Recently conservatives have tried to–what? claim some reflected glory? tarnish a liberal icon?–change the debate by arguing that President Kennedy was really a conservative, that he would be a Republican if he were alive today, and blah, blah, blah.
Is there any substance to this claim?
In a word, no.
The argument depends in part on a misrepresentation of liberal ideas and in part on a misapplication of conservative ideas.
One example of the misrepresentation of liberal ideas is that because some conservatives claim that liberals are opposed to a strong military, or what they might call being “soft on defense”, they argue that anyone who favors a strong military and a strong defense is, ipso facto, a conservative. In fact, liberalism is not characterized by hostility to national defense, although many liberals are skeptical about excessive military spending or expansionist military activities. We have arrived at these positions in large part because of the disastrous effects of America’s imperialist activities in Vietnam, Iran, and many other parts of the world.
Second, because some conservatives believe that tax cuts are the solution to every situation they conclude that Kennedy’s support for a cut in the top marginal tax rate means that he must have been a conservative because only conservatives support tax cuts. The case can be made that the tax cut was actually a Keynesian measure, not what would later become known as supply side economics.
Was he on the left wing of the Democratic Party? No. Although he introduced civil rights legislation, his support for such legislation, and his willingness to commit political capital to get it passed fell far short of what was needed. It is impossible to know what he would have done if he had survived to serve two full terms, but the contrast between what he was willing to do and what Johnson was willing to do to get civil rights legislation passed is striking.
The particulars will change over time, but at the heart of Kennedy’s policy views was the recognition that government can be a force to reduce inequality and support civil rights, improve the lot of ordinary Americans, address the causes and effects of poverty, provide essential services to people who would not otherwise be able to obtain them, strengthen the economy, and help to spread justice, democracy, and peace around the world.
These ideas are anathema to today’s Republican Party and conservative movement, just as they were fifty years ago.
prompt them to constantly try to rebrand themselves with the imagined complimentary attributes of past public figures.
First it was Reagan, now it’s Kennedy.
At this point, they’ve bolted the fence and galloped so far to the right that even Reagan sounds like a liberal compared to them!
While Kennedy was certainly no liberal; he was a Democrat, through and through. And in those days, that still meant a mix of positions on different issues. The whole resolved itself into a semblance of moderation; or at least what was regarded as “moderate” in that less enlightened time.
I remember elections back then when the differences between the two parties’ positions on issues seemed so minor that they were hard-pressed to energize the voters to get them to the polling place.
Speaking style so polished, cooly confident & highly intelligent even brilliant. He is someone I can listen to forever & I cannot stand politicians.
I can’t recall seeing any example of him being emotional, rash or displaying any creepy characteristics except his womanizing which was apparently a family trait.
…our first ‘conservative’ Dem President after FDR. Was Kennedy more like Truman or FDR?