"Joan Kennedy, the former wife of Massachusetts Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, is in the hospital recuperating from a concussion and a broken shoulder after a passer-by found her lying in a street, according to her son.'Were indebted to some anonymous pedestrian who found her and picked her up and got her help,' Patrick Kennedy told the Boston Herald for its Wednesday editions.
Details of exactly what happened and how she ended up in the street were unclear. There was no police report on the incident. Joan Kennedy, who divides her time between Cape Cod and a Boston condominium, has struggled with alcoholism."
-- The Associated Press
This story, from 2005, is a glorious moment in Ted Kennedy's life. That's a photo of Joan, above, standing by "Teddy" after he killed Mary Jo Kopechne in what we now know as the great hippie epoch called 1969.
What a wonderful time. What a wonderful guy, looking like the cornered rat that he was. He divorced Joan, of course, and pretended the rest of us would pretend along with him, that he was a great person, if he continued to stand up for doing the wrong thing - under the guise of helping the little guy. You know, me - but not Joan, the woman he swore fidelity to. I think they call it "paying lip service" or something like that.
Anyway, look at his face there in good ol' '69. That's the real Ted Kennedy. The guy who, from that day forward, could never tell Mary Jo's parents what happened that night. The guy who claimed remorse but couldn't admit the truth. The Catholic who paraded himself as an icon of virtue, until he died, because his rotten Democratic Party would reward him for not giving answers - even for lying, divorce and murder - just as it let Bill Clinton (a Baptist) get away with defaming Monica Lewinsky, and gave Gavin Newsom 75% of the vote to become mayor of NewAge San Francisco after he was busted for cheating with his best friend's (and campaign manager's) wife. Yes, indeed, the Democrats are a party of players!
Well, it's been a party alright. And now it's over for the guy who lived with a lampshade on his head. Good riddance.
VIDEO UPDATE:
Hat Tip: Althouse
As a right-wing true-believer you are (of course) only doing your duty here by pissing on this guy's grave, but I did want to point out that in addition to a committing a DUI-inspired manslaughter 40 years ago, Ted Kennedy was also instrumental in passing a numbers of legislative items we today take for granted, e.g., laws making it easier for African-Americans to vote, go to school, buy houses and that sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteNow you can argue with your fellow wingnuts about whether all of this Civil Rights stuff was a welcome step forward towards racial equality or an shameful violation of the States Rights of the former Confederacy, but most normal Americans do NOT miss the Jim Crow era and are grateful to Ted for helping to put it behind us.
****************
1964
Senator Kennedy makes his maiden speech to the Senate on the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was signed on July 2, 1964, and outlawed segregation in public accommodations.
The first major bill that Senator Kennedy managed on the Senate floor was the Immigration Act of 1965. It was enacted and stood as a major turning point in immigration and civil rights policy because it eliminated discriminatory immigration quotas which favored European immigration, but restricted immigration from other parts of the world. The 1965 Act gave priority to immigrants based on their skills and family relationships.
He was also a strong and vocal supporter of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, to end discrimination against minorities in voting.
1968
Senator Kennedy was a strong supporter of the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the third major civil rights legislation of the decade after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965
I always love how liberals, when trying to convince me of the worth of liberalism (or of a liberal) will run to race to do it. Pardon the pun, but such stereotyping is "appalling". I mean, you could've pointed out Kennedy's deregulation of trucking or the airlines (both of which I'd applaud) but instead - like Barbara Boxer recently - you see a black man in front of you so you run to his race, though you and I both know it's the very-least important aspect of who you or I are. Why?
ReplyDeleteAnd, of course, you leave out that the Civil Rights Act was passed with a majority of Republican votes - or that the Democrats were the party of the KKK - or refuse to acknowledge that, whether defending white rights or black, the Dems are the party of using racial obsession to gain or keep power. "Not part of the narrative", as the saying goes, right?
But, to stay on point, Ted Kennedy wasn't "committing a DUI-inspired manslaughter 40 years ago" but continuing a long string of ugly drunken incidents that hurt the powerless outside of the public eye - just the kinds of things other Democrats (Bill Clinton being a prime example) are allowed to get away with on a regular basis, as long as they bring home the bacon (pork) and continue the ruthless "ends justifies the means" style of politics that's been ripping the fiber of this country apart.
