Great Jumping Horny Toads! Kennedy Endorses Obama

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Well, you have defined the same reasons why so many feared Kennedy as President in 1959. Missing, though, is a fear based in religion. That was another reason why many saw Kennedy as a poor choice for president.

Oh please do tell. I need to know this before the election.
C'mon -gimme, gimme, gimme.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Oh please do tell. I need to know this before the election.

Bias and ignorance by one who knows only using a conservative agenda is demonstated again.

As usual, classicman knows because he was there in 1959. Oh. He need not be there. Extremist conservative bias is enough to know.

classicman - the day you posted something was not convervative enough for you is the day we know you don't bother to learn before knowing. An intelligent classicman would have been interested in learning those comparison. Classicman's post is a blunt obvious insult. Being a moderate means learning facts before knowing. But classicman knows all about Kennedy because he were there. Did god tell you how to know?

Meanwhile, much of aimeecc's criticisms of Obama were similar criticisms of 1959 John Kennedy. He had no experience. He was a poor Senator. He could not possiblity relate to the poor and downtrodded Hispanics, WV Hillbillies, and negros (the word that was routinely used then). He had no international experience. He grew up in a sheltered, rich kid life. He could not stand up to our enemies (USSR). He was on an ego trip as any rich kid would be. His experience was too limited to find, identify, or know of talented subordinates. Just a few Kennedy criticisms in 1959 - many conclusions justified by accurate facts.

So why are we all alive today?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Bias and ignorance by one who knows only using a conservative agenda is demonstated again. (unfortunately by tw)

As usual, classicman knows because he was there in 1959. Oh. He need not be there. Extremist conservative bias is enough to know.

An intelligent classicman would have been interested in learning those comparison. Classicman's post is a blunt obvious insult. {FALSE}
So why are we all alive today?

*Bold text = my emphasis*

Well now its my turn - no insult was intended nor implied - I actually wanted your insight and perspective on this issue. I was in a rush to post. Now I'm sorry I posted in haste and got nothing more than another indignant response from you. Such a waste.

Thanks for the "intelligent" compliment - ewven though you didn't really mean it

I'm not saying I'll agree with your opinion tw - we all know that, but I am trying to get as much info and perspective from as many sources as possible before I cast another vote.

*Note* Please leave my relationship with God out of your future posts. Its not your place. Also, Kennedy was dead before I was born so the only perspective I have on his legacy is that which I've read, seen on tv or heard from older friends and family who were alive at the time.

Pssst - and just between you and me Tom, I voted for Obama on Tuesday in the primary. Perhaps you would have been able to infer that from some of my other posts (see 46 above for example) instead of just making rash assumptions about me. Let go of whatever bias you have please.

[aimeecc]

Originally Posted by tw

Meanwhile, much of aimeecc's criticisms of Obama were similar criticisms of 1959 John Kennedy. He had no experience. He was a poor Senator. He could not possiblity relate to the poor and downtrodded Hispanics, WV Hillbillies, and negros (the word that was routinely used then). He had no international experience. He grew up in a sheltered, rich kid life. He could not stand up to our enemies (USSR). He was on an ego trip as any rich kid would be. His experience was too limited to find, identify, or know of talented subordinates. Just a few Kennedy criticisms in 1959 - many conclusions justified by accurate facts.
So why are we all alive today?

tw, you should really have read my previous posting on this thread.

First and foremost, Americans have always romanticized the Kennedy presidency. He is the youngest President, the first to skillfully manipulate the media. Beautiful wife, darling children - women wanted him and men wanted to be him. He had incredible approval ratings - never below 50%, and once as high as 80%. However, during his short presidency we had the failed Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missile crisis - the closest we have come to nuclear war. I often wonder if the media had covered his extramarital affairs like they did Clinton if he would have had the same approval ratings and if America would still have the Camelot image. I also don't know if our love affair would have continued had he not been assisinated, and became an old man with serious baggage like the rest of the Presidents. He would have been the one to blame for the Vietnam War.

In truth, Kennedy's depth and experience (or should I say lack of) before Presidency is similar to Obama's. He won because he was able to manipulate the media. He "won" television debates because of his appearance, not his answers. Radio listeners felt Nixon won the debates, not Kennedy, but television viewers saw Nixon as tense and uncomfortable, and deemed Kennedy the winner. He was poetic, speaking of change and service. It was a new message then. Obama has dusted off this campaign trick and is using it wisely. He seems to transcend politics and bring hope to those desparate for a message of hope. But is it real?

