50 years ago: The JFK assassination

posted at 8:41 am on November 22, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Today marks the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, cut down in Dallas in the third year of his term by Lee Harvey Oswald, who like so many other political assassins in history was nothing more than a failed crank, of the communist variety in this case.  Media organizations will offer retrospectives all day long, with replays of their live coverage beginning this afternoon.  This is the relevant part of the CBS News record, in which Walter Cronkite informs the nation (based on confirmation from Dan Rather at the scene) that the President was indeed dead:

To call this a seminal event in American history is a rather large understatement.  The assassination started a turbulent decade of protests and worse, more assassinations — Martin Luther King and Kennedy’s brother Robert among them — and the expansion of what would then be America’s longest war, and its most divisive in a hundred years. One could fill a library of books about the assassination itself, and fill Alcratraz several times over with purported conspirators and ringleaders who supposedly masterminded it.  We could fill another library with books about how the event changed America, mostly for the worse, and what it means today.

I don’t have any recollection of the assassination myself; I was only seven months old when it took place.  I can still understand what people mean when they say that they can always remember exactly where they were when they heard the news.  I have the same connection to the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan 18 years later, which fortunately turned out better for him and for America.  And of course, all of us have that shared sense of memory about 9/11.

Even though I don’t have that connection to today’s event, it is still well worth noting for its cultural and political impact.  Looking at the recollections and the 50-year-old coverage is like looking through a hazy and monochromatic telescope to an America that passed from the scene with the President, if it really existed at all. I’ll miss that coverage as I’ll be doing a show today, but most of it is on YouTube now, and I may watch it this weekend when I have more time.

What do you recall about the assassination? And what do you think it means, 50 years later?

Update: My old friend (and first paying editor!) Ira Stoll has a new book on the subject: JFK, Conservative. Be sure to check it out, on Kindle or audiobook as well.

Update: John Ziegler has an excellent essay on the coverage of the assassination — why it was so good, and what we can learn from it.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 10:12 AM

True. Both Kennedy and Reagan had limitations but both knew the value and importance of America as the leader of the free world.

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 11:17 AM

JFK maintained an incredibly morally squalid life and must have had a weird and lurid universe of enemies beyond the obvious ones.

rrpjr on November 22, 2013 at 11:20 AM

Also, never really got the big deal when JFK Jr died in the plane crash, but maybe it’s because I grew up long after the whole Camelot thing.

nextgen_repub on November 22, 2013 at 11:10 AM

I think, in part the John John plane crash thing is tied to that iconic picture of him saluting during the funeral procession. But the reality is that he died in typical Kennedy arrogance. The usual plane was unavailable so John John took out a plane he really didn’t know how to fly.

You’re right that Gen Xers and younger really don’t get anything but the Kennedy myth and not the man or what he did while in office.

Happy Nomad on November 22, 2013 at 11:23 AM

Speaking of conspiracies, I love this scene from Shooter:

http://videosift.com/video/Levon-Helms-scene-in-Shooter

BuckeyeSam on November 22, 2013 at 11:25 AM

JFK must be tired of being dug up every year at this time and vigorously humped by libtards and the media.

HumpBot Salvation on November 22, 2013 at 11:29 AM

I was 4. I don’t recall the 22nd – the notification of his assassination like I recall those of MLK or RFK. But I do recall the funeral ceremony which was broadcast live in Toronto.

The PR myths around ‘Camelot’ are the measure of when journalism stopped being journalism – when ethics were sold out for a story / meme that had little to do with reality. JFK and the pretty much the entire Kennedy clan were not only placed on a pedestal, but they saw themselves as entitled to be on that pedestal, elitists, pampered princes, where the rules are entirely different for them. In that, they contributed to the state of where we are today with style being far more important than substance, and where the media is little more than a propaganda wing.

To a large extent, JFK and his legacy are overrated. But this also doesn’t warrant ignoring some of the real steps forward that he / his Administration achieved or got us on the path to achieving. Part of his legacy is affected by the fact that the next 4 who would hold that office would be mediocre to bad Presidents. Against that lineup – even average would look good.

Athos on November 22, 2013 at 11:30 AM

The only reason it still gets such high visibility is that it has always been seen as one of the most shocking events during the formative years of the Baby Boom Generation – the most narcissistic generation in history.

Everything is all About Them, so of course, this HAS to be The Most Terrible Thing that Ever Happened in History, Ever.

Tom Servo on November 22, 2013 at 11:33 AM

To his last days Ruby denied shooting Oswald as part of a conspiracy.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Not all the events have to be connected. And, given what we know about JFK’s private life, an awful lot of stuff was known and covered up by somebody.

But whatever the truth, we will never know. The myths have been repeated for so long they hold the same place as truths. It will be the role for historians decades from now to accurately assess JFK’s legacy.

Happy Nomad on November 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM

He was an actor pretending to be a man of substance. It was his birthright handed down from a family of power hungry degenerate criminals.

Buttercup on November 22, 2013 at 10:51 AM

Maybe. He was also this guy

Monday, August 2, 1943 – On night patrol, PT 109 was rammed by a Japanese destroyer, killing two of the 13 crewmen. Jack rescued a nearly drowned crewman with bad burns, dragging him out of the water onto the floating hulk. In the process, Jack swallowed a lot of sea water and gasoline and would suffer lifelong stomach problems.

12 hours later they abandoned the wreckage of PT 109 and swam for a nearby island using a makeshift raft built from pieces of the boat. Jack swam while towing the burned crewman for four hours. That night Jack Kennedy swam out with a lantern and a pistol hoping to flag any patrolling PT boats, but was unsuccessful.

They moved to a larger island nearby, with Jack once again towing the injured crewman. Jack made two more attempts to flag PT boats without success. The men lived on coconut milk and rainwater until they eventually made contact with friendly natives. Jack carved a rescue message into a coconut husk which made its way back to the Navy and the crew of PT 109 was rescued by PT boats.

Jack spent a total of nine months in the South Pacific. After PT 109, he commanded a gunboat, the 59, but saw little combat. He returned to the states, then underwent surgery for his back problems.

