Do you have a copy of that letter?
JFK is also responsible for destroying us when his immigration goals to replace American voters passed in 1965.
Do you have the vote count from Republicans and Democrats on this bill?
JFK was more lefty than people remember.
You may be right, but I don't remember it that way. A "lefty" never want's you to have more of your own money.
Sincere Regards..
KS
From Vietnam, to the 1965 Immigration Act, to homelessness (permanently emptying the mental hospitals in 1963 legislation) to unionizing government, to stealing the 1960 election and giving us LBJ, JFK was the end of America.
“However, if there is one man who can take the most credit for the 1965 act, it is John F. Kennedy. Kennedy seems to have inherited the resentment his father Joseph felt as an outsider in Boston’s WASP aristocracy. He voted against the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952, and supported various refugee acts throughout the 1950s.
In 1958 he wrote a book, A Nation of Immigrants, which attacked the quota system as illogical and without purpose, and the book served as Kennedy’s blueprint for immigration reform after he became president in 1960.
In the summer of 1963, Kennedy sent Congress a proposal calling for the elimination of the national origins quota system. He wanted immigrants admitted on the basis of family reunification and needed skills, without regard to national origin.
After his assassination in November, his brother Robert took up the cause of immigration reform, calling it JFK’s legacy. In the forward to a revised edition of A Nation of Immigrants, issued in 1964 to gain support for the new law, he wrote, “I know of no cause which President Kennedy championed more warmly than the improvement of our immigration policies.” Sold as a memorial to JFK, there was very little opposition to what became known as the Immigration Act of 1965.”
Dear Mr. Vice Pres.
I know this is presumptuous of me but I’m passing on some thoughts after viewing the Convention here in L.A.
Somehow the idea persists that someone should put an end to the traditional demonstrations which follow each nomination. True they once had their place when their only purpose was to influence the delegates within the convention hall. Now however TV has opened a window onto convention deliberations and the “demonstration” is revealed as a synthetic time waster which only serves to belittle us in what should be one of our finer moments. One has a feeling that general gratitude would be the reward for any one who would once and for all declare the “demonstration” abandoned.
Starting with the opening speech and continuing through all the speeches until Kennedy’s acceptance speech I thought the Democrats could pick up some campaign money by selling the collection of addresses as, “talks suitable for any patriotic occasion with platitudes and generalities guaranteed.”
I do not include Kennedy’s acceptance speech because beneath the generalities I heard a frightening call to arms. Unfortunately he is a powerful speaker with an appeal to the emotions. He leaves little doubt that his idea of the “challenging new world” is one in which the Federal Govt. will grow bigger & do more and of course spend more. I know there must be some short sighted people in the Republican Party who will advise that the Republicans should try to “out liberal” him. In my opinion this would be fatal.
You were kind enough to write me to comment on the “talk” I had given and which you had read. That is why I’m presuming on your busy day with these thoughts. I have been speaking on the subject in more than thirty eight states to audiences of Democrats & Republicans. Invariably the reaction is a standing ovation—not for me but for the views expressed. I am convinced that America is economically conservative and for that reason I think some one should force the Democrats to publish the “retail price” for this great new wave of “public service” they promise. I don’t pose as an infallible pundit but I have a strong feeling that the twenty million non voters in this country just might be conservatives who have cynically concluded the two parties offer no choice between them where fiscal stability is concerned. No Republican no matter how liberal is going to woo a Democratic vote but a Republican bucking the give away trend might re-create some voters who have been staying at home.
One last thought,— shouldn’t some one tag Mr. Kennedy’s bold new imaginative program with it’s proper age? Under the tousled boyish hair cut it is still old Karl Marx—first launched a century ago. There is nothing new in the idea of a Govt. being Big Brother to us all. Hitler called his “State Socialism” and way before him it was “benevolent monarchy.”
I apologize for taking so much of your time but I have such a yearning to hear some one come before us and talk specifics instead of generalities. I’m sure the American people do not want the govt. paid services at “any price” and if we collectively can afford “free this & that” they’d like to know it before they buy and not after it is entrenched behind another immovable govt. bureau.
You will be very much in my prayers in the days ahead.
Sincerely,
Ronnie Reagan