My colleagues and I were discussing the craziest Nixonian moments the other day, and we decided to come up with a top ten list. Here it is. Add your own favorites in the comments. (Alternatively, you could do the things the Disney folks did to Lincoln, and pick quotes from a variety of different moments to create a special Nixonian pastiche.) Some questions to ponder:
— was Nixon really our craziest president, or would they all sound crazy if they’d installed voice-activated taping systems?
— who did Nixon admit to having a crush on (see the 14-second beep in item 10)?
1. On thinking big (April 25, 1972)
Nixon: I still think we ought to take the North Vietnamese dikes out now. Will that drown people?
Kissinger: About two hundred thousand people.
Nixon: No, no, no, I’d rather use the nuclear bomb. Have you got that, Henry?
Kissinger: That, I think, would just be too much.
Nixon: The nuclear bomb, does that bother you?…I just want you to think big, Henry, for Christsakes.
2. On firebombing the Brookings Institution (July 1, 1971)
We’re up against an enemy, a conspiracy. They are using any means. We are going to use any means. Is that clear? Did they get the Brookings Institute raided last night? …No? Get it done! I want it done!
3. On Jews and pot (May 26, 1971)
You know, it’s a funny thing, every one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana are Jewish. What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob? What is the matter with them? I suppose because most of them are psychiatrists.
4. On looking Jewish (July 3, 1971)
Nixon: I want to look at any sensitive areas around, where Jews are involved, Bob. See, the Jews are all through the government. And we have got to get in those areas, we’ve got to get the man in charge, who is not Jewish, to patrol the Jewish -
Haldeman: [unclear]
Nixon: . . . full of Jews. Second, most Jews are [unclear]. You know what I mean? You have Garment and Kissinger.
Haldeman: And thankfully Safire.
Nixon: But by God, they’re exceptions. But Bob, generally speaking, you can’t trust the bastards. They turn on us.
Haldeman: And their whole orientation is against this administration anyway. . . . And they’re smart. They have the ability to do what they want to do. Which is, to hurt us. . . .
Nixon: Henry doesn’t have many Jews. Got this one. . . . .
Haldeman: He’s got quite a few. . . . He had Halperin.
Nixon: Yeah, I know. But, you know. . . he’s got Haig, his secretary is not Jewish. . . . .
Haldeman: None of his aides have ever been Jewish, even Tony Lake who turned on us.
Nixon: Well Tony Lake always seemed Jewish.
Haldeman: I don’t think so. I wondered about that.
Nixon: He looked it.
Haldeman: I know.
5. On the curious absence of Negro spies: (July 5, 1971)
So few of those who engage in espionage are Negroes. …As a matter of fact, very few of them become Communists. If they do, they either, like, they get into Angela Davis — they’re more of an activist type. And they throw bombs and this and that. But the Negroes, have you ever noticed? There are damned few Negro spies.
6. On abortion: (January 23, 1973)
There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white. Or a rape.
7. On the value of a cooperative IRS director: (May 13, 1971)
I want to be sure he is a ruthless son of a bitch, that he’ll do what he’s told, that every income tax return I want to see, I see. That he’ll go after our enemies, not our friends.
8. On the value of a cooperative Treasury Secretary (September 15, 1972)
Dean: Don’t be surprised if George Shultz comes to see you in the next few days because I made a request of Johnnie Walters….
President Nixon: On what grounds? You mean George didn’t want it? Let him see me. I’ll throw him out of the office. … Now, I don’t want George Shultz ever raising a question like that. …. I didn’t. . . I put him over there. He didn’t get secretary of treasury because he’s got nice blue eyes and not for any other reason. It was a god damn big favor for him to get that job.
9. On the value of dishonorable men (July 1, 1971)
I need somebody . . . I need really rather than a worker (just to give you the personality type) oh, like [John C.] Whitaker who’ll work his butt off and do it honorably. I need a— I really need a son-of-a-bitch like Huston who will work his butt off and do it dishonorably. Do you see what I mean? Who will know what he’s doing and will—I want to know, too. And I’ll direct him myself. I’ll pitch it. I know how to play this game.
