Would JFK Have Been Bashed Here As A DNC DINO?

I would bet cold hard cash on it.

And, yes, I know the DNC wasn't around when he was President. But Kennedy was pro military, pro business, a tax cutter, very cautious on moving too quickly on civil rights, etc.

Quite a moderate. He soundly thrashed Humphrey in the primaries and the liberals hated him.

But he was elected, wasn't he? And did some pretty good things in his three short years.

Think about it the next time you bash Hillary, Bayh, Warner, Clark, Richardson or whomever as being too much of a "Republican-lite" for your taste.

n/t

tax cuts to increase govt revenue.

because he waged a war.

...and for his time he was failry liberal, with civil rights and all.

This is just more DLC propaganda. We all know how they take ownership for things they had nothing to do with. Now they are taking ownership for JFK.

What makes JFK a "dino?"

He supported ending segregation. Introduced first Civil Rights bill.

He opposed going to war against Cuba. Supported limiting the war in Vietnam.

He strongly supported labor rights. Came out on the side of workers, not corporations.

What did he ever do that could even be compared with the DLC?

The DLC are delusional at this point.

frankly, I think Gore-Lieberman had same problem. There has been no exciting offering from the DEM party in the past 9 years except for HOWARD DEAN. What does that tell you?

flaming liberal. And, for that matter, comparatively, a beacon of virtue.

That's probably the first thing that started them on the track to dismantling the New Deal, all that extra play money with which to buy the media and run Congressmen who would stay reliably bought.

I was sad when he was assassinated, because I thought that considering the eneimies he'd made, he might have had potential.

We'll just never know. His record, though, wasn't great when viewed from a working stiff's perspective.

Top Tax rates on the wealthy were approaching 90% back then if memory serves.

90% is too high?

And the strange thing is.. no matter which "D" organization that candidates happens to associate themselves with..

..we'll rally behind them! :grouphug:

Ronald Reagan took a huge shit on the New Deal and George Bush is doing just the same. By comparison, Kennedy was proposing bringing a government that was already quite populist on economic issues, a tad bit more to the center. People like Evan Bayh are proposing continuing the policies of a government that is dangerously right wing.

You'd have a large cadre of Stevenson people, a group backing Humphrey, a handful for Johnson and Symington, and a sizeable contingent dedicated to Eleanor Roosevelt.

I know he beat out Kennedy for Veep slot under Stevenson.

for the 1956 vice presidential nominee.

And JFK supporters?

so the DU of 1960.

NSAM 263/273.

You might want to get your history straight before making such statements.

He was hardly any DINO.

Why didn't we withdraw then?

He was also warning about the CIA. Porter Goss was a major player in those days, wrt to the bay of pigs .. operation northwoods etc..

too much history, staring us right in the face right this minute, forty plus years later.

That says a lot.

Richard Parker writes about this in his Galbraith biography.

They said he cut Capital Gains Tax, and a range of other taxes he cut that only helped the wealthy. They said he also missed the vote in the Senate to censure Joe McCarthy...and that he was hugely pro-military.

The Civil Rights issue was more to do with RFK than JFK, Bobby thrust the Civil Rights issue onto JFK, up until that point JFK seemed indifferent to Civil Rights.

Out of the two of them, I far prefer Robert Kennedy, RFK disfused the Cuban Missile Crisis as well, he told JFK what to do.

I'm not sure what to make of JFK, I wasn't born until 15 years after he was assassinated. JFK was only President for two years, maybe had he have lived, he might have become more like RFK...but as JFKs record stands, it's a bit patchy. But if I had of been around at the time, I would have voted for him...and he did say: "Do you realize that I'm the only thing that stands between Nixon and the White House."

RFK from what I've read and heard about him would have been a better President.

The three BEST Presidents of the 20th Century I think were FDR, LBJ and Clinton. LBJ's Presidency was a tragedy, because he wanted his Presidency to be about The Great Society and about helping the poor and vulnerable in society...and he got bogged down in Vietnam and it ruined everything.

On Edit: Spelling error.

And I agree with you wholeheartedly. Without Vietnam, LBJ would have gone down as one of the top 10.

History may yet treat him more kindly. But his rigidity re: Vietnam really doomed him.

Robert A. Caro's "The Years of Lyndon Johnson: Means of Ascent" and "The Years of Lyndon Johnson: Master of The Senate"? Fabulous stuff.

