My dirty little liberal secret

[Bucky]

I'm getting a little tired of this JFK stuff.

[midnight armadillo]

1. amen!

Maybe it's time for the older folks to MOVE ON with their lives...

[ablbodyed]

3. Sorry but you're missing an important point....

Sure much of it is wallowing in the past. But what a past because it also shows WHAT WE HAVE LOST, AND WILL NEVER HAVE AGAIN: When liberalism meant something, and there was hope in the country. The rethugs have killed hope, smothered it with their greed and intolerence.
We're a conutry whose people have a vested interest in maintaining the strength of the bars in their gilded cage. And shut off any thought about the true situation.
Perhaps you're not really as liberal as you claim. Perhaps you should think about THAT.

[Bucky]

5. Ok, I'm thinking about it

My liberalism is rooted in optimism, logic, and hope. I strongly believe in the essential goodness of human beings. The study of history informs me that when people are committed to something good, they can overcome the greatest of obsticles.

My liberalism is unconnected to dispair, surrender, or hysterical reactions to political frustrations. I hardly think you embody the spirit of Camelot when you (erroneously) concede that:
1- liberalism no longer "means something"
2- Republicans "have killed hope"
3- greed and intolerance have smothered the American spirit
4- the general population has "shut off" thinking about their situation, and
5- we're all content with living in "gilded cages"

Finally you call my liberalism into question. How is it I'm not liberal? The only thing I've said is that I don't share your sour world view.

[midnight armadillo]

7. No, not missing a point

Sure much of it is wallowing in the past. But what a past because it also shows WHAT WE HAVE LOST, AND WILL NEVER HAVE AGAIN: When liberalism meant something, and there was hope in the country. The rethugs have killed hope, smothered it with their greed and intolerence.
We're a conutry whose people have a vested interest in maintaining the strength of the bars in their gilded cage. And shut off any thought about the true situation.

That's funny, I have never once seen one of these endless JFK shows/stories report on anything besides a) the Cuban missile crisis b) Vietnam and c) Camelot, fashion, Jackie O, Camelot, glamour, Camelot, and style.

That's right - almost all of it is mindless nostalgic bullshit. It bores me to tears, and as a MA resident we get enough Kennedy press as it is without all this. I have yet to see or hear of a single retrospective on JFK's presidency that includes the word 'liberal' in it, much less a discussion of the policy goals of his presidency, the challenges the nation faced (aside from Cuba), or accomplishments besides boinking Fiddle and Faddle.

Perhaps you're not really as liberal as you claim. Perhaps you should think about THAT.

If you honestly think that my opinion of weepy eyed fuzzy camera shorts of JFK and Jackie Onassis prancing around the White House lawn has anything to do with my particular ideological bent, then you are possessed of a terribly lazy and unimaginative mind. I wasn't aware that posting on DU required ideologically pure liberalism.

[LARED]

8. Thank you

For reminding folks that Camelot and all the feel good mythology around it, is just like it is defined; a legend.

[VOX]

23. Uh, JFK was married to Jackie Kennedy, NOT Jackie Onassis...

Born Jacqueline Lee Bouvier, she married Greek businessman Aristotle Onassis in 1968.

[NashVegas]

17. No, I Think the REAL Point Is

"We will kill your leaders, and we will get away with it."

[soupkitchen]

2. Well this is probably the last of it for the next ten years

[Bucky]

4. I hope you're right. I know you're wrong.

I'm 40 myself, born 6 weeks prior to the 9/11 of my parents' generation. I probably qualify as one of the "older folks" but I just can't quite get into the mood of... of... well, whatever it is that you call the obsessive celebration (that's not really a celebration) of somebody getting killed.

Why not celebrate a more recent hero like Jessica Lynch or Tina Turner or that dude that tied helium balloons to his lawn chair?

