The Loss of a Good Man

Bfgrn

New member
Here is a nice op-ed on Sargent Shriver by the NY Times Bob Herbert


R. Sargent Shriver, one of America’s great good men, died this week at the age of 95. He was best known as the brother-in-law of John F. Kennedy. Married for 56 years to Kennedy’s sister, Eunice, who died in 2009, he was also the father of Maria Shriver, the former television personality who is married to Arnold Schwarzenegger. That Mr. Shriver was not better known for his own extraordinary accomplishments, and for his rock-solid commitment to the ideals that this nation ought to stand for, is not just unfortunate, but discouraging.

He was the founding director of the Peace Corps, the signature success of Kennedy’s New Frontier. He founded Head Start, created the Job Corps and Legal Services for the Poor, and gave us Volunteers in Service to America, which was the domestic version of the Peace Corps. He served as president and chairman of the Special Olympics, which was founded by Eunice Shriver. Indefatigable and unrepentantly idealistic, Mr. Shriver may have directly affected more people in a positive way than any American since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

He was the flip side of the cruelty and ugliness that has come to dominate so much of American public life. The U.S. has once again fallen into the hands of the forces who, rather than trying to help, would relieve the middle class and the poor of every last shred of economic security. Not only have millions been thrown out of work, but the squeeze is on to prevent them from getting the safety net assistance that might cushion the awful blow of joblessness.

Public services are being dismantled throughout the republic in the name of austerity — school systems, libraries, police forces, transportation services, and so on. Any talk of raising taxes on the rich is verboten. Shared sacrifice? Not if you’re wealthy.

Sargent Shriver had a different view of America — warmer, richer and more humane. A young Bill Moyers, who joined Mr. Shriver at the Peace Corps and eventually became its deputy director, said a crucial component of the corps was Mr. Shriver’s deep commitment to the idea of America “as a social enterprise ... of caring and cooperative people.”

Here’s an example: In 1964, as leader of the Office of Economic Opportunity in the Johnson administration, Mr. Shriver came across studies that showed connections between poor nutrition, lower I.Q. scores and arrested social and emotional development. He wondered whether early childhood intervention “could have a beneficial effect on the children of poor people.” Head Start followed in incredibly short order.

Mr. Shriver was the point man, the driving force of Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty. Between 1964 and 1968, nearly one of every three poor Americans left the poverty rolls, the largest drop in a four-year period ever recorded. Mr. Shriver’s idealism was not of the dreamy sort. It was geared toward concrete results.

Whole article
 
Here is a nice op-ed on Sargent Shriver by the NY Times Bob Herbert


R. Sargent Shriver, one of America’s great good men, died this week at the age of 95. He was best known as the brother-in-law of John F. Kennedy. Married for 56 years to Kennedy’s sister, Eunice, who died in 2009, he was also the father of Maria Shriver, the former television personality who is married to Arnold Schwarzenegger. That Mr. Shriver was not better known for his own extraordinary accomplishments, and for his rock-solid commitment to the ideals that this nation ought to stand for, is not just unfortunate, but discouraging.

He was the founding director of the Peace Corps, the signature success of Kennedy’s New Frontier. He founded Head Start, created the Job Corps and Legal Services for the Poor, and gave us Volunteers in Service to America, which was the domestic version of the Peace Corps. He served as president and chairman of the Special Olympics, which was founded by Eunice Shriver. Indefatigable and unrepentantly idealistic, Mr. Shriver may have directly affected more people in a positive way than any American since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

He was the flip side of the cruelty and ugliness that has come to dominate so much of American public life. The U.S. has once again fallen into the hands of the forces who, rather than trying to help, would relieve the middle class and the poor of every last shred of economic security. Not only have millions been thrown out of work, but the squeeze is on to prevent them from getting the safety net assistance that might cushion the awful blow of joblessness.

Public services are being dismantled throughout the republic in the name of austerity — school systems, libraries, police forces, transportation services, and so on. Any talk of raising taxes on the rich is verboten. Shared sacrifice? Not if you’re wealthy.

Sargent Shriver had a different view of America — warmer, richer and more humane. A young Bill Moyers, who joined Mr. Shriver at the Peace Corps and eventually became its deputy director, said a crucial component of the corps was Mr. Shriver’s deep commitment to the idea of America “as a social enterprise ... of caring and cooperative people.”

Here’s an example: In 1964, as leader of the Office of Economic Opportunity in the Johnson administration, Mr. Shriver came across studies that showed connections between poor nutrition, lower I.Q. scores and arrested social and emotional development. He wondered whether early childhood intervention “could have a beneficial effect on the children of poor people.” Head Start followed in incredibly short order.

Mr. Shriver was the point man, the driving force of Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty. Between 1964 and 1968, nearly one of every three poor Americans left the poverty rolls, the largest drop in a four-year period ever recorded. Mr. Shriver’s idealism was not of the dreamy sort. It was geared toward concrete results.

Whole article

Sounds like the Right's definition of a country-destroying Socialist!!
 
Oh yes, Sargent Shriver was truly generous -- with taxpayer dollars, of course.

Liberals are, for the most part, well-intentioned folks; but they seem incapable of putting their OWN money where their mouth is...
 
Sounds like the Right's definition of a country-destroying Socialist!!
Do you think the "Peace Corps" is socialist ? Or Head Start ?
Or "Special Olympics".....???

Special Olympics wouldn't even exist if an abortion loving ass like you had his way would it...? Those kids would all be dead.....

