Maybe they woke up in time to watch themselves die.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
Have you ever been to a convention of Creationists/Intelligent Designers? They would easily convince the weak-minded such as yourself that the world was created 6000 years ago, as was everything in it. They have a "scientific" explanation for everything and it would have you thumping bibles on any street corner. More's the pity.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342 Boy, that really cut deep. ouch.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
Well, as I was implying, it was only intended as a scratch, but no doubt it would seem deep to you. Sigh.
bman342 1 year ago
@bman342 Grave, the meaning deep.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
What about the building that wasn't hit?
gamesbok 1 year ago
How irritating. JFK was removed from the Presidency in a cruel and abrupt way. If his brother did not even consider the idea that perhaps he should take up his brother's causes and bring them to fruition, he wouldn't be normal. Did Vidal ever think that maybe one of the reasons he wanted to be President (besides the issues) was to investigate his brother's murder ?
0907oliv 2 years ago
By the way vidal, Bobby Kennedy was NOT an obscure senator. He was one of the most famous senators, not just because he's a kennedy but because his ideology and dreams of a better america won the hearts of many americans. No doubt bobby would have been won the democratic ticket. BTW Gore, there is no way bobby wanted to be VP with Lyndon. The two hated each other. He'd rather die than serve under the man he loathed.
geoffybellofiore 2 years ago
Good comment. But I think the obscure senator he is referring to is Eugene McCarthy. Gore Vidal has never had a good word to say about RFK. He never forgave him for some fight they had several years before. He would never admit that RFK grew or evolved into a better person. Bobby was more qualified, appealed to a broader constituency, than McCarthy . His comments about JFK are interesting. Once he expressed resentment that JFK didn't hang out with him more.
0907oliv 2 years ago 2
I would question whether RFK was more qualified than McCarthy. He might have had broader appeal, but not that much. Remember, Carter and Clinton came out of nowhere to win the election.
Moot point, as I don't think he was going to win the nomination, Humphrey had the delegates
polytide50 2 years ago
Vidal's reference to the 'obscure senator' was to Gene McCarthy, not RFK, genius.
yvesami 2 years ago
Bullshit Gore Vidal! Bobby was just what America needed! RIP RFK!!!!
geoffybellofiore 2 years ago
Funny calling Kennedy a oppurntunist.Who isn`t in politics.Kennedy was in for the long run.Would he have won who knows.He had to go thru Humphrey then Nixon.I think Gore Vidal ate his words after Kennedy beat McCarthey.Joe Kennedy wasn`t calling the shots on this one.
openedup09 2 years ago 2
The abrupt cut to the leering interviewer at 2:02 made me laugh aloud. Ah, simple pleasures.
TheReactorSings 2 years ago
Full of a natural charm and warmth this guy. He really loves the Kennedys.
lewars1912 2 years ago 2
I can tell you what else he's full of, but there might be some children watching this.......
brian8793 2 years ago
Us and we and is and os are all correct.
lewars1912 2 years ago
I never thought I'd see Gore Vidal bashing the Kennedys...Of course we all know what happened......he recently said Hillary should have been president.
rickrik00 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh Gore Vidal, shut the fuck up.
TheLogicalGod 2 years ago
lol. fuck you.
YouDickwod 2 years ago
Is this 1968 or 2009?
MerleOberon 2 years ago 5
seriously...us humans, what a species
ispearedbritney 2 years ago 3
"We" humans actually!
mathproof 2 years ago
what about us
ispearedbritney 2 years ago
Oh, I was correcting someone's grammar. That person had said," 'US' humans."
mathproof 2 years ago
well in that case, congratulations! we humans need more humans like you in this world...next time just comment on the video you're watching, & not on the grammatical errors of others' comments. that is all.
ispearedbritney 2 years ago
Of course, we do. Perhaps your missive should be for people who can't write to just watch the video and not comment, eh?
mathproof 2 years ago
What is this accent Vidal speaks with? Mid-Atlantic it sounds. Where did he learn that?