It's a tragedy of Shakespearian proporations what happened to LBJs Presidency...and I think his death was brought on early from all of the worry. It physically affected the man and made him really ill.

LBJ was a GIANT amongst ordinary mortals, a very compassionate and wonderful man.

:cry:

On Edit: Changed word.

a wonderful man. You need to talk to some of the people who worked with him. I worked with 2 guys who worked presidential SS duty when he was in the WH. He considered himself the Master and everyone else his slave. When he said jump, you better damn well be off the floor already.

I don't dispute the story that he took the war and all those death personally, and I think it did affect him physically. Inside, he had a soft heart, but outside, some of the stories would curl your hair.

You have to have a tough exterior and you have to show those who's the boss...because if you don't you won't survive. Politics is a dirty business and you've got to be tough.

Also if your opponent gets in your face, then you get back in their face. If your opponent hits you, then you hit them back twice as hard.

I've heard many a story about LBJ, so I know :)

On Edit: Dammit spelling error.

prepared for the battle Kennedy was fighting with his own State and Defense Departments.

He was manipulated by the people who were having a hard time manipulating Kennedy.

He wasn't a conservative, as some claim (although I have read that he campaigned from the right in his first campaign). He was definitely left-of-center for the time and probably left-of-center on a lot of issues even from today's perspective. But he also wasn't a far-left liberal, who ran a pretty centrist, hawkish campaign. I've read that the '60 campaign, while it enthused people because it seemed to be a new generation of politicians (Nixon was only 46), both candidates had pretty centrist platforms. Nixon even got 1/3 of the Black vote that year - the political chameleon that he was, he ran left-of-center on a number of issues.

The left-liberals of the time did not like JFK. And I'd bet many on DU wouldn't have liked him either. Although, to be fair, I'm sure he'd have had a lot of support among DU'ers too. He certainly wouldn't be seen as a Lieberman-type. It's possible he'd be seen like Hillary Clinton, however.

You might recall the only real criticism of Bobby Kennedy within the party in 1968 came from the far left...which called him cowardly and claimed he had only spoken up about VietNam after Eugene McCarthy showed him it was safe to do so....

Should I alter my political sensibilities because someone evokes the mystique of an assassinated Democratic icon? And does so to stifle criticism of their political stripe! As ploys go, this does more to insult Kennedy than it does to elevate this cadre of centrists.

This is a RNC/DLC talking point. Hell, before 9/11 I was OK with Bush's tax cut. Sometimes a tax cut is OK. That doesn't mean it's always the right thing to do...and I support the military. I just want anymore 'Nams.

Do you mean DLC?

who doesn't know the difference between the DNC and the DLC? :shrug:

protected working people. Seventeen months into his presidency he becme a full convert to True Keynesianism.

He had a State and Defense Departments which worked against him.

He was not a DINO.

If he were a modern day politician he would definitely be part of the DLC wing.

If you directly compare JFK then to now, he would have been a so-called 'DINO', but if he had lived and progressed with the country like everyone else, he would be as liberal as the rest of us... IMHO

I guess I am one of the few around here that doesn't fall to the floor genuflecting at the mention of all things Kennedy. I don't know why some of you think people are above criticism just because they are famous and beloved. Kennedy stuck his dick in anything female with a pulse for chrissake..i don't know how fucking admirable that is for a married man of his stature to do. just sayin...

I also believe all this Camolot bullshit was hyped up myth created by Jackie to make him into a larger than life legend and it worked.

The dislike and distrust of anything Repuke has only aggravated an already trigger ready group to shoot at anything perceived as moderate or DINO sounding. The expression DINO is pretty pathetic to begin with.

I will not be part of any thread attacking Hillary, other than to say at this point it's pretty clear she is running for President (or something) but attacking her distracts us from the huge steaming fetid pile of crime, corruption and evil that is running this country. They are called Repukes. I really suggest that they be the target of any inquiries or attacks. Just walk down the street and you will step in an obvious, warm pile of Repuke corruption.

Find someone else besides Hillary to flog. She's a good leader. I have finally come to the point where if she is nominated by the Democrats (and doesn't do anything really stupid like picking a lame VP) I will vote for her.

So, really, would you rather lose your right to have an abortion if needed or burn the US flag? Would you rather allow our troops to be killed due to really poor planning and political manipulation or burn the US flag. Tens of millions of children are actually starving or hungry in the US. Shall we let them eat burnt flag?