I've read references to it in a few books. Just finished In the President's Secret Service by Ronald Kessler and there are several anecdotes about it. Also painted a much worse picture of JFK's womanizing than I had imagined.

quote:

---

As a percentage of the national budget, the Great Society's share is not significant enough to merit mention, except for Medicare,

---

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/federal_budget_detail_fy13bs12015n

Welfare: 10 percent
Health care: 28 percent.

that's 38 percent, which is significant.

Of the Health Care portion, 641billion is Medicare, 575 billion is welfare-related (mostly Medicaid).

You claim that Medicare is popular. Popularity is irrelevant to the question of whether it's contributing to the economic disaster. Military spending is also popular, but it is also a huge contributor. You cite some extreme examples from one of the areas of the worst poverty in America (South Texas). I can't refute your examples from your own history, but I can tell you that very few people in America were starving. Even if you cite the soup kitchens of the great depression, it's kind of a strawman. People didn't go to soup kitchens because they were starving, generally, they went to soup kitchens because food was free, which allowed them to stretch their meagre budget farther.

In real hunger and starvation, people keep cutting back and cutting back but the food is the last to go.

None of this is to say that that's an ideal situation. Nobody, liberal or conservative, wants people to starve - or even to get close to it. But the conversation is about what works, and the history of the great society is a history of failure. American society has grown exponentially more wealthy, but the needle on poverty hasn't moved an inch. And it doesn't matter how much you soak the rich, that doesn't change. Direct subsidies to the poor are band-aids. I'm sure that liberals would agree, saying we need to do more, but the problem is that their solution is always more of the same. Give the poor more of the resources of our society (which has a huge effect on the middle class because it's diverting that wealth from them).

There are alternatives that actually would move the needle on poverty, but liberals would not embrace them:
1. You can't cut poverty while simultaneously importing it. Stop illegal immigration. This won't happen because liberals want voters who don't work and big business want workers who don't vote. Wiping out this source of cheap labor isn't without its negative consequences on the economy (home prices would rise, for example), but a reasonable argument could be made that you could minimize that with other policies.
2. Restrict welfare payments. Yes, we don't want to toss poor welfare moms out on the street, but they need to be at least on the street enough to look for jobs. Welfare should keep people 2-3 steps above poverty while still not being comfortable. The reason illegals "take the jobs Americans won't do" is only because Americans have an alternative. No, they won't move to the Rio Grande Valley from Detroit to pick squash, but they can work in hotels, landscaping and many other areas which are currently dominated by illegals.
3. INCREASE welfare payments to those who work. This is counter-intuitive, but if you pay those who work more than those who don't, you encourage more work. It's a novel idea that has not been tried, but we've seen in other areas that this sort of incentive pays off in the long term. So for instance, the Reagan tax cut increased revenue, because it promoted more investment. Promoting more work will raise all boats and eventually these workers, if they get good enough, will have the chance to work to a level above that which is subsidized. If you are paying someone 3x welfare for working for 5 years, that is cheaper in the long term than paying them 1x for 20 years for not working.
4. Education investment is much more likely to move the needle on poverty, but again, it's not a question of simply throwing money at the problem, because it's not how many teachers you have or whether you have schools with modern equipment or wooden walls, it's about the desire of the child to learn. And a lot of that goes back to the parents. Short of going all-out Sparta circa 500 BC and stealing the kids of the poor from their parents and raising them in some kind of orphanage, that's not going to change. And of course, there are a lot of good reasons why something like that would be a terrible idea.

the needle hasn't moved on poverty statistics but it has moved considerably in terms of how painful poverty is. Being poor now is much like what being low income was when I was a kid. I did some inspections on poor people's houses in a community in southTexas a decade ago and I wouldn't want to live in any of the 40 or so dumps I visited over a couple of days. But, they all had electricity, they all had propane tanks, they all had running water, etc. They also all had big televisions and Dallas Cowboy beer posters on the walls, for that matter.

They would all be considered below the poverty line but they were far better off than many of the people who lived within a mile of me fifty years ago. Their kids are not getting pulled out of school to go pick beets in Minnesota or carrots in New Mexico and ending up functionally illiterate. Most graduate from the local high school and some go to college and the military and pull their own weight. They get a chance or set of chances they would not have had as things were before LBJ bull dogged the cracker Senators who ran everything back in the day. All of the complaints Aalan and others make about the Great Society are valid and I agree with the proposed solutions, especially cutting off mass immigration, which debases the labor scale, but it is a mistake to believe that the GS has had only negative consequences.

quote:

---

Mac Wallace anyone? The death of Henry Marshall?