10. On the glorification of homosexuality in an All in the Family episode (May 13, 1971)
Nixon: I do not mind the homosexuality. I understand it. (14-second beep to hide personal information) But nevertheless, the point that I make is that goddamit, I do not think that you glorify on public television homosexuality… even more than you glorify whores. Now we all know that people go to whores. …we all have weaknesses. But, goddammit, what do you think that does to kids? What do you think that does to 11 and 12 year old boys when they see that? …You know what happened to the Greeks! Homosexuality destroyed them. Sure, Aristotle was a homo. We all know that. So was Socrates.
Ehrlichman: But he never had the influence that television had.
61 comments
March 13, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Maurice
Continuing the discussion of classical history on May 13th, 1971, after deciding that contemporary television is an even more pernicious influence than Aristotle and Socrates:
NIXON: You know what happened to the Romans? The last six Roman emperors were fags. Neither in a public way. You know what happened to the popes? They were layin’ the nuns; that’s been goin’ on for years, centuries. But the Catholic Church went to hell three or four centuries ago. It was homosexual, and it had to be cleaned out. That’s what’s happened to Britain. It happened earlier to France.
Let’s look at the strong societies. The Russians. Goddamn, they root ‘em out. They don’t let ‘em around at all. I don’t know what they do with them. Look at this country. You think the Russians allow dope? Homosexuality, dope, immorality, are the enemies of strong societies. That’s why the Communists and left-wingers are clinging to one another. They’re trying to destroy us. I know Moynihan will disagree with this, [Attorney General John] Mitchell will, and Garment will. But, goddamn, we have to stand up to this.
March 13, 2010 at 4:11 pm
grackle
It’s amazing how enjoyable things can be when you know that they are solidly in the past. Great post.
March 13, 2010 at 4:13 pm
Charlieford
Hmm, grackle, i don’t know … “solidly in the past”? Did you mean that itonically?
March 13, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Charlieford
Ironically that would be.
March 13, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Rick Perlstein
Nixon on all the homos at Bohemian Grove.
“But it’s not just the ratty part of town. The upper class in San Francisco is that way. The Bohemian Grove, which I attend from time to time . . . It is the most faggy goddamned thing you could ever imagine with that San Francisco crowd. I can’t shake hands with anybody from San Francisco.”
March 13, 2010 at 4:57 pm
Ahistoricality
Nixon: Sure, Aristotle was a homo. We all know that. So was Socrates.
Ehrlichman: But he never had the influence that television had.
Wow.
March 13, 2010 at 6:31 pm
Doctor Science
was Nixon really our craziest president, or would they all sound crazy if they’d installed voice-activated taping systems?
That’s two questions, to which I answer, respectively:
1. you’d have to consult experts on the pre-FDR Presidents. I wouldn’t be surprised if e.g. Wilson was *at least* as crazy as Nixon, but I have little knowledge of 19th-century Presidential battiness.
2. Yes.
But also, powerful people naturally attract yes-men, and very few people have the mental strength to not become functionally crazy when there’s a circle nodding and agreeing with everything they say, however wacky.
March 13, 2010 at 6:51 pm
JPool
I haven’t listened to Le Show in years, but Harry Shearer’s Nixon parodies, which in more recent years became known as “Nixon in Heaven”, were especially sharp in parodying the nuttiness revealed in the tapes. The first half of the audio linked here presents Nixon’s response to learning the identity of Deep Throat.
One of the striking things about Shearer’s performances is his reproduction of Nixon’s tic of insisting that he knew/understood anything that anyone might try to tell him already.
March 13, 2010 at 7:24 pm
grackle
Did you mean that itonically? In the eyes of the beholder, charlieford. I must say, when I think of Nixon, two things come to mind: (1) Dan Akroyd on snl, (I think he was channeling Nixon) and (2) a joy I felt when I heard that he resigned comes back to me every time his name is mentioned. I gues I meant that I don’t think he is truly among the undead.