[ablbodyed]

6. I hope that you're satirical....

with you examples of today's heroes. If not, I guess that's one of the reasons why we're in such a fix: we look for heroism in the shallow (Lynch excepted, and she was FAR more heroic after she returned), we look for heroism in the insipid, in
the ephemeral. JFK was flawed, but had REAL heroic qualities. Do you think that the outpouring of grief was not REAL? Does anyone here on DU think that we'd be worse off if JFK had lived? Or even more so RFK, who had true liberal impulses.
Your post seems to convey a profound misunderstanding of heroism and the corruption of it in today's world. Perhaps too much MTV in your past?

[harrison]

9. I think you are missing the greater point. This isn't just some

historical exercise. The very fact that we can't get to the heart of the Kennedy assassination, the very fact that there are institutional blockages to a fair and thorough investigation into the murder of Kennedy suggests that there are powers that are STILL at work in our government.

That makes the assassination as relevant for today as yesterday.

[toddzilla]

10. those powers will always be at work

those powers are based on money, and the players change but the game does not.

[lemon lime]

11. Great point

but if we find a conspiracy in the truth, we have niether the truth nor a conspiracy. We simply end up with nothing.
Of interst, is the controversy surrounding the assasination. Why is it that it can't be exacly what it seems to be? The conspiracy theories have raised questions to which there seems to be no answer. Can it be that the conspiracy itself caused these questions and therefore there can be no real answers?
It reminds me of the movie " The Life of David Gail". An attempt to defend a convicted murderer who did not commit the crime, but instead wanted to disprove the " we never executed an inocent man" speech. The fact is, that he set himself up. The victim commited suicide and he knew they would blame him. He was only guilty of helping her.
Theories that conspire to the unfacts do exacly that. They can lead us astray simply by pointing out the unusual nature of certain facts.
It walks like a duck, Lee Harvey Oswald was caught in the library with a gun. There may have been another shooter who got away. Is it unusual for a group to contain more than one assasin? Look at the Columbine murders. Look at the various terror groups today. More than one nut in a basket of fruit.
JFK was assasinated by more than one man. Conspiracy or murder?
Is it unreasonable to examine the fact that if there was another shooter, that we simply never caught him?

[lemon lime]

12. I hope you have all seen David Gail, otherwise

I have ruined a really good flick.
Sorry.

[Lars39]

14. Too many questions have been snowed and obstructed.

Conspiracies happen, people are put in jail for them. Ductapefatwa's sig line says it all: one man's conspiracy is another man's business plan.

[Cheswick2.0]

16. no he was not caught in the library with a gun

he was caught in a movie theater with no gun.

[Fovea]

31. It walks like a duck, Lee Harvey Oswald was caught in the library with a g

No, he was not. That is incorrect. He was caught in a movie theatre after supposedly shooting a Dallas police officer.

[liberalmuse]

13. I am too, because...

even though I was much too young to know what happened, it still makes me very sad for America at that time--and a co-worker almost caught me tearing up. I finally started turning it off (on NPR, that is). Enough is enough. Dredging up one of America's darkest hours over and over and over again is just another reason for the media to try and manipulate our emotions for ratings.

[mitchum]

15. Since I prefer history to hagiography...

I've been tired of it for a looong time.

[Zomby Woof]

26. off to Liberal Re-Education Camp with you!

Yes, it does get tiresome being shouted down for daring to be dissenting liberals not enamored of the Kennedy myth. I am with you on this.

Myth pervades the entire story - from all that "Camelot" nonsense, to all the hagiographies here on DU and on the television.

His assassination was horrific, criminal, and every thing else that could be said humanely in defense of someone murdered so madly, coldly, and publicly. But it was also the single factor that elevated him to some kind of mythic quasi-sainthood among many Americans, and many more overly-idealistic liberals. Had he not been killed, he would be remembered much less fondly today.

I also scoff at the Boomer conceit that America was "more innocent" in those days. Read your HISTORY, people! Naive, maybe, but not innocent.

Vietnam. I can't remember his legacy without mentioning Vietnam. May it stain his memory forever.

