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.
Everyone felt terrible for Jackie and the kids, though.
Ditto. My community did NOT like the Kennedys.
I was stunned at how quickly Jackie was forced out of the white house. Now it's obvious why, but back then, it just seemed so uncaring and heartless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jghorton
... But, in the late 60's, everything was turned upside down (Vietnam protests, 'free love' generation, Woodstock, Civil Rights movement, LSD, etc.) --- The country lost its sense of innocence, respect for authority, and civil behavior ....and nothing has been the same since then!
--- Oh where are Beaver Cleaver and Donna Reed when we need them?
It was a much better time. Women didn't work, they stayed home and took care of the children. A man could work one job and support a family.
We never locked the doors on our house, didn't even know where the keys were. I would take that society over this garbage 7 days a week.
I hear lots of people saying that, here on CD, and occasionally IRL, but I grew up in the 50s/60s and that's not how we lived. My brother and I used to worry that Santa couldn't get into the house b/c we locked our door at night and we had no chimney. My parents would assure us they'd leave the door unlocked, and we checked before we went to bed on Christmas Eve!
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmmjv
Way too much smoking back then. You could even smoke in hospital rooms. The dressing part I'd like to have back though, today we have guys wearing hats in restaurants.
Lands, yes, the smoking in hospitals. Nurses, and even some doctors smoked, sometimes a lot. It's funny that people now complain about men wearing hats indoors, when Kennedy, as said above, made it OK for them not to wear one outdoors.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FancyFeast5000
What is the point of wearing hose in the heat and humidity?
I'm thinking if you live in a cold climate, on cold days hose would help keep your legs warm, although tights would be better. Of course, in the snow, hose wouldn't help much and they would get WET. There is no question whatsoever that wearing hose in the HOT and HUMID South they get "wet" from sweat if you have to spend even five minutes outside, which is just gross!!!
Thank god I didn't live during your mother's era. By the way, how do those high heels work for you in snow and ice?
To school and work, we wore boots and carried the shoes in a shoe bag. Going to church, out to dinner, etc, we just winged it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'm Retired Now
Stats show people are getting fatter and fatter every year. All part of the breakdown of society from the glory years of the early 1960s.
It's pretty amusing to hear posters say that people are less informed with today's Technology and yearn for the days of Spoon Fed "news" to the public. Many people, including World Leaders never knew that FDR was paralyzed and used a wheelchair. It was a closely guarded secret that the Media was complicit in …… Just as Kennedy and LBJ'a philandering was. .
They kept Kennedy's Addison's Disease secret, too.
I remember all the way until high school that people smoked in grocery stores while shopping. You'd see cigarette butts all over the floor. People even smoked while standing in line. There were ashtrays all over restaurants, even in the bathrooms. Dressing rooms at department stores had ashtrays. Imagine the smell of all those clothes! I know it never bothered me at the time. It just seemed normal, and I was probably used to the smell in every public place. Now it would bother me tremendously. We've come a long way baby!
From the very beginning, back to the Virginia plantations, tobacco drove the economy.
Now, it's just artificial food driving the economy.
Number one would be the fact that he made Khrushchev blink and all those duck and cover drills we Boomers did are something we can look back at and laugh about.
Ummm, no.
People trusted Kennedy mostly because the media covered up his foibles and screwups, which he had in as full measure as any other president before or since.
They ballyhooed his bravery in rescuing his men after PT109 was rammed (as they should)... but have you seen any show questioning why he posted no watches on the boat in known enemy-infested waters in fog? Later captains were court-martialled and stripped of their ranks for lesser offenses, such as the captain of the USS Indianapolis, who failed to zigzag despite a known submarine warning, and got torpedoed.
They praised him to the skies for standing down Kruschev during the October Missile Crisis... but how many reported that the reason the Russians put those nuclear missiles into Cuba in the first place, was in response to Kennedy putting similar nuclear missiles into Turkey? Or that the reason Kruschev backed down, was because Kennedy meekly agreed to take the missiles back out of Turkey? In other words, Kennedy was the one who caved, not Kruschev?
How much publicity will the media give during the coming memorials, to the Bay of Pigs, which Kennedy did a horrible job of organizing and then abandoned our allied troops on he beach? How much will they give to his skirt-chasing, which eclipsed anything Bill Clinton ever did?
The "innocence" the media laments losing ever since Kennedy, actually didn't have much to do with Kennedy - he was just the mascot.
The "innocence" was the naivety of the American people... who were naive mostly because that same media handed them a rose-color picture of what actually went on, instead of seeking out and telling the truth much of the time, as should have been their job. And then when a venal, self-serving politician took over from JFK, the media was caught between a rock and a hard place. They couldn't start reporting on the truth without admitting they'd been hiding the truth for years, when that same venal politician had been vice-president of the administration they had raised to such lofty heights.
They didn't have much choice but to continue their coverup, through the beginning of the "Vietnam era", even as television started showing the grim truth that could not be covered up. It was a godsend when the other party finally took over and relieved them of the need to cover anything up any more. Ever since then, they've only had to cover up when Kennedy's party was in power.
The "end of innocence" was when the media realized they couldn't cover up for the people they liked, without also creating imaginary enemies of the people they didn't like, for balance. The assassination had little to do with "ending innocence" - it just made a convenient excuse.
Looking at old photos and videos of people who were truly poor back during the Depression and earlier proves that poverty alone isn't the reason for the violent anti-social behavior that we see in the urban poor today. Back then people had respect for themselves and for others. The self-absorbed mindset today is completely different. Poverty back then was thought of as temporary, but now poverty has become a culture unto itself; no longer temporary but a way of life.
We're not moving forward, we're moving backward.
Check out this video of New York City life from the 1940s. NYC was dirtier, polluted, and more dangerous back then but you'd never guess it from watching the people going about their everyday business-
I really had to step back and appreciate where I live. I went for a job interview in another state. There were little things that I had taken for granted back home, like pumping gas for the car first, then going in and paying to a real person behind a counter, not paying first to a person enclosed behind six inch thick bullet resistant plexiglas, before I could pump. Maybe people get used to living in a place where crime is so high, that they don't notice those types of extreme measures for something as simple as pumping gas.
What's extreme about it? You pay for a product first before you leave with it. Same as with anything you purchase.
Are you SERIOUSLY disregarding the Cuban Missile Crisis and the FACT that that was as close as we have EVER come to nuclear war? In fact, Reagan referred to President Kennedy quite often. He liked the Kennedys. If you are old enough, you are not cosmic dust right now because Russia "blinked" even though Castro and Che wanted to fire off those missiles.....therefore, you should be quite grateful to Kennedy.
Yes--that was the best thing about the 'good old days'. Many Republicans liked Kennedy and Reagan liked many Democrats. That was before being a "real" Republican meant you have to hate anyone with differing ideas or policies and never compromise. Reagan would have been called a RINO today.
People trusted Kennedy mostly because the media covered up his foibles and screwups, which he had in as full measure as any other president before or since.
They ballyhooed his bravery in rescuing his men after PT109 was rammed (as they should)... but have you seen any show questioning why he posted no watches on the boat in known enemy-infested waters in fog? Later captains were court-martialled and stripped of their ranks for lesser offenses, such as the captain of the USS Indianapolis, who failed to zigzag despite a known submarine warning, and got torpedoed.
They praised him to the skies for standing down Kruschev during the October Missile Crisis... but how many reported that the reason the Russians put those nuclear missiles into Cuba in the first place, was in response to Kennedy putting similar nuclear missiles into Turkey? Or that the reason Kruschev backed down, was because Kennedy meekly agreed to take the missiles back out of Turkey? In other words, Kennedy was the one who caved, not Kruschev?
How much publicity will the media give during the coming memorials, to the Bay of Pigs, which Kennedy did a horrible job of organizing and then abandoned our allied troops on he beach? How much will they give to his skirt-chasing, which eclipsed anything Bill Clinton ever did?
The "innocence" the media laments losing ever since Kennedy, actually didn't have much to do with Kennedy - he was just the mascot.
The "innocence" was the naivety of the American people... who were naive mostly because that same media handed them a rose-color picture of what actually went on, instead of seeking out and telling the truth much of the time, as should have been their job. And then when a venal, self-serving politician took over from JFK, the media was caught between a rock and a hard place. They couldn't start reporting on the truth without admitting they'd been hiding the truth for years, when that same venal politician had been vice-president of the administration they had raised to such lofty heights.
They didn't have much choice but to continue their coverup, through the beginning of the "Vietnam era", even as television started showing the grim truth that could not be covered up. It was a godsend when the other party finally took over and relieved them of the need to cover anything up any more. Ever since then, they've only had to cover up when Kennedy's party was in power.
The "end of innocence" was when the media realized they couldn't cover up for the people they liked, without also creating imaginary enemies of the people they didn't like, for balance. The assassination had little to do with "ending innocence" - it just made a convenient excuse.
This is the second time you have posted this tripe. Can you please cite your sources? Also--how old were you when Kennedy was assassinated? It's quite easy to post all the BS you want about someone long gone. You act like you are an expert on this subject--did you work in the media? Did you work in his administration? What expertise in political science of the 50s and 60s qualifies you to make these absurd statements?
What's extreme about it? You pay for a product first before you leave with it. Same as with anything you purchase.
By that logic should we prepay for our meals in sit-down restaurants? What if you decide you want dessert after... a second bill?
I have pumped gas in countries outside the U.S. and never have I had to prepay, only in the U.S. In Canada it is pay at the pump or if you are paying cash, pay after you pump. It is interesting to note that the gas stations near the border in Michigan are post-pay as well.
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.
