Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 09/10/2008 5:42:41 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Kaslin

“And later, Kennedy called the summit meeting the “roughest thing in my life. (Khrushchev) just beat the hell out of me. I’ve got a terrible problem if he thinks I’m inexperienced and have no guts.””

I have heard about that before, JFK coming out shaken and pale as described by someone there.

The democrat party is long long dead.
It is the extreme liberal party now.
JFK wouldn’t recognize it.


2 posted on 09/10/2008 5:47:30 PM PDT by Names Ash Housewares
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

>So when the haze disappears, what remains? A man of limited government, low taxes and strong national defense who rejected government redistribution of wealth.<

true.

i tell this to my democrat friends and they think i’m putting them on.


3 posted on 09/10/2008 5:48:07 PM PDT by ken21 (people die and you never hear from them again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Yes, he would ! Both he and Bobby warned against a welfare state. It freaked them out.

JFK and Sarah Palin would almost MATCH on the issues of taxes, government and national security.

Sarah has a JFK type of energy, excitment and determination to her.


4 posted on 09/10/2008 5:51:25 PM PDT by se_ohio_young_conservative (Reagan conservatism is back ! .. Thank God for Sarah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

The sad thing about this article is that it’s true. Kennedy was not a limited government guy; in fact, that whole New Frontier thing was vaguely fascist. As for the low-tax claim, surely Kennedy supported low-taxes. However, he did not do so because of some overriding belief in markets. he did so because he was a staunch Keynesian. While Keynesians are unique among socialists in recognizing that economies grow better when the state does not confiscate upwards of 90% of productive people’s wealth, they are still socialists.

I weep that the best argument we can hope for in favor of limited government from Republicans is the fact that “supply-side” economics engender an expansion of the tax base.


5 posted on 09/10/2008 5:55:01 PM PDT by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
I relish the liberal teeth-gnashing when this subject is brought up - that their icon and standard-bearer is to the right of the likes of McCain, Specter, etc. Again, it's style over substance. Symbolism above all. Liberals are so useless in a society structured as we are.


6 posted on 09/10/2008 5:55:01 PM PDT by Viking2002 (A man who never quits is never defeated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Most of LBJ's socialist "Great Soecity" was made up of government programs originally proposed by JFK that never made it thur Congress because he was assisinated before he could push for them. LBJ got them passed by evoking the spirit of his slain predecessor. For example the infamous Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 passed by JFK's brother was modeled after the exact list of immigrations "reforms" his brother promised as President.

Go rewatch the Nixon-Kennedy debates, Kennedy spends the entire time heaping praise on Wilson & FDR and promising Americans all kinds of goodies to ensure the government will take care of you. He just stops short of telling people how the government will pay for it.

Take away Kennedy's staunch anti-Communism and token tax cut, and the other 90% of he was a solid Massachuttes liberal. It's rather ironic that the nation's first "Catholic" friend wanted nothing to do with the traditional values of the Catholic church.

Everything single one of the Kennedy clan in politics today and in the past has been a far-left kook, but we're to believe JFK would be a "Republican" today? The only "Republican" in power now that bears any resemblence to JFK's plans for America is Arnold Schwartzenegger. The left loves JFK, hails Obama as the new JFK, and looks to JFK "camelot" presidency, and we're to believe JFK was a conservative? You don't see any Dems promise to be the reincarnation of Reagan, do you?

Perhaps the only explaination is some freepers seem to get Mike Huckabee and JFK mixed up. One of them was a nanny-stater, big-government, smooth-talking empty suit Elmer Gantry clone who was conservative on just one issue. The other was a fine, patriotic, across the board conservative Governor from Arkansas.

7 posted on 09/10/2008 5:56:55 PM PDT by BillyBoy (Operation Chaos - Phase 1: Hillary Phase 2: Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Kaslin, you are spot on with your threads and posts tonight.

I see this as the biggest source of rot in the Democratic party, and as a result, it is a rot in our political system.

Since the mid-Sixties, the base of the Democratic party has swung so far left that it is beginning to rival and even surpass the sometimes disturbing expressions of liberalism of European liberals like the German Green Party.

It sounds like a broken record, but there is no Scoop Jackson, and there is no John F. Kennedy. And, to my lasting political sorrow, there is no more Zell Miller. (I occasionally listen to his speech in 2004..."Spitballs?" Man o Man. He was the last man out in the Democratic party.

And there won't be any more Zell Millers in that party, either.

One of the things that steams, disgusts and depresses me is to hear the viewpoints of liberals who hold up JFK as a demigod, as they try to surrender our sovereignty and leave people who are depending on us in the lurch by surrendering us to our foes. Sometimes they simply surrender us with their seemingly innate willingness to vacillate and delay, and sometimes they surrender us by actively aiding and abetting our foes.

And then these people will trot out:

"...We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty..."

His words died with him when Zell Miller turned out the lights and left.

11 posted on 09/10/2008 6:27:03 PM PDT by rlmorel (Who is Saul Alinsky and why is Barack Obama is a disciple of his methods?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

bump


12 posted on 09/10/2008 7:26:24 PM PDT by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

JFK might feel at home in today’s GOP, but with his wealth, his incessant womanizing, his poor health and his equally poor choice of brothers and in-laws, the Dominant Media would turn him into a combination John D. Rockefeller and Blue Beard (literally) on steroids.


13 posted on 09/10/2008 11:52:43 PM PDT by pawdoggie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson