“This has been debated endlessly. I would not and could not call JFK “Conservative” by much of any standard, certainly not one with those principles. He was a rank opportunist. He and his brother Bobby partly rode Joe McCarthy’s coattails - opportunism. McCarthy was quite popular in the early 1950s before the Deep State and political establishment went to work on destroying him. McCarthy was mega-popular amongst Irish Catholic Democrats in Massachusetts and Joe Kennedy knew that and was using him to try to depose the liberal elitist Sen. Lodge and install his son as Senator. Again, pure opportunism.”
If he were opportunist regarding Joe McCarthy, they would have sided against McCarthy and made sure he came out tarred and feathered, since that’s EXACTLY what the Democrat Party did at the time, made sure he ended up with a destroyed reputation. I know that’s exactly what I would have done had I been them and I been opportunistic since that’s EXACTLY what most Democrats did. In fact, the vast majority of the Democrats, even Harry Truman, who was painted as a hardliner against Communism, practically turned on McCarthy like a used car. The fact that JFK actually sided with him, AGAINST the rest of his party, would strongly suggest he isn’t opportunistic, or at least, he’s less opportunistic than most other members of the party. I know if I were one of those other democrats and operated under their viewpoint, then Irish Catholic Democrats in Massachusetts or not, I would have probably gone out of my way to ensure he got tarred and feathered, NOT defend him even when the rest of the democrat party is against me, because that’s exactly how the others acted during that time, again, including even Harry Truman.
“I disagree vehemently that JFK would have not backed all the coming leftist issues embraced by the Democrats. How many Democrats stood up strongly against Roe for the long term ? Teddy did for about 5 minutes before caving. Too much pressure from an ever-increasing left-wing and radicalized base. Only a rare few individuals, like PA Governor Bob Casey, Sr., stood opposed to infanticide, and he was marginalized in the party by 1992, not even 20 whole years after Roe.”
I can name quite a few liberal people who stood against it regardless of party ties: Jack Nicholson, for starters, is liberal enough that he spoke glowingly of Cuba under Castro of all places, and you’d be surprised to learn that he’s actually one of the more pro-life of them, especially when he himself nearly ended up aborted. Same goes for Martin Sheen, who actually went as far as to avoid associating himself with Barack Obama precisely BECAUSE of the latter’s pro-Abortion stance, and part of the reason he was against Obama’s pro abortion stance was because he was also Catholic. And let’s not forget Randall Terry, who is explicitly a Democrat, yet has even gone to jail to push the pro-life message, campaigned on it. And bear in mind, Nicholson and Sheen are both current and very openly left-wing in various issues. If they can speak out against abortion even today, let alone presumably back then, I’m pretty sure JFK would do the same, period, even if he is leftist. There’s even a whole list of them compiled here, and with footnotes as well:
https://www.conservapedia.com/List_of_celebrities_who_support_the_Right_to_Life
McCarthy was an Irish Catholic. Until not long before his Senate runs, he was still a Democrat as most Irish Catholics were. The Wisconsin Democrat party had generally been the weak party. The state was dominated by the Socialist La Follettes who used the Republican Party as a vehicle for their agenda. In the 1930s, the La Follettes split entirely from the Republicans to form the WI Progressive Party. It was during that period that a young McCarthy was a Democrat. With the rise of the WI Republicans again by the late '30s and early '40s over the Progressives, McCarthy then switched to the GOP. The Democrats had reason to worry that if one of their most valuable bloc voters, Catholics, left the party for the GOP, this could have disastrous consequences nationally.
When McCarthy, on his second try for the Senate in 1946, managed to upend Sen. Robert La Follette, Jr. after he returned to the GOP in the Senate primary, it was nothing short of a revolution in WI. Junior La Follette didn't take losing very well and ended up committing suicide not long after. McCarthy was a dangerous figure to the Democrats on a number of fronts: he was very popular to the working class Catholics, and secondly when he began to take on the cause of the Soviet infiltration of the government and their sympathizers. He was also using his newfound celebrity to take down left-wing Democrats in the Senate, many of whom were supported by anti-American interests. He was also not well-regarded by the elitist establishment wing of the GOP, which had grown more and more comfortable with Socialism in the post-1932 era.
"I know that’s exactly what I would have done had I been them and I been opportunistic since that’s EXACTLY what most Democrats did. In fact, the vast majority of the Democrats, even Harry Truman, who was painted as a hardliner against Communism, practically turned on McCarthy like a used car. The fact that JFK actually sided with him, AGAINST the rest of his party, would strongly suggest he isn’t opportunistic, or at least, he’s less opportunistic than most other members of the party. I know if I were one of those other democrats and operated under their viewpoint, then Irish Catholic Democrats in Massachusetts or not, I would have probably gone out of my way to ensure he got tarred and feathered, NOT defend him even when the rest of the democrat party is against me, because that’s exactly how the others acted during that time, again, including even Harry Truman."