---

Under rated post!!!!

quote:

---

Re reading my post, I don't see where I weighed in on the scumbag issue. He was a very adroit one.

my parents ran a business in jim wells county and both siblings worked and lived in duval. And I've known every lawyer who has practiced in either county and all the parr watchers say parr got Stevenson for the webb county betrayal, not out of love for lbj.

as for stealing an election, JFK's daddy and mayor Daley stole Illinois in 1960 and that put his reckless son in the wh. As scumbags go, my money is on dashing jack.

---

Huisache:
My grandfather was on the Jim Wells Democratic County Executive Committee and was actually one of the two poll watchers on site at Box 13 in Duval County on behalf of the reform movement or party. He was also one of the few to see the finalized list and had the names of all those who actually voted. He was sued by lbj along with several others when he tried to help stop the fraud. The whole course of events was documented and all of it relayed to Stevenson throughout the process of the challenges.

While the challenges were going one person was killed another had an attempt made on his life and three of the main figures that could have helped expose the fraud backed away due to threats. George Parr had baby sat my grandmother and my great grandparents and the Parr's were or had been extremely close. Even still my grandmother took my mother and went into hiding far away during this time. .

The reform party knew in advance that an arrangement had been made by Johnson with Parr, I am sure partially due to the Webb County DA deal but that was all part of a Democratic movement at the time to get rid of folks like Parr and the corrupt power they wielded. That is why there was so much preparation to be able to expose the fraud. Stevenson was a much more honest and decent man than lbj was. Parr as promised money and favors, and most of all (a promise lbj kept) immunity from both racketeering and tax evasion charges. That is why Parr supported lbj. lbj was a murderous scum of the earth and he and his legacy are a blight on Texas. My grandfather is in all the books and I remember Robert Caro sitting in his house when he was writing his books and my grandfather refusing
to be interviewed or talk about Box 13. There were far reaching deadly
and negative effects of that incident all due to lbj.

Oh, and in regard to the OP, I have no doubt that either lbj or his nasty wife was somehow involved in having JFK killed. JFK could have been cheating with rabid billy goats and stolen the whole state of Illinois, and he would be far and away a better human being than that coward johnson.

threads like this make the history board one of the bigger jokes on Texags.

quote:

---

threads like this make the history board one of the bigger jokes on Texags.

---

??????????????

quote:

---

threads like this make the history board one of the bigger jokes on Texags.

---

quote:

---

threads like this make the history board one of the bigger jokes on Texags.

---

Actually this is one of the most interesting and informative threads ever. We have several different posters with direct knowledge of LBJ and his accomplishments and his faults. I have enjoyed the hell out of it and learned a great deal.

... and there's been no name calling.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Mac Wallace anyone? The death of Henry Marshall?

---

Under rated post!!!!

---

I personally think this has been a great topic and the responses have been very interesting. RGV AG that was an awesome and very interesting read. Thanks for sharing! I'm not in the LBJ had anything to do with killing JFK camp. However, I'm of the impression that LBJ did whatever he thought necessary for advancement and staying in power. My grandparents were yellow dog democrats who grew up in rural Bertram Texas in the early 1900's and credit LBJ with bringing them electricity......and they'd turn over in their grave if I said anything negative about LBJ............that being said, everthing I've read about him points to him being a low-life political bully. I too believe the Mac Wallace.....death of Henry Marshall is an underated post...........I think the murder of Douglas Kinser at the Austin Pitch and Putt by Mac Wallace is very interesting as well. (not saying that was LBJ involvement..........just interesting).

quote:

---

My grandparents were yellow dog democrats who grew up in rural Bertram Texas in the early 1900's

---

As a former resident of Liberty Hill, this cracked me up. "Rural" Bertram, Texas of the early 2000's probably isn't much different.


I'm guessing the guy who thinks this thread is a joke just read the OP and proceeded to reply without reading the meat of the thread. Count me in with RGV on my sentiment towards LBJ. He was a complete and total dirt bag.

Your right Beer Leg..........it's not much different! My Dad was born just outside of Liberty Hill, in fact, there is the Williams-Buck Log Cabin and Cemetary with a state historical marker and that was his grandfather's cabin where he grew up (the Institute of Texan Cultures has the exact replica on their back 40).......talk about "rural" Bertram, my parents went to high school there, and my Dad played college basketball even though Bertram didn't even have a gym.........they played all games away (thats pretty rural).

