Skip to comments.Why JFK could not be a Democrat in todays Democratic Party.
Posted on 07/09/2014 10:59:16 AM PDT by skinndogNN
Im tired of hearing the nonsense that the Republican Party has been taking over by the far right, and that the Democratic Party is the moderate party. It is simply not true. The Democratic Party is the party that has changed, not Conservatives.
God, Liberty, defense spending, and patriotism is all in JFK's inauguration speech.
Today's Democrats don't talk this way. My point is I miss moderate Democrats.
--------- And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe-the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.
In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility-I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it-and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you-ask what you can do for your country.
With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.
If you freeze him and revive him in 2014, probably.
But if he was alive this whole time, he’d be the most nauseating liberal and Democrat dean out there.
But if he was alive this whole time, hed be the most nauseating liberal and Democrat dean out there.
Bears repeating, because it's true.
I opened this thread to say the same thing. Good job.
Harry S. Truman reclaimed the Democrat Party from FDR and returned it closer to TJefferson’s concept/platform (small-ish government but a heavy-thumb on economic “incentives” in an effort to maintain military readiness).
JFK was the last of the Truman Democrats; Thomas Jefferson’s ideology died with Jack). JFK’s choice of Johnson was a an effort to appease the “identity politics” of his day.
Moderation in temperament is a very good thing. Moderation in virtue is evil.
“Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty. ‘ JFK, Inaugural address, 1961
Thanks. I hear this all the time and it’s simply absurd. He would have been a non-stop pest, second guessing Nixon and Reagan especially. Every year growing more leftward.
This is strange wish projection from a political party that prides itself in sobriety and clarity.
I wish this shallow observation would just go away.
That “ask not” speech would go over like a lead balloon with today’s dems...
To Senator Lloyd Benson’s “Senator Quayle, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was my friend, Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy”:
‘Senator Benson, Jack Kennedy said, “We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”
‘Senator Benson, if Jack Kennedy were to rise from his rest today, he would think that Communism had taken over America.’
Today’s Democrats are “moderates” only in the sense that they cannot come out in public reading from Marx’s texts and Mao’s Little Red Book as these ‘68 Revolutionaries did back in the 1968, while waving North Vietnamese military flags claiming all they wanted was “peace”.
They can’t come out publicly for the Communist revolution that they’ve dreamed about ever since their parents first sat them on their knees filling their heads with political nonsense.
The revolution is happening though
Hopefully there will be a counter revolution
The 1960s Marxist-Alinsky campus radical, psycho spoiled brats were celebrated in the establishment MSM as the most intelligent generation ever! They are now arguably that very establishment that praised them and they hold themselves and their ideological issue in even higher regard.
They hijacked the Democratic Party in the 1970s. Liberals fled, many to the Republican Party.
The fault is ours. Abe will explain from "the other side."
You initiated a policy to tolerate the Marxist-Alinsky radicals and let them rant; not only has it not ceased but was constantly augmented by decades of infiltration and indoctrination. You now have two Americas. In my opinion, it will not cease until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half statist and half free; I do not expect the house to fall; but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other.
There is no Democratic Party.
In a private letter to vice president Nixon in 1960, Ronald Reagan called JFK a Marxist.
Reagan on JFK 1960:
“”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 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.””
“”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.””
make a liberal’s tiny head explode: tell them JFK was the prototype Tea Party President killed by a prototype occupier.
Except that would be a ridiculous thing to say about the leftwing JFK.
If you like immigration today, then thank JFK, and here is the platform he ran on. JFK had a goal to replace the American voters and import a future democrat party, a goal he had spoke on for years and had written a book about.
Immigration (1960 democrat party platform)
“We shall adjust our immigration, nationality and refugee policies to eliminate discrimination and to enable members of scattered families abroad to be united with relatives already in our midst.
The national-origins quota system of limiting immigration contradicts the rounding principles of this nation. It is inconsistent with our belief in the rights of man. This system was instituted after World War I as a policy of deliberate discrimination by a Republican Administration and Congress.
The revision of immigration and nationality laws we seek will implement our belief that enlightened immigration, naturalization and refugee policies and humane administration of them are important aspects of our foreign policy.
These laws will bring greater skills to our land, reunite families, permit the United States to meet its fair share of world programs of rescue and rehabilitation, and take advantage of immigration as an important factor in the growth of the American economy.
In this World Refugee Year it is our hope to achieve admission of our fair share of refugees. We will institute policies to alleviate suffering among the homeless wherever we are able to extend our aid.
We must remove the distinctions between native-born and naturalized citizens to assure full protection of our laws to all. There is no place in the United States for “second-class citizenship.”
The protections provided by due process, right of appeal, and statutes of limitation, can be extended to non-citizens without hampering the security of our nation.
We commend the Democratic Congress for the initial steps that have recently been taken toward liberalizing changes in immigration law. However, this should not be a piecemeal project and we are confident that a Democratic President in cooperation with Democratic Congresses will again implant a humanitarian and liberal spirit in our nation’s immigration and citizenship policies.”
The problem with these cross-time comparisons, though, is that you can't pluck dead people from the past and put them down in the present. Even if you could, you can't guarantee that they'd think exactly as they did in the past.
In his day, John F. Kennedy was more conservative than today's Democrats, but if he'd lived, would he really have bucked the trend that his party, his state, and his family followed?