• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Dry spell of no Kennedy in Congress will soon be over

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,908
44
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Dry spell of no Kennedy in Congress will soon be over

I don't know anything about this Kennedy.

What took him so long, was he to young to run?

2-9-2012

http://news.yahoo.com/kennedy-moves-ahead-expected-congressional-bid-125115131.html

Kennedy moves ahead of expected congressional bid


Joseph Kennedy III has moved to a different Boston suburb ahead of an expected congressional bid to replace retiring U.S. Rep. Barney Frank.

Brookline's town clerk says the 31-year-old Kennedy came to town hall Tuesday and registered to vote as a Democrat, listing a Brookline address.



He'd been living in Cambridge, which is in a different district.

Kennedy is the son of former U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy II and a grandson of the late Robert F. Kennedy.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Well, now we have a second generation of Kennedies coming along just when the first generation crapped out.

And on the humorous side, those Irish Catholics get every more numerous as each generation comes along. In the democratic humor of the 1960's, everyone was nominating Ethel Kennedy for secretary of Labor, but in future generations, secretary of Labor must be reserved for the most prolific Kennedy mother.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,876
4
0
Well, not in my district, so I can't vote against him. He'll probably cruise to victory in this state. D:
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,431
82
91
Well, not in my district, so I can't vote against him. He'll probably cruise to victory in this state. D:
With a name like Kennedy... he will probably get the prime committee spots in congress. Name recognition FTW.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,156
3,769
136
Political dynasties YAY!

Don't forget to genuflect.
I know it's not nearly as important as a House seat in Massachusetts, but please don't forget to explicitly oppose Jeb Bush for . . . PRESIDENT . . . in 2016 on the same grounds!

Maybe Jeb will go for the all important right wing lesbian vote by choosing Mary Cheyney as his running mate. :p

Bush/Cheyney 2016 . . . because Americans never learn! :cool:
 

Ausm

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
25,215
13
81
I know it's not nearly as important as a House seat in Massachusetts, but please don't forget to explicitly oppose Jeb Bush for . . . PRESIDENT . . . in 2016 on the same grounds!

Maybe Jeb will go for the all important right wing lesbian vote by choosing Mary Cheyney as his running mate. :p

Bush/Cheyney 2016 . . . because Americans never learn! :cool:
Oh GOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
 

dwell

pics?
Oct 9, 1999
5,190
0
0
If that intern's story is true, JFK was a borderline rapist. Fuck that whole family is cursed.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
344
126
If that intern's story is true, JFK was a borderline rapist. Fuck that whole family is cursed.
Times were different and the Kennedy men had a different view of sex.

Joe Kennedy taught his sons to enjoy sex period, without much regard to 'fidelity'.

He married a devout catholic woman and she was expected to turn a blind eye to his mistresses while raising the family. His sons were taught accordingly.

There have been recent commentaries noting the high correlation between powerful men and adultery/sexual promiscuity.

It wasn't 'rape', any more than a rock star who has sex with groupies and tosses them aside is 'rape'.

It is viewed as despicable by many - it's not very 'respectful of women', but was consensual - and I suspect more objections by men are jealousy than morality.

I'd say it was an 'entitlement' feeling, just as movie stars - who JFK enjoyed spending time with - have the same issue commonly.

He expected Jackie to be a good mother and turn a blind eye to his adultery; her vacation with Aristotle Annassis on his yacht while First Lady, who she later married, says something.

He was taught that a lot of sex was good for him, and it may well be the case. Who doesn't 'feel like a million bucks' with that flattery and pleasure?

It raises questions about the role of sex and power. Some men don't - Carter and Bush, for example - while others do, Clinton/Eisenhower/FDR for example.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
Although I could not resist a chance to use humor, I also agree with Craig that the Kennedy
family has been involved in much of our best legislation in recent years. The Kennedy family is not the first or will it be the last political dynasty. Arguable. The Adam's family was first, and the first father and son President, then the Roosevelt's, the Rockafellers, Prescott Bush founded another, and for a while, it looked like the Eisenhower name might be multi-generational.