DermochelysCoriacea 2 years ago
Washington DC, I'm guessing. (That's where he grew up.)
tintintabulations 2 years ago
he was old back then lol
thesparitan 2 years ago
Robert Kennedy didn't like Gore Vidal. This led Truman Capote to say Vidal was thrown out of the White House -- practically deposited, drunk, on Pennsylvania Ave. Here, Vidal mentions RFK. He considered Bobby to be a manic-depressive who made bad decisions. There was a dual side to Bobby -- he was the most compassionate man sometimes -- and the most obstinate, mean SOB you could imagine. I like Gore and wish he'd become President.
stanislavskymethod 2 years ago
My God... A comment on a YouTube video that's over twenty words long and without a single gratuitous spelling error. We should be friends. Maybe we could throw a baseball around some time. Or maybe just get pizza. Or root beer. Hi, I'm Ken.
keelorenz 2 years ago
Jackie Kennedy was not a sister of Gore Vidal. Vidal's mother was at one time married to Jackie's stepfather; they were never siblings. Interestingly enough, Gore was a Kennedy groupie until Bobby threatened to break the arm Gore had draped too near Jackie's ass at a White House function, thus engendering Vidal's waspish enmity forever.
thesadsack 2 years ago
Thanks Mr Gore...
theoneawsomone 2 years ago
(Off topic: Noam Chomsky has the lowest opinion of McCarthy EVER, he thinks he just seized the anti-war platform as a vehicle of self-promotion while letting his base get hit by nightsticks by police outside the DNC. Then afterward, he went home to write poetry and "talk about baseball". Vidal, on the other hand, liked McCarthy because he was witty and made him laugh. ...Not sure who to believe there. Maybe Gore has a blind spot.)
zprodigy 2 years ago
is that true did noam actually think thats surprising
thesparitan 2 years ago
Hmm, I read both of his memoirs and he seems to seriously have thought Bobby was evil incarnate, total fake and a possible psycho in the making.
He definitely had issues with the dynasty "ambitions" of the Kennedys, and skeptical that Bobby could switch from ruthless attorney general to a buddy-buddy philanthropist who loved peace.
Who knows. My mom is still a huge Bobby groupie. *shrugs*
zprodigy 2 years ago
im a fan of the kennedys, minus teddy but i wouldnt compare bobbys move to a vulcher. i do enjoy that he says what he feels and even at the end says i dont see good times ahead. thats needed in hard times.. the truth is a valuble thing. i think bobby and jfk were 2 very dif people privately. jfk was more patient and knew how to play the system a little better. bobby seemed like he never made plans just went out on a whim. ive heard he was on a suicide mission and his fam opposed him running idk
pat442389 2 years ago
Well, it's true that Gore Vidal thought Kennedy was one of the worst presidents. Simply, for the same reason everyone else didn't like him. He started all that in Cuba, the missle crisis.. etc..
But he stated that Kennedy was one of the most witty and extravagant presidents ever and had a great personality.
jbeard100 2 years ago 2
sounds like someone watched Bill Maher the other night.
hardcorezombi 2 years ago
sounds more like Bill Maher has been watching Gore Vidal for some time
toberhouse 2 years ago
Actually, it would be the other way around.
HumanStrategy 2 years ago
And Jackie Kennedy was his half sister, which makes his comments even more strident...
Moionfire 2 years ago
He is the best. He is so awesome. I Love Him!!!
TheToltec 2 years ago
ah, me too i've only found Gore vidal tonight. i love the older vidal but he's truely real, don't really know who he is, but i'm sure i will by the end of the night . I g5ew up reconiszing his name. i think hes great a real free thinker.
hopaloop 2 years ago
Very very sharp mind, and totally true in hindsight!
mike18at 2 years ago 9
Yes and I am sure if there had been a youtube then all the usual right wing nutters would be shouting him down as a fag librul,sad ,we get the country we deserve
CHANNELOMD 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Obama is a tool for fascist bankers.
