Monday, August 10, 2009

Bobby and Frost/Nixon

Politics but about political philosophy rather than partisanship.


For quite awhile we had a copy of the DVD Bobby, bought from one of those sale bins, which I had held off on watching. Its reviews had been good; it had an excellent cast; but I think it was the pain of what inspired it that made me delay although I expected it to be an engrossing story. Then from Netflix, we watched Frost/Nixon about Nixon's series of David Frost post-resignation interviews. It was the obvious time to watch Bobby.

If Robert Kennedy hadn't been killed, he might have won the presidency in 1968. . Richard Nixon would not have been the same man who resigned in 1974 or did that fateful interview in 1977. Our country would not be the same nation it is today. A nation and lives were changed by one man's gun. It's what, besides the pain of them, that I hate most about assassinations.

If I was a believer in spiritual intervention, I'd believe that all such events happened for a reason and were meant to be. But if I was a believer in life evolving and our need to do what we can to make that be the right way, I'd not feel any such comfort.

Robert Kennedy had not been my choice of a candidate in 1968. I was in the McCarthy camp. These were not the days where that meant I walked house to house or donated money. McCarthy got my vote but not anywhere near the support I gave last year to Obama. Of course, with one small child and wanting a second, just starting out in the world, I wasn't in the same position to be heavily politically involved. Or so I thought at that time. Raising babies was my cause. Some mix both together. I hadn't even though it was certainly a critical turning point for our country. I see that even more clearly over 40 years later.

That year, I did see Kennedy speak but not planned. I happened to be in downtown Portland for a medical test. I saw the crowd and then him on a stand created on one corner right downtown. I rarely pass that street without remembering it. I doubt that kind of event could happen today. I stood at the back and listened to him talk. I still didn't vote for him.

Then came a morning, June 7th, where my Avon lady showed up early and told me that Bobby Kennedy had been shot. I was completely shocked. She and I both cried. I turned on the television to see more about it. It couldn't have happened again, but it had. JFK, King, and now Bobby. It was heartbreaking.

I painted a painting that morning with broad strokes of blacks and reds. It was of a man crouched in the foreground while in the background a city burned. It was about hopelessness and sorrow. I gave that painting to someone who liked it and wish I had not.

Frost/Nixon
was a reminder of something also-- of a time after Nixon had taken the reins of power, a time where I believed his administration was trying to take power from the people. I remember a friend of ours saying they would prefer competent dictatorship to incompetent democracy. I felt we were heading to that royal presidency and then Nixon also shocked me by resigning. Some thought he never should have done that. Doubtless Dick Cheney was one of those someones.

The year after Robert Kennedy had been killed, on that same day, coincidentally also D-Day, my son was born. I don't remember even thinking of it being the day Kennedy had been killed. Perhaps the pain of political assassination was something I didn't want to equate with birth.

After watching these films, I thought a lot more about the things Robert Kennedy had said, his dreams, what he had hoped to birth. They reminded me again how differently people see the world. Despite not voting for him in the primary, Kennedy would have had my vote if he had gotten the nomination. I wanted the war in Vietnam over. I felt it had been a huge mistake. Instead we got Richard Nixon who said he'd end it and waited years to do it; then was politically destroyed by believing he was above the law-- exactly what I feared he thought.

Today as then, there is a huge divide in this country, and it's not just whether someone believes war is a good solution. It's not even whether a president should be above the law. It's a bigger gulf.

Our gulf is whether we want to see government solve problems or do we think people can do it best without federal intervention-- health care, safe food, environment, programs for the disadvantaged, transportation, education, and pretty much anything except wars.

The question to ask, that goes beyond parties, is do we think the only wolves the government must protect us from are overseas or do we think there can be others, who operate more close to the line of legality, but where individuals must band together to protect themselves? Do we believe say monopolies are a bad thing or do we feel the blocking of them in the past was the bad thing? It takes government to prevent monopolies but if someone doesn't believe government should be involved, perhaps they see monopolies as a good thing.

Robert Kennedy believed in government and how united we could change things for the better, we could make this a better nation, and good place for all to live. He saw government as part of a solution. I am not going to get into whether he was the man to fix things but just this is about what he said, his philosophy that drew to him the crowds.

Today the argument is still between those who see government as the problem (Ronald Reagan followers) or those who want to make it be the solution (those who voted for Barack Obama). Can that kind of divide really be broached?

I recommend both films for political insights into their times. Frank Langella did an excellent job in making Richard Nixon both sympathetic and powerful. While the Ron Howard film didn't gloss over Nixon's problems, it also was fair. Nixon accomplished a lot using the tool of government-- some things others regretted even in his own party. I do think he followed his own star.

It is hard for me to think sympathetically about Richard Nixon-- and yet I twice saw him put his country ahead of his own ambitions. In 1960, when JFK won but probably by fraud and then in 1974, when the country was facing a potentially very divisive impeachment trial where the end result would be removal from office anyway.

(Incidentally to those who think the Clinton impeachment and Nixon's would have been comparable, I don't agree. I think what Clinton did was a personality flaw of a sexual nature. How many people involved in sexual immorality don't lie about it if they think they can get away with it? What Nixon did involved an imperial presidency, committing crimes in its name like burglary, and very much did matter and still does today.)

Bobby combines actual footage of Kennedy, his speeches, with imagining who might have been at the hotel that night. Predominantly the story is about those other people, names we never heard of and the impact of being there that night on who they were. It ended with one of his speeches and left me feeling sad for what was lost in terms of the promise.

Both films were about personalities more than politics. Anybody who can make me feel sympathy for Richard Nixon has made a good film.

20 comments:

  1. The might have beens never will be. We have to go with what we have Rain...

    ReplyDelete
  2. It though reminds us how important protecting our elected officials is. And in Nixon's case hopefully refuting totally the idea that a president is above the law. That one still is being debated.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Roger and I watched both of those films very recently, as well. Our reactions were very much like yours. I was a supporter of Bobby back in '68, except that I was only 16 and not eligible to vote. I felt when Obama was elected, that our 40 years of wandering in that political desert was finally over. Now I am not so sure.

    ReplyDelete
  4. One gunman? Everybody knows there was one more bullet fired than Sirhan Sirhan's gun held. :-)

    Just kidding, but I am cracking myself up here playing the conspiracy card.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rain . . You've done it once again. Caused me to think of the trail of individuals that have led our country. You have also restated the horror and disruption caused by political assassination. Yes, it would have been a different America had Martin Luther King, Jack & Bobby, and others lived on. But we still must deal with today - and we have a huge problem, right now, to deal with. Americas' duly elected President, in just a few short months, has imposed a political disaster upon us. The direction he is leading America can only result in reducing our exceptionalism. In the name of equality he is destroying the base fabric of our nation. I am very much aware that you disagree. I am also aware that I do not have the ability to change your mind - yet it is not an impossible stand off because you have left the door cracked open to receive ideas from the other side. My daughter FORCED me to read Bill Clinton's book and I found it to be pretty good. Oh, He was a bit of a stinker in his private life, but he made a number of good decisions as President. I would like to find a way to get you to read, for example, Mark Levins' book "LIBERTY & TYRANNY". Caution: It is a readable portrait of Conservative thought. I would guess that you would not agree with everything as said, but would at least come away with a better opinion of Conservative political thought. Have a happy Monday. . . Dixon

    ReplyDelete
  6. Very interesting Post, Rain. I, like you, was deeply saddened by Robert Kennedy's death and feel it was a turning point for our country that has taken us where we are today. I too was a McCarthy supporter and worked for his campaign in the Primary here in Los Angeles. I was at The Beverly Hilton--McCarhy's headquarters---the night of the Primary but came home because it was so very crowded. I was watching Kennedy's speech from The Ambassador on TV here at home and then, a few moments later, the horrific announcement of him being shot. I was in the Dentist chair when his death was announced. It seemed the end of everything---first John Kennedy, then Dr. King and Medger Evers and Malcom X and now, Bobby Kennedy. I so agree that where we are now is a direct result of all these incidents. Nixon, a frightening character if ever there was one...and this last administration---that ALL of them aren't in jail says so much about the Moral Breakdown of everything in our country and the acceptence and/or indifference to the kinds of things that we would not have accepted in the 1960's.

    Both these films are certainly worth seeing--FROST/NIXON probably more important in my view, but BOBBY, as you said, shows us the Hope Bobby Kennedy gave to those of us who believe Government can help to solve our many problems. And also shows us what was lost that day.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dixon, I don't have a problem with real conservative thinking. Andrew Sullivan wrote such a book, The Conservative Soul. I see true conservative thinking to be a positive thing and a good balance to liberal thinking; but Mark Levin espouses the right of Rush Limbaugh.

    I first heard he had his own radio program when a good friend of mine told me I should hear him and he's not one of the weird right. As soon as I realized Mark Levin was the F. Lee Levin of Rush Limbaugh, I knew it wasn't the case. But because I respect you and your thinking, I looked again at Levin.

    Today I listened to Levin debate David Frum as Levin attempted to justify Rush Limbaugh. That took about 12 minutes and wore me out but I did some more looking and found this analysis by a conservative which I hope you will read: Imprudent Rants Imperil the Spread of Ideas.

