John F. Kennedy

[Disgustipated]

I'm not completely familiar with the context of that speech, but I've always interpreted it as a reminder not always to expect the government to solve all problems, that it's ultimately its citizens that define what a nation achieves and that the government is only a tool for those who actually commit themselves to its betterment.

Yep, he was the last great democrat. Now all the Obama lovers only ask what the government can give them in terms of unemployment benefits and foods stamps. What happened to the days when people didn't expect the government to baby them? Yes I know I said I will vote for Obama again. But my reasons aren't because I think Obama is good (he is not), it's to punish the republicans who still don't "get it".

Its interesting that most moderates (Even moderate conservatives) and liberals seem to think that, but the far right tends to think he's actually one of the worst. I happen to agree, but don't really have enough time to expound now. Short version: Internment camps.

I think any president would have instituted internment camps. It was hardly his biggest failing. His biggest failing was prolonging the great depression, socialist financial policies (instituted by questionable means). He did have good speeches, however, and did give people hope.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I have little doubt that Hoover would have approved internment camps, but there is no way Coolidge would have.

 

[Leoreth]

Yep, he was the last great democrat. Now all the Obama lovers only ask what the government can give them in terms of unemployment benefits and foods stamps. What happened to the days when people didn't expect the government to baby them? Yes I know I said I will vote for Obama again. But my reasons aren't because I think Obama is good (he is not), it's to punish the republicans who still don't "get it".

I don't think that current democrats wouldn't still agree with the gist of that JFK speech. It's just that the current debate seems to be so poisoned that they're almost constantly on the defense.

 

[downtown]

Its kind of funny that JFK is held up as the last great Liberal, when Liberals were pretty cool to the guy's election in the first place (Kennedy's first campaign slogan as a member of congress was "A fighting conservative", and he ran way to the right of Stevenson and Humphrey)

 

[Cutlass]

Its kind of funny that JFK is held up as the last great Liberal, when Liberals were pretty cool to the guy's election in the first place (Kennedy's first campaign slogan as a member of congress was "A fighting conservative", and he ran way to the right of Stevenson and Humphrey)

Show's how much things have shifted in American politics....

 

[Traitorfish]

I'm not completely familiar with the context of that speech, but I've always interpreted it as a reminder not always to expect the government to solve all problems, that it's ultimately its citizens that define what a nation achieves and that the government is only a tool for those who actually commit themselves to its betterment.

I tend to interpret as expressing the depth of influence that integral nationalism holds on American political thought, despite a general unwillingness to make it explicit. (Can't be rugged individuals if the nation is an organic unity.) But I'm cynical like that.

 

[Formaldehyde]

It was very nationalistic, as was much of Kennedy's rhetoric. He likely did more to promote the fears of socialism and the Cold War than any president until Reagan. For instance, here is a quote from his inauguration address:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

 

[kochman]

How would you rank Kennedy as a president? Was he great, good, average, or poor?

I put average, just because he didn't really have time to stand out... his greatest claim to fame was getting assassinated.

He was good during the Cold War with the "I'm a jellydonut" thing (haha), but the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam were issues... though I put Vietnam more on LBJ. Kennedy just sent advisors, which is not really a problem.

 

[Rik Meleet]

I seem to recall him cutting a secret deal with the Soviets to pull back our missiles from their region in exchange for them pulling back theirs from ours.

Sounds like a pretty savvy deal - both sides get something out of it and since the American compromise was secret, he made it look like an American victory.

Clearly, his administration at least had some capable people.

That's the aftermath (where the Russians got what they wanted; a guaranteed safe foothold close to the US mainland with access to Latin-America and as a bonus they got the US to remove missiles in Italy and Turkey).

The espionage part was before and during the crisis. Through espionage it was 100% clear Chroesjtsjov would in the end not fire nuclear missiles so JFK could play it the hard way and call bluffs.

 

[Dachs]

Through espionage it was 100% clear Chroesjtsjov would in the end not fire nuclear missiles so JFK could play it the hard way and call bluffs.

Congratulations, you have induced me to despise the Dutch language.

I also kind of have to question the actual value to the USSR of Cuba, but that wasn't obvious during the crisis itself so it's not really that relevant.

 

[say1988]

It was very nationalistic, as was much of Kennedy's rhetoric. He likely did more to promote the fears of socialism and the Cold War than any president until Reagan. For instance, here is a quote from his inauguration address:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

Of course that "liberty" is restricted to those residing in the US. If that means putting millions of foreigners under despots, it is A-Ok.

 

[Takhisis]

That would be nice to have.
"He's a president, therefor he's awful."

And it would be true, since all American presidents in the XX aand XXI centuries have been up to dodgy stuff to say the least.

It was very nationalistic, as was much of Kennedy's rhetoric. He likely did more to promote the fears of socialism and the Cold War than any president until Reagan. For instance, here is a quote from his inauguration address:

"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

Of course that "liberty" is restricted to those residing in the US. If that means putting millions of foreigners under despots, it is A-Ok.

Of course! Bankrolling terrorist groups to terrorise the population and then supporting the military when they kick them out and terrorise the population doesn't count. The American continent is for the Americans!

 

[caketastydelish]

He had a very successful sex life.

Say what you want, but he never "got it on" with Marilyn Manroe.

 

[Glassfan]

The Ronald Reagan of Democrats.

 

[Takhisis]

Since Republicans are bad and Reagan is their embodiment, JFK being the embodiment of Democrats makes him…

 

[Glassfan]

Since Republicans are bad and Reagan is their embodiment, JFK being the embodiment of Democrats makes him…

Worse?!

 

[Cutlass]

Worse?!

Well, the difference is that Kennedy, for all his faults, mas doing a bit to move the country in a positive direction. And Reagan was moving the country in a harmful direction.

 

[kochman]

Well, the difference is that Kennedy, for all his faults, mas doing a bit to move the country in a positive direction. And Reagan was moving the country in a harmful direction.

So, wait, you aren't a Reagan supporter?

 

[Glassfan]

Well, the difference is that Kennedy, for all his faults, mas doing a bit to move the country in a positive direction. And Reagan was moving the country in a harmful direction.

Obviously a matter of opinion. I would argue just the opposite.

 

[Cutlass]

Obviously a matter of opinion. I would argue just the opposite.

Sure.

I, on the other hand, don't like endless deficits, a weaker economy, economic instability, rollbacks in individual liberty, a tax burden shifted towards the poor and middle class, lower wages, and selling out the country to special interests.

But hey, whatever floats your boat.