March 13, 2010 at 7:25 pm
grackle
that would be guess
March 13, 2010 at 8:38 pm
Es-tonea-pesta
What a weirdo. Who says “What the Christ”?
March 13, 2010 at 9:34 pm
Matt
You have to figure in the huge amounts of cursing on the tapes, too. My understanding is that his cursing towards his supporters was so extreme that he often became tongue-tied about his enemies.
March 13, 2010 at 9:37 pm
pv
#1 is 100 times funnier because in my head are the caricature voices of both Nixon and Kissinger. “That, I think, would just be too much” is almost hilarious in its understatement.
March 13, 2010 at 10:14 pm
Urk
I love this.
Weirdly enough, I had just tonight run into a great post with many of these quotes at an esoteric music and history blog called Locust Street. it’s part of what seems to be a kind of year-by-year mixtape-and-liner notes history of the 20th Century. Or something.
I’ll link to it in a different comment. I’m html stupid & don’t want this to get caught in the spam filter. But it & the whole of that blog is worth a look.
March 13, 2010 at 10:17 pm
Urk
Locust Street
March 13, 2010 at 10:19 pm
Urk
oopos, nope. Locust Street
March 14, 2010 at 5:03 am
kid bitzer
as bad as nixon was (i.e. plenty), i have the sense that he was surrounded by a fair bit of institutional sobriety, i.e. that the subordinates, the civil service, even the upper appointees, were not going to transgress certain limits of law and custom at his bidding. yes, the plumbers did so. but look at the saturday night massacre, and you’ll see institutional traditions eventually reasserting themselves against an insane radical in office.
and my impression of the bush/cheney white house is that the firewall of institutional custom had all been swept away. imagine nixon–drunk, paranoid, and fanatical–surrounded by mini-nixons all through the executive branch. no deference to tradition. no deference to the other branches of government. no concern about public opinion.
of course, this was not an accident. cheney had spent the last few decades working to rig d.c. for exactly this sort of executive monarchy. reagan had made a lot of advances, too.
but the picture i get is that under nixon, a group like the plumbers was really an outlier. most of the executive branch still had some allegiance to the rule of law.
under bush, we had comey and a few renegades who still believed in the rule of law as against executive monarchy. they were as rare under bush as the plumbers were under nixon.
March 14, 2010 at 9:58 am
TF Smith
KB – That’s an excellent point; as pathological as Nixon was, he was still surrounded by Washington Establishment/Eastern Establishment/GI Generation types, and at a time when there truly was a fairly close national consensus/world view on the role of the federal government because of the Cold War/MIC state…they were not New Dealers, of course, but at least the Nixon Administration’s staff saw the world through a (relatively) realistic lens.
Nixon delayed the US withdrawl from SEA for five years for domestic political reasons, for which he should burn in hell for all eternity, but at least he acknowledged the need for a withdrawal for strategic reasons – which is more than Cheney et al ever would, I think…
Even Reagan’s Administration was not as bad as George the Lesser’s, in terms of the institutional functions of the federal government; I think because they also had the Cold War world view.
I think the Bushes, I and II, having grown up in the Cold War environment, were at sea without it, George II even more so than George I; George II’s utter and complete inability to understand a transformational era in US foreign policy, with all the impact it has had on US domestic politics, is, I think, a large part of how and why the US went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Obama’s status as the first post-Vietnam president is illustrative; I don’t think it gets as much attention as it deserves.
Overall, given the expenditure of blood and treasure the US engaged in during the Cold War, and the extraordinary influence the Cold War had on US foreign, domestic, and economic policy in the second half of the past century, I am not sure what compares elsewhere in American history, other than the ending of slavery and the collapse of “southern” political control of the federal government; maybe the end of the continental frontier in the 1890s?