So, tw, yes, I know what your saying. And just because he's been endorsed by a couple (not all) Kennedy's (Former Maryland Lieutenant Governor Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, issued a statement in support of Clinton) and because he dusted off JFKs poetry does not mean he will be as great as JFK was during his short Presidency.

And, no, were not alive today because of JFKs leadership. That's stretching his impact.

[tw]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

And, no, were not alive today because of JFKs leadership. That's stretching his impact.

Yes, we are saying the same things with slightly different perspectives. However we are all alive because of what Kennedy did. It is a critical lesson from history.

It was called a 'button' because we launched no nuclear weapons or launched all against every 'enemy' nations. Had Kennedy not put a stop to 'big dic' thinking during the Cuban missile crisis, then we now know he would have had no choice but to push that button. The 1st Marine Division would have been nuked on Cuban beaches by tactical nuclear weapons we did not know existed. We came that close to ending the world as we know it only because 'big dic' thinking was doing anything possible to create what we now know would have been unrestricted 'world wide' nuclear war.

The Cuban Missile Crisis is the perfect example of why 'big dic' thinking - a one-dimensional solution that loves 'big gun' prescriptions - is often a loser's agenda. IOW America needs people with intelligence - not people who know only using one-dimensional political agendas.

We learned 30 years later how close the world changed as we know it. I was not stretching anything. It was Kennedy's leadership that kept us from making that 'world wide nuclear war' mistake.

We came that close to changing our world during those 13 days in October because a strong majority advocated 'big dic' solutions. Another lesson as to why intelligent leaders *always* talk to their enemies - this sentence directed at 'big dic' thinkers here who believe otherwise.

Intelligent leaders see things in perspectives - ignore 'good and evil' thinking. Intelligent leaders work with reality - not myths created by political agendas. Intelligent leaders ask damning questions to avoid traps advocated by 'big dic' thinking. Because Cuba was not invaded, we are all alive today. Scary were the number of Americans (including so many in the Kennedy brain trust) that advocated that 'big dic' trap.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by classicman

Oh please do tell. I need to know this before the election.
C'mon -gimme, gimme, gimme.

There was a fear that a Catholic would be more loyal to the Vatican than to the US.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

There was a fear that a Catholic would be more loyal to the Vatican than to the US.

Today, many religious extremists advocate imposing their religion on all others. Santorum was removed from the Senate because he imposed his religion on Terry Schiavo. Anyone voting for a political leader based upon his religious believes must also want the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, and 30 Years War all over again.

How ironic that people feared Kennedy because he was a Catholic. But now have no problem with religious leaders (ie the Pope) ordering politicians to impose their religious doctrine in American laws. Yes, the Pope has ordered just that. He has ordered American politicians to impose Church doctrine on American laws. Evangelical Christian extremists are doing same.

[lookout123]

Anyone voting for a political leader based upon his religious believes must also want the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, and 30 Years War all over again.

whew! good thing you stopped there, i was afraid you might stoop to hyperbole!

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

There was a fear that a Catholic would be more loyal to the Vatican than to the US.

America vetoed the Morman, maybe we can get a Jew on the ticket.

[glatt]

My wife took our kids out of school and went to the Clinton rally yesterday in Arlington. She has liked Clinton for years. I actually went into a N.O.W. office back in '92 and bought her a "Hillary for President in '96" pin for her birthday because she was such a fan.

She and the kids had to wait in line for a while and get there early to be able to get in. I'm glad the kids went. They learned more at that rally than they would have in school yesterday.

She's trying to convince me to vote for Clinton, but I'm trying to convince her to vote for Obama.

Here's Sen. Clinton being introduced by Arlington Country Sheriff Beth Arthur. See, Clinton is strong with law enforcement.

[glatt]

Notice in the picture above all the young people behind Clinton? They were High School students who were seated behind the stage so they would be in all the pictures. The organizers also invited people to come down to the gym floor and stand in front of the stage "especially young people." They are really trying to appeal to the young folks, but the general population who showed up for the rally were mostly middle aged and older. While waiting around, one guy was talking with Mrs. glatt about when he was a Dukakis supporter and went to one of those ralleys.