hoya95
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,445 
|
Post by hoya95 on Sept 3, 2009 13:15:02 GMT -5
Was Old Joe Kennedy an appeaser? Check Did JFK rampantly cheat on his wife? Check Was Bobby his bag man and a carpetbagger? Check Did Ted kill MaryJo Kopechne? Check I don't remember Paranioa 2 saying the Kennedys died becuase they weren't real men. Rather he said it's ridiculous to lionize them given their behavior. As for karma, who knows? Joe Kennedy Jr. died in a near suicidal bombing mission in WWII. JFK and Bobby were both murdered. There have been a whole bunch of other tragedies on top of that. There is no point in arguing with fools trying to be obnoxious, but you lot might want to worry about karma yourselves. There are things you do not say under any circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Sept 3, 2009 13:15:20 GMT -5
All fair. I won't cry for them either. As an aside, did Laura Bush (then Welch) run from the scene and lawyer up? And was she 17 at the time or a 37 year old Senator? Just asking. OK, so fine. You won't cry for the Bush's (even though we all know that really, you will). And we're not asking you to cry for the Kennedy's. But how about just shutting up? And I'm not "taken" by this Massachusetts family. I don't like Massachusetts, and I have actually no strong feelings for or against the Kennedy's politics. I'm too young to know all that much about JFK and Bobby. But what I am appalled by is your and Paranoia's partisanship and how ugly it makes both of you as people. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2009 13:17:47 GMT -5
Can we just get back to talking about Michael Jackson? That was more fun.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 3, 2009 13:21:43 GMT -5
As to the issue of "justified," perhaps I have a different reading of this post: When Harry Reid said "Teddy's death is going to help us", I couldn't help but think he was speaking the truth for the very first time since he went into public life. I know that America's roads are safer without Senator Kennedy; that cocktail waitresses are safer now that Chris Dodd has lost his molesting partner; that women in Palm Beach are less likely to be assaulted by ne'er do well hanger on Kennedy cousins without Ted's patriarchal influence and that the world is simply a better place. Good for you Seantor Reid. The reality is that you refuse to acknowledge that you would not give the Bush family the same treatment that you have given this particular tragedy. Your treatment of the Bushes might not be positive, but it does not appear as though it would be as negative as it would be for the Kennedys. The gap here is likely not explained best by principle, but by politics. |
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Sept 3, 2009 13:25:35 GMT -5
I'll cop to that. I find the entire Kennedy clan repulsive. You may feel the same way about the Bush family (I don't presuppose to know your thoughts). I have never wished them ill. I don't miss them either.
|
|
paranoia2
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 847
|
Post by paranoia2 on Sept 3, 2009 13:27:47 GMT -5
When there is a thread celebrating the life of the Bush family I will not be falling in lock-step with that sentiment either. After extensive reading and studying of the Kennedy family I have formed the opinion that they merely reached mythical stature due to a VERY understanding media in a much different time than today. I have a father that came from humble beginnings, worked hard, didn't cheat, was a great dad and still loves my mother. He is a hero. Sleazy politicians born into wealth that exploit their lofty social positions with sordid sex and high powered cover-ups make me sick (both sides of the aisle).
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 3, 2009 14:29:48 GMT -5
Were all of them Democrats? Yes. * * * * * Was George W.'s grandfather an appeaser? Check. Did George H.W. Bush have some problems/gray areas of his own? Check Are W. and Jeb carpet baggers? Check Did Laura kill someone? Check I do not endorse this kind of crude analysis but only offer it as a parallel to suggest once again that your concern here is not with victims but with politics. Crude? How about completely wrong? Especially on the carpet bagger claim? How is W a carpet bagger? He grew up in Texas. His much maligned Guard service was in Texas. He met, married and settled down with Laura in Texas. How does that make him a carpet bagger. Same with Jeb, he moved to Florida (after doing some stuff abroad) 15 years before running for governor. RFK on the other hand... |
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 3, 2009 14:32:34 GMT -5
When there is a thread celebrating the life of the Bush family I will not be falling in lock-step with that sentiment either. After extensive reading and studying of the Kennedy family I have formed the opinion that they merely reached mythical stature due to a VERY understanding media in a much different time than today. I have a father that came from humble beginnings, worked hard, didn't cheat, was a great dad and still loves my mother. He is a hero. Sleazy politicians born into wealth that exploit their lofty social positions with sordid sex and high powered cover-ups make me sick (both sides of the aisle). Somehow, I don't think the media will be slobbering all over themselves when one of the Bush presidents die. I doubt Chris Matthews gets the same shivers running up his leg when he thinks about 41 or 43. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 3, 2009 16:29:52 GMT -5