March 14, 2010 at 11:28 am
kid bitzer
“he was still surrounded by Washington Establishment/Eastern Establishment/GI Generation types”
yeah; sometimes i think that broder’s incoherent maunderings about bipartisanship are really a misplaced memory of individuals from this set–the achesons, harrimans, marshalls, etc.
far be it from me to lionize these people. but james baker made even a fixer like clark clifford look good, and karl rove makes james baker look angelic.
inside the nixon circle, it was buchanan who points the way most clearly to rove. tear the country in half, and we’ll get the bigger part. and of course, that resonated deeply with nixon himself.
by the way, i hope i may be permitted one small, star-struck fan-boy squeal at the presence of rick perlstein up thread. eeeee! rick perlstein!
March 14, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Linkmeister
The new Grand Old Opry House opens in 1974. “Opening night, March 16, was attended by President Nixon, who played a few songs on the piano.”
March 14, 2010 at 12:29 pm
mr earl
I’m fond of this one, re the Phase II Economic Plan:
President Nixon: Bah. This new policy was necessary from a psychological standpoint on the economy. Point one. Second: the new policy in our terms was very important, from a leadership standpoint.
Bob Haldeman∇: Presidential leadership.
President Nixon: [Unclear] based on [unclear] and [unclear] handled the jail break. I mean, maybe that’s leadership. Anyway, that’s what they need.
Colson: And there’s a third point.
President Nixon: It’s a balls thing. It’s a balls thing.
Colson: That’s right. And there’s a third point and that is that when the good results start coming in, it’s because of what you did.
President Nixon: Holy shit. That’s right.
So, uh, no sycophancy, “surrounded by Eastern Establishment types,” huh?
March 14, 2010 at 12:56 pm
Mr Punch
Nixon’s craziest moment was his midnight visit to activists at the Lincoln Memorial. No mere quotation can match that.
March 14, 2010 at 1:23 pm
kid bitzer
oh, of course he had sycophants, m.e., and plenty of them.
and maybe i’m just all wrong about there having been more distributed sanity in the executive branch at that time.
but colson might not be the best one to use to refute the theory in any case, since we know he was towards the plumbers side of the shop.
March 14, 2010 at 1:50 pm
Eric
I find his madman theory hard to top:
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/305/madman_nuclear_alert.html
March 14, 2010 at 3:56 pm
TF Smith
Well, KB responded already, but my point is that as whacked out and “outside” as many in the Nixon White House were (and Buchanan as an Irish Catholic was as much an outsider to the EE as Nixon as a California Quaker was – or Rove as a college drop-out Texan is/was) the Nixon Administration was more than a little different.
Rogers, Schultz, Laird, Richardson, Ruckelshaus – not all Porfiles in Courage candidates, but not exactly sycophants.
March 14, 2010 at 5:03 pm
politicalfootball
I generally had grackle’s reaction to Nixon – right up until Bush II. Now I’m nostalgic for the days when it was possible for a Republican president to sink so low he could be impeached.
Also: eeee, Rick Perlstein!
(I have a theory that Perlstein visits blogs occasionally for the same reason the Sally Field character in Soapdish visited shopping malls.)
March 14, 2010 at 6:38 pm
PorJ
What about the other mentally-ill presidents comparable to Nixon? Here’s a quick stab:
1. Woodrow Wilson: Paranoid, delusional (before the stroke).
2. TR: Narcissistic personality disorder.
3. LBJ: Compulsive, with other traits – addictive personality disorder.
4. Bill Clinton: if sexual addiction exists…..
5. Abe: Depressive (tho not manic)
6. James Buchanan: Everything (seriously: look at what his contemporaries wrote about him – even the people who liked him).
7. Andrew Jackson: occasionally delusional, narcissistic personality disorder (exaggerated perception of slights, etc.) Could be a case of borderline, but was too highly-functional.
I dunno, somebody help me out here. I think a good argument could be made that ANYBODY who attempts to be President is diagnosable according to the standards of the DSM.
March 15, 2010 at 1:00 am
dave
I think you mean ‘ANYBODY […] is diagnosable according to the standards of the DSM’. This is after all a well-known fact.
