![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Though it's easy enough to avoid the evening news these days, I would imagine there are quite a few Americans who are getting tired of the run up to the anniversary of President Kennedy's death. I was very young in September 1951 when the 50th anniversary of William McKinley's death from assassination occurred. I probably saw the evening news that day, since my parents watched. Like Kennedy's anniversary this year, it was on a Friday. The news may have mentioned it was the anniversary of McKinley's death, though I certainly don't remember. But certainly there was no weeks-long run up. 1901 seemed very long ago and far away, though there were a good many people in 1951 who still remembered 1901.
If I remember correctly a short motion picture clip of William McKinley walking through the Buffalo Exposition did exist. But it would be one of a very few motion picture records of him. I think perhaps I've also seen a brief clip, silent of course, of him making his second inaugural speech. But other than that I've only seen a few still pictures of the man. So there wouldn't be a lot of film to show on the TV news. Remember, too, that there wasn't a lot of time on the early TV news for nostalgia or reflexion. Till the early 1960s, the national news was only 15 minutes long in the evening.
Young people these days might get a mistaken impression of John Kennedy as a President from the anniversary hoopla, especially since some of the people making up the tributes aren't old enough to remember. The PBS shows and news segments do however give a good perception of how he was perceived at the time. John Kennedy was without a doubt the news media's all time favorite President. And he was very popular with much of the public including me in those days.
John Kennedy was different from the Presidents who came before him in frivolous and important ways.
Up until John Kennedy's every President of the 20th century rode to his inauguration with the former President, both of them wearing a top hat. John Kennedy had a top hat in his hand during the ride but didn't wear it. From then on the top hat was gone as formal wear. (I can remember my father having rented a top hat with his tuxedo for some formal event he went to in the 1950s. He thought it was pretty silly, but I think he was honored to have been invited to an event that required he arrive in a top hat.)
Kennedy was the youngest President since Teddy Roosevelt and the youngest ever elected. Like Teddy Roosevelt he was a lot more liberal than many of his own party were comfortable with.
Kennedy was very much at ease with the press and used it to his advantage. He actually liked giving press conferences and the press loved him for it. Franklin Roosevelt's last years were during World War II when censorship and self-censorship were the order of the day. Harry Truman was a much better speaker in person than on the radio. The press disliked Eisenhower, who like the military man he was, peppered his press conferences, some of which were the first ones ever televised live, with obfuscations and double talk. Kennedy enjoyed engaging the press, often making sharply worded jokes to worm his way out of answering impossible questions.
John Kennedy was far from perfect.
John Kennedy engaged in more nepotism than any other President in my life time. Every President chooses friends from back home to work around him. Kennedy chose a lot of family members.
Like Bill Clinton, he had a difficult time keeping his pants on, though a much less aggressive press core gladly kept it a secret.
Like Barrack Obama, his skill in getting legislation through Congress was minimal. Most of the ideas we remember him for were implemented by Lyndon Johnson who had a far more agreeable Congress to work with, elected very much in sympathy after Kennedy's death.
Known these days for aggressively desegregating Southern schools, Kennedy was in fact following a policy begun by Eisenhower.
His inept handling of the Bay of Pigs affair, most certainly was the root of the Cuban missile crisis that nearly brought our civilization to an aburpt end. What he should have done is up for debate, but clearly the CIA had gotten out of control. Though he knew what was going to be started his lack of a firm commitment to either support the invasion or to stop it nearly meant that many Americans younger than 50 now, might never have been born.
John Kennedy was far from awful.
Conservatives will often tell you Kennedy would not have been reelected. I doubt that very much. Like Obama in his reelection, Kennedy was much more popular personally than the national split on his policies would indicate.
Having botched the Bay of Pigs affair royally, Kennedy managed to get the Soviets to remove their missiles from Cuba, and avoid a nuclear war, with a promise to stay out of Cuba and a reciprocal removal of our missiles from Turkey. There are some who'll say Kennedy gave up too much. But honestly, given how history played out it couldn't have been done much better.
Kennedy's approach to the Viet-Nam War was much different than Lyndon Johnson's. If Kennedy had lived to serve a second term, the outcome of the war would have been little different, and Kennedy's legacy might have suffered for it. But it is probable that we never would have become so deeply involved in Viet-Nam with our troops on the ground. The world's opinion of our country might have been that much better, and perhaps a trauma like that of the spring of 1970 might not have been a necessary trial for our country to pass through
I will post the obligatory where-was-I-when tomorrow.
If I remember correctly a short motion picture clip of William McKinley walking through the Buffalo Exposition did exist. But it would be one of a very few motion picture records of him. I think perhaps I've also seen a brief clip, silent of course, of him making his second inaugural speech. But other than that I've only seen a few still pictures of the man. So there wouldn't be a lot of film to show on the TV news. Remember, too, that there wasn't a lot of time on the early TV news for nostalgia or reflexion. Till the early 1960s, the national news was only 15 minutes long in the evening.
Young people these days might get a mistaken impression of John Kennedy as a President from the anniversary hoopla, especially since some of the people making up the tributes aren't old enough to remember. The PBS shows and news segments do however give a good perception of how he was perceived at the time. John Kennedy was without a doubt the news media's all time favorite President. And he was very popular with much of the public including me in those days.
John Kennedy was different from the Presidents who came before him in frivolous and important ways.
Up until John Kennedy's every President of the 20th century rode to his inauguration with the former President, both of them wearing a top hat. John Kennedy had a top hat in his hand during the ride but didn't wear it. From then on the top hat was gone as formal wear. (I can remember my father having rented a top hat with his tuxedo for some formal event he went to in the 1950s. He thought it was pretty silly, but I think he was honored to have been invited to an event that required he arrive in a top hat.)
Kennedy was the youngest President since Teddy Roosevelt and the youngest ever elected. Like Teddy Roosevelt he was a lot more liberal than many of his own party were comfortable with.
Kennedy was very much at ease with the press and used it to his advantage. He actually liked giving press conferences and the press loved him for it. Franklin Roosevelt's last years were during World War II when censorship and self-censorship were the order of the day. Harry Truman was a much better speaker in person than on the radio. The press disliked Eisenhower, who like the military man he was, peppered his press conferences, some of which were the first ones ever televised live, with obfuscations and double talk. Kennedy enjoyed engaging the press, often making sharply worded jokes to worm his way out of answering impossible questions.
John Kennedy was far from perfect.
John Kennedy engaged in more nepotism than any other President in my life time. Every President chooses friends from back home to work around him. Kennedy chose a lot of family members.
Like Bill Clinton, he had a difficult time keeping his pants on, though a much less aggressive press core gladly kept it a secret.
Like Barrack Obama, his skill in getting legislation through Congress was minimal. Most of the ideas we remember him for were implemented by Lyndon Johnson who had a far more agreeable Congress to work with, elected very much in sympathy after Kennedy's death.
Known these days for aggressively desegregating Southern schools, Kennedy was in fact following a policy begun by Eisenhower.
His inept handling of the Bay of Pigs affair, most certainly was the root of the Cuban missile crisis that nearly brought our civilization to an aburpt end. What he should have done is up for debate, but clearly the CIA had gotten out of control. Though he knew what was going to be started his lack of a firm commitment to either support the invasion or to stop it nearly meant that many Americans younger than 50 now, might never have been born.
John Kennedy was far from awful.
Conservatives will often tell you Kennedy would not have been reelected. I doubt that very much. Like Obama in his reelection, Kennedy was much more popular personally than the national split on his policies would indicate.
Having botched the Bay of Pigs affair royally, Kennedy managed to get the Soviets to remove their missiles from Cuba, and avoid a nuclear war, with a promise to stay out of Cuba and a reciprocal removal of our missiles from Turkey. There are some who'll say Kennedy gave up too much. But honestly, given how history played out it couldn't have been done much better.
Kennedy's approach to the Viet-Nam War was much different than Lyndon Johnson's. If Kennedy had lived to serve a second term, the outcome of the war would have been little different, and Kennedy's legacy might have suffered for it. But it is probable that we never would have become so deeply involved in Viet-Nam with our troops on the ground. The world's opinion of our country might have been that much better, and perhaps a trauma like that of the spring of 1970 might not have been a necessary trial for our country to pass through
I will post the obligatory where-was-I-when tomorrow.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
As a side note, the Washington Post went back over its coverage of the 1963 March on Washington, and it revelaed a lot about how we distort things over time. Everybody talks about "I have a dream" as a landmark now, but it got only a two line mention in the paper. The Post instead spent several pages discussing amazement that the negro marchers behaved... There's a lot of shine on the past now, that wasn't there at the time.
From:
no subject