Ted Kennedy: Bush Is No JFK

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Stephanie, Apr 6, 2006.

  1. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    Wednesday, April 5, 2006 10:53 p.m. EDT
    They must of threw open the doors to the insane asylum this week, all the loony Dems are running around spouting real stupid shit. I don't know how much more I can take.. :spank3:
    Arguing that President Bush should have followed the strategy of diplomacy employed in the Cuban missile crisis by his brothers rather than to have launched a pre-emptive strike against Saddam Hussein, Sen. Ted Kennedy castigated the president for his attack on Iraq.

    In his new book, "America Back on Track," his first since 1982, Kennedy claimed that his two brothers' refusal to launch a pre-emptive strike on Fidel Castro when it was learned back in 1962 that there were missiles in Cuba aimed at the United States was the proper approach to the crisis. Kennedy writes that they were right when they argued that "a first strike was inconsistent with American values," and would be a "Pearl Harbor in reverse," according to the Boston Globe.

    While admitting that pre-emptive war may be justified if launched to prevent "an imminent attack on our country," he claims that the Iraq war fits into a different category, which he calls "preventive war," which he condemns.

    "The premeditated nature of preventive attacks and preventive wars makes them anathema to well-established international principles against aggression," Kennedy writes in the book, which the Globe reports is due to be released April 18.

    Kennedy, D-Mass., argued that "Preventive war is consistent with neither our values nor our national security. It gives other nations an excuse to violate fundamental principles of civilized international behavior, and the downward spiral we initiate could well engulf the whole planet."

    Kennedy views Bush's decision to invade Iraq as an example of "preventive war" - of attacking a nation to prevent it from developing the ability to threaten the United States. He adds that a similar manner of thinking led the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor in 1941, since Japan was seeking to block the U.S. military buildup in the Pacific.

    Kennedy, who the Globe notes voted against the Iraq war, remains one of its harshest critics. He charges that Bush's national security strategy is "too extreme" in its reaction to Sept. 11, 2001, because it "legitimizes a first strike, and elevates it to a core security doctrine."

    "War should always be our last resort," he writess, adding that the Bush administration, however, "made preventive war an option of first resort."

    His anti-war stand is nothing new. In a speech at the Brookings Institution on April 6, 2004, he claimed that Iraq was never a threat to the United States and that Bush took the country to war under false pretenses, giving al-Qaida two years to regroup and plant terrorist cells throughout the world.

    "Iraq is George Bush's Vietnam," Kennedy said.

    According to the book jacket: "With his first major policy book in more than 20 years, Senator Kennedy takes an in-depth look at our modern political landscape and offers innovative policies that he genuinely believes will guide the country effectively to the future."

    The Globe describes it as "a broad indictment of the Bush administration and its policies, noting that Kennedy accuses the president of engaging in an "unprecedented level of secrecy" about government operations. He adopts the current Democrat and attacking policies that he says are harmful to the environment, the economy and the education system.

    It is a primer of Kennedy's far-left policy proposals that the Globe suggests will surprise few who follow liberal politics. Among his proposals: a higher minimum wage, billions of dollars in new education spending, higher taxes on the wealthy, equal rights for gays and lesbians and a universal national healthcare program that is nothing less than socialized medicine. He insists that most of his policies will somehow "pay for themselves" by boosting the nation's productivity.

    Writes Kennedy in a shocking distortion of American history: "The blunderbuss demands of the right wing that we downsize all areas of government ignore 200 years of history - 200 years of partnerships between business and government that made America the largest and most productive economy in the world."
    http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/4/5/230026.shtml?s=ic
     
  2. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,568
    Thanks Received:
    8,170
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,199
    Well wasn't Vietnam JFK's Vietnam?

    Seriously though, who is claiming President Bush is a JFK? President Bush has shown himself alot more competent, not to mention President Bush got reelected. No one knows if Kennedy would have been reelected.
     
  3. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +491
    Ted Kennedy, being JFK's youngest brother, and perhaps his only surviving sibling, is in a unique position to make claims like this. After all, JFK's younger brother is seen as an authority of who and who isn't like his older brother!

    Of course, Ted Kennedy isn't a JFK, either. John F. Kennedy was tough on crime as was his brother, Bobby, because they went after Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters. JFK was also an ardent anti-communist, as evidenced by the Cuban Missile Crisis. Teddy, on the other hand, is neither of those and if it weren't for his two brothers' legacies, would now be spending his days at Cappy's Bar and Grill instead of Capital Hill. He is definitely riding, and indeed living, on his brothers' coattails.

    But a few things about the JFK administration puzzle me. First, there was that question of voting irregularities in some states, so there was a question as to whether JFK actually won (or some might say "stole") the 1960 election from Richard Nixon. Then, there was the highly inappropriate act of naming his own brother, Robert, as Attorney General. And of course, Bobby was involved with coordinating the Bay of Pigs invasion, which means that there was a terrible abuse of power on JFK's part or he was asleep at the switch. Then, the failure of the Bay of Pigs was due in great part that JFK decided at the last minute not to lend military support to the invading army which, by the way was pulled together not only by Bobby, but by the CIA. Can you imagine, Dubya invading Iraq with an army pulled together by the CIA and the howls of rage that would be heard from here to Bangkok over the whole affair? That makes the NSA wiretaps tame by comparison!

    I am reminded of the phrase oft used by Teddy, Hillary, Nancy Pelosi in recent days.... "A Culture of Corruption"

    But.... JFK was charismatic, popular, virile, debonair, sophisticated, rich, had a beautiful wife, was building a family while President... what wasn't there to like? Well.... apart from the items I mentioned, there were Marilyn Monroe, Carlo Gambino's mistress and lots of other women. But, the public wasn't made aware of all that until well after John and Robert Kennedy's deaths.
     
  4. Adam's Apple
    Offline

    Adam's Apple Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,092
    Thanks Received:
    445
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +447
    BRAVO, Karl. :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: One of the best posts I've seen on this board in my two years of membership.
     

Share This Page