Were there negative comments when Kennedy died?

Well okay, if you all want to identify yourself as decrepit old farts, fine.

I read the thread on the first president people voted for and others have divulged their ages here and there, and I just assumed I could properly don my grandmother's shawl and matronly role here. (But don't ask me to give up my tennis shoes.)

I was old enough to vote for Kennedy, but didn't. Some of us grow older and wiser. Others go the other way and get decrepit. :wink:

Ewww bad Mesquite. Bad.

Of course there were negative comments after Kennedy died. He was elected with a slim majority - the Bay of Pigs happened under him - he had a very shaky first couple of years as president - the actions the administration took on civil rights was anathema to many, and not enough for activists - there were many who hated him for lots of reasons - some rational, some as irrational as the hate which suppurates round here now - so it goes.

Because of the assassination, there was a somewhat bizarre hagiographic (is that a word?) response (mebbe helped by the missile crisis? I, as a little kid, idolised him after that, and when they took action re civil rights) interval publicly - very prolonged in his case. He hit some sort of archetypal need in people, after the assassination, (like Princess Di) just as there had been a sort of pop-star phenomenon amongst many prior to his death.

Privately, I am sure many initially said "good" - but were shocked by the manner of his death, and its implications for American society - some kept thinking "good", I suspect - but public attacks on Kennedy after his death were rare for a few years - they then, of course, became de rigeur. That presidency will be one of the more difficult ones to judge rationally.

And yes, the press would have been very reluctant to attack a "martyred" president - just as Reagan would have been immune if the bullet had killed him.

I saw footage of Malcolm X, saying the "chickens had come home to roost" for Kennedy. He made a couple of other quite unfortunate remarks about Kennedy, immediately following the assasination.

I forgot about Malcolm X Sofia. I do remember that. That was before he had mellowed out somewhat.

I recall Malcolm X making that comment; it was the first time I'd heard the expression, and I didn't quite understand what he meant. I got the general idea, though, and I knew he was blamed for saying something inappropriate.

But here's the thing: What I suspect he meant was that violence was a part of the American fabric, and whites had visited much violence on blacks through US history. Hence chickens coming home to roost...

I heard about classrooms erupting into cheers when some schoolkids were informed. While not widespread, it did get reported on.

Politicians, no matter who they are, aren't Caesars or gods. When they die, some folks will mourn and others will giggle. That's as it should be.

The classic non-mourning response to a presidential death was Dorothy Parker upon being informed that Coolidge had died..."How could they tell?"

I think it has a lot to do with a sense of decency and upbringing.

Ah. A thread idea.

There are many who's lives don't deserve respect--but there is a certain character trait in some, that prohibits speaking ill of the dead between death and burial.

I'm thinking of the adage If you don't have anything good to say, say nothing...is appropriate for the recently departed. Doesn't mean false praise is appropriate. Perhaps discretion.

If I outlive Carter and Clinton, I can think of two or three truthful, positive areas to speak of.

Carter and Clinton are two distinctive animals. I love Carter, but am no fan of Clinton.

sofia

All cultures do have some particular set of acceptable behaviors and rituals for the deceased. We'll see, on the news, examples of hair pulling and teeth knashing and shirt ripping and very loud wailing for example, all which would seem inappropriate here. Quite likely, our tendency to be silent would be seen as cold-hearted elsewhere. Children in each culture are indoctrinated in their particular style of 'correct' grief behavior.

When my father died, we held a get-together after the funeral at the home he had built and where we had grown up and where the grandchildren had all visited and played through the early years of their lives. It was a lovely sunny summer day and my daughter with the cousin who was her good friend (both about five years old) were running about and laughing and playing. A particularly anal christian relative attempted to shush them. I shushed her and told the girls to have fun. Those two girls and I had a very clear understanding of which behavior my father would have preferred, and quiet morose children was not it.

But political figures pay special prices for all the perks they get from being up at alpha position. One of those prices is they get talked about, and that talk won't always be good...unless one lives in an authoritarian culture, of course. I think we have no obligation as citizens to just say nice things about a dead politician, and in fact I think it's dangerous to feel we ought to. One also ought to give a nod for service (as with a soldier or a fireman or a teacher) but no more than that.

In the case of one so revered, but whom I disapproved of, I felt it necessary to counterbalance what I see as a myth in error. I have a personal like for Reagan on one level, but not politically. Too many lives are affected by the world's treatment of some politicians to remain silent. Sometimes crass seems necssary.

It just seemed to me that those who felt it important that 'the record be set straight' could have left alone those of us who genuinely wished to remember and respect and mourn him. We would just get a good thread going and here came the critics to pour as much cold water as they could on anything good that was said.

I didn't think it too much to ask that we have one thread of good stuff. I guess that was too much to ask.

I avoided half of those threads.

I understand your sentiments.

I recall at age nine, my most beloved Uncle had died, and friends and relatives gathered. Though I was so young, I was horrified at how so many adults around me were telling jokes and laughing. No one had told me how I should feel. I was heartbroken, and asked my mother to tell them they should all go home, if they thought something was so funny. I wanted to take the broom to the lot of them.

To each his own, I'm sure, but I would prefer my children to be well-behaved at a funeral gathering, out of respect for those who are very sad. Respect for others is not so much an anal thing, as it just reflects thoughts for others, and a little self-discipline. All in all, not such useless things.

As I was teaching my daughter to drive, we came upon a funeral procession. I instructed her to pull to the side of the road. She hadn't seen this particular manuever in the driving manual, and I explained that we do this to show respect for the dead.

I don't think ascension to public office strips one of a little deference from death to burial. It is in the realm of common decency to me. I can'timagine anyone suggesting continuing this polite discretion after burial. Nor would I censure negative commentors, or shush children--

But, what I would THINK... <However, in your situation, you were a member of the primary family. Your feelings were paramount, in that case.>

Funny, our little rules.

Of course it is too much to ask. You are in a community which you don't own.

BBB
In the cases of both Kennedy and Reagan, what I object to is the excesses of the Media and the chauvinist myth-making. Kennedy's Camelot myth was mild compared to the excesses of those promoting the Reagan myth. It's almost like they are trying to recover his reputation, which at the time he left office was not all that great. All the rhetoric is an attempt to hide his less than honorable actions while in office. They would be better off boasting about how likeable a person he was---and I would give them that.

BBB

False in both cases.