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Marking the 50-year anniversary is one thing, but the Dems have gone full WELLSTONE!WELLSTONE!

Again.

Christien on November 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I remember how happy some of my Dem neighbors were when Reagan was shot. Their kids were in our faces IMMEDIATELY, laughing and saying they were disappointed he didn’t die.

Christien on November 22, 2013 at 11:37 AM

It’s very fitting that verbaluce shows up in this thread to display their historical ignorance.

It’s symbolically appropriate to have a liberal with a tenuous grasp of history commenting in a JFK thread (even if their factually incorrect statements refer to Reagan).

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM

If – as liberals are wont to claim – that JFK was really killed by the atmosphere of hate fostered by the right then how do they explain the assassination attempt on Reagan? Or is this a double standard?\

/rhetorical

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 11:44 AM

The only reason it still gets such high visibility is that it has always been seen as one of the most shocking events during the formative years of the Baby Boom Generation – the most narcissistic generation in history.

Everything is all About Them, so of course, this HAS to be The Most Terrible Thing that Ever Happened in History, Ever.

Tom Servo on November 22, 2013 at 11:33 AM

It also provides them an opportunity to whitewash the Democrat politics of the era behind the “Camelot” facade.

JFK was a despicable person and a mediocre president who pushed a lot of what are today conservative policies. But as typical for a Democrat for his era he was squeamish about civil rights legislation.

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 11:48 AM

I was a very young 12 years old in the 7th grade 5th period French lab class when the announcement came over the loudspeaker that Kennedy had been shot. We all went on to the last class, 6th period, And, then, it was announced over the loud speaker that Kennedy was indeed dead. I remember my English teacher holding back tears. Frankly, I was just dumbfounded…………. in somewhat of a daze. Things like this did not happen in America. It was a loss of innocence. The 1960s seemed to unravel after that.

For the record, It is my conviction that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. The conspiracy nuts are just that, nuts.

SC.Charlie on November 22, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Remember: AFTER JFK’s PT boat got sunk – and you can criticize him for negligence if you want – he went BACK into duty and went into action with another boat. He could have used his family connections to go stateside. But he didn’t.

Those were pretty flimsy boats. One shell from a destroyer and POOF, gone.

He piloted that boat in a lot of very dangerous action.

The man was courageous, don’t you think otherwise.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Who cares?

Seriously. I am so sick and tired of the JFK fetish and the JFK assassination fetish.

JFE was not a good person nor a good president. He isn’t a hero or a saint. Stop giving this time and energy.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 11:53 AM

Who cares?

Okay, nobody is forcing you to read it or follow the story.

I agree there’s a little bit of “Baby Boomer” romanticizing going on. Well, more than a little.

But a lot of people who were alive at the time see if differently. And it’s a story worth covering and a major event in the modern history of this country that warrant attention.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 11:56 AM

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM

that’s great to the extent any of it is factual. I’m a little hesitant to believe everything we are told about that escapade – just as I’m hesitant to believe everything we are told about Chappaquidick.

Regardless, even if he acted properly (not heroically mind you – he did his duty as a Navy officer in the description provided. Let’s not forget the Kennedy PR machine was already in full swing) plenty of other men and women did far more heroic deeds in WWII.

And, those actions don’t make him a good person or a good president.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM

It’s very fitting that verbaluce shows up in this thread to display their historical ignorance.

It’s symbolically appropriate to have a liberal with a tenuous grasp of history commenting in a JFK thread (even if their factually incorrect statements refer to Reagan).

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Proggies like verbaldouche learn their history from Zinn’s book of historical unsourced anecdotes.

slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Okay, nobody is forcing you to read it or follow the story.

I agree there’s a little bit of “Baby Boomer” romanticizing going on. Well, more than a little.

But a lot of people who were alive at the time see if differently. And it’s a story worth covering and a major event in the modern history of this country that warrant attention.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Nobody is forcing you to read my comment either.

The point is that this “newsworthy” event is covered constantly. Every year we get inundated with it. And, even when it isn’t the anniversary, there are always Kennedy stories in the news.

Far more significant events have been covered much, much, much, much less.

The problem is baby boomers and media/liberals have a fetish for their boy-king Kennedy. You people need to get over it. It happened, move on. For god’s sake, the holocaust receives less coverage than this dishonest philanderer’s death. He gave a couple of good speeches and almost started WWIII. He was not a good president. He did nothing significant. His assassination, despite what Boomers tell themselves, did not change the world.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 12:01 PM

I was sitting in my seventh grade social studies class. I remember somebody screaming down the hall; it was another, female, teacher, who,.like quite a few of mine, was an Irish Catholic. (The others were mostly Jewish or German, reflecting the characteristic New York ethnic mix.) I think people forget that Kennedy’s presidency was a celebration of the assimilation of non-WASPs (the white ones anyway) so that part of the shock over his murder probably derived from a fear that the country might unravel; as, to an extent, it has. Of course much of subsequent cultural history had less to do with Kennedy’s murder than with plain demographics. But for me personally the tale of a ruthless, fanatically driven father and his obedient children who end up as doomed successes has a particularly poignant flavor, as if all Americans partake of an alchemy once reserved for royalty.

Seth Halpern on November 22, 2013 at 12:02 PM

And, those actions don’t make him a good person or a good president.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Recall the accusations made about GHW Bush and his plane being shot down. He screwed it up…his buddy died because of Bush etc.

There is no doubt that JFK did his duty. Or Joe Jr. I don’t think anyone would question that.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Seth Halpern on November 22, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Very well put. Very much an American story. Including Oswald.

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 12:05 PM

And, those actions don’t make him a good person or a good president.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Recall the accusations made about GHW Bush and his plane being shot down. He screwed it up…his buddy died because of Bush etc.

There is no doubt that JFK did his duty. Or Joe Jr. I don’t think anyone would question that.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 12:04 PM

And we’re better off for them having done their duty.

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 12:06 PM

Dallas didn’t kill Kennedy. A leftwing communist nutball killed him. Stop blaming Dallas for the poison that is leftist thinking.

neyney on November 22, 2013 at 12:11 PM

I was in my second grade classroom at Brennen Elem in Columbia SC when the announcement came over the intercom. Miss Bell started weeping, but still gently marshaled all of us students out to the schoolyard to send everyone home. I remember feeling her sadness and fear as I rode my bike home with the early release from school.

