• 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

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
17,546
1,759
126
Originally Posted by pcgeek11
So it is OK if the Kennedy men molest young women, run illegal booze for the mob, kill young girls on and on and that is fine...

Wow!




Better than Republicans that proclaim against homosexuality and gay marriage and then are found messing with a gay prostitute in the mens bathroom.
What you are saying is it is better to molest young women, run illegal booze for the mob, kill young girls than it is to speak out against gay marriage and gays then get caught with one in a consenting gay relationship?


Wow! You really are fucked up aren't you?
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Just what we need, more crooks and idiots in congress. Not just ordinary crooks mind you, these are the entitled crooks that deserve to be in congress simply because of their last name. Sigh. Says a lot about the idiots that are voting that the Kennedy's keep on showing up.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
No, you're full of crap and misrepresenting what I said. I didn't 'dismiss' it.

It's so predictable someone will be disengenuos and say something like that.
You're a liar, and a horrible excuse for a human being. You're half of the problem with this country today. You're the mirror image of a far right nutter.
 

Skitzer

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2000
4,416
2
81
You're a liar, and a horrible excuse for a human being. You're half of the problem with this country today. You're the mirror image of a far right nutter.
Thank you, you beat me to it.
Craig is without a doubt the biggest liberal hack job on this Forum. Occasionally his posts seem to be intelligent and thought out, but if you look closely, that impression is wiped out totally by his tangible hate of anything/anyone with center to right leaning opinions and the irrational progressive bullshit he espouses. I am a moderate Independent and I can see both sides of an issue without too much bias. It is obvious to people like me that there is no hope for someone like Craig.
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,699
47
91
good idea. another kennedy clown who never worked a day in it's life and a mouth full of silver spoons. Fulfills the only criteria to be a liberal politician.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,708
1
0
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.
I thought you hated dynastical rich white people?
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,708
1
0
Love that the Craig234 objectivity approach is showing in full force:

1) Read a bunch of biased crap (common dreams etc.) to form a fixed opinion
2) Observe real life events and rationalize and compartmentalize them to fit fixed the opinion from above.
3) Broadcast the logical leap as an argument while avoiding any semblance of critical thought.
3) Repeat


I personally don't see how coming from a certain bloodline makes you somehow innately qualified and predestined to hold a public office, other than having your dad hand it to you as a graduation gift.

As far as JFK and cuban missile cris go, while JFKs administration did do an excellent job dancing on the blade's edge, it was JFKs previous actions and demeanor that empowered Kruschev to do it in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
344
126
good idea.
Just filtered your post for the only honest content.

It's amazing to me the hate for the family that has been the most public service wealth family in American history by far.

They didn't sacrifice enough, three of four sons killed serving the public and the fourth nearly killed (John Hinkley was waiting to shoot Ted Kennedy, but when Kennedy was late he switched to Reagan). One of the wealthiest men in America who lost his first son in extremely dangerous service in WWII and nearly lost his second (PT-109), where family political connections weren't used to get a son out of the war (Texas Air National Gurad 'champagne unit' in Vietnam), but in (JFK had medical problems).

The Kennedys did not have to do public service - they did because they believe in it. And I guess that's the real offense to the bastards who are against 'public service'.

That's why they embrace the rich and selfish who will exploit others to gain wealth and attack the people who will help others - especially 'class traitors'.
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,708
1
0
Just filtered your post for the only honest content.

It's amazing to me the hate for the family that has been the most public service wealth family in American history by far.

They didn't sacrifice enough, three of four sons killed serving the public and the fourth nearly killed (John Hinkley was waiting to shoot Ted Kennedy, but when Kennedy was late he switched to Reagan). One of the wealthiest men in America who lost his first son in extremely dangerous service in WWII and nearly lost his second (PT-109), where family political connections weren't used to get a son out of the war (Texas Air National Gurad 'champagne unit' in Vietnam), but in (JFK had medical problems).

The Kennedys did not have to do public service - they did because they believe in it. And I guess that's the real offense to the bastards who are against 'public service'.

That's why they embrace the rich and selfish who will exploit others to gain wealth and attack the people who will help others - especially 'class traitors'.
I'm sure your argument for the Bushes' public services will be diametrically opposed to the snowjob above.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush-Davis-Walker_family_political_line
 

IGBT

Lifer
Jul 16, 2001
17,699
47
91
Just filtered your post for the only honest content.

It's amazing to me the hate for the family that has been the most public service wealth family in American history by far.

They didn't sacrifice enough, three of four sons killed serving the public and the fourth nearly killed (John Hinkley was waiting to shoot Ted Kennedy, but when Kennedy was late he switched to Reagan). One of the wealthiest men in America who lost his first son in extremely dangerous service in WWII and nearly lost his second (PT-109), where family political connections weren't used to get a son out of the war (Texas Air National Gurad 'champagne unit in Vietnam'), but in (JFK had medical problems).

The Kennedys did not have to do public service - they did because they believe in it. And I guess that's the real offense to the bastards who are against 'public service'.