9/11 was an inside job.
With the exception of a few Gore Vidals, Americans are morons and liars.
bofors7715 2 years ago
I agree
Lenox8081 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Wonder why a bunch of morons and liars voted Obama to power.
cosmicconundrum 2 years ago
You've sort of answered yourself.
youfatstinkypoo 2 years ago
You are right sir.
Cantwetalk 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In addition to a demonstrably unsympathetic personality, Gore Vidal is an ordinary writer and an extraordinary fool. A miserable character, he looks down on everybody. He has no sense of reality. And his talent for political analysis is hardly above that of the average paranoid schizophrenic
scotty123123 2 years ago
Fuck this piece of shit. "I don't see any reason why any of them (kennedys) should be."
Why? Because they want peace not war? negotiation not conflict? Progress not stupidity?
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"I see very dark times ahead, and cannot end on an optimistic note."
skeetrosauce 2 years ago
I remember this as a kid and was very much into the political scene..I have to agree that Kennedy was not all that he said he was...and Vidal does bring that to a head. 1968 was a bad time in our history.i remember all of its horrors..It was a time for change...that is what scares me now cause that is all I hear with this new group in power. Change,change To what? One must always remember the great ignorance of the electorate.They love to be told what to think, and always will..sadly...
jfs78 2 years ago 2
It was a time of Change. It was a bad year because all of those who were trying to bring it were killed. And change to what? All three heroes made it clear: Peace, racial equality, tolerance, a better world. Obama same: Change in our attitudes to the world, which he has done. The world LOVES this guy, the same way the world LOVED bobby, Jack and Martin. Foreign leaders have high praise for Obama and we are looking very good in the world. Sounds like change to me.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"Obama same: Change in our attitudes to the world, which he has done"
What kind of a nut are you? Obama is just another fascist warmonger. He's been killing people since he took office. He gave trillions to corrupt bankers, foreign banks. He's taken over industries. He's a freakin' tyrant.
You're living in a fantasy. Why don't you look at facts for a "change", and stop worshiping evil politicians.
OgeronimonominoregO 2 years ago
Obama is wildly popular around the world, but of course in America there are a few nuts who have a problem with him for no good reason. He's definitely FAR from a warmonger. He's trying talks with Iran, trying to close Gitmo, is getting ready to sign a nuclear disarming treaty, is bringing Iraq to a close. Even afghanistan will be a short affair. He wants to get bin Laden not nation build. Bush started nationalizing industries and giving money to corrupt bankers. Obama did not. Tyrant=Bush.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"He's definitely FAR from a warmonger."
Perhaps if he dropped a bomb on your family, you'd have a different opinion. He is expanding Bush's illegal wars, adding more troops to Afghanistan (at least 17,000), bombing Pakistan and killing civilians.
"Obama did not."
Flat out lie. Obama voted for or signed all those bills, supports the Federal Reserve in stealing from us.
Wake the hell up!
Where in the Constitution does he get the authority to tax Americans to pay for bankers losses?
OgeronimonominoregO 2 years ago
You don't have to lecture me on that. I am aware of what is happening in Afghanistan and Pakistan. For a while bombs were killing Pakistani civilians and he stopped that. By the way, he only wants to get bin laden on matter of principle. If you look at the number of troops that are in Afghanistan, there aren't enough to fight a full blown war. And he shouldn't fight one either, considering that Bin laden was created by us. Obama is much different from Bush, but change comes slow.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"For a while bombs were killing Pakistani civilians and he stopped that."
Oh, the bombs were killing people? Not those who ordered them dropped?
He stopped nothing. What are you talking about? They just killed "dozens" (according to the news I heard on the radio today) more civilians in Afghanistan.
What do you call people who set off bombs and kill innocent people for political purposes? It's on the tip of my tongue.
OgeronimonominoregO 2 years ago
I understand your anger. And I'm with you on the banks thing. Why banks are being bailed out is beyond me. I'm not a big fan of the bailouts in general, but jobs are in trouble. Although I don't know how much jobs will be helped with the bailouts. Aside from that , however, he is trying to make change. We will see what happens. This is a country in which you have to bring change slowly. Him talking to Iran is in itself a huge deal.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"Why banks are being bailed out is beyond me."
I don't think so. You just don't want to face the truth.
"This is a country in which you have to bring change slowly"
He's spent more money already than all previous presidents combined! He's ramming bill after bill through on everything! Do you even realize what you're saying? Are you kidding me with "slowly"??? He couldn't act any more fast and loose than he already has. It's absolutely disgusting how they are looting and destroying us.
OgeronimonominoregO 2 years ago
Why don't you calm down sir? You and i have the same concerns. He' spending it on clean energy, new jobs, scientific research, etc. pretty much all long term things that will bear fruit for us in the future. The republican governors of several states appreciate his stimulus package which they say will help build schools, etc. This may prolong the recession, but we will emerge stronger. FDR may have prolonged the depression but america had a middle class boom after he signed the GI bill.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
"Why don't you calm down sir?"
Tyranny upsets me.
"He' spending it on clean energy, new jobs, scientific research, etc"
None of which he has any legal authority to do.
Not that that matters, of course. He can do whatever the hell he wants to . He can KILL DOZENS OF UNARMED CIVILIANS, and most news outlets won't even mention it because the lives of those people are not important. Hell, he doesn't even have to say "oops"!
Yet people like you will talk about how he's bringing "change".
OgeronimonominoregO 2 years ago
Actually the news the other day reported that Hillary Clinton had given an official apology to the Pakistan ppl because of all the bombing happening there that has killed civilians. I'm not saying "Sorry" is a charm, we might never be forgiven, but it shows a change in attitude this administration has. As for legal authority, we live in a 21st century world, which is going to have some 21st century demands. By the way, he taught constitutional law so he's not going to be another Bush.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
He is trying to save a paitent that caught a
heart attack under 8 years of the retard Bush
CHANNELOMD 2 years ago
You listen to Alex Jones and now you know the real deal...Obama has not spent more money than all previous presidents combined. You're thinking of the record deficits that are reflective of the illegal war of choice that Bush started but didn't include in the budget. Obama actually decided to include the costs of war in the budget so people realize what we are doing. If you don't like what we are doing in Afghanistan than you should talk to the majority of americans who agree with it.
chrisfloyd77 2 years ago
Christ. Alex Jones... the Michelle Bachman of radio persona.
keelorenz 2 years ago
so so so sad
unfortunately bloody true
panzermort 2 years ago
GV has kinda shifty eyes. I wonder if he's under the influence of some psychedelic...
His eyes remind me of Johnny Depp's in the movie 'Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas'.
atrickpay11 2 years ago
I think that's a product of him thinking
SirYolkington 2 years ago 6
lol
lordennis01 2 years ago
Robert Kennedy was a jerk.
tmgore64 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Bore Vidal was always a pseudo-intellectual egotist.
Who cared what he thought or said? What did he ever DO for anyone else except blather on endlessly about the wrongs of the world while others were trying to change them (with their lives).
A person like that is not worthy to speak the name Robert Kennedy.
purplegrandma 2 years ago
Wrong on the second point. Johnson's early pledge, and this was also a major slogan in his campaign in '64, was "We Seek No Wider War"(Phil Ochs actually used that phrase as the basis for one of his songs).
KennBurch 3 years ago
OMG! The interviewer is Moses Znaimer!
theGhoulman 3 years ago
Excellent!
Mark999999999 3 years ago
fuckOisiam0666: you say that Kennedy was the last bastion against the military-industrial complex. However, was he not the guy who got the US military into Vietnam?
atrickpay11 3 years ago
The United States is an evil empire. Revolt now!
Just wait. This country is worse than China.
racinemike 3 years ago
Government happens because people are happy to pass on their personal responsibility. The human race is fucked.
toastedhippy 3 years ago 6
This guy is so right on, Obama is like RFK all over again.
mozart20dlubos 3 years ago
i just seen Gore Vidal
in person.
he signed my Book.
.
Hes a funny ass guy in person.
BicksBoogieOne 3 years ago
Never could stand the Kennedys RFK never transformed I remember him as an anti-labor scumbag Vidal is wrong about McCarthy also--he was a good guy but he basically liked getting drunk and writing poetry with Robert Lowell. Once you vote you are lost only pressure from the outside changes things.
482c 3 years ago
I wish we had anti-war opportunistic politicians.
IrrigatedPancake 3 years ago 2
Well then be one...
zzRider 3 years ago
You know what David Icke has this stuff just about down pat. I mean if you read any of his research on the New World Order, Vietnam and other wars. He ties it up. The other fantastic *real* journalist is a guy called John Pilgar watch his documentaries about USA aggression. It is not the American people apart from their willful ignorance, but the evil, sick, Nazi fascist government that is run by as they say "the owners".
TheGoodnessIsGood 3 years ago
Question: Who is Gore's interviewer? Is it Moses znaimer?
bando8000 3 years ago
Yes, it is M. Znaimer.
acikul 3 years ago
God ... "smart" is sexy !!!!! you rock Mr Vidal
MasterMark123 3 years ago
This is all still so relevant today its amazing
wheeZy42O 3 years ago 2
This is pure fantasy. THERE WAS N WAY RFK would win the nomination. Absolutely, no way. Just like Hillary, the math wasn't there. Humphrey had about 33% more delegates going into the convention, and Johnson controlled the convention. Even RFK said a number of times if he didn;t get McCarthy and his people on side, AND get some delegates to defect from Humphrey, he wouldn;t win the nomination. This is just more Kennedy myth, and not backed up by facts.
atowersshaw 3 years ago
Humphrey entered the race but did NOT go for states; instead he went straight to the convention and started trying to get delegates. Out of the candidates who were actually running the race (you know winning states, ppl voting for them) RFK was winning, and would have easily wooed the Humphrey's delegates over to his side at his convention, especially since Humphrey had no votes and RFK did.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
I know it is on here someplace, but there a couple of clips of RFK saying he needed Humphrey delegates or they wouldn't make it. I know the romantic notio is to think RFK would've won, but the Democratic machine was behind Humphrey, not to mention LBJ.
atowersshaw 2 years ago
He may have, but when him and McCarthy competed for California, each one knew that California was "make or break." Sure, I'm also not a big fan of that war machine that was running the party at the time, but McCarthy and Kennedy both had the vote of the people, and if Humphrey had won anyway if Kennedy had lived, then the dems would have still lost the election, like they did. Ppl would be furious that their voted were ignored. Plus, the last name Kennedy is a powerful name in politics.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
See, this is an example of the myths surrounding the Kennedys, no offence intended to you. A majority of Americans were against the war, but a majority of Americans were NOT in favor of pulling out at that time. Just either win it, or quit it, and about half in favor of staying the course. Eugene McCarthy, much like McGovern four years later, would have been slaughtered. It would have been child's play to paint him as Neville Chamberlain revisited.
atowersshaw 2 years ago
Why do you think Kennedy decided to enter? He was seen as a stronger candidate than McCarthy, that's why he entered, because of what you just said. This is no myth. MLK even said that there was a huge majority against the war, and that most of that majority was for a full pullout. McCarthy slaughtered, I'm with you there. But not Bobby. Plus, McCarthy's voters would have come over to Bobby's side. Many had already jumped ship when Kennedy entered the race and others would have too.
lilkumarjones 2 years ago
I'm second to nobody in my admiration for Mr. Vidal, but he didn't realize the transformation that happened with RFK when he ran for President; RFK captured the imagination of the public at large, would have been nominated and probably elected, would have ended the VietNam disaster. Of course RFK scared the crap out of the owners of America, and was shot to death for his efforts.
billyguns2 3 years ago
Right on.