I knew my Dad hated Kennedy (I think mostly over the Bay of Pigs and Castro), but when he came home from work, he held up the afternoon newspaper with the giant headlines taking up the entire above-the-fold area saying “Kennedy Assassinated”. I still remember that paper clearly. He was pretty sober about it, and tried to assure us 5 kids everything was going to be alright. All the next week we were all glued to the tube and it was all sadness. It was surreal.

Harbingeing on November 22, 2013 at 12:15 PM

A fount of wrongness:

To his last days Ruby denied shooting Oswald as part of a conspiracy.

Certainly seemed alive enough here

And it’s just not there. Ferrie?

Yeah, it’s not as if they had had worked together or something.

That’s a reach. Oswald was pro-Castro and Ferrie anti-Castro. The two don’t mix.
SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 11:17 AM

You’d have to try telling that to the two official US investigations:
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS OF THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES -
“The committee believed that Lee Harvey Oswald’s verified association with anti-Castro Cubans while living in New Orleans during 1963, together with his possible contacts with other anti-Castro activists, further enhanced the possibility of the involvement of anti-Castro elements in the assassination.”
WARREN COMMISSION -
“On August 5, he visited a store managed by Carlos Bringuier, a Cuban refugee and avid opponent of Castro and the New Orleans delegate of the Cuban student directorate. Oswald indicated an interest in joining the struggle against Castro. He told Bringuier that he had been a marine and was trained in guerrilla warfare, and that he was willing not only to train Cubans to fight Castro but also to join the fight himself.” (Page 728, appendix)”

Unless, of course, you mean this Lee Harvey Oswald, the one whom the CIA claimed visited the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City? If you do, I’d like to talk with you about a certain bridge I have for sale.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Nobody is forcing you to read my comment either.

Yes, but I wasn’t the one who said “who cares”. If I said “who cares” about your comment and then commented on it I’d be in your position.

And again: it was a major event in the modern history of this
country. Most of these past commemorations were one day coverage. Hardly excessive.

The 50th will obviously have greater coverage.

If you read the accounts by the people who were there and are still alive, they talk about the significance. That’s worth listening to.

Or not. It’s your call.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

He also almost started WWIII, was an unmitigated disaster in almost every foreign policy endeavor he tried, and unfortunately, personally was not a very good human being. I note his courage in WWII, and even that was trumped up, and I doubt anyone here would have loved to have traded places with him there.

He understood the danger of govt regulation on business but then acted often times in direct contradiction to that fact.

He was a below average president with a beautiful wife and charming little kids who was our first media president – style over substance.

It is unfortunate that he was another of our presidents gunned down by those opposed to him. But I feel no special bond for him because he was the last successfully assassinated president. The continued love of this president, while we continue to forget what real character and service to our country of Presidents who were much better men, whether you agreed with their policies or not, is frustrating to me. He is owed no special rememberance. And the pure evil that sprung from the family more than overshadows any nominally good things they may have done.

A pox on the House of Kennedy.

Zomcon JEM on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

For his presidency and subsequent legacy, assignation was the only option.
And, watching the liberal c-jerk and the heebs on our side getting all nostalgic and teary eyed, priceless.
Pass the Texas bbq, man,

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

I was a few months short of my 8th birthday when Kennedy was assassinated. I was in Catholic school at the time. They made announcements over the PA system. We sat at our desks and prayed.

dissent555 on November 22, 2013 at 12:18 PM

Chris of Rights on November 22, 2013 at 9:08 AM

I agree completely. I’m 44 and I don’t give a damn about this. To me all these articles and crap on him only verifies my observations of the self-absorption of baby boomers.

JFK only did two things of note… stood firm on the Cuban missile crisis (which those who traditionally honor him would NEVER do now), and suggesting we go to the moon (been there, done that… now what?)

Give it a rest already.

dominigan on November 22, 2013 at 12:19 PM

For his presidency and subsequent legacy, assignation was the only option.
And, watching the liberal c-jerk and the heebs on our side getting all nostalgic and teary eyed, priceless.
Pass the Texas bbq, man,

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

And what’s ironic is that those getting teary-eyed now have more ideologically in common with his shooter than him.

dominigan on November 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS OF THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES -
“The committee believed that Lee Harvey Oswald’s verified association with anti-Castro Cubans while living in New Orleans during 1963, together with his possible contacts with other anti-Castro activists, further enhanced the possibility of the involvement of anti-Castro elements in the assassination.”
WARREN COMMISSION

This is the second time you’ve done this. And the second time you leave out the rest of the story. Both the HSCA and the Warren Commission found no evidence of any involvement of anti-Castro Cubans in the assassination.

None.

And the Bringuier contact was a ruse by Oswald to infiltrate the anti-Castro group.

Oswald, a self-avowed Marxist, killed JFK.

That is what both every investigation by the government into the assassination has reported.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM

He was also this guy
kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 11:34 AM

While it’s admirable he served his country I’m not inclined to believe one fairytale over another. Most of the positive press written about this family was nothing more than propaganda and lies. With such excessive tales of grandiosity it’s impossible to determine fact from fiction. Curious what source were you citing from?

Buttercup on November 22, 2013 at 12:22 PM

And what’s ironic is that those getting teary-eyed now have more ideologically in common with his shooter than him.

dominigan on November 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM

And they don’t even know it. And they get away with painting everyone else with blame and hatred.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 12:22 PM

I was in my second grade classroom at Brennen Elem in Columbia SC when the announcement came over the intercom. Miss Bell started weeping, but still gently marshaled all of us students out to the schoolyard to send everyone home. I remember feeling her sadness and fear as I rode my bike home with the early release from school.

I knew my Dad hated Kennedy (I think mostly over the Bay of Pigs and Castro), but when he came home from work, he held up the afternoon newspaper with the giant headlines taking up the entire above-the-fold area saying “Kennedy Assassinated”. I still remember that paper clearly. He was pretty sober about it, and tried to assure us 5 kids everything was going to be alright. All the next week we were all glued to the tube and it was all sadness. It was surreal.

