tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5408368436169661319.post7500727595012882135..comments2024-03-28T10:48:48.561-04:00Comments on Joe Torcivia's The Issue At Hand Blog: R.I.P. Senator Edward M. Kennedy.Joe Torciviahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00421096229407174474noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5408368436169661319.post-2371626594318162992009-08-30T11:09:27.780-04:002009-08-30T11:09:27.780-04:00Joe and Chuck,
I read a rather detailed, fascinat...Joe and Chuck,<br /><br />I read a rather detailed, fascinating "what might have been" article in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of JFK's assassination in 1983. A brief summary (at least, to the best of my recollection):<br /><br />1. JFK re-elected by a large margin in 1964.<br />2. American troops pulled out of Vietnam soon thereafter -- there are protests, but nothing really severe (I believe that this was wishful thinking)<br />3. LBJ barely nudges Nixon and is elected in 1968<br />4. RFK runs for president in 1972 but is beaten by Ronald Reagan, who goes on to serve two terms<br />5. The article ends with JFK and RFK celebrating Teddy's nomination in 1980<br /><br />I'll have to see if I can't find this article somewhere.<br /><br />Chuck, I think you may overstate Teddy's bipartisanship a little, but my one REAL quarrel with him stems from his apparent attempt in the mid-1980s to work behind the scenes with then-Soviet leader Yuri Andropov to counteract Reagan's Cold War efforts (http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/ted-kennedy-soviet-union-ronald-reagan-opinions-columnists-peter-robinson.html). This has been written up in several sources. You can probably understand why I, in particular, look upon this gambit with fixed disfavor.<br /><br />ChrisChris Barathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06845538037091279990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5408368436169661319.post-77536587247334655272009-08-27T13:31:53.912-04:002009-08-27T13:31:53.912-04:00Hi Joe,
Obviously political figures who generate a...Hi Joe,<br />Obviously political figures who generate a large amount of commentary are difficult subjects to keep on a non-controversial, non-confrontational level.<br />Without running afoul of your guidelines/rules, I believe I may offer the following:<br />1. Ted Kennedy was the last of a larger-than-life generation of Kennedys.<br />2. Regardless of his actual politics, I've heard it being said from both sides of the political fence that Ted Kennedy was an advocate for people and causes that he really believed in and to which he was not a fair-weather friend.<br />3. He had some self-admitted and self-inflicted personal choices that affected both his aspirations and influence (although as far reaching as it appeared to be - love or hate him, most people know about Ted Kennedy!).<br />4. He appears to have had the ability to work with both of the major parties in the Senate. And did so retaining the trust and respect of his own party and finding trust and respect with members of the other side with whom he had to work.<br /><br />I would like to say that we still have politicians regardless of party in both the House and Senate who can or have achieved the level of commitment, dedication and cooperation that Ted Kennedy did have or strived to have. Personally, I've heard comments from Representatives and Senators that suggest four specific members who come close, but that pales against 535 total members. May we as voters have the clarity to look beyond the rhetoric and pick worthy candidates of any party who look out for us and our country with the aforementioned commitment, dedication and cooperation.<br /><br />Is that civil and non-partisan enough to make the cut and still be a commentary on the man and his legacy?Chuck Munsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02815223305362131302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5408368436169661319.post-63542424340022937792009-08-26T22:07:40.846-04:002009-08-26T22:07:40.846-04:00I’m sorry to say that I had to delete a comment on...I’m sorry to say that I had to delete a comment on this post. <br /><br />The commenter did not pay strict attention to my “No Unpleasantness” ground rule! <br /><br />I wouldn’t say the comment was politically motivated, but was less than appropriate under the circumstances. <br /><br />I do enjoy the comments of this poster, and he or she is certainly invited back to post in the future – but “My Rule is My Rule”! <br /><br />Let’s keep to it in the future!Joe Torciviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00421096229407174474noreply@blogger.com