TheGoodnessIsGood 3 years ago
"Anticipate a move against us which could then be used as a pretext for war."
9/11, anyone?
satyr68 3 years ago 3
Of course. It's a running theme. They really are very uncreative aren't they.
TheGoodnessIsGood 3 years ago
He's been wrong in many things but here, he was bang on : Kennedy 68 was a desperate, opportunistic move......although "Vanity Fair" magazine now choses to print the fairy story.
haldenver 3 years ago
Gore is a poor a prognosticator here as ever...predicting LBJ was going to declare war so as to continue as a wartime President, like FDR. The following year he was on David Susskind, saying Nixon was probably going to escalate the war in Viet-Nam.
margotdarby 3 years ago
Vidal wasn't wrong about Vietnam being a quagmire. Nixon did escalate the war by incessant bombing of the North. I admire Vidal.
lancer89032 3 years ago 3
Good Lord NO, it was Lyndon Johnson who bombed the North incessantly...at least until just before the '68 election, on behalf of the Paris talks and the Humphrey candidacy. (This is when John McCain became a POW.)
Johnson escalated the war 1965-67; Nixon ended our involvement 1969-1973; the South Vietnamese lost the war, 1974-75, when the Democrat Congress refused to honor our treaty obligations to the South Vietnamese, and cut off funding.
margotdarby 3 years ago
Good Lord Yes, there was massive bombing of North Vietnam during the Nixon presidency also.You are buggering history when you claim that this did not happen. Thank God that the Democratic congress cut off the funding to this quagmire and huge mistake. The Vietnamese are fine now without any foreign intrusions.
lancer89032 3 years ago
Were you alive when LBJ and Nixon were President? LBJ DID wag war on Vietnam, although technically not called that; Nixon DID escalate that war. Millions of dead innocents later, we STILL have not learned our lessons. Gore Vidal is one of the only truth-tellers in the world today!
billyguns2 3 years ago 2
But that the Kennedys only goal was to win, regardless of any reason WHY they might want to win - is a correct perception, I think. Supreme, vintage Vidal arrogance on display here, hehe.
Pippin76 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I wish Buckley had socked him dead.
chukmaty 3 years ago
Ha!
illinoisgrad 3 years ago
apparently you are the only one who likes dark humor I see.
chukmaty 3 years ago
Its clear Vidal hated RFK, probably for personal reasons. Vidal could hate anyone at the drop of a hat. MY guess is, RFK didnt coddle Vidal, didnt defer to him. This would piss the holy hell of an a vain egocentric genius like Vidal. RFK had far more empathy with the poor, and blacks, than Jack did. To say RKF was a fake just trying to be president, is looney. That was Nixon.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago 3
My understanding is that Gore Vidal put his arm around his cousin, Jackie, and Bobby said, "get you-ah a-hm off of he-ah you fag!" And it went down from there. (I'm not kidding.)
rustyquoin 4 years ago 2
Yes, thats fits, as I said below -- probably for personal reasons, such as that. Why would Vidal hate RFK so? Just wacked out. The only thing that made sense - RFK pissed him off on something personal. Still, Vidal's historical fiction books were great. Too bad he can't rise above his own ego, he had the ability to be great. He didn't make it, just another vain fukk head.
MarkDouglasC 4 years ago
As it happens, I only a few years ago finished Vidal's memoir "Palimpsest," in which he discusses the RFK incident. The roots went back further, according to Vidal, than his having touched Jackie's shoulder at a White House dinner. On balance -- and I'm by no means a Vidal defender -- I'd tend to believe his version of things. Not that there's really any other version, considering that RFK never went public with it. Nor, apparently, were there any witnesses.
ironduke2000 3 years ago 3
To continue for a moment longer: RFK may well have had empathy for the poor, but he was also the product of a political family with axes to grind, beginning with its "lower station" as Boston Catholic Irish, to father Joe's perceived humiliation at the hands of FDR. And the bones of Bobby's career lay in his being a McCarthy henchman. Idealism and opportunism are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Ambition can, and does, unite the lofty and the low.