Harbingeing on November 22, 2013 at 12:15 PM

I was in fifth grade – we found out from a classmate who had just come back to the room after having been in the school office. Everyone thought it was a sick joke until the teacher came in a few minutes later, confirmed it and then we were sent home.
Like you, I remember watching all the coverage. We kept the newspaper with it’s big headline, I think one of my bro’s has it in his stuff.
The year before, in the fall, we had seen JFK when he was in town for some political thingee. It seemed so strange to think he was now gone, in an instant.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 12:24 PM

He was a leader for a significant part of the American people. On some level we need to be able to embrace all of America.

That includes the people who consider Kennedy to be their political hero and Reagan to be the devil.

As well as those who consider Reagan to be political hero and Kennedy to be a devil.

To be an American is to be able to embrace all of our history and say I see myself.

kcewa on November 22, 2013 at 12:25 PM

Unless, of course, you mean this Lee Harvey Oswald, the one whom the CIA claimed visited the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City? If you do, I’d like to talk with you about a certain bridge I have for sale

Oswald did go to the Cuban and Soviet Embassies in Mexico City. That’s a fact.

The HSCA went to Mexico City and interviewed the Cuban and Soviet officials. All said the person they saw was Oswald.

Robert Blakey was the chief counsel for the HSCA: “We obtained from the Cuban officials the visa application, with his photograph on it and his signature. We verified that it was Oswald’s signature. Oswald, therefore, was in Mexico City.”

And one more: Marina Oswald, his wife, said he told her about his visit to Mexico City.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:25 PM

It’s a sad state of affairs that our media suddenly rediscover their craft…over a 50-year-old story that has already been covered ad nauseum.

Fortunately, the feeling will pass for them, they will forget their craft again, and go back to ignoring major stories of today.

Christien on November 22, 2013 at 12:26 PM

People … including such supposed conservative voices like Limbaugh and Medved… along with the entire supine media …should stop convicting Lee Harvey Oswald of a crime he remains innocent of without a trial.

No one was ever convicted of the JFK assassination.

We are supposed to respect the basic right of any American to be presumed innocent until convicted in a court of law.

Not railroad people for political gain.

profitsbeard on November 22, 2013 at 12:29 PM

Both the HSCA and the Warren Commission found no evidence of any involvement of anti-Castro Cubans in the assassination.

The question at hand here is not about Cuban involvement, but rather if Oswald was involved in anti-Commie activity. As the investigation clearly stated, he was. It’s a matter of historical record.

And the Bringuier contact was a ruse by Oswald to infiltrate the anti-Castro group.
SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM

A double agent? I’m not sure ya really wanna run too far with that, but more power to you anyway.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 12:33 PM

From the PBS Frontline show on Oswald, “Who was Oswald?”

PBS NARRATOR: [T]here is much evidence that the real Oswald was in Mexico City. At the Soviet embassy, all three KGB officers told FRONTLINE the man they met was the real Lee Harvey Oswald, not the man in the photograph the CIA released.

Soviet Embassy Official Valeriy KOSTIKOV: [through interpreter] No, this is a completely different person. The Oswald who had visited our embassy and whose photographs I saw in many newspapers and on T.V. was completely different.

Cuban Embassy Staffer Slvian DURAN: The day after the assassination, in the Mexican newspapers were a photo of Oswald and I said to my husband, “I’m sure that this is the man who went to us for a visa.” So I went to the embassy and I look up the applications and I saw his application and it was the same one.

Mr. BLAKEY: We obtained from the Cuban officials the visa application, with his photograph on it and his signature. We verified that it was Oswald’s signature. Oswald, therefore, was in Mexico City.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Dems are just bummed that Death of A President wasn’t a documentary.

Christien on November 22, 2013 at 12:35 PM

I have been having some fun with my old lib/lefty comrades by posing the following question:

Which version of the JFK assassination do you prefer:

The Warren Commission/Oswald as Lone Gunman Version

or

The Leftist Oliver Stone JFK Movie Homosexual Cabal Version

Heh.

Bruno Strozek on November 22, 2013 at 12:36 PM

For his presidency and subsequent legacy, assignation was the only option.
And, watching the liberal c-jerk and the heebs on our side getting all nostalgic and teary eyed, priceless.
Pass the Texas bbq, man,

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

And what’s ironic is that those getting teary-eyed now have more ideologically in common with his shooter than him.

dominigan on November 22, 2013 at 12:20 PM

I accidentally clicked on the ‘actual radio feed for that day’ on I heart radio trying to get back to Rush. It was not even two seconds in before they were whining about those pesky republicans and their hate of protocol. And, that the secret service was crawling all over Dallas…blah blah blah. Should’ve been checking out the Marxist communist instead of the republicans.
I take pleasure that it is unseasonably cold in Dallas today and they had a pretty hefty thunderstorm last night. I hope the sycophant media freezes their commie as$es off.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 12:37 PM

It’s a sad state of affairs that our media suddenly rediscover their craft…over a 50-year-old story that has already been covered ad nauseum.

You really can’t blame them on this one, as everyone who was old enough to remember the JFK killing usually does have a vivid memory of it. Also, this is the half-century mark.

Fortunately, the feeling will pass for them, they will forget their craft again, and go back to ignoring major stories of today.
Christien on November 22, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Yup, true enough.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 12:38 PM

The Leftist Oliver Stone JFK Movie Homosexual Cabal Version
Heh.
Bruno Strozek on November 22, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Which, as a bonus burn, tags Dem LBJ as the villain behind it all. Heh.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 12:42 PM

His assassination, despite what Boomers tell themselves, did not change the world.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 12:01 PM

Since you’re obviously too young and self-absorbed to understand what the world was like before you were born, maybe a little context would help you. In 1963, we were barely out of the golden age of radio, and television had only begun really proliferating into a large number of homes. Nightly TV news had only begun to gather entire families every night around Walter Cronkite at the dinner table. It’s how a 7-year old kid knew anything at all about the news or what his dad thought about Kennedy, Kruschev, and Castro.