That's why they embrace the rich and selfish who will exploit others to gain wealth and attack the people who will help others - especially 'class traitors'.


they were a bunch of rum runners and opportunists all with a bloated sense of personal destiny. If it wasn't for their booze racket revenue they would be just another bunch of paddies looking for a job. Nothing special. Nothing exceptional. Undistinguished.
 

MovingTarget

Diamond Member
Jun 22, 2003
8,990
84
91
The Kennedy wealth and political dynasty: Another example of why we should have a meaningful estate tax. Are you listening, GOP?
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
I'm sure there are more than a few families who have lost many family members to war. I'm not sure why Craig thinks the Kennedys are special other than the fact that they're rich.

Swinging from the nuts of a 1% that is ostensibly "on his team" is just what does. Craig swings from Soros' nuts to Kerry's nuts to Gore's nuts to Kennedy's nuts like he's fuckin' Tarzan.
 

modestninja

Senior member
Jul 17, 2003
753
0
76
The Kennedy wealth and political dynasty: Another example of why we should have a meaningful estate tax. Are you listening, GOP?
Yup. That would help move us more in a meritocratic direction. Too bad so many politicians (both R and Ds both) would vehemently oppose a meaningful estate tax.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
44,156
3,769
136
Link to stories about Eisenhower and FDR's infidelity? That's news to me.
Actually both are pretty well documented. Eisenhower's was his military driver, FDR's was his secretary iirc.

I'll look for links and post them if I get ambitious, but you could do it, too. Side issue, and not a big one for me.

Okay:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kay_Summersby
http://www.amazon.com/Past-Forgetting-Affair-Dwight-Eisenhower/dp/0671223585
http://blockyourid.com/~gbpprorg/judicial-inc/86eisenhower_flaunted_his_lover_in.htm

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/04/26/the-women-the-president-loved.html
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2008/04/18/fdrs-secret-love
http://www.amazon.com/FDR-Lucy-Friends-Resa-Willis/dp/0415980135
 
Last edited:

FuzzyBee

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2000
5,172
0
76
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.
Man, you have an awfully big rug you're able to sweep your idols' discretions under.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
Uh-huh. I guess you probably believe Hinckley was a "shadow government" operative, too, right?
I thought it was pretty cool that the conspiracy theorists can now add an angry husband or a jealous boyfriend as the shooter on the grassy knoll. Maybe it wasn't the mafia/Johnson/Castro/aliens/shadow gov't/FBI/military/CIA/muppets after all.
 

preCRT

Platinum Member
Apr 12, 2000
2,340
123
106
If Joe 3rd is anything politically like his great uncle Ted, I'll be very happy to vote for him in the primary & general election. I wasn't too keen on the other candidates who have stepped forward so far in the district since Barney announced his retirement.

Between that race & Elizabeth Warren kicking out Scott Brown, I predict a HUGE voter turnout in the 4th district.
 

Dulanic

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2000
9,751
359
136
If Joe 3rd is anything politically like his great uncle Ted, I'll be very happy to vote for him in the primary & general election. I wasn't too keen on the other candidates who have stepped forward so far in the district since Barney announced his retirement.

Between that race & Elizabeth Warren kicking out Scott Brown, I predict a HUGE voter turnout in the 4th district.
I am going to have to side with you on this. I voted for Scott Brown and will not be doing so again this time. I have yet to see anyone have bad things about Joe 3rd besides OMG LIBTARD and OMG KENNEDY! both of which have 0 meaning overall. I will research more what he is behind but his ads have been positive and he has served in the Peace Corps for 2 years and has some legal background. However, I will not vote for him just because he's Dem or his family name.
 

actuarial

Platinum Member
Jan 22, 2009
2,814
0
71
I'm disputing your obviously untrue claim that the majority of people that engage in that behavior have an (R) next to their name. In fact I showed a pretty good example of that in the JFK story.
I agree with your overall assessment, but this post is still pretty LOL worthy in terms of the pot calling the kettle black.

When Doc said that virulent outrage is reserved only for (R) on these forums he was pointing out the reality here at ATP&N is that the majority of posters hang out on the left side of the political spectrum and usually attack (R). A minority, including myself, occasionally reciprocate by bashing (D).
Explanation as to why you feel justified in being a partisan hack that only attacks one side.

You, of course are (D) and resent the fact that someone is bashing your side, so you bash (R) and feel self righteously justified in doing so.
Use basically the exact same explanation to criticize someone else. I guess the only difference is that you played the minority card to support your hackery.

Welcome to politics in America.
Indeed.
 

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,445
0
0
I agree with your overall assessment, but this post is still pretty LOL worthy in terms of the pot calling the kettle black.



Explanation as to why you feel justified in being a partisan hack that only attacks one side.



Use basically the exact same explanation to criticize someone else. I guess the only difference is that you played the minority card to support your hackery.



Indeed.
1. Agreed.

2.It's my to occasional pleasure to pop the left/liberal/progressive/Democrat bubble of self righteous smugness that so frequently permeates their postings.

3. My point usually isn't that conservatives or Republicans are great (I don't think they are), but are as good as or better than their competition. If they've already used the argument they frequently understand my use of it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY