Skip to comments.JFK, Conservative
Posted on 10/24/2013 9:26:12 AM PDT by NKP_Vet
John F. Kennedy is lionized by liberals. He inspired LBJ to push for landmark civil rights laws. His New Frontier promised new spending on education and medical care for the elderly. His champions insist he would have done great liberal things had he not been killed by Lee Harvey Oswald.
But what if we judge him by the lengthy record of his actual political career, in historical perspective? What if this hero of liberals was, in fact, the opposite of a liberal?
As Ira Stoll convincingly argues, by the standards of both his time and our own, John F. Kennedy was a conservative. His two great causes were anticommunism and economic growth. His tax cuts, which spurred one of the greatest economic booms in our history, were fiercely opposed by his more liberal advisers. He fought against unions. He pushed for free trade and a strong dollar. And above all, he pushed for a military buildup and an aggressive anticommunism around the world. Indeed, JFK had more in common with Ronald Reagan than with LBJ.
Not every Republican is a true heir to Kennedy, but hardly any Democrats deserve that mantle. JFK, Conservative is sure to appeal to conservative readers and will force liberals to reconsider one of their icons.
(Excerpt) Read more at amazon.com ...
I just recently mostly read (partly skimmed) a biography of old Joe Kennedy, which was very sympathetic, probably too much so, but it more or less made the point that Joe became a Democrat because the Republicans would not accept him.
He was also a womanizer who damned near got us all nuked.
He was also pro-Adolf Hitler, the scum. JFK is not a good role model for conservatives, no matter how they might want to dig him out of the cellar.
Druggie wh*remonger got himself a little too involved with the mob molls.
The Democrat Party has been extremely progressive since 1912.
Etremely statist since 1932.
Extremely radical Left since 1972.
And yes, JFK today would be considered almost a reactionary compared to contemporary Democrats.
His two great causes were blondes and nepotism.
Why does anyone want to count this intellectually light weight, morally bankrupt empty suit among our ranks as a conservative?
The Republicans wouldn't accept him? In what way? He could have registered as a Republican w/o anyone knowing if he wanted to. My guess is that the GOP wouldn't take a bribe with a guarantee of something like Ambassador to the Court of King James as payback.
Old Joe was a philandering, whiskey smuggling limosine gangster. I'm glad he wasn't a Republican.
The iconography of Camelot, after a half-century, has been exposed for the myth it always was. Ironically, it is the myth and not the man which has done so much for the Democrat party as the Democrats have run on the myth in every cycle. It provided cover for one of the most debased politicians in American history, Teddy Kennedy, to survive scandal, indeed even negligent homicide, and cause the Republic untold harm during his long tenure in the United States Senate.
The entire myth was a lie, a lie in the sense of Obama's charisma is a lie, it is a myth served up by elite Democrats to be accepted by rank-and-file Democrats and impressionable but naïve Americans who want to believe in their heroes.
Who was more liberal back then, Kennedy or the Rockefeller Republicans?
Suggest you drop Ira Stoll a line and tell him all the research he did about JFK is just a bunch of lying nonsense.
He should be impressed.
Absolute fact is JFK appointed pro-life Byron White to the US Supreme Court. White and a very young William Rehnquist,
appointed by Nixon were the only two that didn’t give this country legalized murder.
Five republican appointed justices did the evil deed. Republicans gave us Roe w. Wade, the exact same way that a republican appointed justice gave us ObamaCare.
Joe Kennedy went to, and graduated, from Harvard University around 1909. At that time Harvard was all East Coast Establishment, and East Coast Establishment was all Republican. Kennedy started shmoozing the sons of the Establishment as soon as he landed at Harvard. Kennedy was ambitious, and wanted to rub shoulders with the East Coast Establishment as an equal. His purpose in becoming involved in politics was not ideological, it was practical — to get ahead.
The Republican Establishment was not interested in rubbing shoulders with an Irish upstart, according to the book I read.
It's bad enough I feel honor bound to defend what I say, however, I feel no compulsion to defend what I do not say. I am not aware that I commented on Wizard White. If you think I did, please quote me the passage.
If you think I did state something in error-a matter which can readily be determined by reading what I actually wrote in my reply-I would be grateful if you could instruct me.
JFK was an incompetent president and a liberal, today he would be a more modern version of the liberal that he was in his own day, his being elected killed America.
Democrats wrote a law to replace the American voter.
From unionizing government, to Vietnam, to the 1965 Immigration Act, JFK was the end of us.