This assassination was the first real-time, nationally-televised event of brutal, ugly violence and tragic national loss in history. It was so sudden and violent that it utterly smashed the innocence and cultural sensibilities of the entire postwar ’50′s Ozzy & Harriet generation in ways that still aren’t fully appreciated. It destabilized the entire culture, which history shows quickly unraveled and degraded throughout the ’60s and beyond. It was the first 9/11-level trauma live TV media event in history.

Harbingeing on November 22, 2013 at 12:49 PM

It was the first 9/11-level trauma live TV media event in history.

Excellent post and summary of how the event affected the country.

It was an earthquake. The changes in America were enormous.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:52 PM

There is no doubt that JFK did his duty. Or Joe Jr. I don’t think anyone would question that.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I don’t question his bravery or his duty. There is, however, one question that I would love to hear the answer to. I never will because everyone who could answer it is dead. They probably wouldn’t tell me anyway. The night that the destroyer cut the 109 in two, where was the deck watch and what was he doing?

Oldnuke on November 22, 2013 at 1:01 PM

I was in 2nd grade at my Lutheran School and the phone rang in the narthex. It was my mother calling the teacher with the news. A television was brought in and we watched until school was let out, then my brothers and I went to deliver the evening newspaper with the hugest font headline I ever saw, KENNEDY ASSASSINATED all caps and bold type…
I’ll be glad when this day is over and all of the remembering is done.

OmahaConservative on November 22, 2013 at 1:01 PM

Harbingeing on November 22, 2013 at 12:49 PM

It was the first 9/11-level trauma live TV media event in history.

Excellent post and summary of how the event affected the country.

It was an earthquake. The changes in America were enormous.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Why do I get the feeling the two of you are clutching authentic JFK boxers you procured on EBay while breathlessly watching the ongoing coverage? You took the day off from work for it, didn’t you?
Guys, some people just don’t care as much as you clearly do and we too are allowed an opinion as well.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 1:04 PM

Guys, some people just don’t care as much as you clearly do and we too are allowed an opinion as well.

Ed and AP run the site; I don’t. Post whatever you want. They’ll decide. No one is stopping you from saying whatever you want. I find it odd that people will write that they don’t care about a subject. If you don’t care, don’t write.

In any case, it’s not what I think – I wasn’t alive – it was what the people who were alive think.

Do you not understand, for example, the enormous changes in news coverage of events the assassination made? It was the first major TV event covered live. After the assassination TV took over for print as the primary source for people’s information.

Try to read and listen to what other people say the event meant to them and to the country.

You don’t need to listen to me.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:10 PM

I was in the 7th grade. I think it was the 3rd or 4th period when the school announced over the intercomm that the president had been shot. I was so into where I was at that I thought they meant the school class president at first.

Being way out west in Oregon and being so young I did not care about politics so it is difficult to project from then, the effects today. I didn’t hold JFK to any particular high place of importance other than he was president. I remember when he was elected we had a mock election at school and I voted for Nixon. There was a catholic church and school built next to my house that took away some great fields/small woods for exploring in so I didn’t like catholics very much then.

Looking back there was a lot of myth and such created after he died that did not really go along with the facts. But he was inspiring and I think was a patriotic American. It is hard to believe Democrats have gone so far left since then.

TerryW on November 22, 2013 at 1:12 PM

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Whatever you say, fanboy. But, thank you for proving my point.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I was seven years-old at St. Catherine’s School. I could hear the nuns running around the hallways crying. Finally, our nun, still crying, came in to tell us the news while we prayed.

When I see replays of it, I can remember watching every minute of it live 50 years ago. My mother got very mad at me when she caught me putting water on my face so that I could fit-in with everyone else who were crying. I was sad but didn’t have the emotional maturity and attachment level for tears.

I think the real innocence lost event for me was watching Oswald being killed live on TV.

HellCat on November 22, 2013 at 1:13 PM

He was not a good president. He did nothing significant. His assassination, despite what Boomers tell themselves, did not change the world.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 12:01 PM

All of that is true, though his death did change this country, for the worse. Johnson and his party used the tragedy of his murder to springboard their agenda, giving us the Kennedy brain trust’s Great Society, which we are still grappling with today, and which is still being expanded upon, by Democrat and Republican. Obamacare expands it yet further, to our economic detriment. Thanks Oswald.

rickv404 on November 22, 2013 at 1:13 PM

I remember watching the funeral on TV in Houston,Tx. and I remember my mother telling us those children lost their father and that he was the President of the United States. She had tears in her eyes…and was silently praying the rosary.

workingclass artist on November 22, 2013 at 1:16 PM

This assassination was the first real-time, nationally-televised event of brutal, ugly violence and tragic national loss in history. It was so sudden and violent that it utterly smashed the innocence and cultural sensibilities of the entire postwar ’50′s Ozzy & Harriet generation in ways that still aren’t fully appreciated. It destabilized the entire culture, which history shows quickly unraveled and degraded throughout the ’60s and beyond. It was the first 9/11-level trauma live TV media event in history.

Harbingeing on November 22, 2013 at 12:49 PM

The assassination didn’t destabilize the culture. Progressives marching through all the institutions and the sexual revolution did that.

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 1:17 PM

The night that the destroyer cut the 109 in two, where was the deck watch and what was he doing?

Oldnuke on November 22, 2013 at 1:01 PM

The destroyer appeared out of thin air. And those stupid Japanese didn’t even feel it when they ran that PT boat over.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 1:21 PM

If Kennedy would not have died he wouldn’t even have been re-elected.

Still, he was a patriot and a D, compared to the thugs who rule the land today. See the last picture and the comments too. It’s dated but things only got waaaaay worse since then.

Schadenfreude on November 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM

At the risk of sounding like A Paulnut, I have to mention that he had the South Vietnamese ruler murdered like a week earlier and was in bed with the Mafia trying to kill Castro. I am not happy that he was killed by any means, but it is a little bit over the top to scream and shriek when Karma shows up.

Southernblogger on November 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM

Schadenfreude on November 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM

That right there is funny.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM

It was the first 9/11-level trauma live TV media event in history.