Applaud him if you want to, but, to me, you're like a little girl, explaining why she's enchanted with her favorite boy band, without understanding anything of the dirty music business or what their fan base of groupies are really for.
Let's see, the 1866 Civil Rights Act had Democrat opposition to the end, including the president.
ReplyDeletePresident Andrew Johnson vetoed the bill, saying that blacks were not qualified for United States citizenship and that the bill would "operate in favor of the colored and against the white race."
The Republicans in congress overrode the presidential veto on April 9, 1866.
And the 1964 Act had plenty of its own Democrat fun:
Senators led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. Said Russell: "We will resist to the bitter end any measure or any movement which would have a tendency to bring about social equality and intermingling and amalgamation of the races in our states."
When the left wants an image, such as that of a civil rights party, it simply hijacks it from those who actually did it.
Yes, its true, if you go back to 1866 - 143 years ago - you find a different political landscape, one where Republicans were not hostile to African Americans.
ReplyDeleteBut as any student of American history knows, this all changed permanently with the advent of Nixon's "Southern Strategy," a conscious and deliberate long-term plan to whip up and exploit the fear and resentment of white blue-collar voters for the benefit of the GOP.
This tactic did help the GOP win for decades and has made celebrities of peopel like Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.
But statistics on the "Birther" conspiracy theory show how it is playing out now and the results aren't pretty.
For example, polls reveal that 47% of Republicans nationwide deny that Obama was born in the US. That seems like a huge number but its very misleading.
The average % for all 50 states is being driven higher by the South, where a full 70% of white voters deny that Obama is actually an American citizen.
To put that another way: the vast majority of white Republicans in the former slave-holding states believe that the first black president in American history, is an illegal alien.
That's the GOP's "winning" racial strategy; that's the degraded state of the "party of Lincoln"
Pretty lame if you ask me. Fighting on the wrong side of history never makes much sense.
I mean, you could've pointed out Kennedy's deregulation of trucking or the airlines (both of which I'd applaud) but instead - like Barbara Boxer recently - you see a black man in front of you so you run to his race, though you and I both know it's the very-least important aspect of who you or I are. Why?
ReplyDelete***************
Flipping through your blog I don't see ANY posts about regulatory issues in interstate shipping - not so much as an "trucking" tag.
You are awfully obsessed with racial issues, however:
http://themachoresponse.blogspot.com/search/label/racism
That's why.
Links fixed:
ReplyDeletePosts labelled "racism" on TMR
Posts labelled "trucking" or "airlines" - none found.
God, you guys can be stupid:
ReplyDeleteFirst you claim the Democrats were a different party 143 years ago, then you jump to Nixon - which ain't even close to 143 years ago - ignoring such obvious things as the Republicans wanting to run Colin Powell for president long before Obama was even a blip on the Democrat's radar. Why can't you just admit you don't understand Republicanism and get it over with? All you're doing is stereotyping again with no clue about what you're talking about? I mean, where's the Black Power Movement's role in your assessment of Nixon's Southern Strategy? Or was he just a mean ol' racist with no motivation other than just to be a mean ol' racist - from the party that was never just a bunch of mean ol' racists? (If that's so, then please explain - including the role of former KKK leader Senator Robert Byrd, who by now must be 143 years old,...)
Dude, stereotypes are no way to run your life - or look at the world. You're not a "student of history" but a clown counting heads - specifically to see who's white or not and basing your ideas on that alone. I'm a black Republican conservative, and I know others, and my Republican friends and I don't even trip on race, except as a joke, unless a Democrat brings it up. You guys are the racists.
Look at how you jump from 143 years ago to Nixon, then to Birthers - like wanting to be sure the president is an American automatically makes one a racist - just because some of them (even the majority) have white skin. It's the same strategy used when the Obama/Joker posters showed up - "that's racist" - when there wasn't a white person behind that either. It's nutty, with nothing to support it.
Do you actually know any Republicans? Are they dyed-in-the-wool racists? I know many and they aren't. If anything, they despise racism - and Democrats - for refusing to stop beating the drums of racism when we're just trying to get on with our lives. That's what's lame.
You can keep it up if you want but you can't sell me on such a stupid time-line, or your ignorant take on conservatives. If it was as you say, I as a black man, would have no place with them but life is way better for me than at any time I was a liberal. And liberals are way uglier than you'll ever admit: I know it because they turned on me since the first day I started asking them to explain themselves. They just can't deal with anything but acceptance of their twisted version of things, so to hell with 'em, if you ask me.