March 15, 2010 at 2:22 am
kid bitzer
what’s the dsm code for “pedantic”, again?
March 15, 2010 at 6:11 am
chris y
AFAIK, if sexual addiction exists Kennedy had a worse case of it than Clinton.
March 15, 2010 at 6:23 am
kid bitzer
if loving you is diagnosable according to the standards of the dsm, i don’t wanna be right.
March 15, 2010 at 7:18 am
ME
He sounds like a corrupt, racist version of Shitmydadsays. Clearly I missed out on a lot, not growing up in the US in the 70s.
March 15, 2010 at 7:40 am
kid bitzer
so much. so, so much. we haven’t even started reminiscing about leisure suits.
March 15, 2010 at 8:23 am
lornix
Uh oh, PorJ. Now you’ve done it (with no. 5 in your list). Next thing you know – Ari and Eric are going to be in here arguing about whether Lincoln or FDR was the most insane president ever.
March 15, 2010 at 9:12 am
Daniel Marcus
My fave (pardon the language):
Haldeman: We gotta get the Niggers out of the garden…. Get the Filipinos and work ‘em like slaves.
Nixon: Right.
In the Oval Office. The two most powerful men in the country. 1972.
March 15, 2010 at 10:21 am
NM
It’s amazing how often Nixon sounded like a bad Nixon impersonation.
March 15, 2010 at 10:47 am
Jackmormon
Nixon: I do not mind the homosexuality. I understand it. (14-second beep to hide personal information) But nevertheless…
Wait, what?
March 15, 2010 at 10:50 am
kid bitzer
sigh…look, jm. everybody knew about pat nixon and rosemary woods.
if they could muster the tact and discretion to leave it alone, why can’t you?
March 15, 2010 at 10:56 am
Jackmormon
Right then!
March 15, 2010 at 11:24 am
Justin Igger
Grow up you bedwetters. I’m sure most of the things Clinton or Bush said would have been much worse. Effeminate weirdos! You hate Nixon but have no problem with Johnson. Hypocrites.
March 15, 2010 at 11:36 am
Walt
It’s because we can distinguish right from wrong, Justin. Of course it’s hard for you to understand, and we can’t explain it to you, any more than a person who can see color can explain the concept of “green” to a colorblind person.
March 15, 2010 at 12:16 pm
Western Dave
I’m stealing Perlstein’s quote off the wall and hanging it in my bedroom to next to my autographed Richard White comment on a paper that I saw.
Alternatively, I may hang it next to my Bill Cronon designed childhood memory suitable for framing or epilogues.
Oh Ricky you’re so fine, I want to teach you all the time, Ricky!
March 15, 2010 at 12:16 pm
Western Dave
PS. Ari I tried to stalk you at ASEH to no avail. You missed a great paper on the Indianapolis 500.
March 15, 2010 at 12:31 pm
RLaing
Of course, the really hilarious thing about Nixon is that he was America’s last liberal president: FOIA, EPA, Earth Day, wage and price controls, opening to China and so forth.
March 15, 2010 at 1:00 pm
politicalfootball
It’s amazing how often Nixon sounded like a bad Nixon impersonation.
Is it just me, or do great right-wing malefactors often look like stock villains out of central casting. Did Joe McCarthy ever take a flattering picture?
Even leaving aside his name, Pope Ratzinger is one diabolical-looking dude.
March 15, 2010 at 1:11 pm
Russell60
On the subject of Nixon sounding like a bad Nixon impersonation, whenever I read some of the more appalling quotes, I hear David Frye, not Richard Nixon. No disrespect to Frye, who was not a bad Nixon impersonator, at least when compared to Rich Little…
March 15, 2010 at 1:21 pm
fp3690
Actually, the homosexuality thing was even factually wrong. Of all the people in Plato’s symposium, Socrates and Plato were the only ones with wives. In fact, Socrates’ wife implored him to escape Athens, but he insisted that he had to drink the cyan since this was the punishment the republic imposed on him. Aristotle wasn’t gay either.