Were all of them Democrats? Yes. * * * * * Was George W.'s grandfather an appeaser? Check. Did George H.W. Bush have some problems/gray areas of his own? Check Are W. and Jeb carpet baggers? Check Did Laura kill someone? Check I do not endorse this kind of crude analysis but only offer it as a parallel to suggest once again that your concern here is not with victims but with politics. Crude? How about completely wrong? Especially on the carpet bagger claim? How is W a carpet bagger? He grew up in Texas. His much maligned Guard service was in Texas. He met, married and settled down with Laura in Texas. How does that make him a carpet bagger. Same with Jeb, he moved to Florida (after doing some stuff abroad) 15 years before running for governor. RFK on the other hand... Your definition of carpetbagger is not historically correct. The term referred to a Northerner who moved to the South usually seeking private gain. Neither the primary definition on Merriam-Webster nor the authoritative Wikipedia references or contemplates a "statute of limitations" for carpetbagger claims. In the historical sense, one was not a carpet bagger for moving, say, from Massachusetts to New York to run for office since both shared the same relationship with respect to the Mason-Dixon line. As such, the operative facts for George W. are that he was born and educated in New England and, at the start of his adult life, moved to an area that is decidedly not in the north.* Same issue with Jeb. The historically correct usage of carpetbagger does not appear to take into account of a statute of limitations. William Hines Furbush, referenced on Wikipedia, had been in Arkansas for at least 3 years prior to his election. Albion Tourgee's biography might also be instructive in these regards. In modern parlance, I agree that an RFK or Hillary Clinton would be considered a carpetbagger. However, the term as it is used (or misused) should not be used as a basis to exclude other cases, which are or could be based on its historically correct usage. * As an aside, if his marrying Laura in Texas in 1977 is important in your timeline, why isn't his failed 1978 congressional race, in which carpet bagging assertions were made? |
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 3, 2009 18:03:29 GMT -5
Crude? How about completely wrong? Especially on the carpet bagger claim? How is W a carpet bagger? He grew up in Texas. His much maligned Guard service was in Texas. He met, married and settled down with Laura in Texas. How does that make him a carpet bagger. Same with Jeb, he moved to Florida (after doing some stuff abroad) 15 years before running for governor. RFK on the other hand... Your definition of carpetbagger is not historically correct. The term referred to a Northerner who moved to the South usually seeking private gain. Neither the primary definition on Merriam-Webster nor the authoritative Wikipedia references or contemplates a "statute of limitations" for carpetbagger claims. In the historical sense, one was not a carpet bagger for moving, say, from Massachusetts to New York to run for office since both shared the same relationship with respect to the Mason-Dixon line. As such, the operative facts for George W. are that he was born and educated in New England and, at the start of his adult life, moved to an area that is decidedly not in the north.* Same issue with Jeb. The historically correct usage of carpetbagger does not appear to take into account of a statute of limitations. William Hines Furbush, referenced on Wikipedia, had been in Arkansas for at least 3 years prior to his election. Albion Tourgee's biography might also be instructive in these regards. In modern parlance, I agree that an RFK or Hillary Clinton would be considered a carpetbagger. However, the term as it is used (or misused) should not be used as a basis to exclude other cases, which are or could be based on its historically correct usage. * As an aside, if his marrying Laura in Texas in 1977 is important in your timeline, why isn't his failed 1978 congressional race, in which carpet bagging assertions were made? Great arguments: 1. I used the modern-day concept of carpetbagger, not the 1800's version 2. I didn't consult Wikipedia when crafting my argument 3. I didn't include the 1978 race, which took place 25 years (?) after he was already living in Texas, going to elementary school? Nice job. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 3, 2009 18:48:35 GMT -5
The reason the Kennedys are lionized by the press is that John F. Kennedy was the earlier version of Barack Obama, a young, handsome candidate/president. The press slobbered over Kennedy like they are doing with Obama and they slobbered over Jackie Kennedy just like they are slobbering over Michelle Obama.