However, if there is one man who can take the most credit for the 1965 act, it is John F. Kennedy. Kennedy seems to have inherited the resentment his father Joseph felt as an outsider in Bostons WASP aristocracy. He voted against the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, and supported various refugee acts throughout the 1950s. In 1958 he wrote a book, A Nation of Immigrants, which attacked the quota system as illogical and without purpose, and the book served as Kennedys blueprint for immigration reform after he became president in 1960. In the summer of 1963, Kennedy sent Congress a proposal calling for the elimination of the national origins quota system. He wanted immigrants admitted on the basis of family reunification and needed skills, without regard to national origin. After his assassination in November, his brother Robert took up the cause of immigration reform, calling it JFKs legacy. In the forward to a revised edition of A Nation of Immigrants, issued in 1964 to gain support for the new law, he wrote, I know of no cause which President Kennedy championed more warmly than the improvement of our immigration policies. Sold as a memorial to JFK, there was very little opposition to what became known as the Immigration Act of 1965.
Only thing I am saying is research into Kennedy’s politics prove him to be as conservative or more conservative as today’s RINOs. And if he were still around I seriously doubt he would be in the democrat party. And I mentioned Bryon White because Kennedy appointed him to the Supreme Court. A president appoints someone that they think has the same political philosophy. He did not vote with the majority on Roe v. Wade and he turned into a reliable conservative vote during his years on the court. In turn the no-nothing Bill Clinton appointed the left-wing radical Ruth Bader-Gingsburg to replace him.
“JFK was an incompetent president and a liberal, today he would be a more modern version of the liberal that he was in his own day, his being elected killed America”.
Same request for you. How about writing Ira Stoll and tell him all his research on Kennedy is all wrong. He was a crazy left-wing, anti-God, baby murdering, union-loving liberal of the first degree. Hell, do one better than that, write a book about how “liberal” JFK. Truth of the matter is republicans were the anti-war, pro-abortion party 60 years ago and absolute fact is they gave us Roe v. Wade and ObamaCare. Prescott Bush, the grandpa of little george, did business with Hitler and was the first secretary of the baby killing mill Planned Parenthood.
I don’t need to write to every person that wants to create and feed the never ending myths of JFK.
Without JFK America would have survived and we would be living in an entirely different America.
Electing Eisenhowers vice president would have made an incredible difference, and America would have survived and would be totally different (in 1960 even Nixon was a very different man).
Imagine no Vietnam, no 1960s era dominated by Vietnam and the draft and resistance, no Kennedy assassinations, no unionizing of government employees, NO 1965 IMMIGRATION ACT that led to the end of America.
No Watergate, no Bay of Pigs, a President Reagan in 1968 without any Bush dynasty being created, no LBJ, no Goldwater debacle, no creation of Ted Kennedy the Senatorial Giant.
Imagine America without this immigration that killed it, and no 1960s.
Ike had already sent advisors there.
Don’t confuse having some advisers there with creating JFK’s Vietnam War.
The US Army had been involved in Vietnam since FDR and the 1940s with no intention of becoming engaged in an American war there, we have advisers and Army Special Forces all over the globe and in war zones today, that has nothing to do with sending in 16,000 troops as JFK did, and Nixon would not have done.
No, that was J. Edgar Hoover, who spied on everybody, to include MLK and JFK. Hoover despised JFK because of his reckless affairs with women other than his wife.
Nazi lover too.
I like(ed) JFK...the favorite Presidents of my lifetime are Reagan, Eisenhower and JFK. He would have been like a sore thumb to these diseased liberal “statists” of today.
JFK did not want to expand the war in Vietnam and had drafted plans to pull US forces out of Vietnam. LBJ owned his political career to Brown and Root (a subsidiary to Halliburton), the huge defense contractors that wanted war in Vietnam. LBJ gave Brown and Root the contruction contracts in South Vietnam. Hell, he and his wife has so much stock in Brown and Root, it was called Brown, Root and Johnson. LBJ also had huge stock in Flying Tiger Airlines, who flew most of the US military to Southeast Asia. Well Kennedy wanted to end the American involvement in SEA, Johnson wanted to make money. Does not take a genius to put two and two together. On his death bed, Douglas MacArthur pleaded with JFK to keep the US out of Vietnam, saying it was an unwinnable civil war. What man alive knew more about war in the Pacific theater and Asian geopolitical politics than MacArthur. I can’t think of any. Looks like JFK was going to take his advice. Then he went to Dallas and we all know the rest the story. Vietnam was not Eisenhower’s war, it was not JFK’s war, it was not Nixon’s war, it was that sorry ass, crooked as a snake Lyndon Johnson’s war. End of story.
In reality JFK went into Vietnam with 16,000 troops and part of the JFK machine wants to pretend that he was only escalating because he wasn’t, or what is, is, or whatever.
Now we have a JFK fan boy to push him on us here at FR?
Are you also a fan of his fatal blow to America, his immigration policy? How about unionizing government?
Even as a young newspaper boy, JFK’s seeming incompetence puzzled me.
Wow, you really are a fan boy of that nasty SOB.
Drunks are hard to interpret.
I don’t think JFK was a drunk was he, wasn’t he only a drug addict?
I despise liberals, but JFK was an old time conservative democrat, more pro-life and small government that 99% of the RINOs that dominate today’s GOP.
Reagan also started out as a democrat. One of Reagan’s political heroes was Kennedy. And speaking of liberals, one of the biggest liberals of the last 50 years to be president was George W. Bush. He never vetoed the first spending bill till his last year in office and exploited the national debt. He appointed more open homosexuals to his administration than Bill Clinton did to his. He threw away hundreds of millions of dollars fighting AIDs in Africa, when the majority of the money went to warlords. Lastly, he invaded the wrong country when he went into Iraq in retaliation for 9/11, and we’ll be bogged down there until hell freezes over. If Bush had governed like a conservative republican instead of a spend crazy liberal democrat the election of Obama would have never happened.
Reagan’s “hero”? Reagan was anti-JFK, “As a “Democrat for Nixon,” Reagan champions Nixon’s candidacy for president, delivering more than 200 speeches in his support.”
You keep harping on JFK as a pro-life president, where are you seeing campaign literature on abortion from pre-1960 for JFK, or anyone else?
Don’t drag Reagan into this, he opposed JFK and campaigned as a leader of the “Southern California Democrats for Nixon”.
JFK was a sleazy liberal, the scum of the earth type guy and a disaster for America.
“When John Kennedy was President, he didn’t push a program of dreary mediocrity with endless tax increases on those who dream of better days. He challenged Americans, just as we’re challenging you today, to make America grow and to make America great by pushing for lower personal income tax rates for all the working people of America. And there was a great similarity between his tax cut program and the one that we implemented in 1981” ~ Ronald Reagan, Oct 10, 1984
Abortion in 1960 was not the hot political issue it would later become, but population control was a topic of discussion. As a senator, Kennedy was asked, Do you see any hope at all of slowing up the rate of population increase? Kennedys reply was somewhat dismissive. Now, on the question of limiting population: As you know the Japanese have been doing it very vigorously, through abortion, which I think would be repugnant to all Americans.
That’s it for me attempting to post anything about Kennedy.
You must have been very close to him to call him “a “sleazy liberal, the scum of the earth and a disaster for America”.
Now that’s words I would reserve for Obama, but I can’t recall any time on these boards that you have lowered the boom on Obama like you have on Kennedy with your irrational rants. From your questioning back to me about Kennedy being pro-life where I showed you where he appointed pro-life Byron White to the Supreme Court and White DID NOT vote for Roe v. Wade, it’s obvious you have not read one link I provided on Kennedy. No need in continuing this conversation. It’s liking to a wall.
Reagan compared his “hero” (according to your lie) to Karl Marx and Hitler. “ Under the tousled boyish hair cut it is still old Karl Marx”.
While you are promoting the sleazy liberal that so despised America that he sought to replace it’s people and identity (successfully) and claiming that he was a “hero” of Ronald Reagan, and posting a 1981 quote when President Reagan was seeking to use a dead president for politics when speaking to the public as president, just as any politician would after JFK was turned into a martyr by dishonest people like you, let me show you what Reagan really thought.
In a hand written private letter to republican Richard Nixon in 1960, this is what the democrat Ronald Reagan had to say about JFK in regards to his acceptance speech as the democrat nominee. Shortly after the Democratic Party held its Convention in Los Angeles in 1960 where it nominated Massachusetts Senator John F. Kennedy for President, Ronald Reagan sent the following letter to Vice President Richard Nixon offering his services in the upcoming presidential campaign.
After mocking the “platitudes and generalities” of the other democrat speeches, Reagan gets to the meat of who JFK was.