And yet it was raw opportunism that motivated the Kennedys in linking themselves to Joe McCarthy. As I said, in the early '50s, McCarthy was a hero to Irish Catholic Democrats, especially in Massachusetts. At that time, Jack Kennedy was a Congressman trying to distinguish himself. His paternal grandfather, John Fitzgerald, had also been a Congressman and ran against the grandfather of Lodge, Henry Cabot, Sr. in 1916 for Senator. Politics in Massachusetts had been largely divided between the Protestant Republican Brahmins and Irish Catholic Democrats. When the then-heavily Whig Massachusetts in the 1850s saw the collapse of that party, many members briefly utilized the anti-Catholic Know-Nothing Party for the interim before the Republican Party was officially organized. Because of this, it bitterly divided the two religious groups. The Protestants feared the incoming Catholics would eventually outpopulate and outvote them in time, which eventually happened. The 1916 race was a warning of things to come. The corrupt, but affable Honey Fitz vs. the stalwart Conservative Lodge Sr. The most serious warning came in 1928 when reliably Republican Massachusetts repudiated Herbert Hoover for NY Irish Catholic Al Smith for President (as did neighboring Rhode Island, which also was heavily GOP, but with a burgeoning Catholic population).
Curiously, Rhode Island Republicans could see the writing on the wall and ran a Quebec-born French Canadian Catholic for Senator in 1928 against an incumbent Democrat, Felix Hebert (same name as a future long-time Democrat Congressman from Louisiana, though no relation). Even as Hoover lost RI, Hebert took the Senate seat and went to DC. Massachusetts, tightly controlled by the GOP Brahmins, largely failed to begin to make inroads into the Catholic population, which remained overwhelmingly Democrat. Flash forward to 1952 and Kennedy is making his run against Cabot, Jr... It would've been unimaginable for JFK to go against Joe McCarthy in Massachusetts, even if national Democrats despised him. In this case, religion was thicker than party. Cabot, Jr. was not seen as a particular ally of McCarthy, he was regarded more as the rabble of the Democrat opposition in his state. But former Ambassador Joseph Kennedy realized that it would be McCarthy that would turn the race. His son would ride on McCarthy's popularity in the state to victory, despite his being a Republican. They cultivated Joe in every way possible (Bobby, of course, went to work for him). Had he repudiated McCarthy, JFK would not have won in 1952, it's that simple. Although ultimately McCarthy gave a tepid endorsement (solely due to party) to Lodge, there was already the appearance that a JFK win would not be seen as a "bad" thing. Lodge's problem, too, was that he had jettisoned the old Conservative politics of his grandfather and was a trendy young liberal. Between that and the religious politics of the state, it allowed for the toppling of the Republican majority, and Massachusetts would rapidly move to the Democrat party control (and ultimately, leftward).
I'll add, too, that when the attacks against McCarthy by the usual suspects began to take its toll on his popularity and when it came time for the "censure" vote against him in 1954, JFK made sure he was conveniently out of the Senate so that he wouldn't have to vote. Opportunism and cowardice. If he voted against censure, he would've been severely damaged as a future Democrat Presidential candidate nationally. If he voted for it, he would've been voting against the wishes of his Irish Catholic base, who viewed the attacks on McCarthy because of his religion.
"I can name quite a few liberal people who stood against it regardless of party ties: Jack Nicholson, for starters, is liberal enough that he spoke glowingly of Cuba under Castro of all places, and you’d be surprised to learn that he’s actually one of the more pro-life of them, especially when he himself nearly ended up aborted. Same goes for Martin Sheen, who actually went as far as to avoid associating himself with Barack Obama precisely BECAUSE of the latter’s pro-Abortion stance, and part of the reason he was against Obama’s pro abortion stance was because he was also Catholic. And let’s not forget Randall Terry, who is explicitly a Democrat, yet has even gone to jail to push the pro-life message, campaigned on it. And bear in mind, Nicholson and Sheen are both current and very openly left-wing in various issues. If they can speak out against abortion even today, let alone presumably back then, I’m pretty sure JFK would do the same, period, even if he is leftist. There’s even a whole list of them compiled here, and with footnotes as well:"
But celebrities are still not elected officials. If their power and influence were at stake as elected officials, I guarantee they would've changed their tune or be kicked out of office. In the scope of things, Nicholson, Sheen and Terry were not particularly influential political figures. Again, if you think JFK would've been a pro-lifer had he lived into the '70s and '80s (or '90s), I think you're fooling yourself. He was always going to eventually go with the prevailing party opinion. You might have a point had Teddy defended life issues, but that got in the way with appealing to the radical feminist lobby. It would've been no different with JFK.