    I don't know what this bunch are, the Levins and Hannitys but they favored a war that cost so far $3 trillion and isn't over yet. That might not even be the full cost and yet they worry about health care bankrupting our country? It blows my mind how you can defend that war and yet say you care about balancing the budget. Why didn't they favor raising taxes to pay for the war they wanted?

    Anyway I hope you continue to read and yes, we do disagree a lot but we could still be friends. I have conservative friends and do respect we see things differently and yet have many values in common.

    I appreciate all comments here and whether they agree or disagree, they add to the discussion and that's what we need right now as a nation-- real discussions.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Incidentally, on Levin's debate with Frum (it's online), he equated being right with being popular. So no matter what you say, it's your numbers that matter. Frum could not be right because Frum doesn't have a big forum to espouse his philosophy. I guess there is some logic to that but it's not about what is really right but rather what is loudest and what appeals to the most people to hear. Currently people like a lot of things that are anything but healthy. So it would mean the most popular TV show would be the highest quality? To me that thinking is scary especially where a lot of people espousing that way of thinking are also doing all they can to take away money for education and turn our schools into test taking factories, not places to learn critical reasoning. It might explain a lot about our country today though :(

    ReplyDelete
  9. We saw Frost/Nixon in a theater while it was making its rounds there and even though I lived through those times will have to say that I learned a lot from the film. I think it is generally accurate in its portrayal of the people and events.

    Nixon did do some good things and there is one of his proposals that I still think might work. He proposed doing away with welfare but giving everyone an income. In other words, replace welfare with an earned income. I've thought for a long while that even welfare recipients should pay taxes, even if we had to (and we would) raise their benefit amount by the amount of taxes due. I do think it is an eye opener to see some of your income go away to pay taxes.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dixon interesting thoughts on Clinton. I thought many of the things he did were fairly conservative. Other than being a wuss when it came to Al Qaida, I thought he was not too bad of a president and would gladly take him over Obama at the moment.

    Rain and Dick thanks for the Frost Nixon review. I was afraid to watch it because I figured they would take too large a poetic license and twist it to make it what they wished they said not what they actually said.

    ReplyDelete
  11. One big difference between the Clinton time in office and today is the increase in the power of right wing radio and even the television celebrities like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity. Back then you mainly had Rush Limbaugh to tell you the world was being destroyed by Clinton.

    The far right began to put their power together during the Clinton years. Remember the accusations back then that he murdered Vince Foster, all sorts of accusations of terrible things being done by the Clintons. They used the tools they learned against Gore and Kerry and now even though they could not defeat Obama, they are working to destroy his effectiveness.

    By the way, some believe they never wanted to win in 2008, and it's why they put up McCain and then when it looked like he might be able to win, they added Palin to the ticket. Why would that be? Because of the mess they knew was coming, and they didn't want a Republican president in office when it hit the fan which was inevitable.

    You who dislike obama so much almost totally listen to right wing radio and whether you know how far right they are like say Limbaugh or you think they aren't that far off like Levin, they are spouting the rhetoric that Obama is going to destroy the country. Now, a lot of nice people believe them not based on anything that has happened but out of the spiel being put forth.

    Paul Krugman had a good piece today saying that the only reason we are not in a big D depression right now is because of the things Obama did. Krugman felt he didn't do enough but he said if you don't believe in big government, then you do believe a depression would have been okay right now because only big government stopped it in its tracks. A lot of states were ready to go under and only the stimulus going to them stopped it from happening and some might yet anyway. I see projects every day where I live that say funded by that stimulus.

    Most of you who fear this deficit all so much were supporters of the Iraq war, a war we had no reason for fighting and which none of you wanted to pay for at the time. $3 trillion and you now worry about $1 trillion to protect American families from catastrophic illness. Part of the reason the deficit looks so bad is the honesty with which Obama has put the cost of the Iraqi war onto the budget, out in the open, not hidden.

    Please read that link I put in above as I think a lot of you are voting and betting against your own best interests. You aren't the really wealthy like those who benefited the most during the Bush years and you are the ones losing now because you vote based on fear of socialism and anger at the left or at some enemy the right creates.

    The irony of this resentment of health care reform, fear of a public option is that anybody except maybe seniors could end up with no insurance. It doesn't take much and have you been reading what it costs to go into an ER or have even a day in a hospital? Try $10-15,000. You don't know how bad it is because you currently have insurance but you have no guarantee you will keep that as things stand.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Rain . . . My friend, you write one of my favorite blogs. Intelligent, concise, and always interesting. Whether it's ducks crossing the road or a snow capped mountain in the distance, you write a great blog.

    Your concept of politics is different from mine, and some of your opinions on other matters as well. I respectfully see that as a challenge - not a barrier. Like you, I think it is interesting to consider alternative thought.