March 15, 2010 at 1:53 pm
grackle
Aristotle wasn’t gay either.
Next you’re going to say Lincoln wasn’t gay, I suppose.
March 15, 2010 at 2:22 pm
Justin Igger
lol @ porj – a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Sounds like someone took a 100 level DSM class. Nice try at sounding intelligent! I think you left out Clinton as a sociopath and Obama as well. Goofy twit.
March 15, 2010 at 2:44 pm
Hob
I would totally visit Disneyland again if they installed an animatronic Nixon! But should they put him in the pirate cave, or the haunted house?
March 15, 2010 at 6:04 pm
TF Smith
“Goofy twit” from some one who choses “Justin Igger” as a psuedonym?
Seriously?
That’s not even parody…
March 15, 2010 at 7:40 pm
Sir Charles
Not to brag and name drop, but I will simply note that at Casa Sir Charles we have the Perlstein bedroom, where the great man finds rest and repose after long days at the National Archives listening to sparkling dialogue of the kind so well illustrated by this post. It’s true.
He makes us very proud.
I find myself alternating between hearing David Frye’s “Richard Nixon: A Fantasy” and Ackroyd and Belushi doing the Nixon/Kissinger scene from “The Final Days.” “Pray with me Henry!”
March 15, 2010 at 10:30 pm
Walt
As a connoisseur of fine cinema, I hear all Nixon in the voice of Dan Hedaya.
March 16, 2010 at 8:44 am
godlessgirl
I do wonder what we would think about the private conversations had between all world leaders and their friends or staff. What kinds of “WTF!?” moments would they be having? Would we trust them after hearing what they kept behind closed doors?
Fascinating read!
godlessgirl.com
March 17, 2010 at 4:42 am
Western Dave
@Sir Charles,
So will you be putting the bedsheets he sleeps on up on E-Bay? Or can I just make a direct offer?
March 17, 2010 at 7:51 am
Sir Charles
Western Dave,
Clearly I hadn’t realized the commercial potential of this thing. Little did I know the fervor for our man.
I’m going to have to get signed, advanced copies of the next book as part of my future nest egg.
March 17, 2010 at 9:29 am
kid bitzer
i should have known it. he’s virtually renting out the perlstein bedroom to big campaign donors.
March 17, 2010 at 10:22 am
Western Dave
kb,
I worked hard to set that joke up and you totally stole it! Full disclosure. Rick and I were, I think, the same year but different (related) departments in Michigan. I thought he was foolish to leave and may have even said as much to him. Of course in the early 90s we still thought that tt jobs were going to open up as faculty retired.
March 17, 2010 at 12:00 pm
Sir Charles
That’s very funny. (I refuse to write “LOL” after having been traumatized by some Yglesias troll who used it in everyone of a series of about twenty comments at our site recently — young Matt draws an unsavory crowd.)
Now I feel like I have to get a plaque for that bedroom.
March 18, 2010 at 10:09 am
Ralph Hitchens
Those tapes are going to be the everlasting chains of his disgrace, sad in part because he was hardly an ineffective president before he went off the rails with Watergate. Inherited a big war, started drawing down US troops right away (ground forces were out of VN by 1972), normalized relations with China, pushed arms control with the USSR, pursued a relatively liberal social agenda (for a Republican), was praised by Sir Robert Thompson (a notable Brit) as a “professional president.” But Lord, the things he said and tolerated being said in his presence! All the while knowing about the taping system, and having a sense of history. Beggars the imagination.
March 21, 2010 at 6:54 pm
TF Smith
Started drawing down US troops right away? 1969-72 is right away? Much less “drawing down” by way of Cambodia…
Roughly 21,000 Americans died in SEA 1969-72; about 36,000 died in 1965-68…
http://www.archives.gov/research/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics.html#year
Just think, if we’d withdrawn in 1969, 20,000 or so more 50-somethings would be here…