Oh - and let's not forget the Dems "winning" racial strategy: Scream that white skin inherently makes one racist forever. What color is your skin, Appalled? And why is it your non-racist ass will invest so much time in trying to convince, specifically, a black man to leave the party that doesn't make him feel like less of an American - only to join up with those who are screaming he is - and should be ready to fight it all the way? Do you think I want to be victim? Which is what I am in liberal eyes - a victim white Democrats, like you, must "save" like you're my great white hope. It's all part of a crazy idea, but it's all yours.
Check out the post I recently did on Bill Whittle - and watch it. I think you might learn something.
And how old are you? You can't be much of an adult because, otherwise, you'd probably know better. I lived through things you talk ignorantly about - like Nixon - so you must not be old enough to understand anything but what they teach you in (decidedly liberal) college or something.
You should read this blog, Appalled, and not just one post.
ReplyDeleteYou might learn something.
First you claim the Democrats were a different party 143 years ago, then you jump to Nixon - which ain't even close to 143 years ago - ignoring such obvious things as the Republicans wanting to run Colin Powell for president long before Obama was even a blip on the Democrat's radar.
ReplyDelete**************
You might have missed this but ("JRN") was the time-traveller who got us off track on the mid-60s and brought up the political events of 1866. I did find this to be an interesting point so I responded to it.
RE: the Southern Strategy this phrase was first used by Jacob Javits in 1963, putting us right back in the same time-frame as your original post. Nixon's strategists did not invent this they just noticed and capitalized on it.
Finally, since you mention Colin Powell, I do admire him as do the vast majority of Americans.
In this I part ways with the many high-profile Republicans who have been trying so hard to drum him out of the GOP these past months, but then I only claim to be an American not a "Republican".
Now, since we are talking about it, and you have expressed the desire to enlighten the public, I am curious to know what you, as a black Republican, think about the Southern Strategy.
Do you support it, I guess would be the obvious question - not only do you think it is in the long-term best interest of the US, but do you think it is a winning strategy for the GOP?
I guess a related question would be, as the GOP evolves into a regional Southern party appealing primarily to born again Christians and the white working class, how do you see racially tinged issues such as the Birther movement playing out?
70% of white Republican voters in the former Confederate states believe that Barack Obama is an illegal alien. You say this has nothing to do with race. OK.
What explains this disrepancy then? Why are the numbers for the acceptance of this bizarre conspiracy theory off the charts in the South but extremely low in the rest of the country?
Are you absolutely sure that has nothing to do with this long-term strategy that the GOP has had of using white resentment and fear as a wedge issue to win elections in the South?
That looks like a pretty reasonable connection to make to me, but if you have some alternate explanation I'd love to hear it.
Wait a minute - you don't mention WHY Republicans are disgusted with Colin Powell. Do you know? Or is it just more of your "racist" theory?
ReplyDeleteWait a minute - I'm supposed to accept the Birthers as racist because you say they are?
And wait a minute - if "Nixon's strategists did not invent this they just noticed and capitalized on it" - why label them racists? Racism is a shriveling of the heart, not merely political opportunism.
And, finally, listen to yourself - with your "pretty reasonable connection" - you're GUESSING about what's going in other people's heads. You've got no evidence of racism on anybody's part, it's just an ASSUMPTION you're making because you can't fathom another possible answer. You're even maintaining that assumption while talking to a black conservative Republican who's told you all the racism I've ever encountered has been from so-called liberals - including yourself with your original stereotyping.
Get a grip, dude.
And one more thing:
ReplyDeleteIn mentioning that Republicans don't care for Powell anymore, you neglect to notice THEY ONCE LOVED HIM - enough to want to run him for president and head of the party - which punches another big-assed hole in your racist party of Lincoln theory.
And did you watch this yet?
As if on cue, this item hit the newswires 15 min ago: - kinda makes my point for me.
ReplyDeleteRepublicans Waiting for a ‘Great White Hope,’ Says GOP Rep
(ChattahBox)—According to Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-KS), the Republicans are waiting for a “great white hope” to step up from the ranks of the Republican party to defeat that black man in office, President Barack Obama. Rep. Jenkins made her inappropriate and racially tinged remark during a recent town hall meeting and she is catching some flak for it this week, after a story was written about it in the Topeka Capitol-Journal.
