Interesting read

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://nymag.com/news/frank-rich/jfk-2011-11/

While I do not agree with all of his comments, this article is well worth the read. I will let you all take a gander and then for those who take the time to read the four pages, we can discuss the merits.

(the article is on the assassination of JFK and the 'hatred' towards him at the time.... and how it relates to Obama and the atmosphere today.)

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Oh wow that was really interesting. I read a review of King's new book in the NY Times' book review last week, and I definitely want to pick it up. Now I am even more interested - I'll pick it up this week. I did know that the atmosphere in Dallas was toxic and strangely comparable to what I have witnessed over my lifetime as our political conversation has become more and more hateful. I only found that out fairly recently though, sometime within the past couple of years. I was pretty shocked by it, naively thinking that this has been a recent phenomenon. Although, that's actually what the smarmy villagers want you to believe - how many times have we had to hear some overpaid idiot wax poetic about the good old days of Ronnie and Tip O'Neil? Speaking of overpaid idiots; would anyone really buy that Chris Matthews book?

Anyway, I do happen to believe that hate speech incites violence.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Cawacko should read this article. I think he'll find it very interesting.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Oh wow that was really interesting. I read a review of King's new book in the NY Times' book review last week, and I definitely want to pick it up. Now I am even more interested - I'll pick it up this week. I did know that the atmosphere in Dallas was toxic and strangely comparable to what I have witnessed over my lifetime as our political conversation has become more and more hateful. I only found that out fairly recently though, sometime within the past couple of years. I was pretty shocked by it, naively thinking that this has been a recent phenomenon. Although, that's actually what the smarmy villagers want you to believe - how many times have we had to hear some overpaid idiot wax poetic about the good old days of Ronnie and Tip O'Neil? Speaking of overpaid idiots; would anyone really buy that Chris Matthews book?

Anyway, I do happen to believe that hate speech incites violence.

I think the atmosphere has become increasingly toxic ever since Clinton was in office. Looking back, the right going after Clinton was tame compared to the far left going after Bush and the far right after Obama. I think it odd that the author skipped over that level of vitriol.

Reagan and O'Neil butted heads all the time and got heated with each other constantly. But where those, like myself, look to those days with fondness is the debates were almost always on POLICY differences. Both would present their ideas/plans and then it was on. Now we have a bunch of gutless wonders on both sides that are afraid to put forth any sort of detailed plan of action. We cannot even get a simple budget passed... in three years... no budget, yet we wonder why things are FUBAR.

No one save the Kennedy worshipers would buy Matthews book. Even the author, who has an obvious fondness for Kennedy (as did most of his generation), recognizes the over-glorification that Matthews spins forth in his book.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

As for King's book.... I was kind of interested in it before reading this article. Now I am definitely going to read it.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

As for King's book.... I was kind of interested in it before reading this article. Now I am definitely going to read it.

Me too. He's a great writer, but I've thought his best work was behind him. I haven't read him in a while. He probably has written more of my all-time favorite books than any author though. This one sounds like something very different for him, but I think he has the talent and the knowledge to pull it off. I'm kind of excited about it now.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I think the atmosphere has become increasingly toxic ever since Clinton was in office. Looking back, the right going after Clinton was tame compared to the far left going after Bush and the far right after Obama. I think it odd that the author skipped over that level of vitriol.

Reagan and O'Neil butted heads all the time and got heated with each other constantly. But where those, like myself, look to those days with fondness is the debates were almost always on POLICY differences. Both would present their ideas/plans and then it was on. Now we have a bunch of gutless wonders on both sides that are afraid to put forth any sort of detailed plan of action. We cannot even get a simple budget passed... in three years... no budget, yet we wonder why things are FUBAR.

No one save the Kennedy worshipers would buy Matthews book. Even the author, who has an obvious fondness for Kennedy (as did most of his generation), recognizes the over-glorification that Matthews spins forth in his book.