Excellent post and summary of how the event affected the country.
SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Gotta agree with you on that one. It was a good summary and I think Harbingeing made a key point that to really grasp the times and import, you had to have been around. There was no immediate news let alone texting, Twitter Facebook, etc to let people know what was going on – excluding the the live televised shooting of Oswald, of course. People actually “read all about it” in the papers in the extra evening edition and the next morn.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM

I was only 3 at the time. I only remember my family gathered in darkness around the TV in the downstairs playroom. LBJ is the first President in my memory. I vividly remember that awful spring of 1968 with MLK and RFK. I was so excited that spring to see my brother graduate from high school but the events right before commencement made me feel the whole world was spinning out of control. Between the assassinations, Vietnam, and my brother turning 18 (and draft eligible), my mother had a nervous breakdown.

teacherman on November 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:10 PM

Whatever you say, fanboy. But, thank you for proving my point.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 1:13 PM

You know what, I apologize to you Steve and to Harbenging. I might not care, but you have do e your homework and you seem to know your stuff. Everyone has their thing and in a historical eye, I can appreciate that.
So, please accept my apology. Enjoy the day.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 1:27 PM

I think JFK was a mediocre president at best. His policies were mostly bottled up in Congress and it was a presidency of style over substance.

And his private behavior was disgusting.

The fact that I think his death had a significant effect on American society doesn’t mean I like him or thought he was great.

I just read and listen to what others who were alive at the time say. And think about what followed his death.

And conclude that his assassination led to some major changes in the country.

Again: that doesn’t mean I’m a Kennedy idolator.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:29 PM

At the risk of sounding like A Paulnut, I have to mention that he had the South Vietnamese ruler murdered like a week earlier
Southernblogger on November 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM

I remember some adults at the time saying they thought Madame Nhu had something to do with it due to some comments she had made beforehand, after her husband was killed.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 1:30 PM

gwelf on November 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Proggies like verbaldouche learn their history from Zinn’s book of historical unsourced anecdotes.

slickwillie2001 on November 22, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Haven’t read Zinn.
Or Glenn Beck.
Sue me.

Reagan bios I’d recommend (all imperfect but worthy) –
Lou Cannon’s telling of his Governorship is excellent, as well as his ‘Role Of A Lifetime’.
Didn’t like Edmund Morris’ weird one too much – but one of the best as far as young Reagan.
The best read though is the diaries Brinkley edited.
Rawhide Down is riveting…less about Reagan than those around him.
Although a tad too defensive, D’Souza’s bio is a pretty good insider telling. Googly eyed, but at times understandably so.
(This was written before D’Souza descended into nutsville.)

Kennedy I’ve read less on – got a lot from Caro’s LBJ books.
It can be argued there isn’t as much to say/read/learn about JFK as there is RR…or LBJ.

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 1:34 PM

So, please accept my apology. Enjoy the day.

No problem. Apology accepted.

Hey, we’re all just giving our opinions. Nothing is written in stone.

My view isn’t just what I think were the consequences of the assassination; it’s what people who were alive say.

And it’s what they think and believe, how they changed as people, that is the point.

We can dismiss them as sort of romanticizing the past. We all do that. Times always seemed better when we were younger.

But think of what happened after his death. Some of that wasn’t related to his assassination, of course; but I think some of it was. It certainly changed how the media covered events. It certainly led to LBJ’s “Great Society” programs many of which never would have passed under JFK. And Vietnam? Who knows.

America changed after November 22, 1963 and not because I think JFK was some great president.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:39 PM

I think JFK was a mediocre president at best. His policies were mostly bottled up in Congress and it was a presidency of style over substance.

You should check out the book “JFK, Conservative” Ed links to above. JFK was probably more conservative than the candidates the GOP have offered up after Reagan. Of course, that’s not saying much.
Another factor, he wasn’t in office for even one full term so he didn’t have much time to set down a long term record.

And his private behavior was disgusting.
SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 1:29 PM

Back then the press kept it secret as they did with his health and drug issues. It wasn’t public knowledge that he was a sex addict. Young boys like me only knew what we saw on TV and from reading PT109.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 1:40 PM

But you’re deluded if you think someone with Reagan’s record would get a rousing welcome at CPAC. Maybe if you keep his record but call him, let’s see, Raynold Rogon you could better imagine it.

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM

I’ve personally seen Chris Christie get a rousing welcome at CPAC. And he is and has always been far to the left of Reagan.

People that think Reagan couldn’t get support today have conveniently forgotten the nominations of Romney, McCain, even GWB. All three of which were well known moderates. GWB successfully tacked to the right with his “compassionate conservativism” in election years. The other two were never able to pretend to be anything other than moderates.

Chris of Rights on November 22, 2013 at 1:48 PM

I was in gym class, in the 2nd grade. They piped in the radio over the school PA system. I saw Oswald get shot on live TV. I told my mom, she was ironing clothes. She said No honey, they already shot him. I said no, they shot him again. She said Oh my God! That was when I started reading newspapers.

birdwatcher on November 22, 2013 at 1:53 PM

“Paultard!” Southernblogger on November 22, 2013 at 1:22 PM

No, it wasn’t JFK who ordered the assassination of US/CIA puppet Ngo Dinh Diem, President of Vietnam (1955-1963) — who makes Karzai look good in comparison, btw.

JFK ordered the financing of the corrupt regime pulled. The CIA did the rest, going too far assassinating him against explicit CinC orders. Complicated string of events ends up placing the onus of blame on Nixon and Dulles for the fabrication to relocate blame for the crime.