Freshman Rep. Jenkins held a town hall meeting on August 19, in Hiawatha Kansas. And made her inflammatory remarks in response to a question from an audience member, asking if the Republican Party had plans for a future policy blueprint.
Jenkins answered by saying: ‘”Republicans are struggling right now to find ‘the great white hope.’” “I suggest to any of you who are concerned about that, who are Republican, there are some great young Republican minds in Washington,” said Jenkins.
Jenkins went on to name three white Congressmen, as examples of a “great white hope.” She named, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, (R-Calif) Rep. Paul Ryan, (R-Wis) and Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA). “So don’t, you know, lose faith if you are a conservative,” said Jenkins.
The phrase, “great white hope” has long been associated with racism and originated during the time a black fighter, Jack Johnson rose to become the heavyweight-boxing champion in the 1900s. A campaign began to find a white fighter, “a great white hope” to reclaim the title away from a black man.
When the white fighter, James J. Jeffries finally agreed to face Johnson in 1910 he said, “I am going into this fight for the sole purpose of proving that a white man is better than a Negro.” The fight took place before an all-white crowd with loud chants of “kill the n_______."
Sorry, but I remain unimpressed.
And, of course, this one quote from one Republican clearly outdoes the 100 years of quotes from the whole of the Democratic Party - including party platforms - I supplied you with in the link above ("You might learn something.")
ReplyDeleteYou're hard-headed, and that's not a trait known for serving folks well in life. As my foster-mother used to say, "A hard head makes for a soft behind."
Followed your link and agree that those quotes are indeed disgraceful.
ReplyDeleteKudos to the Democratic party for making the effort necessary to break with this part of America's ugly past.
And shame on the Republican party for continuing to exploit that same ugly past for political gain.
"Well, there goes the South!" - LBJ
Um, if you look at the dates of the quotes, you will see there was no "break". And to attribute their passion for racism to the party that has been fighting them all the way - based on a single quote - is asinine.
ReplyDeleteLike I said, you're hard-headed.
(shrug)
ReplyDeleteNot hard-headed, just born in this century.
Apologies to JRN, but 1866 was a long time ago.
"For instance, it turns out that he supported a woman's right to have an abortion...in order to avoid those horrible mixed-race babies:
ReplyDeleteThere are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white."
A President whom Crack Emcee lauds as a 'patriot'. Nice guy.
Why, Appalled, have you chosen to dwell on 1866 when the paragraph below it is about 1964? And it reads about the same. Not a lot of progress for the Dems in 143 years.
ReplyDeleteVery selective, Appalled. Learn that from the professor you've been worshiping? YOU read 1866 and stayed there.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteYou delete a reasonable question because it shows you for what you are, and you call ME a coward? Delete all you want. Keep up the charade. I dont care.
ReplyDeleteI'm waaay ahead of you.
ReplyDeleteAnd you lie:
If you didn't care you wouldn't comment - or come back, within an hour, to comment again.
Face it:
Like most liberals, you even lie to yourself.
But you can't lie to me, "strawman"....I've got your number. Which, if you think about it, is really the answer to your question. Glad to be of service - and far away from you.
If leaps in logic was an olympic event, youd grab the gold every time. But if youre happy with it, keep on keeping on.
ReplyDeleteWow - you're the second white liberal, this week, to give this black man permission to live my life as I see fit! Amazing! Maybe one day, in the future, you'll return to tell me you've grasped that that was never to be your role in the first place!
ReplyDeleteHope and Change!
Why, Appalled, have you chosen to dwell on 1866 when the paragraph below it is about 1964?
ReplyDelete****************
Sorry JRN, I assumed you already you knew how 1964 turned out, but if you don't, then I'd be happy to refresh your memory.
LBJ predicted that the Democratic Party would lose the South for generations when he signed the Civil Rights Act, and he was right.
The old-school segregationists and "States Rights" fanatics abandoned the Democrats for the Republican Party and the realignment of the GOP to its new power-base in the agrarian "Solid South" began.
Meanwhile, the Democrats became the party of choice for large urban centers and the industrialized North-east. And so here we are today.
Hope you feel like you're up to speed now - any more question, please do let me know.