The hand written letter:
“”I do not include Kennedy’s acceptance speech because beneath the generalities I heard a frightening call to arms. Unfortunately he is a powerful speaker with an appeal to the emotions. He leaves little doubt that his idea of the “challenging new world” is one in which the Federal Govt. will grow bigger & do more and of course spend more. I know there must be some short sighted people in the Republican Party who will advise that the Republicans should try to “out liberal” him. In my opinion this would be fatal.
I am convinced that America is economically conservative and for that reason I think some one should force the Democrats to publish the “retail price” for this great new wave of “public service” they promise. I don’t pose as an infallible pundit but I have a strong feeling that the twenty million non voters in this country just might be conservatives who have cynically concluded the two parties offer no choice between them where fiscal stability is concerned. No Republican no matter how liberal is going to woo a Democratic vote but a Republican bucking the give away trend might re-create some voters who have been staying at home.
One last thought,— shouldn’t some one tag Mr. Kennedy’s bold new imaginative program with it’s proper age? Under the tousled boyish hair cut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago. There is nothing new in the idea of a Govt. being Big Brother to us all. Hitler called his “State Socialism” and way before him it was “benevolent monarchy.
I apologize for taking so much of your time but I have such a yearning to hear some one come before us and talk specifics instead of generalities. I’m sure the American people do not want the govt. paid services at “any price” and if we collectively can afford “free this & that” they’d like to know it before they buy and not after it is entrenched behind another immovable govt. bureau.
You will be very much in my prayers in the days ahead.
I like the way you completely ignore any and all links that have anything good to say about JFK. Sounds like an anger issue to me. Why not reserve your venom to a real life person that is actually destroying this country while you go on a rant against a man who’s been dead 50 years.
By the way JFK was the conservative when he ran against Nixon, who was as liberal as the day is long.
The Republicans didn’t fancy “Catholics.”
Reagan had a different opinion on who the conservative was in 1960.
Why you are promoting the man who ruined America is a puzzle, why you are lying about Reagan is a puzzle, why you are lying about JFK being anti-abortion when nobody knows is a puzzle, chances are that a number of JFK’s kids were aborted if anything, Byron White wasn’t chosen in early 1962 America for anything related to abortion, no one even knew or cared about the issue then in presidential and Supreme Court politics.
What is this creepy obsession you have with promoting the man that Reagan compared to Karl Marx and Hitler as a liberal, and that led him to campaign as a “democrat for Nixon because he was the conservative?
The Republicans were Catholics.
Well at least he’s not lionizing Martin King
And I like NKP vet
But not over Kennedy who was about worthless
We will have to disagree.
I think they were largely White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. (WASP)
Catholics have always been democrats, the first election republicans won the Catholic vote was in 1972 when Nixon ran for reelection, it is disputed but possible that Eisenhower may have won their vote for his reelection in 1956.
Protestants have always voted republican, except in 1932, 1936, and in 1964.
See post 16, America did not survive the 1960 election of JFK, his immigration goals destroyed us.
The Catholics did the one thing that could reverse the stereotypes. Their relentless insistance on education for their children pulled them ahead of their contemporaries and solidly into the middle class.
There are still legacy Democratic / Catholic strongholds but they are susceptable. I am part of a group that is building the next generation of the Republican Party. We are hunting down the bright young kids with leadership ability and dragging them into the Party. When I am given a name and punch someone's doorbell the chances are better than even that I will be talking to a Catholic.
The Reagan Revolution was Catholic. The campaign was by Catholics and aimed at Catholics. Reagan's philosophy and base was Western Republican (Mormon) but it was Catholics that ground out the Reagan agenda.
That's funny, I seem to recall something about '76, North Carolina, Evangelicals, Jesse Helms and the Congressional Club.
Revisionist history won't work until the people who actually remember are dead and gone.
“What is this creepy obsession you have with promoting the man that Reagan compared to Karl Marx and Hitler as a liberal, and that led him to campaign as a democrat for Nixon because he was the conservative?”
The “creepy obsession” is your abnormal, amateurish rants aboutJohn Kennedy, who for the record was every bit as “conservative” as RINOs like George W. Bush who HAVE DESTROYED conservatism in the republican party and gave us King Obama. Big government GW Bush who’s lasting legacy will be his gift to American of a socialist by the name of Obama..........who flatly stated he would transform American and is delivering on his promise.
Never once have a read a post from you that attacks Obama the way you have attacked Kennedy. And I didn’t write the book about JFK. A conservative wrote the book and his name is Ira Stoll.
To paraphrase The Great One, ‘It isn’t so much that NKP_Vet is ignorant. It’s just that he knows so many things that aren’t so.’
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.