Eh, no one elected said much about Bush. You are probably equating message board posts with the actual national dialog. During the Clinton years it was elected officials making these statements. It was insanity. I forget the elected official, I believe a republican senator, who said he couldn't guarantee Clinton's safety if he visited his state. Because the people of his state (it was a southern state) were just so patriotic that they would murder the President of the United States if he showed up there.

IMO there is no way the bush years surpassed the clinton years in hateful dialog from supposedly respectable people in positions of power.

I agree that in our memories though, it started during the Clinton years. Maybe that is because prior to him we had Reagan and Bush and again, that level of hatefulness just wasn't reached? But it was with JFK. I believe it was with LBJ as well, but I will admit quite a bit of that came from the left.

 

[Bfgrn]

Circulated in Dallas Texas, November 21, 1963 by the John Birch crowd...NOW the Birchers are funding the teapublicans and the agenda on the flier has become the teapublican party platform...

When Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, John Kenneth Galbraith wrote that he was relieved that the President had died quickly, fearing the destruction of his wit and intellect as the greater evil.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

And actually I really don't know about the Nixon years. Or Carter. Hard to believe Ford really was capable of riling anyone up very much.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Me too. He's a great writer, but I've thought his best work was behind him. I haven't read him in a while. He probably has written more of my all-time favorite books than any author though. This one sounds like something very different for him, but I think he has the talent and the knowledge to pull it off. I'm kind of excited about it now.

It has been a long time since I had an interest in a new book by King. I am fascinated by the events of the 1960's though. The lives of JFK, RFK and MLK and how they ended have much to teach us, whether you agree with policies promoted by them or not. I would agree that King has the talent to make this work. Given his tendency to tenaciously review topics he writes about, this has the potential to be good. Funny that he takes a shot at the Tea Party though. That part annoys me a bit as it tries to hit on a movement today and correlate it with the hatred in Dallas. He is trying to assign the same level to the Tea Party. He would have been better served to leave today out of it. I know the left loves to paint the Tea Party as a bunch of hate filled lunatics, but quite frankly that is ridiculous.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Yes, I just recently saw that poster. I can't remember if it was a blog or in a book. I was really shocked by that. But later I realized I shouldn't have been. None of us should be. Our history is actually pretty hateful and bloody. We just think everyone got along because many of us were imprinted by the Reagan years. And boy could we all go 50 rounds about that.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

It has been a long time since I had an interest in a new book by King. I am fascinated by the events of the 1960's though. The lives of JFK, RFK and MLK and how they ended have much to teach us, whether you agree with policies promoted by them or not. I would agree that King has the talent to make this work. Given his tendency to tenaciously review topics he writes about, this has the potential to be good. Funny that he takes a shot at the Tea Party though. That part annoys me a bit as it tries to hit on a movement today and correlate it with the hatred in Dallas. He is trying to assign the same level to the Tea Party. He would have been better served to leave today out of it. I know the left loves to paint the Tea Party as a bunch of hate filled lunatics, but quite frankly that is ridiculous.

Well, I don't think so, but it must be hard to admire someone and want to read them while knowing that they really hold opposing views. I give you much credit for doing that. The closest I come is that I still see Clint Eastwood movies because he's a great filmmaker. For the most part I don't patronize conservatives. Of course it's easier for me because cons don't really produce much in the way of art. LOL

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I guess I do buy King's conclusion that there is almost no way the JFK assassination was anything other than Oswald being the lone gunman. But when you look at that time, and as you say, it was a really fascinating time in our history, amazing really...it's hard to believe three such men were all murdered no? Just in a big coincidence? Two Kennedy's and a King. I think that's what fuels the conspiracy theories. All three of them. And what would history look like if none had died, or even if just one hadn't? It's hard to let it go.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

And actually I really don't know about the Nixon years. Or Carter. Hard to believe Ford really was capable of riling anyone up very much.

