Posted on 09/09/2008 7:22:56 PM PDT by Kaslin
Young, handsome and charismatic, John F. Kennedy assumed the presidency in 1961 when he was 43 years of age. Harvard-educated and highly articulate, he was exceptionally popular with young people and academics. The Kennedy family, and especially his attractive wife and children, had an aura of celebrity about them that influenced people.
During World War II, he was a Navy lieutenant junior grade in charge of a PT boat that was rammed and sunk by a Japanese destroyer in the Pacific when a nighttime mission went awry. He received a U.S. Navy and Marine Corps Medal for leading his crew to safety at a difficult time.
Back in civilian life, Kennedy wrote the book "Profiles in Courage" while he was recuperating in the hospital from a back operation. Later, it was disclosed that the book, which won a Pulitzer Prize, was co-authored by Kennedy's speechwriter, Ted Sorensen.
Kennedy's runs for political office were aided by his father's wealth and the fact that his grandfather had been mayor of Boston. In the House of Representatives, where he served six years, he compiled a mixed record. In the U.S. Senate, where he served eight, he was often absent due to back operations.
As president, Kennedy's first act was to create the Peace Corps, an alternative to the military draft that gave idealistic young volunteers an opportunity to help developing countries.
(Excerpt) Read more at ibdeditorials.com ...
Along with James Dean, Marilyn Monroe and Princess Diane one of the most inconsequential characters in my lifetime.
Excellent editorial and excellent commentary of John F. Kennedy’s checkered accomplishments. Remember that JFK was a genuine patriot who sincerely had America’s best interests at heart. His faults were inexperience, lack of sound judgement due to that inexperience and some less than savory characters who gave him advice and inability to control his zipper. These were all minor faults compared to everyone the Democrats have nominated since, with the possible exception of Walter Mondale (1984).
It seems to me that JFK’s most significant achievements came after he died. In large part because of JFK and the manner in which he died, Massachusetts and several other Northeastern states keep electing his screwup family members to public office, and many of rest of them remain in the public eye as “activists.”
The Kennedys have created a wonderful myth.
We all know how the Kennedys got their fortune. Joe was intent on getting some of his boys into the Senate, Governor’s office or White House, just like Vito Corleone.
Jack was put in an arranged marriage with a trophy wife, who would look good on his arm
The Bay of Pigs was an utter disaster - Kennedy left hundreds of Cuban allies on the beach to get arrested by Castro. The Russians viewed Kennedy as a weakling, which nearly brought us to nuclear war.
It is my belief that his death came at just the right moment in his career to secure his legacy, character mostly in tact.
This is the equivalent of being behind the wheel of a ferrari in the middle of the Bonnevile Flats and somehow being surprised and run over by a steamroller.
He should have been court marshalled.
What probably happened was that they maintained a normal day schedule and at night when it was time for their mission, went out to a quiet spot, shut down the engines, streched out on deck and got some sleep.
I wouldn't rule out a nighttime rendevous with some native women either.
Caroline Kennedy, last of that particular family and who’s on the Obama campaign staff, would probably disagree, IMHO.
There was a great book published some time ago titled “A Question of Character” that documented JFK’s many weaknesses along with the occasional positive trait. He was a typical Kennedy, a frighteningly average person supported by his father’s money. The book is heavily documented and is an excellent read. Of course, since it exposed the chief lib hero for the vapid Kennedy that he was, I had to ask for the book, which was cleverly hidden in a non-related section by the libs running the bookstore. Some things never change.
The rifle found at the scene was foreign-made. Sixteen years later, a House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that the president's murder was likely a conspiracy of which Oswald was a part.
The rifle was Italian military surplus sold to thousands of Americans via mail order. It was a decent, inexpensive deer rifle.
The House 'select" committee was full of crap. All evidence points to Oswald as a lone nut and not part of some conspiracy.
"The Dark Side of Camelot" is also an excellent read.
She would be wrong, of course.
I still say if he started in politics today he would be ignored by modern democrats as too Conservative.
The term “groupspeak” was coined in the aftermath of Kennedy’s Bay of Pigs fiasco to describe the failure of the decision-making process when it is dominated completely by advisors who all think the same way, and all think the same way as the boss does.
Experienced leaders know that there have to be “devil’s advocates”, that the pros and cons of any course of action need to be weighed against other courses of action that are realistically available, including, even, the courses of no action, such as to wait and see, or to wait for a more opportune time, for example.
A groupspeak-driven failure is not limited to a military decision. Businesses sometimes fail or fade because of it. At the root of a lot of government program failures is groupspeak-driven decision making. The beneficiaries of the program lobby the policy makers, who generally have been appointed from the ranks of the beneficiaries, and the decision is made by politicians who have made themselves beholden to the beneficiaries of the program. Whether the program is better than nothing or better than reasonable policy and programmatic alternatives is scarcely considered.
Very keen observation. I'd never thought about along those lines, but you're right. A tip o' my hat to you.
If Kennedy were alive today he’d be too conservative to be in the GOP.
Thank you.
The term is actually “groupthink” and it is discussed in a 1977 book by Janis and Mann titled “Decision Making”. The concept applies to a large number of groups and situations as you describe. It is a condition that leads groups to not only make poor decisions but to also do so with arrogant hubris. You made a good post and describe an important concept.
And Obama wants to meet with President Iwannajihad? Oh, yeah, I can see how that would work out reall well for the US.
The Kennedy mythologists will never accept that their boy put tens of millions of American lives at risk by his displays of weakness at Berlin, the Bay of Pigs and the Vienna conference (also known as “negotiating without preconditions”).
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.