2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumOn revolution: JFK: Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable
Uncle Joe
(58,351 posts)Thanks for the thread, Fumesucker.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)"his hatred of the Cuban revolution was so strong."
So they weren't exactly best buds.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ilanbenmeir/bernie-sanders-despised-democrats-in-1980s-said-a-jfk-speech#.sd7A4E200z
Vermont senator and Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders once said that he was physically nauseated by a speech made by President John F. Kennedy when Sanders was a young man, because Kennedys hatred for the Cuban Revolution [
] was so strong.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Or anyone for that matter?
I thought the Clinton supporters appreciate JFK quotes, I'm seeing one used to attack Bernie right now, you really should coordinate your talking points a bit better in the protected group.
Anyhow, I appreciate you kicking my thread.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)John Poet
(2,510 posts)displayed their best qualities in response to the Cuban revolution.
They drove Cuba straight into the Soviet orbit, by attempting to subvert the popular will of the Cuban people who only rid themselves of a corrupt dictator, albeit one who had been friendly to the corporate business interests of the United States, as well as friendly to organized crime based in the United States but also operating in Cuba.
Opposing popular revolutions for the sake of "fighting communism" was a policy mistake the United States kept making all through the latter half of the 20th century, by both Democrats and Republicans. The Democrats FINALLY got it right in the 1980s, when they opposed actions of the Reagan administration meant to topple the Sandinistas in Nicaragua.
If Bernie was nauseated by Kennedy's adherence to this policy that put global anti-communist worries ahead of the popular will of a people, and put US corporate interests ahead of a sovereign people's desire to rid themselves of brutal right-wing dictators,
then Bernie was RIGHT to be "nauseated".
Kennedy was WRONG on Cuba.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Bernie was 22 when JFK was assassinated.
Where the F**k did this "Best Buds" crap come from???
It isn't like everyone comes from so privileged a background that they get to meet Presidents.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)His parents were divorced and his family was criticized as being from "white trash."
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Sorry if I phrased that poorly.
I like Bill and don't mean to be taking shots at him.
I still don't understand your "Best Buds" comment.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)of his contempt for most Democratic politicians throughout his years in Congress, which is why he has so little support there.
certainot
(9,090 posts)these 90 universities are appropriate places to protest any major progressive/liberal/dem issue or attack on dem candidates, because when they start honoring their mission statements and stop broadcasting sports on 260+ limbaugh stations, the right's most effective propaganda operation will fall apart.
at $1000/hour x 15 hrs a day 1200 radio stations are worth more than 4BIL$/year in free pro wall st/republican/anti-democratic infomercial. ignoring that is suicidal for the planet. the party of lincoln is now the party of limbaugh. the monster propaganda monster they created got loose, and that is why they have trump.
ignoring rw talk radio is the biggest political mistake in history and continuing to give talk radio a free speech free ride may guarantee a not so peaceful revolution. maybe before the violent revolution, the people could fix what's being used to short circuit our democracy with made to order pro 1% constituencies created out of a near-captive audience where free easy alts to rw radio are practically impossible.
people are feeling like revolution because democracy is not working, and the usual culprits- money in politics and media consolidation, are actually symptoms of ignoring the PSYOPS that made that deregulation possible in the first place. if a peaceful revolution does not include challenging one of the if not the major impediment to democracy, then the non-peaceful revolution may be inevitable. before that, maybe the revolutionaries should stop ignoring the big turd under the rug, the one that explains how a fascist talking yam like trump and a bunch of other global warming deniers at the top of the gop ticket.
those 1200 coordinated radio stations not only are a big reason we're in this mess, in emergencies they will be the loudest free, easy, and ubiquitous sources of information. they will help the same old crew define why there is a revolution and against what.
they're going to go all out for the GOP nominee and against bernie or hillary.
1/4 or more of the loudest of those stations owe much of their community acceptance, advertising power, and 'popularity' to being able to piggyback these 90 universities.
merely discussing the idiocy of a university endorsing global warming denial will cause advertisers to flee.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Empowerer
(3,900 posts)On the one hand, I read threads touting Bernie Sanders commitment to political revolution. But then - often in the very next thread - All this talk of revolution suddenly flips into great concern for "pragmatism" and demands that we stop all this talk about reparations because they are too revolutionary a concept to be seriously considered, much less fought for:
"{Sanders is} being realistic on this. Reparations would never pass and he is quite aware of that. It turns out that like any other politician, he has a limit to what he will push for in this campaign."
"White people in this country won't allow it."
"Reparations is an idea that is radical to both. It's a non-starter."
"I really don't see it as a practical solution. I also think it would divide the races rather than bring them together."
"Reparations will never happen and it's time for people who demand it to give up"
"At some point this country needs to formally atone for slavery and how it got rich off the backs of slaves. But at this point there are more pressing issues than to take on an issue that will just serve as divisive / wedge issue."
Shaking my head . . .
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Your comment says everything about you and nothing about anyone else.
bigtree
(85,988 posts)...not American politics.
I hate the misappropriation of quotes to try and suit Bernie's campaign. First it's MLK, now it's JFK.
Of, course, you're free to just make stuff up.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Did you criticize that use of JFK's words?
bigtree
(85,988 posts)...and yes, even without seeing it, I generally do.
Be specific with our history. There's no need to distort it to fit a primary election campaign.
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Long enough for me to decide to copy the style to make a point, I appreciate you helping me out.
bigtree
(85,988 posts)...which will be met with 'violent revolution?'
Hyperbole much?
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Have you objected to that other use of JFK quotes yet?
I mean in that thread..
bigtree
(85,988 posts)...can't address that by pointing to some other thread.
Where do you believe there are efforts to 'make peaceful revolution impossible' which will be (should be) met with 'violent revolution?'
Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)Did you condemn the use of JFK quotes in that thread the way you did in mine or not?