I can only go by what I read on Nixon and Ford. I would agree Ford didn't really seem capable of pissing anyone off. Nixon in my opinion deserved everything that came at him (and more). But even then, I don't recall reading about anyone going after him with the vitriol we see today. Carter deserved most of what he got as well. I think it infuriated a lot of people that someone who was so clearly intelligent was also so inept in leadership.

I think this is where the Obama/Carter comparisons are on point. Both very intelligent, but both lacking the common sense and business acumen to produce effective policies to overcome the bad economies.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

I can only go by what I read on Nixon and Ford. I would agree Ford didn't really seem capable of pissing anyone off. Nixon in my opinion deserved everything that came at him (and more). But even then, I don't recall reading about anyone going after him with the vitriol we see today. Carter deserved most of what he got as well. I think it infuriated a lot of people that someone who was so clearly intelligent was also so inept in leadership.

I think this is where the Obama/Carter comparisons are on point. Both very intelligent, but both lacking the common sense and business acumen to produce effective policies to overcome the bad economies.

Common sense or courage? I don't know much about Carter, but IMO Obama lacks courage.

 

[Cancel 2016.11]

Well I PM'd Cawacko and told him to look at this thread because he likes this stuff. Hopefully more people will read it, I love conversations about this, but I know it's hard to tear most here away from the big threads about anal sex and whether or not poet is posting on two different boards. That's where all the big thinkers are.

 

[Bfgrn]

I guess I do buy King's conclusion that there is almost no way the JFK assassination was anything other than Oswald being the lone gunman. But when you look at that time, and as you say, it was a really fascinating time in our history, amazing really...it's hard to believe three such men were all murdered no? Just in a big coincidence? Two Kennedy's and a King. I think that's what fuels the conspiracy theories. All three of them. And what would history look like if none had died, or even if just one hadn't? It's hard to let it go.

It is not a ballistic, neurological or anatomically possible Oswald was the lone assassin. And it is only possible when the highest levels of government, particularly the President (LBJ) and the FBI (J Edgar Hoover) decided Oswald was the lone assassin the day after Oswald was killed.

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I guess I do buy King's conclusion that there is almost no way the JFK assassination was anything other than Oswald being the lone gunman. But when you look at that time, and as you say, it was a really fascinating time in our history, amazing really...it's hard to believe three such men were all murdered no? Just in a big coincidence? Two Kennedy's and a King. I think that's what fuels the conspiracy theories. All three of them. And what would history look like if none had died, or even if just one hadn't? It's hard to let it go.

I think that is part of what holds my fascination for the period. That said, I think you also have an element of copycat in the killings of RFK and MLK. Anyone hear NOT know the names Sirhan Sirhan or James Earl Ray?

I think we should never refer to assholes like this by name at least in the mainstream media. Its like those two assholes at Columbine. Their pictures and names plastered all over the news. Suddenly you have an uptick in school shootings. Not only does it glorify (to an extent) the assholes, but it also gives bad ideas to other nuts.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Common sense or courage? I don't know much about Carter, but IMO Obama lacks courage.

Probably a combination of the two. Obama doesn't have a clue when it comes to economics/business. So he is by nature reliant upon those around him and relies WAY too much on what is 'popular' or not with public opinion polls when making his decisions. Similar to how Carter initially went with Volcker's plan only to reverse course the second things started getting tough and public opinion shifted against him.

No way Obama (or anyone in DC) has the spine to do what is necessary to get the economy back on track in an election year. Which is why Obama puts forth 'ideas/plans' he knows the Reps won't go for and then blames them when they don't walk in lock step with his ideas and points to that as the reason he is inept in dealing with the economy.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

It is not a ballistic, neurological or anatomically possible Oswald was the lone assassin. And it is only possible when the highest levels of government, particularly the President (LBJ) and the FBI (J Edgar Hoover) decided Oswald was the lone assassin the day after Oswald was killed.

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

Captain cut and paste strikes again!