As for me I would not vote for a candidate because his last name is Kennedy not would I vote against such a candidate on the basis of last name. But I will make a exception for the Bush family, Prescott Bush was a totally disgusting human being, George H Bush, was slightly better, but GWB, was a totally unmitigated disaster for our country and the world for that matter.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Times were different and the Kennedy men had a different view of sex.

Joe Kennedy taught his sons to enjoy sex period, without much regard to 'fidelity'.

He married a devout catholic woman and she was expected to turn a blind eye to his mistresses while raising the family. His sons were taught accordingly.

There have been recent commentaries noting the high correlation between powerful men and adultery/sexual promiscuity.

It wasn't 'rape', any more than a rock star who has sex with groupies and tosses them aside is 'rape'.

It is viewed as despicable by many - it's not very 'respectful of women', but was consensual - and I suspect more objections by men are jealousy than morality.

I'd say it was an 'entitlement' feeling, just as movie stars - who JFK enjoyed spending time with - have the same issue commonly.

He expected Jackie to be a good mother and turn a blind eye to his adultery; her vacation with Aristotle Annassis on his yacht while First Lady, who she later married, says something.

He was taught that a lot of sex was good for him, and it may well be the case. Who doesn't 'feel like a million bucks' with that flattery and pleasure?

It raises questions about the role of sex and power. Some men don't - Carter and Bush, for example - while others do, Clinton/Eisenhower/FDR for example.
Wow. You are truly a master of rationalization.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,991
2
0
If that intern's story is true, JFK was a borderline rapist. Fuck that whole family is cursed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dweel, IF your father was a convicted rapist, would it mean are equally guilty and should be forever damned.

Its a founding principle of US law, children are not guilty of the sins of their parents.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121

Corn

Diamond Member
Nov 12, 1999
6,389
29
91

etrigan420

Golden Member
Oct 30, 2007
1,723
1
71
Non-issue. Virulent outrage for this type of behavior is reserved solely for those with an (R) after their name.
Not really. Virulent outrage for this type of behavior is reserved solely for those who preach against, politicize, and legislate based on their abhorration of this behavior, *then* engage in it.

That the majority of those doing so have an (R) after their name is inconsequential.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Not really. Virulent outrage for this type of behavior is reserved solely for those who preach against, politicize, and legislate based on their abhorration of this behavior, *then* engage in it.

That the majority of those doing so have an (R) after their name is inconsequential.
It looks like Doc nailed this one again.

This quoted post is almost as rich and deep in hypocrisy as the "times were different" post.
 

Griffinhart

Golden Member
Dec 7, 2004
1,130
1
76
Hard to say what will happen in the state elections. He may have a Kennedy name but there are more Dems you can throw a stick at here. Not to mention the fact that Mass lost a seat in the house this year, so he will be facing a long term incombant.

Given how the districts are here and how things will shake out afterwards, he would likely face off against the likes of Markey or Tierney. I don't see it happening.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Not really. Virulent outrage for this type of behavior is reserved solely for those who preach against, politicize, and legislate based on their abhorration of this behavior, *then* engage in it.

That the majority of those doing so have an (R) after their name is inconsequential.
There's not a politician in this country that hasn't made a stand publicly for families. Their isn't a politician in this country that hasn't politicized behavior. There isn't a politician in this country who hasn't voted for legislation that is based on morality.

You just want every Democrat to get a pass on their bad behavior and every Republican to be condemned for their bad behavior. So you rationalize some category that allows you to attack Republicans, but leave your favored party alone.
Doc pointed out the obvious hypocrisy from the left/Democrats on these forums and I agreed.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,466
422
126
Political dynasties YAY!

Don't forget to genuflect.
As someone before me said... the Bush family was/is(?) a Political Dynasty as well. We'll have to see what Jeb Bush does in the future. They've been a Dynasty for as long as the Kennedys have and have been involved in as many scandals as have the Kennedy family.

Of course I suppose Political dynasties are only bad in your book if they have differing political views than you
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY