The JFK Thing Posted by Michael Cohen

Last night Matt Yglesias had a post where he expressed his mystification with the fascination so many Democrats "of a certain age" have with John F Kennedy.

But from where I sit JFK, um, wasn't a very good president. His signature accomplishment was . . . the Peace Corps? Basically, boomers seem to have taken the Kennedy/Johnson years, attributed all of the Vietnam stuff to Johnson even though Kennedy initiated the policy, then attributed all of the popular domestic stuff to JFK even though almost none of it passed while he was president, and then you get a lot of hand-waving. At some point, can't we act like grownups and let this drop. The Republican hagiography of Ronald Reagan is embarrassing but the JFK business is even more detached from reality.

It bears mentioning that JFK's signature accomplishment was probably resolving the Cuban Missile Crisis without blowing the world to kingdom come, but certainly it is true that Kennedy's achievements as President were threadbare. And a few years ago I would have likely written a post seconding Matt's point, but then I wrote a book on presidential campaign speechwriting and came to see JFK in a whole new light.

The fact that so many Dems of a certain age "idolize" Kennedy is because he was an extraordinarily inspiring figure. His speeches preached sacrifice, patriotism and yes, change. Take a look at this passage from his speech accepting the Democratic nomination for President:

The New Frontier of which I speak is not a set of promises, it is a set of challenges. It sums up not what I intend to offer the American people, but what I intend to ask of them. It appeals to their pride, not to their pocketbook – it holds out the promise of more sacrifice instead of more security.

But I tell you the New Frontier is here, whether we seek it or not. Beyond that frontier are the uncharted areas of science and space, unsolved problems of peace and war, unconquered pockets of ignorance and prejudice, unanswered questions of poverty and surplus. It would be easier to shrink back from that frontier, to look to the safe mediocrity of the past, to be lulled by good intentions and high rhetoric – and those who prefer that course should not cast their votes for me regardless of party.

But I believe the times demand new invention, innovation, imagination, decision. I am asking each of you to be pioneers on that New Frontier. My call is to the young in heart, regardless of age – to all who respond to the Scriptural call: “Be strong and of good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed.”

For courage – not complacency – is our need today – leadership, not salesmanship. And the only valid test of leadership is the ability to lead, and lead vigorously. A tired nation, said David Lloyd George, is a Tory nation, and the United States today cannot afford to be either tired or Tory.

There may be those who wish to hear more – more promises to this group or that – more harsh rhetoric about the men in the Kremlin – more assurances of a golden future, where taxes are always low and subsidies ever high. But my promises are in the platform you have adopted. Our ends will not be won by rhetoric and we can have faith in the future only if we have faith in ourselves.

This is stirring and courageous language and for millions of Americans, it changed the way they think about politics. This is to not even mention the soaring rhetoric of his inaugural address. Maybe as a younger generation that grew up after Vietnam and Watergate and in the midst of discussions about stained blue dresses we have become cynical about the power of political rhetoric to inspire people . .  and bring real change. But I think for a lot of folks who came of age in the 60s and who saw or heard Kennedy speak, these words and, more important, his youthful and vigorous image stuck with them.  For better or worse the guy embodied political and generational change and I hardly find it surprising that so many Americans who came of age in the 60s were inspired by Kennedy -- even if he didn't accomplish much. After all, us wonks who look exclusively at policy accomplishments are in the minority. For millions of Americans, political image is just as salient if not more. As Obama suggested last night in the Democratic debate words can make a difference; they can inspire people. Never underestimate the power of the bully pulpit!

My mother who would pretty much agree with much of what Matt said about JFK's conduct as President once said to me she knew all his faults, but "we loved him." And I think that pretty much sums it up.

Comments

[Neil]

What is the nexus between Matt Yglesias, JFK, Ronald Reagan, foriegn policy and global affairs? ...not that this post doesn't make an excellent point about JFKs accomplishments and how he wasn't bullied by Krushchev who was quite certain he could plant missiles with warheads 90 miles from the USA. Kennedy also won the battle of a free West Berlin under siege by Communists and rallied democracies the world over to unite against comminist expansion. It could be argued that Kennedy layed the groundwork for the civil rights movement. Too bad somebody put a bullet in his head, he may have earned four more years and who knows then what he would have accomplished.

[mike m]

Excellent post, really honest stuff. Sadly, I think we need a lot more than pretty words right now. Obama is a mistake. We might never realize it because I think obama will be a popular president if he gets the job, but this is still a mistake.

[PPP]

The essential article on the subject:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/theodore_sorensen/2007/07/obama_the_next_jfk.html

[Peace]

What JFK like Obama inspires is hope and not fear for a better tomorrow. This makes him very different from that suppoesed other great communicater Ronald Reagan who constantly used the fear of the Soviet Union or Bill Clinton who managed to only talk about specific policy proposals and not how to unite the American people.

[zbird]

Very powerful speech. But I think to really appreciate Kennedy's rhetorical power you have to imagine the medium he was speaking through--probably a prime-time commercial-free network broadcast. I can just see families finishing their dinner and gathering on the couch in front of a black and white TV set to watch--uninterrupted by the internet, by 80 cable channels, or even by phone calls (yes, they had phones, but calling was too expensive to do all the time).

I doubt that any speech, no matter how well-written could possibly have the same affect today.