Now what I'm going to say now, please do not try to insinuate I'm trying to say anything about Obama. Kennedy's being killed and Jackie's reference to Camelot being over then took the press completely over the top. Had Kennedy not been killed I don't think the Kennedy mystique would have continued into the future like it has, particularly since Kennedy was a tax-cutting, strong national defense moderate.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Sept 3, 2009 18:50:18 GMT -5
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 3, 2009 19:46:16 GMT -5
"Es-ki-mo power” hahahahahahaha! Now that's priceless. |
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 3, 2009 20:41:15 GMT -5
Your definition of carpetbagger is not historically correct. The term referred to a Northerner who moved to the South usually seeking private gain. Neither the primary definition on Merriam-Webster nor the authoritative Wikipedia references or contemplates a "statute of limitations" for carpetbagger claims. In the historical sense, one was not a carpet bagger for moving, say, from Massachusetts to New York to run for office since both shared the same relationship with respect to the Mason-Dixon line. As such, the operative facts for George W. are that he was born and educated in New England and, at the start of his adult life, moved to an area that is decidedly not in the north.* Same issue with Jeb. The historically correct usage of carpetbagger does not appear to take into account of a statute of limitations. William Hines Furbush, referenced on Wikipedia, had been in Arkansas for at least 3 years prior to his election. Albion Tourgee's biography might also be instructive in these regards. In modern parlance, I agree that an RFK or Hillary Clinton would be considered a carpetbagger. However, the term as it is used (or misused) should not be used as a basis to exclude other cases, which are or could be based on its historically correct usage. * As an aside, if his marrying Laura in Texas in 1977 is important in your timeline, why isn't his failed 1978 congressional race, in which carpet bagging assertions were made? Great arguments: 1. I used the modern-day concept of carpetbagger, not the 1800's version 2. I didn't consult Wikipedia when crafting my argument 3. I didn't include the 1978 race, which took place 25 years (?) after he was already living in Texas, going to elementary school? Nice job. As to #3, you found it important enough in your timeline to include Bush's marriage to Laura, which happened one year before the congressional race. In addition to George W. and Jeb, I would add George H.W. to those who meet the traditional standards of carpetbaggery. As H.W. wrote in his autobiography, "The hardest campaign lesson of all was finding out I wasn't a Texan, at least not by my opponent's definition." His opponent was born, raised, and educated in Texas. As to Florida, Jeb certainly was none of those things and spent a good portion of his pre-political life in Texas. As to Texas, George W. certainly was not born or educated there. It is conceded, however, that W. and Jeb may not meet the revisionist, secondary definition of carpetbaggers. |
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 8, 2009 17:58:32 GMT -5
TMQ weighs in on Kennedy killing Kopechne with a perspective from someone who's pretty even handed criticizing both sides of the aisle: "The late Sen. Ted Kennedy was a complex mix of the noble and the reprehensible. The latter part of his reputation is deepened by news that his posthumous book, "True Compass," does not say what happened at Chappaquiddick, only that Kennedy admits he did something terribly wrong. But what? Because Kennedy has died without saying, society will never know what happened the night Mary Jo Kopechne was killed. Kennedy's refusal to explain must mean that whatever happened was shameful, and by that I certainly do not refer to sex. Did Kennedy really try to save her? Did she drown rapidly or live in terror for hours in an air pocket (as the diver who found her body contended) while Kennedy was relaxing at his hotel, having not called the police? Because Kennedy in the end refused to say what happened, society must assume he died hiding a shameful secret. This defiles the Kennedy legacy. And the fact that Kennedy was able to spend decades stonewalling about Chappaquiddick, then leave the Earth without ever being called to account, deepens cynicism about rich-man's justice." sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/090908&sportCat=nfl |
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Post by Jack on Sept 8, 2009 19:22:35 GMT -5
True, TMQ does not betray a particular political bias, at least when it comes to traditional definitions of liberal/conservative Republican/Democrat, but he certainly has never been shy about making extreme leaps of logic (while making them sound like basic common sense). His over the top coverage of "Spygate" was exhibit A, and his commentary on Kennedy (without having seen the book, I can only assume) falls under the same column. Kennedy already has told his side of the story, with repeated rescue attempts, and people have not believed him. I understand their cynicism, but I don't know why Easterbrook or anyone else should expect him to repeat that tale in his memoir. It was "terribly wrong" for him to fail to report the accident as soon as possible, and that is as good an explanation for what Kennedy meant as anything Easterbook proposes.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 8, 2009 19:35:22 GMT -5
True, TMQ does not betray a particular political bias, at least when it comes to traditional definitions of liberal/conservative Republican/Democrat, but he certainly has never been shy about making extreme leaps of logic (while making them sound like basic common sense). His over the top coverage of "Spygate" was exhibit A, and his commentary on Kennedy (without having seen the book, I can only assume) falls under the same column. Kennedy already has told his side of the story, with repeated rescue attempts, and people have not believed him. I understand their cynicism, but I don't know why Easterbrook or anyone else should expect him to repeat that tale in his memoir. It was "terribly wrong" for him to fail to report the accident as soon as possible, and that is as good an explanation for what Kennedy meant as anything Easterbook proposes. Kennedy only has to answer to one, and it's not me. However, I (and a lot of other people) have a really bad taste in my mouth with the way Kennedy skirted ever having to fess up to what he did, or face and actual punishment. People talk about JFK and his indiscretions and how he'd never be able to get away with such things in today's political climate. Screwing around is nothing compared to this and it still shocks me that nothing ever happened to Ted as a result. It would be like driving drunk and literally driving into the capital building and essentially getting off scot-free... |
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Sept 8, 2009 19:42:51 GMT -5
"George Bush Is From Connecticut" remains a mildly popular bumper sticker in Austin, but I'm pretty sure if you wind up being one of the most popular governors of Texas ever you get to call yourself a Texan. I'm not a fan of W, who earned his cowboy caricature reputation as President, but call him a carpetbagger within the Dallas city limits and you're likely to end up with a black eye.
|
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Sept 22, 2009 15:22:37 GMT -5
The appointment measure has passed both houses in MA, with the result that Governor Patrick may name a replacement shortly. I do not know who is on the short list but have heard Michael Dukakis's name mentioned.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Sept 22, 2009 17:01:55 GMT -5
I was kinda surprised how close the Senate vote was (24-16).
|
|
