Barry Goldwater: "Extremism in the defense of liberty..."

[Misoir1]

@0:22 - What is LBJ doing there?

[AliceNchainz011]

@Misoir1 That face in the crowd? Thats not LBJ, though it def. looks a lot like him.

[mrandquist]

@AliceNchainz011 That was actually Richard Nixon. 

[mrandquist]

@Misoir1 That was actually Richard Nixon that you saw. He was the GOP nominee in 1960, 1968 and 1972. He sat out 1964's election for various reasons but supported Goldwater.

[PatriotConservative1]

Imagine how much better our country would of been if Barry Goldwater won in 1964, Just think no Great Society programs, no massive debt & no unconstitutional Medicare & Medicare Programs

[avmsf]

Fact Alert: Goldwater's famous addition to our collective political lexicon was made at the Cow Palace in San Francisco, Ca

[ZenPapageno]

The word "extremism" means doing that which is stupid. Let's think of some stupid things and see if they're vices.

** Hitting yourself in the face with a trout in the defense of liberty is not a vice **

Right you are!. No vice in hitting yourself with a trout.

** Calling the Country and Western station and asking the DJ to play "Walk on the Wild Side" by Lou Reed in the defense of liberty is not a vice **

Boy, Howdy! No vice there, babe.

[Yew424]

@ZenPapageno

That's not what extremism means....

[ZenPapageno]

@Yew424 Extremism is going too far with something. Goldwater was talking about people who thought there were Communists behind every bush, like the John Burch Society, which denounced Truman and Eisenhower as Communists. Barry pandered to them by saying that they were good at heart, overlooking the obvious fact that they were assholes.

[9mmparadox]

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Marcus Tullius Cicero

[ampat1779]

But alas, we were given Lyndon, and 10 years of war. But wasn't Barry gonna get us into a war?.....wait......I mean the networks said that....he was dangerous....I mean, they said. Thanks Walter Klondike

[67nairb]

@Cakerolled And in your brain you know it's drained.

[pureaggression]

malcom x says the same thing in his speech!!!

[philberz]

Nixon was playing his cards pretty well here

[gootenslog]

@Cakerolled

Yeah, like YOU have a right to judge anyone as nuts.

Cast the first stone if you must, but I also recommend that you clean your vagina as well. It stinks.

[SanctusLicentia]

"With no apologies" is a wonderful biography, I suggest reading it. Barry Goldwater was a true statesman.

[Cakerolled]

@SanctusLicentia

"Before the Storm" by Perlstein is better.

[redfoxbennaton]

That is the most inspirational quote ever.

[nojyt]

Are you guys kidding me? That kind of mentality lets you wash your hands clean of anything, and it's been used as justification for all kinds of horrors in history. Let's not keep falling into that trap. A snazzy line isn't necessarily an intelligent one.

[nevaseenamancry]

@nojyt This is more than a "snazzy line" you fucktard. It has everything to do with our constitution and principle as a society. We must not be HASTE and we must not make WASTE for the future generations. Think about it in those terms if you can. He should have been ELECTED. NO FUCKIN' DOUBT.

[nojyt]

@nevaseenamancry So on the one hand we have a reasonable comment about the dangers of stooping to extremism in the defense of any cause. On the other hand we have someone who calls me a fucktard, and whose grammar is seriously in question.

My money stays on my opinion.

[FurryAR]

@nojyt

It's a banal, milquetoast comment rooted in a simplistic understanding of political history that egregiously misrepresents neutrality for rationalism and misunderstanding for superior intelligence.

It doesn't deserve respect no matter how inarticulate and crude nevaseenamancry was in dismissing it. Your money is ill spent on style, rather than substance.

[nojyt]

@FurryAR Trying to show off on YouTube, huh? :) Ok.

The "substance" of my original comment was that it is too simplistic to use verbal rhetoric the way Goldwater does, because it leads us down a dangerous path of ever-increasing moral ambivalence.

If the best response to that comment you guys can come up with is to call me names, you haven't made any case at all.

[FurryAR]

@nojyt If disputing pompous, unqualified statements is showing off, sure. Real attention whore here.

You don't know what moral ambivalence is attributing anti-moderate positions to it. Besides, it was not a debate. It's fine to use axioms of core principle to rally.

Honestly, we don't have to make the case. Your predictable criticism is impotent, like being smug about creationism. Acting superior when you're insulted after condescendingly implying that we perpetuate atrocities is "fucktarded."

[nojyt]

@nojyt I'll have to pull out a dictionary to understand your last post. It was very convoluted. Just to be clear, were you accusing me of creationism or anti-creationism?

[aponcia1601]

What a great man! 

[cirosuperiore]

a great man...he was so right...

[blummedia]

@cirosuperiore He IS so right..... ideas like Mr Goldwater's never die.

[marcinohio575]

AMEN! A++++