You think because he wasn't "cruel and ugly" like todays Democrats makes him a socialist ?
You certainly can't think JFK was a socialist can you ? The "first tax cutter" of what was once my party.....

An early opponent of American involvement in WWII, Shriver was a founding member of the America First Committee, that tried to keep the United States out of the European war.

Shriver volunteered for the Navy saying it was his duty even though he disagreed with the governments policys....


(I guess that sounds like an old version of Bill Clinton to you....)
 
Last edited:
Do you think the "Peace Corps" is socialist ? Or Head Start ?

"The Head Start Program is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families."
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_Start_Program"]Head Start Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Washtenaw_head_start_school_superior_township_michigan.JPG" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Washtenaw_head_start_school_superior_township_michigan.JPG/250px-Washtenaw_head_start_school_superior_township_michigan.JPG"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/0/0e/Washtenaw_head_start_school_superior_township_michigan.JPG/250px-Washtenaw_head_start_school_superior_township_michigan.JPG[/ame]

It's nice to see you don't think helping the less fortunate is Socialism. Good for you! :good4u:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Do you think the "Peace Corps" is socialist ? Or Head Start ?
Or "Special Olympics".....???

Special Olympics wouldn't even exist if an abortion loving ass like you had his way would it...? Those kids would all be dead.....

You think because he wasn't "cruel and ugly" like todays Democrats makes him a socialist ?
You certainly can't think JFK was a socialist can you ? The "first tax cutter" of what was once my party.....

An early opponent of American involvement in WWII, Shriver was a founding member of the America First Committee, that tried to keep the United States out of the European war.

Shriver volunteered for the Navy saying it was his duty even though he disagreed with the governments policys....


(I guess that sounds like an old version of Bill Clinton to you....)
 
"The Head Start Program is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families."
Head Start Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's nice to see you don't think helping the less fortunate is Socialism. Good for you! :good4u:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Maybe they should stop breeding if they cannot afford to take care of their own kids without depending on the the government to provide for them.
 
"The Head Start Program is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families."
Head Start Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's nice to see you don't think helping the less fortunate is Socialism. Good for you! :good4u:

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ESEA - ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965 (by LBJ)

This Web site offers information and resources for how the Elementary and Secondary Act (ESEA) of 1965, reauthorized in 2002 as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, is implemented .....


http://www.ncpublicschools.org/nclb/

Of course because it now, in 2002, had GW Bush's name on it, it was vilified and ridiculed by the real party of NO.......
 
The thing that sets Shriver's programs apart from the wlefare programs LBJ instituted is that Shriver's programs were a hand up, not a hand out.

His involved people in getting themselves out of the situation and towards being productive members of society. Peace Corp & Job Corp required hard work from the participants. Head Start requires participation from the parents.

Yes, they cost tax dollars. But it is not just handing money to the poor. It is teaching them, assisting them, and working towards a goal of them being self-sufficient.
 
The thing that sets Shriver's programs apart from the wlefare programs LBJ instituted is that Shriver's programs were a hand up, not a hand out.

His involved people in getting themselves out of the situation and towards being productive members of society. Peace Corp & Job Corp required hard work from the participants. Head Start requires participation from the parents.

Yes, they cost tax dollars. But it is not just handing money to the poor. It is teaching them, assisting them, and working towards a goal of them being self-sufficient.

You make an excellent point. And I suppose in many cases it pays for itself, as the individuals being given a hand up will go on to find jobs and pay taxes, thereby putting back into the system. This is certainly a better model than that of most government programs.
 
You make an excellent point. And I suppose in many cases it pays for itself, as the individuals being given a hand up will go on to find jobs and pay taxes, thereby putting back into the system. This is certainly a better model than that of most government programs.

When JFK's brother-in law Sargent Shriver accepted LBJ's challenge and took on the 'War on Poverty' the first thing he discovered was rather startling and disturbing. Half of the Americans living in poverty were children. Another large segment were elderly and another segment were mentally and/or physically disabled. So a HUGE segment of the poor fit the TRUE definition of a dependent. So there is an obligation as a civil society to make sure those real dependents are not trampled on or extinguished.

Sargent Shriver hated welfare and had no intention of creating a handout program. He didn't believe in handouts, he believed in opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment. The 'War on Poverty' was called the Office of Economic Opportunity. The core principles were opportunity, responsibility, community and empowerment. The program goals were maximum feasible participation. One of the concepts of empowerment was poor people had a right to one-third of the seats on every local poverty program board, so they had a say in what were the priorities in their community. It was a community based program that focused on education as the keys to the city. Programs such as VISTA, Job Corps, Community Action Program, and Head Start were created to increase opportunity for the poor so they could pull themselves out of poverty with a hand UP, not a hand out. Even when Johnson effectively pulled the plug on the War on Poverty to fund the war in Vietnam, Shriver fought on and won. During the Shriver years more Americans got out of poverty than during any similar time in our history. (The Clinton years - employing the same philosophy - were the second best.)

Ref
 
The Clinton years - employing the same philosophy - were the second best.)

Clinton was a fiscal conservative. Are you acknowledging that conservative policies, such as the welfare-to-work program, lifted people out of poverty? All I've ever heard from those on the far left (such as Michael Moore) is that welfare-to-work was an attack on single mothers, minorities, etc.
 
I noticed something odd about my previous post. I was thanked by Bfgrn, Bravo, and Voltaire.

So this begs the question, if both liberals and conservatives agree with what I said, why can we not find such middle ground on issues?
 
Back
Top