I read these links below after Steyn’s “Ghost” entry this morning.

http://tinyurl.com/daxtwo
Sparks Notes

http://tinyurl.com/k7qadh7
History Commons

1971
Mid-September
President Nixon’s aides have diligently tried to find evidence linking former President John F. Kennedy to the 1963 assassinations of South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem and his brother, Ngo Dinh Nhu (see June 17, 1971), but have been unsuccessful. “Plumber” E. Howard Hunt (see July 7, 1971) has collected 240 diplomatic cables between Washington, DC, and Saigon from the time period surrounding the assassinations, none of which hint at any US involvement in them. White House aide Charles Colson, therefore, decides to fabricate his own evidence. Using a razor blade, glue, and a photocopier, Colson creates a fake “cable” dated October 29, 1963, sent to the US embassy in Saigon from the Kennedy White House. It reads in part, “At highest level meeting today, decision reluctantly made that neither you nor Harkin [apparently a reference to General Paul Harkins, the commander of US forces in Vietnam at the time] should intervene on behalf of Diem or Nhu in event they seek asylum.”

maverick muse on November 22, 2013 at 1:54 PM

I remember some adults at the time saying they thought Madame Nhu had something to do with it due to some comments she had made beforehand, after her husband was killed.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 1:30 PM

Right. That may or not be true but there is no doubt that JFK was not the hope n change Messiah he is portrayed as. I am not about besmirchig the man, I am simply saying there is a lot of mythology there.

Southernblogger on November 22, 2013 at 1:57 PM

I think this is a great opportunity to remind Democrats of all the things JFK stood for – lower taxes, strong military, American exceptionalism, anti-communist, all the things Democrats today hate. Direct quote from JFK – “a rising tide lifts all boats.” I really love reminding libs of that.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/JFK-in-History/JFK-on-the-Economy-and-Taxes.aspx

mbs on November 22, 2013 at 1:57 PM

Yes – it was a massive event. But outside of the currents of DC legislation moving, long term it was not a part of the destabilization moving through the US. The seeds had already been sown. This was merely a tragic event during the beginning of the tumultuous 60s as the baby boomers – as the most narcisstic self absorbed generation in the history of the world – started coming of age.

This was a bad day – and TV captured it relatively well – yet even then it was orchestrated by Kennedy’s family and Jackie for maximum effect. His presidency went out the way it came in – style, style, style and very little else. Those who read more into it than that were and are merely caught up in the self absorption of our times.

His memory is kept alive by the dem party for purely political reasons.

Zomcon JEM on November 22, 2013 at 2:02 PM

I remember as an 8 yr old third grader having to lay our heads down on our desks when the news came. We were sent home early that day and if I recall correctly school was cancelled for a day or 2. This was a tiny school in the Navajo res of southern Utah. I remember watching on our b&w tv all the people filing past the casket. A sad time in America’s history indeed.
I think the most important thing JFK did for America was his vision of putting an American on the moon. Who knows but maybe because of what happened on 11/22/1963 the country became more resolved to accomplish his vision.

Fred

jrsrigmvr on November 22, 2013 at 2:04 PM

Hah! A friend called me to bitch that her soap was interrupted with the ‘breaking news’ of fifty years ago…

OmahaConservative on November 22, 2013 at 2:06 PM

I was in the 2nd grade at a Catholic school in Detroit. The announcement came over the loud speaker that the President was injured in Texas. My image of Texas was of cowboys and cattle, probably from a kid’s puzzle map of the US where each state had an identifying feature, and I thought the President must have been injured in a bull-fighting ring, and I couldn’t figure why the President would have been in a bull-fighting ring. Yeah, I know, I was a strange 7-year old kid.

The next loudspeaker announcement confirmed the President had died and the nuns, all crying, marched us down to the attached church to pray. The name “Oswald” was a derogatory term used at the time about a crazy person, and we couldn’t believe the assassin’s name was Oswald. We were outside playing on Sunday and I’ll never forget my best friend running out of his house and telling us he had just watched Oswald get shot on live TV. It was a crazy couple of days.

PatMac on November 22, 2013 at 2:13 PM

A friend of mine called to moan about her soap being pre empted by the ‘breaking news’ from fifty years ago…

OmahaConservative on November 22, 2013 at 2:16 PM

A friend of mine called to moan about her soap being pre empted by the ‘breaking news’ from fifty years ago…

OmahaConservative on November 22, 2013 at 2:16 PM

I remember when people were POed when “Batman” was interrupted for coverage of a Gemini capsule that was spinning out of control.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 2:25 PM

Poor verbaluce

Trying to besmirch Reagan in death, because Reagan was such a good man and Conservative in life.

It must hurt to be that petty, Troll.

kingsjester on November 22, 2013 at 2:27 PM

C.G.B. Spender did it. (Cigarette Smoking Man)

TennesseeTuxedo on November 22, 2013 at 2:28 PM

Yes, but I wasn’t the one who said “who cares”. If I said “who cares” about your comment and then commented on it I’d be in your position.

And again: it was a major event in the modern history of this
country. Most of these past commemorations were one day coverage. Hardly excessive.

The 50th will obviously have greater coverage.

If you read the accounts by the people who were there and are still alive, they talk about the significance. That’s worth listening to.

Or not. It’s your call.

SteveMG on November 22, 2013 at 12:17 PM

It’s not worth listening to. A bunch of baby-boomers (the very worst generation of people this country ever produced) reveling in nostalgia for an event that was not nearly as significant as they like to believe. And – it all serves to glorify liberalism because the left/media use the ghost of JFK to further liberalism (even though JFK wasn’t remotely liberal by modern standards).

My point is that it is over glorified. I have an opinion about it – and my opinion is that people are treating JFK and his assasination as if it were the Passion of Christ.

A mediocre (at best) president was killed by a loony commie. That doesn’t deserve the constant coverage, the millions of books, the movies, et al. No generation will ever again be as nasal gazing and self-important as the boomers – thank god. I don’t care where anyone was when Kennedy got shot or how it made them feel.

Obviously I understand that this is someone else’s site and they can post what they want and other commentators can post their responses, etc. And – I am free to point out how utterly ridiculous the Kennedy worship is by everyone who does it.