[supernova]

18. My problem with reliving it every year

Is I sometimes fear JFK will one day be remembered more for getting shot than for his real legacy: the ideals, hopes, and dreams he inspired in us.

[NashVegas]

19. I'm Ever So Grateful CNN Wasn't Around at the Time

nor had the Zapruder tape.

[Leftist78]

20. I agree

I don't think there's ever been a person remembered by so many for accomplishing so little. Other than the Cuban Missile Crisis, I don't see what he did that was so spectacular.

He's also the one who put our foot in the door of a little place called Vietnam. We tend to forget that and lay all the blame on LBJ. If Kennedy had lived, it would have been his quagmire, and IMHO his legacy would have been seriously tarnished.

I hear all the people talking about his "vision" and the sense of hope he gave us. I hate to break it to you, but you can't eat hope. Hope doesn't accomplish anything on it's own.

In my mind the REAL liberal icon in the 20th century was FDR. We don't have to talk about hope and vision with him. His accomplishments speak for themselves.

[mitchum]

21. Thank you, Leftist78

those were wise words spoken by a fellow Piedmont native

[VOX]

22. The U.S. was well past the door into Vietnam by the time JFK took office..

And there is much concrete evidence that, having ascertained that U.S. involvement in Vietnam was a waste, Kennedy was in the process of withdrawing troops.

http://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/history/
<snip>
President Dwight D. Eisenhower supported the creation of a counter-revolutionary alternative south of the seventeenth parallel. The United States supported this effort at nation-building through a series of multilateral agreements that created the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO).

Using SEATO for political cover, the Eisenhower administration helped create a new nation from dust in southern Vietnam. In 1955, with the help of massive amounts of American military, political, and economic aid, the Government of the Republic of Vietnam (GVN or South Vietnam) was born.
<snip>
In 1961, President Kennedy sent a team to Vietnam to report on conditions in the South and to assess future American aid requirements. The report, now known as the "December 1961 White Paper," argued for an increase in military, technical, and economic aid, and the introduction of large-scale American "advisers" to help stabilize the Diem regime and crush the NLF. As Kennedy weighed the merits of these recommendations, some of his other advisers urged the president to withdraw from Vietnam altogether, claiming that it was a "dead-end alley."

In typical Kennedy fashion, the president chose a middle route. Instead of a large-scale military buildup as the White Paper had called for or a negotiated settlement that some of his advisers had long advocated, Kennedy sought a limited accord with Diem.
<snip>
At the time of the Kennedy and Diem assassinations, there were 16,000 military advisers in Vietnam. The Kennedy administration had managed to run the war from Washington without the large-scale introduction of American combat troops. The continuing political problems in Saigon, however, convinced the new president, Lyndon Baines Johnson, that more aggressive action was needed.
<snip>

http://www.uwsa.com/pipermail/uwsa/1997q4/025998.html

December 23, 1997 NY Times
Kennedy Had Plan for Early Vietnam Exit
By TIM WEINER

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon documents declassified Monday may rekindle the still-smoldering argument over whether President John Kennedy would have pulled American forces out of Vietnam. The documents show that shortly before Kennedy was assassinated, the nation's top military leaders were going forward with his plan to withdraw American advisers from Vietnam.

"All planning will be directed towards preparing Republic of Vietnam forces for the withdrawal of all United States special assistance units and personnel by the end of calendar year 1965," reads an Oct. 4, 1963, memorandum drafted by Gen.Maxwell Taylor, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and discussed that day by the chiefs.
"Execute the plan to withdraw 1,000 United States military personnel by the end of 1963," the memorandum continues.
<snip>

[Solomon]

24. It's true that it's an age thing. I think you are too young to feel the

same way the ones who lived through it. There was a different spirit in america then. A different outlook on life and the future. It's not what Kennedy did so much as what he represented. Liberalism was not a position that had to be explained or defended. It seemed to be the natural order of things. The step towards enlightenment. We wanted the best and the brightest in government, not cronies just to make money. No one doubted it was the way to go. There were very obvious faults that had to be righted during the time, and so liberalism was indispensable. No one doubted whether giving blacks the right to vote the way we had to go. (A lot didn't like it, but couldn't stop the logic of it) It was the spirit of what children aspired to do in the world, namely make the world a better place. When he was killed, we all lost that spirit. And after Martin and Bobby were taken out, the message had really hit home. Don't try and make the world better for everyone or you'll wind up like them.