LBJ said in 1959........ "I think of all the things I have ever done, nothing has ever given me as much satisfaction as bringing power to the Hill Country
of Texas."
My grandparents agreed!

always respect RGV's posts and opinions; but, consider that people with serious character defects are still capable in their best moments of doing things that benefit millions afterwards.

Bowie and Fannin and Milam were all slave traders but redeemed themselves in 1835-6.

James Polk ran an extremely vicious slave plantation but we benefit immensely from his good work in detaching the American Southwest from the Kleptocracy to the south.

For those who think LBJ was involved in killing Kennedy, as opposed to those who think him capable of it, read Marina and Lee, which is the account of Oswald's wife. The night before her husband shot the president he came to where she was staying and begged her to return to him. She declined. The next morning he put his wedding ring and most of his money on the cabinet in the bedroom they shared that night, went to the garage and got his "curtain rods."

Kennedy's assassination was the act of an absurd man. That is hard to accept but appears to be a fact.

Huisache:
Thanks for the kind words. Obviously I am very jaded towards lbj due to family events and the ire my grandparents had towards him. What is ironic is that they really had severe disdain for lbj, put they did not have extreme harsh feelings toward the Parr brothers.

I wish I had asked them more about why exactly, but if I interpret what they told me I believe they felt that Parr, and other bosses, were like scorpions, if you gave them the chance they were gonna sting you. But that without protection, and to a degree, direction from above they could be beaten and eliminated by decency. The Parr's did a lot of small time good things for scattered individuals, they were masters at "corrupt politician populism", but they and others aided in keeping South Texas poor and corrupt and lbj had no problem with the previous and used them for his means without issue.

I just have a hard time believing there was any decency in lbj, it was all about him, all the time in my opinion. Huisache correctly points out that many other historical "heroes" were highly flawed, and that is the way of things in general. I am just of the opinion that lbj's impact on the last century was highly negative, mainly in respect to the impact Vietnam had on America and some of the high level corruption that really blossomed, both in Texas and nationally, during lbj's times.

quote:

---

always respect RGV's posts and opinions; but, consider that people with serious character defects are still capable in their best moments of doing things that benefit millions afterwards.

Bowie and Fannin and Milam were all slave traders but redeemed themselves in 1835-6.

James Polk ran an extremely vicious slave plantation but we benefit immensely from his good work in detaching the American Southwest from the Kleptocracy to the south.

For those who think LBJ was involved in killing Kennedy, as opposed to those who think him capable of it, read Marina and Lee, which is the account of Oswald's wife. The night before her husband shot the president he came to where she was staying and begged her to return to him. She declined. The next morning he put his wedding ring and most of his money on the cabinet in the bedroom they shared that night, went to the garage and got his "curtain rods."

Kennedy's assassination was the act of an absurd man. That is hard to accept but appears to be a fact.

---

There's no doubt in my mine that Oswald was involved in the assassination. (I'm just not sure he was acting on his own or completely "alone"........I'm aware that most people on here disagree with that ). There is absolutely no doubt he left his ring in that cup on the dresser, and had never taken it off before, which is VERY telling that he was not coming back and about to do something. As for Marina and Lee, its interesting to look at the time frame that the book was published (1977), which was right about the time of the HSCA invenstigation into JFK. The author, Priscilla Johnson McMillian apparently may have been working for the CIA at times(released documents defintetly reveal some involvement) and it is known for a FACT through released documents that the CIA had authors on the payroll and journalists who were to discredit any books that did NOT accept the Warren Commission. It continues today...Max Holland is a well known JFK author and critic of anything that does not follow the WC, and he's on the CIA payroll. I find it interesting that during her deposition to the HSCA Marina was asked about the book (Marina and Lee) and said, "I just contribute very little to the book. It was up to Priscilla to fish out all the facts and everything and put them together some way."
I am not trying to derail the thread to become whether Oswald did it alone or not..........just found your comments interesting. (and no I don't think LBJ was involved to stay on topic)

The LBJ problem (whether he was the worst-kind of scumbag or not) completely ignores the fact that an awful lot of politicians at the time, before and since, are scumbags. He was not unique in his ego, his temperament or his actions...we was just very, very successful at it.

quote:

---

threads like this make the history board one of the bigger jokes on Texags.

---

Can we ban this butthole from the history board?

One of the more curious things I have read about LBJ (I think it was in one of the Caro books) was that when Air Force One would take off he would, irrespective of who any other passengers might be -- including his wife and daughters -- immediately shed his clothes until he was jaybird naked.

I know this sounds fantastic, but I do remember it...don't I?