ironduke2000 3 years ago 2
Well said.
rustyquoin 3 years ago
McCarthy henchman? Surely he was Gene McCarthy's opponent in '68? Oh you mean Joe McCarthy, when Bobby worked as an assistant counsel on the Senate subcommittee. Anyway, how was he a "henchman"? Did he do anything at all.
margotdarby 3 years ago
First of all, on another point altogether, in my original post I wrote, "[...] only a few years ago [...]" when I'd meant to write, "[...] only a few days [...]." Ridiculous to address now, I know, but I hate making typos.
Beyond that, RFK's association with Joe McCarthy, whatever he did or didn't do, nevertheless strikes me as careerism, which was the point I was trying to make. It also seems a might cynical to go after organized crime figures, given all we know of his father's bootlegging.
ironduke2000 3 years ago
i have to disagree with markdouglasC. I have always been a skeptic of kennedy liberalism vs. kennedy opportunism. it was leaders like humphrey, gene mccarthy, lyndon johnson (even eisenhower adm somewhat) who waged war against poverty and racism while they risked political careers. the kennedy's entered the battles kicking and screaming in the 4th quarter.
frankiepop 3 years ago
Well, it is actually...though not on an individual level, but on a global-political-economic-social level. Politicians were fronting businesses since the dawn of wealth and later corporation. Since presidents doesn't last, the men of candidacy usually are favored by their party factions before they are allowed to perform. I like JFK in his speeches, and wonder about the Kennedy assassinations.
Derekanttil 4 years ago
I see this thread leans to the very far left. I am with you in many aspects, folks, but I just don't subscribe to extremist views. Our country has faults and many problems, but it is nowhere near as bad as Vidal makes it out to be....
rockinraffi 4 years ago
love this guy... so ironic how things he said some 40 yrs ago seem to have such relevance to our current situation!
onelefty 4 years ago
nixon a leftest? so if anyone is nuts there a leftist?
raysputin 4 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
For a far-left nut like Vidal to dump on Bobby Kennedy like he does in this piece is the height of arrogance. McCarthy was an insane ultra-leftist as well, and as bad as Nixon was, McCarthy wouldn't have been much better as president. This snob Vidal seems to feel nothing but contempt for America and anything good within it...
rockinraffi 4 years ago
McCarthy lockedup/extradited/blackballed anyone he perceived as left and was an ultra right wing fascist simaler to a lot of people today. If you did not support there views you were an enemy of the state. In future have a clue about what you are typing about before you type
raysputin 4 years ago
You are right to call me on that one. I was thinking about McGovern, not Senator McCarthy from Wisconsin. You are absolutely right about McCarthy, but that does not take away from Vidal being one left-wing nut. Vidal is as much an extremist as McCarthy was, just on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum...
rockinraffi 4 years ago
I congratulate you. There aren't many 24 year olds around who know who McCarthy was, or who are for that matter remotely interested....
rockinraffi 4 years ago
Dear god, you're both wrong. The Senator Joe McCarthy that you're thinking of dies 11 years before this interview. He's talking about Gene McCarthy who was the bold anti-war democrat that ran in the 68 primaries.
Raxr985 4 years ago 6
yeah Jesus man,
Joe McCarthy was the super conservative demagogue of the immediate Post WWII.
They are talking about Eugene McCarthy, the progressive late sixties movementarian. Rockinraffi, you have been posting negatively on many Gore Vidal videos. Considering you don't know the difference between Joe and Gene McCarthy, I suggest you stop slandering your intellectual superiors (ie Vidal).
ejatz 4 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I insist. Vidal may be an intellectual, but he is anti-American, and a shame to his country. He is as bad as witch-hunter Joe McCarthy from Wisconsin, but on the other radical end of the spectrum. If being intellectually inferior means being a proud American who wants to improve our country instead of attacking it at every turn, then I am most decidedly intellectually inferior to Vidal, and proud of it...
rockinraffi 4 years ago
All Joe McCarthy wanted to do was be famous. He wasn't even a good redbaiter, missing the actual Communists who had government jobs while hounding people who'd never been within miles of the CP.