[Leftist78]

25. What?

"No one doubted whether giving blacks the right to vote the way we had to go."

Obviously you're not from my part of the country. Many down here didn't see the logic in it. Of course they were wrong, and history has proven that, but that doesn't change the fact that there was strong opposition to it at the time.

The idea that JFK's era was some sort of liberal golden age is laughable. The truth is the country was very divided during his time. He barely beat Nixon, and the anti-Communist agenda (read: anti-liberal) was in full swing. Liberalism was just as challenged then as it is now. If it wasn't, then we wouldn't have needed mass movements to change the system.

I also find the idea that our benevolent leaders decided that protecting African Americans' right to vote was the right thing to do on their own offensive to say the least. That movement started with the people. Many of them (black and white) died for that cause. It wasn't just an intellectual question of right and wrong to them. I don't credit ANY leader with the accomplishments that rightly belong to the civil rights movement. They never would have passed any legislation without being backed into a political corner on the issue.

The insinuation that the "spirit of the age" was embodied by JFK, and RFK is insulting to the hundreds of thousands of people who really made the world a better place. As is the usual norm, the changes that came didn't come from above us, they came from among us.

[Zomby Woof]

27. beautiful

Best damned post I have read all week.

[Leftist78]

29. wow!!!

thanks :)

[Zomby Woof]

30. you're welcome

You seem well-versed in Howard Zinn, and if you are not, read "A Poeple's History of The United States". You credibly defend his central thesis.

You seem to read history without the blinders of ideology or the dreamy gauzy haze of nostalgia and idealistic illusion.

[Leftist78]

32. Zinn

"A People's History" literally changed my life. I've never looked at the world with the same eyes since reading it.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Padraig18]

34. You owe him an apology, dude!

You are WAY outta line!

[Leftist78]

35. agreed (n/t)

[littlejoe]

36. Then don't watch it

First of all, it isn't "stuff" as you call it. It is important history. You must be too young for it to have had any impression on you. The Kennedy assassination was without doubt the most dangerous time in our history. Why? More dangerous than the previous world wars, you might ask? Because JFK's assassination was perpetratrated by a conspiracy of very wealthy and powerful people. In short, they derailed our democracy and threatened our way of life.

[Solomon]

37. It would be interesting to see the age of the people who comment

on this topic. I said nothing about giving anybody anything. It was because of the LOGIC of the words in american principles, .i.e. "all men are created equal" that COMPELLED us forward despite the stupid opposition of all those backwards people you seem to be enamored of. And it was the fight of african americans and others caused the issue to come to a head.

And I still maintain, those of us who lived through it, have a memory of an american spirit which has not existed since the awful period of public assasinations we went through.

[54anickel]

38. Depends on which "stuff". This was an extremely important time

in our history. Some of the fluffy stuff gets old, but for the most part I think it is very important for people to understand how much our country was influenced in the Kennedy era. The push for the space program lead to some of the greatest contributions of the time and did much to start the tech sector (not to metion Tang!)

Certainly Kennedy should not get the credit for that era, it was just the whole state of mind that the country was in, I'd like to think that state of mind was somewhat inspired by his leadership, just not sure there was a direct cause/effect relationship.

Brings back a lot of memories, good and bad. One thing I'll always remember was a comedy album my mom had called The First Family. Try making one of THOSE regarding Raygun, Bush or Bush II while they were in office.