RGV: I once attended a cockfight in Live Oak County in the '60s and there were a couple of vatos from Duval there with some roosters. I asked them what they thought of Parr: they said "Well, Mr. Parr, he's a son of a beach; but he's a good one."

Huisache:
I don't doubt that a bit, I believe he was very popular with the lower income Hispanics in Duvall county, many jobs with the county and such all ran through him or his. I want to say I have read something about and or a quote about Parr that said he only kept $6.00 of every $10.00 he stole. Many folks were grateful for that, that is how bad many had it in those counties. But at the end of the day, the continued graft coupled with the failed Patron/Populism hurt those areas more than any handout could have possibly helped.

William Wayne Justice once irritatedly said to me -- I think he was about half lit -- "Johnson was a thief, but Coke Stevenson was a g-----n thief, too."

Justice' father was head of the Democratic organization in Henderson County during, I believe, that time, and W.W. was a Democrat to his marrow, too, and both were privy to some degree of knowledge as to how the wheels got greased.

I think he had been drinking because it was in a grocery store on a Saturday afternoon and he didn't know me from Adam. I was reading Caro at the time and was young enough -- and rude enough -- to walk up and ask him a question about Johnson and Parr, which question I can no longer remember. But I remember his answer.

Clarification -- I don't mean to say I think he had been imbibing a little because he didn't recognize me, but because he took the time to listen and answer, and then answered so forcefully. We were not acquainted; he was gracious to give me the time.

Every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess

quote:

---

always respect RGV's posts and opinions; but, consider that people with serious character defects are still capable in their best moments of
doing things that benefit millions afterwards.

---

Yeah, those Autobahns rock!

This thread is why I love the History Board.

Oswald and Oswald alone

I met Billie Sol Estes several times. He always said that LBJ would just have you killed if you crossed him.

Of course Estes is a world class liar.

quote:

---

The next morning he put his wedding ring and most of his money on the cabinet in the bedroom they shared that night, went to the garage and got his "curtain rods."

---

Oh, well, great. We can just ignore all the physical evidence and go with the author's account. Thanks for clearing that up.

I don't think LBJ had anything to do with JFK's killing, but he knew Oswald DID NOT act alone. He formed a commission he knew would look at maybe half the evidence and form only one conclusion.

Someone William Wayne Justice as a character reference. Sorry sir but if Justice were alive today and walking the streets of where he was born he would be strangled.

I agree about Justice; he should have been born, lived and died in Massachusetts, not Texas and especially not east Texas. I am no WWJ fan.

I cited that little encounter to illustrate that even the bluest blue dog Democrat knew of Lyndon's sliminess and could only justify it by citing a competitor Democrat's like sliminess (not that Democrats had a monopoly on qualification for the description).

Again, History indicates strongly that there was little Johnson was not capable of.

One of the most tragic things that Parr was involved in was the killing of attorney Jake Floyd's son Buddy in the early 50's. The locals of Alice, those that were against the Parr group really took this hard and it also became very clear that Parr intended to kill a district Judge. The feeling was Parr felt like he was covered and protected, which he was, by Johnson. Supposedly in repayment for the Box 13 deal Johnson had given Parr the nod to rule as he saw fit, and that included killings and some reprehensible and vile extortion and blackmail.

The Floyd killing was pretty obvious and those involved in the US went without prosecution despite concerted efforts. One of the killers or killing party was never extradited from Mexico and had obvious high level protection from the Federal Government. Johnson vileness enabled a lot of other scum to really shine during his years in power.

A lot of deaths and murders around Johnson. The guy who killed his sister's boyfriend who was convicted in Texas of first degree murder and got PROBATION.

"The jury found Wallace guilty of "murder with malice afore-thought". Eleven of the jurors were for the death penalty. The twelfth argued for life imprisonment. Judge Charles O. Betts overruled the jury and announced a sentence of five years imprisonment. He suspended the sentence and Wallace was immediately freed."


I remember another murder associated with Johnson and it was ruled a suicide. Guy shot himself 5 times with a 22 in the suicide.

Johnson was very, very, very corrupt from his first day in office. Brown & Root. FDR shutting down the IRS investigation to save Johnson.

I think it is really sad about his silver star. I lost a lot of respect for MacArthur on this one, too.

He got the silver star from MacArthur when he went on a single joyride as an observer in a plane. He got the silver star but no one else in the plane got any kind of recognition at all.

MacArthur did it because he was a powerful congressman at the time.

I just don't know how any self respecting person could wear that medal, a medal that people died for, and not feel deeply ashamed.