When Joe McCarthy was planning to go into politics, he decided he'd tie his career to some sort of cause, and he didn't really care what that cause was. In the end, he narrowed it down to anticommunism, or flood control. Think how bad Katrina might have been if he'd gone the OTHER way on that.
KennBurch 3 years ago
Ejatz, mi abuelo paterno era Espaniol, de Castilla. Yo soy hijo de Mexicano criollo y Norteamericana, pero mi familia tiene raices en Espania. Te mando un saludo, a pesar de nuestro desacuerdo acerca del traidor Vidal...
rockinraffi 4 years ago
Pues vale, jaja, un saludo a ti tambien! Pero el desacuerdo es este: Una distincion importante es que Vidal, desde mi punto de vista, no anti-american, para nada. Vidal es contra los que misrepresentan America, y los en el gobierno que usan el poder del EEUU para dominar, tanto la gente americana como la mundial. ps, de hecho soy Americano, solamente vivo en Espana.
ejatz 4 years ago
What I find to be un-american, as I think does Vidal, is the behavior of the political and business elite of the nation using their power in such a way as to make America a weaker nation, simply for personal gain. Attacking American policy and attacking America are vastly different, though politicians have meticulously and painstakingly constructed this false parity. This a fundamental assertion of Vidal, and I think you are confusing his position by calling him anti-american.
ejatz 4 years ago 2
I agree with you and completely understand the distinction you point out. However, listening to Vidal rant, you'd think he is the one that can't see the fine line. I am with you in that interest groups and lobbies have pretty much taken the system over, but Vidal could suggest a constructive solution instead of taking such an ugly turn...
rockinraffi 4 years ago
Although, when Eugene McCarthy's volunteers were canvassing in New Hampshire in '68, they ran into a number of people who thought their candidate WAS Joseph McCarthy, the redbaiter, and were prepared to vote for him as a result of that confusion. This was particularly strange considering that Joseph McCarthy had been DEAD for eleven years by then.
KennBurch 3 years ago
Yes, someone at the time I met in Barcelona tld me her aunt supported McCarthy and then went for Wallace.
Streatham1966 3 years ago
And I've heard that a fair amount of people who did end up voting for George Wallace would have voted for RFK had he lived and been nominated. I think the idea was that both of them would shake things up, although in very different ways.
Another reason to mourn what happened in the Ambassador Hotel kitchen and curse whoever was responsible.
KennBurch 3 years ago
Gore Vidal, what a legend! Love that man...
sptdonkey 4 years ago
wow, if you truly believe that Robert Kennedy is a smarter or more good-hearted man than Gore Vidal. you obviously are affected by the government's shot of "bliss". Good-bye to you then, absolutely no chance for you until you stop lying to yourself. even then you'll only be able to see you were too late.
coreyjdrysdale 4 years ago
Love those cutaways to the reporter. It's a guy named Moses Znaimer, who went on to be dusted by Burt Lancaster in "Atlantic City" before turning into Canada's creepiest media baron.
warrenfleece 4 years ago
Nothing can stop Bush and Cheney save for a bullitt in the brain... which is long overdue for these mutants.
bongolicious 4 years ago
If he was that great he would have been able to stop bush and cheney.
avibard 4 years ago
Vidal is too cynical by half. The man isn't fit to have shined Robert Kennedy's shoes.
jewy 4 years ago 2
You gotta love the cuts to the young interviewer
Pippin76 4 years ago
Thank you for posting this. The president's demagogic attacks on anti-war people, as described by Mr. Vidal, are similar to those of today's president.
suraaldy 4 years ago
he should go back to hairdressing
smuckerooney 4 years ago
Monet is lost on a blind man