    Talk radio has it's blustering take-no-prisoners performers. A few of them are very arrogant and overblown to be sure. The Royal Rush, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, and so forth. Yet there are a few of these people that have excellent minds, established educational credentials, and solid political commentary. Charles Krautenheimer, Mark Steyn, Michelle Malkin, John Bolton, etc.

    So, in my book anyway, it's wrong to tar all of Conservative talk radio as unworthy nonsense. John Stossell (Libertarian) has interesting views. Margret Thatcher (gone now) wrote several really excellent texts on her time in office. The book "Common Sense" is a terrific read.

    Mark Levin is a radio talk show host with a whiny and strident voice. His verbal approach on his show is off-the-wall similar to Glen Becks'. Personally, I don't care to listen to him.

    BUT HIS RECENT BOOK IS A CAREFULLY REASONED, INTELLIGENT REVIEW OF CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES.

    Back to your comment. Bill Clintons' administration was generally middle road moderate and made a number of good moves. Bill himself was a bit of an Irish bounder. The Foster death, the Travel Office shennanigans, and his aggressive money raising deserved to have light shined on it. Her universal medical plan was (or would have been) a disaster. It too, warranted comment.

    You mentioned Al Gore and John Kerry. Two more despicable politicians never lived. Except maybe John Edwards.

    John McCain simply does not have the moxie, energy, or intellectual foundation to be President - and should never have been a candidate. There is something about the Peter Principle at work.

    Sarah Palin was not ready. She does not yet have the gravitas needed. Several years from now, after she writes a book outlining her views more completely, after she gathers more "world wide" knowledge, after that . . . maybe.

    Now, tell me again just exactly who isn't getting medical care in America. And what percentage of the total population do they add up to? And where in the world these people would receive better care?

    Stay cool. Dixon

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thank you for coming back to state your view of this, Dixon. That is what I like about ingineer also. Sometimes we all have to agree to disagree but the important thing is to think about it all and be open. Now I have not read Levin's book but will take a peek at it next time I am in a bookstore. I'd sure hate giving him money though and increasing his ego more than it apparently already is; so if I read it, I'll have to have come across it in a used bookstore :) I am not opposed to conservative thinking. I live a pretty conservative life other than the viewpoint I have that you don't interfere in other people's choices unless it hurts others and of course, my belief in gay marriage... and... well I am kind of conservative and liberal :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. Rain you crack me up. I have probably listened to Rush a total of 1 hour in the last month. And believe me I do not let anyone on the radio or TV tell me how to think.

    If the right wing media is so powerful then how come Obama won? And do you really think the right would willingly give up an election and supreme court nominees just to show those rascally democrats. Come on now.

    ReplyDelete
  15. oh and as for who doesn't have health insurance. You have heard the numbers as have I. 47,000,000 but some of those choose to not have it due to being young. To find out specific stories of people, who either had it and not enough or lost it due to being out of work, keep an eye on Andrew Sullivan's blog and the segment called The View from Your Sickbed. It is where I have seen the stories of what happens to working class families when they get ill and find they are dropped from their insurance or that their insurance covered only a tiny part of their illness. There are also stories on the White House page regarding specific people's experiences in our country when they get ill.

    ReplyDelete
  16. yes, ingineer, i think they could because if McCain was president right now, he'd be getting the blame the right is heaping onto Obama.

    And I said listen to right wing from the extreme of Rush to others they think are more moderate but say the same thing.

    Glad I can amuse you :)

    ReplyDelete
  17. The Right thinks God is on their side and that (only they) know what is best for the country. They want the power back in their hands Rain. Read my latest blog post...

    ReplyDelete
  18. Rain if McCain was president right now all that would be in the news is how bad the war in Afghanistan is going and why are we still in Iraq. And Paul you may or may not be correct on the right thinking God is on their side, but the left thinks they ARE God.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ingineer, I suspect if McCain was president, we'd be hearing about the Depression and how bad the economy was and no talk about health care because he'd not touch it.

    The left is not happy about Iraq or Afghanistan... Afghanistan has been a disaster for any invading country throughout history. If you know your history, you know it is a place to get into and out of fast but Bush didn't get out and now the military wants 45,000 more troops there. This is not good at all :(

    And Paul, I always read your blog but just hadn't gotten to any yet this morning but will now.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I have never been able to watch any of the JFK or RFK documentaries. I simply cannot feel the pain again. I'm grateful for your reviews, however. Didn't watch Frost/Nixon either, or W. You are so interested in politics and you do the necessary research to analyze the people and the problems.

    I was a McCarthy person, too, back in 1967, but until Obama, I was not up for supporting any candidate.

    And now we have lost Eunice Shriver this week. Sigh.

    ReplyDelete