I too wrote in Eugene McCarthy in 1968, but it didn't take long for me to see what Nixon wrought. For those of us who did so, it pretty well cured us of being "one issue voters" even when that issue was as big as our friends getting killed in a war we ultimately lost. What Johnson was able to accomplish on Civil Rights turned out to be a…
I too wrote in Eugene McCarthy in 1968, but it didn't take long for me to see what Nixon wrought. For those of us who did so, it pretty well cured us of being "one issue voters" even when that issue was as big as our friends getting killed in a war we ultimately lost. What Johnson was able to accomplish on Civil Rights turned out to be a much longer lasting legacy.
I've just posted on Hubbell's Substack how those of us of that generation who are still sharp and even reasonably mobile need to be on the front lines of contesting--of proving by our very selves--that old does not equal infirm. You do it, TC. I hope I am able to do it in at least some of my comments.
A subset of Get out The Vote should be Get Out the Seniors. Show, not tell, the kiddies what "old" has accomplished, is currently accomplishing, and still can accomplish. Tell the story of our "one-issue" lives that brought us Nixon and further chaos, not to mention corruption. The issue then was the war, not age, but it was still one issue, and one issue is not the way to insure that our country continues to prosper.
I don't agree with you entirely about JFK, though I recognize his own 40ish infirmities. The war was much more motivated by the "falling dominos" fear of the Soviets which was the result of Cold War hysteria that had gone on all my life. With Stalin there was some basis; after that we listened way to much to the rantings of the leaders and thought they represented the actual people. I visited Russia the month after JFK's assassination, not with an Intourist group, and realized that my student counterparts were willing to debate the differences between communism and capitalism intelligently. They were NOT monomaniacs.
Believing in ranting of the leaders is why we have MAGA. We need to start listening to the opinions of the actual people, those not enthralled by the leaders. That's why I am optimistic that, polls be damned, we have a good shot at winning in November with a leader who doesn't rant. We just have to work to encourage those who are not monomaniacs of the importance of this election.
Great points all. However, JFK's "40s infirmities" were his infirmities in his 20s and 30s also. His reputation is what it is because the Kennedy family has the resources to maintain an excellent PR machine, and too many of our generation still feel what we did about him when we were young enough to have the self-awareness of rocks. (Every "movement person" I knew in the 60s would tell you if asked that "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country" was their original motivator) That and the fact he's been dead for 60 years has allowed too many liberals to hang their wishes about the way things should have been on him and invest him as the representative of those wishes.
I too wrote in Eugene McCarthy in 1968, but it didn't take long for me to see what Nixon wrought. For those of us who did so, it pretty well cured us of being "one issue voters" even when that issue was as big as our friends getting killed in a war we ultimately lost. What Johnson was able to accomplish on Civil Rights turned out to be a much longer lasting legacy.
I've just posted on Hubbell's Substack how those of us of that generation who are still sharp and even reasonably mobile need to be on the front lines of contesting--of proving by our very selves--that old does not equal infirm. You do it, TC. I hope I am able to do it in at least some of my comments.
A subset of Get out The Vote should be Get Out the Seniors. Show, not tell, the kiddies what "old" has accomplished, is currently accomplishing, and still can accomplish. Tell the story of our "one-issue" lives that brought us Nixon and further chaos, not to mention corruption. The issue then was the war, not age, but it was still one issue, and one issue is not the way to insure that our country continues to prosper.
I don't agree with you entirely about JFK, though I recognize his own 40ish infirmities. The war was much more motivated by the "falling dominos" fear of the Soviets which was the result of Cold War hysteria that had gone on all my life. With Stalin there was some basis; after that we listened way to much to the rantings of the leaders and thought they represented the actual people. I visited Russia the month after JFK's assassination, not with an Intourist group, and realized that my student counterparts were willing to debate the differences between communism and capitalism intelligently. They were NOT monomaniacs.
Believing in ranting of the leaders is why we have MAGA. We need to start listening to the opinions of the actual people, those not enthralled by the leaders. That's why I am optimistic that, polls be damned, we have a good shot at winning in November with a leader who doesn't rant. We just have to work to encourage those who are not monomaniacs of the importance of this election.
Great points all. However, JFK's "40s infirmities" were his infirmities in his 20s and 30s also. His reputation is what it is because the Kennedy family has the resources to maintain an excellent PR machine, and too many of our generation still feel what we did about him when we were young enough to have the self-awareness of rocks. (Every "movement person" I knew in the 60s would tell you if asked that "Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country" was their original motivator) That and the fact he's been dead for 60 years has allowed too many liberals to hang their wishes about the way things should have been on him and invest him as the representative of those wishes.