Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
3. Bobby's rep! While I don't wish the loss of a brother on anyone, public support and sympathy started to become crazy for him! (see '64 Convention, anti-war years, up to his death!). Didn't he have a reputation as a little brat, pre-11/22/63?
He was always an arrogant little brat -- the cocksure behavior shown on the podium in the last moments before he was gunned down are a classic example. That, and the shallow appeals to the young and naïve who are always drawn to simple answers; below is a link to one of the more outrageous manifestations of "Liberalism run amok":
He was always an arrogant little brat -- the cocksure behavior shown on the podium in the last moments before he was gunned down are a classic example. That, and the shallow appeals to the young and naïve who are always drawn to simple answers; below is a link to one of the more outrageous manifestations of "Liberalism run amok":
While I agree completely with both Ummagumma and in_newengland, the point I was making is that just because the Mafia had the best motive is not sufficient reason to assume they did it to the exclusion of all others who had motives (although lesser motives). Rogue CIA agents responsible for the botched Bay if Pigs fiasco could certainly have felt threatened enough by JFK's threat to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces to have done the deed, even though we all think the Mafia had a better motive. Rogue CIA agents certainly had the skills to pull off an assassination. The CIA had already done several head of state assassinations.
in_newengland, I think I read somewhere that Oswald may have planned to meet up with David Ferrie at Redbird Airport to be flown out of town.
Just to add.. "Tearing CIA into little pieces " due to the gross incompetence shown in the Bay of Pigs would mean, likely, just sending a few high ranking bureaucrats into early retirement. The worst, breaking up the agency and completely revamping the organizational structure. The agents in the field, those operatives who actually knew how to assassinate someone, would most likely remain the agents in the field, just responding to different office bosses. So why would they risk literally everything to protect a few career bureaucrats ?
He was always an arrogant little brat -- the cocksure behavior shown on the podium in the last moments before he was gunned down are a classic example. That, and the shallow appeals to the young and naïve who are always drawn to simple answers; below is a link to one of the more outrageous manifestations of "Liberalism run amok":
He didn't deserve what happened to him -- no one does; but he did a lot to bring it upon himself.
I happened to listen to view the entire LA Ambassador speech. There's nothing in there that would suggest 'cocksure behavior'.
And note that the article comes from Buckley! Although he had a bad rep pre-11/22/63, a man does have a right to evolve and repent from his past, correct? (Folk did forgive Wallace, didn't they?).
Any rate, Bobby's rep did benefit from Jack's death, due to public sympathy!
I would say the Democrats and especially the radicals in their ranks. They own the Democratic Party now. After JFK was killed by one of their fellow Communists they took the strategy of "blame America first" for everything that is wrong with this country. It worked.
I would say the Democrats and especially the radicals in their ranks. They own the Democratic Party now. After JFK was killed by one of their fellow Communists they took the strategy of "blame America first" for everything that is wrong with this country. It worked.
While we can debate ad infinitum who wanted him gone and might have been behind the assassination, that doesn't mean they benefitted. I say LBJ. JFK may have been trying to deliver Medicare, Civil Rights and some other programs, look who implemented them. But it's unlikely a northerner would have been able to pull off Civil Rights, for example. But Johnson was ultimately remembered for escalating the, later unpopular, Vietnam war; landing on the wrong side of both right wingers and antiwar activists.
We never found out if JFK would have done the same. So you could say JFK's reputation was saved.
While we can debate ad infinitum who wanted him gone and might have been behind the assassination, that doesn't mean they benefitted. I say LBJ. JFK may have been trying to deliver Medicare, Civil Rights and some other programs, look who implemented them. But it's unlikely a northerner would have been able to pull off Civil Rights, for example. But Johnson was ultimately remembered for escalating the, later unpopular, Vietnam war; landing on the wrong side of both right wingers and antiwar activists.
We never found out if JFK would have done the same. So you could say JFK's reputation was saved.
And if you look at it that way, it could be argued that the election of Johnson and Humphrey in 1964 was the "last blast" of the old-line, New-Deal-based faction within the Democratic coalition; but it wasn't fated to last.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