The entire Kennedy mythos needs to be destroyed by conservatives. It is this type of cult-of-personality politics that has ruined the country.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 2:31 PM

The destroyer appeared out of thin air. And those stupid Japanese didn’t even feel it when they ran that PT boat over.

oldroy on November 22, 2013 at 1:21 PM

I’ve actually been in those waters. Nothing appears out of thin air. That said I can see ways that a destroyer might overtake an idling small boat on a moonless night. I’d still liked to have talked to the deck watch or at least someone on deck that night. All the reports I’ve read state the the destroyer was traveling at high speed. If that’s true then I’d suggest that it could have been detected from quite a ways off, especially if engine noise on the PT was low. I doubt that the destroyer saw the PT, they’d definitely have heard the collision but may not have realized what they hit. It’s difficult to explain how dark it really is on the ocean at night. I vividly remember one night when we had been running at flank around 30kts for most of the night. Nothing unusual in that..however. When I got off watch I went up on deck to the fantail to get a breath of fresh air before turning in. I had been there for a few minutes when my eyes became more accustomed to the dark (we were at blackout being in a war zone) I detected something large directly off our stern. I wandered back and stood there a while and suddenly realized what that was looming over my head. It was the bow of an aircraft carrier traveling at the same speed as us directly behind us. Couldn’t have been more than 300 feet directly astern. I grabbed the stern lookout and asked him about it. He said “It’s the Enterprise, been there all night. We’re doing some sort of exercise with them.” I went back inside, called the guy that had relieved me on watch and told him that he’d better not dump the plant tonight if he wanted to see another morning. The next morning we were still in one piece and the bird farm was gone.

Oldnuke on November 22, 2013 at 2:35 PM

But you’re deluded if you think someone with Reagan’s record would get a rousing welcome at CPAC. Maybe if you keep his record but call him, let’s see, Raynold Rogon you could better imagine it.

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 10:43 AM

I’ve personally seen Chris Christie get a rousing welcome at CPAC. And he is and has always been far to the left of Reagan.

People that think Reagan couldn’t get support today have conveniently forgotten the nominations of Romney, McCain, even GWB. All three of which were well known moderates. GWB successfully tacked to the right with his “compassionate conservativism” in election years. The other two were never able to pretend to be anything other than moderates.

Chris of Rights on November 22, 2013 at 1:48 PM

Its also a stupid game because it is irrelevant. times change – what is politically achievable changes. What people want changes. Thinking on various subjects changes.

the idea that any politician from 30 years ago could run on the exact same platform today is silly. And, the same can be said of tons of liberal heroes.

It’s a dumb game played by people with no ability to think logically. Which, of course, explains verbulace’s use of the game.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 2:37 PM

Poor verbaluce

Trying to besmirch Reagan in death, because Reagan was such a good man and Conservative in life.

It must hurt to be that petty, Troll.

kingsjester on November 22, 2013 at 2:27 PM

You seem to not be able to understand that great men can not be besmirched by honest and sober assessments of their lives and records.
I suppose you think he was one of the greatest actors to ever grace the silver screen?
Please do not besmirch him now…

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM

You seem to not be able to understand that great men can not be besmirched by honest and sober assessments of their lives and records.

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM

Honest and sober are not words that describe you or your assessments.

Monkeytoe on November 22, 2013 at 2:43 PM

JFK must be tired of being dug up every year at this time and vigorously humped by libtards and the media.
HumpBot Salvation on November 22, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Oswald was exhumed in 1981, supervised by the same funeral director who originally planted him, who says that the body’s head was not Oswald’s. Saw the film recently, Google can’t produce a link to it.

Akzed on November 22, 2013 at 2:50 PM

Watching the CBS real time news streaming; Cronkite speculates that the the shooter is “right-wing” not 10 minutes after the news breaks.

Wow.

It’s one thing to see that kind of MSM bias today, bit going back to 1963 – wow, just wow.

Bruno Strozek on November 22, 2013 at 2:54 PM

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM

His acting did not benefit millions of Americans. His presidency did.

Stop trying to bitterly rewrite history.

kingsjester on November 22, 2013 at 2:58 PM

Oswald was exhumed in 1981, supervised by the same funeral director who originally planted him, who says that the body’s head was not Oswald’s. Saw the film recently, Google can’t produce a link to it.
Akzed on November 22, 2013 at 2:50 PM

His name was Paul Groody.

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 2:59 PM

You seem to not be able to understand that great men can not be besmirched by honest and sober assessments of their lives and records. verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM

So Kennedy’s flagrant serial infidelities -even in the WH- are irrelevant? Doesn’t knowledge of them make him “ungreat”?

Why were the FBI’s files on MLK sealed for 50 years c. 1980? So as not to besmirch his “greatness”?

Ralph Abernathy wrote that MLK beat up a whore in his motel room the day he was killed. Does that enhance or besmirch his reputation? Or does it have no effect?

Doesn’t a fact like that call into question the adjective “great” in regard to him?

If men are truly great, there will be nothing found that besmirches them, e.g., George Washington.

Akzed on November 22, 2013 at 2:59 PM

Poor verbaluce

Trying to besmirch Reagan in death, because Reagan was such a good man and Conservative in life.

It must hurt to be that petty, Troll.

kingsjester on November 22, 2013 at 2:27 PM

You seem to not be able to understand that great men can not be besmirched by honest and sober assessments of their lives and records.
I suppose you think he was one of the greatest actors to ever grace the silver screen?
Please do not besmirch him now…

verbaluce on November 22, 2013 at 2:39 PM

I figured you’d be sitting in a circle with a bottle of Jergens and a stack of lunchables for the festivities.
I cannot wait for assessment of your manchild. History will be brutal.
Reagan, a great man and leader, has stood strong in the twenty five years since he graced the Oval Office. Even your manchild has tried to compare himself to the greatness of Reagan. That’s like comparing a decorated General to a dung beetle.

RovesChins on November 22, 2013 at 3:02 PM

Was 16 and heard it on a car radio (that car was stopped at a
traffic light) while walking home from Norwalk High school.

Wasn’t sure what I heard until I got home and the 12” TV had
Cronkites report. Didn’t understand what right or left wing was.
Probably thought it was airplane or bird.

Thought my Vaughn Meader “First Family” album is worthless now.

Texyank on November 22, 2013 at 3:12 PM

Thought my Vaughn Meader “First Family” album is worthless now.
Texyank on November 22, 2013 at 3:12 PM

Well, now it’s a collectible. My family had a copy, too. JFK’s death threw Meader’s personal and professional into a tailspin.
I remember the “Kruschev” line when he was asked what he’d have on his dinner plate: “Nothing for me – I’ll just take a little taste from everyone else’s plate.”

whatcat on November 22, 2013 at 3:20 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3