26,869
edits
Albert E. Burke: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→JFK Assassination
| Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
[http://www.orwelltoday.com/jfkjbsdallasad.shtml Dallas Hate-JFK Dealy Ad]</span> | [http://www.orwelltoday.com/jfkjbsdallasad.shtml Dallas Hate-JFK Dealy Ad]</span> | ||
The <mark>entire page 14 of the Dallas Morning News, November 22nd, 1963 [the same day JFK was assassinated]</mark>, was devoted to an advertisement, <mark>ominously bordered in black like an announcement of mourning</mark>. ... | The <mark>entire page 14 of the ''Dallas Morning News'' | ||
, November 22nd, 1963 [the same day JFK was assassinated]</mark>, was devoted to an advertisement, <mark>ominously bordered in black like an announcement of mourning</mark>. ... | |||
Under the sardonic heading, "WELCOME MR KENNEDY TO DALLAS," an organization styling itself as "The American Fact-Finding Committee" — a local coordinator of the <mark>John Birch Society</mark> and <mark>Nelson Bunker Hunt, the son of H. L. Hunt</mark>, it later developed, were <mark>the committee's most prominent members</mark> — asked the President twelve rhetorical questions. He was accused of responsiblity for the imprisonment, starvation, and persecution of 'thousands of Cubans.' The ad declared that he was selling food to the Communist party, and asked, among other things, 'Why have you ordered or permitted your brother Bobby, the Attorney General, to go soft on Communists, fellow-travelers, and ultra-leftists in America, while permitting him to persecute loyal Americans who criticize you, your administration, and your leadership?'..."'Mr Kennedy', the ad concluded, 'we DEMAND answers to these questions, and we want them NOW.' | Under the sardonic heading, "WELCOME MR KENNEDY TO DALLAS," an organization styling itself as "The American Fact-Finding Committee" — a local coordinator of the <mark>John Birch Society</mark> and <mark>Nelson Bunker Hunt, the son of H. L. Hunt</mark>, it later developed, were <mark>the committee's most prominent members</mark> — asked the President twelve rhetorical questions. He was accused of responsiblity for the imprisonment, starvation, and persecution of 'thousands of Cubans.' The ad declared that he was selling food to the Communist party, and asked, among other things, 'Why have you ordered or permitted your brother Bobby, the Attorney General, to go soft on Communists, fellow-travelers, and ultra-leftists in America, while permitting him to persecute loyal Americans who criticize you, your administration, and your leadership?'..."'Mr Kennedy', the ad concluded, 'we DEMAND answers to these questions, and we want them NOW.' | ||
It was another 'Wanted for Treason' broadside. But there were two differences. This denunciation was reaching a vast audience through the pages of a respected newspaper [ | It was another 'Wanted for Treason' broadside. But there were two differences. This denunciation was reaching a vast audience through the pages of a respected newspaper [the ''Dallas Morning News'']. And it was appearing within hours of the President's arrival. ... | ||
In 1963 the Dallas Morning News was published by a man named <mark>Ted Dealey</mark> [as in Dealey Plaza]. When criticized for it later, Dealey said that before agreeing to print the <mark>JBS ad</mark>, he'd read it meticulously and approved it, arguing that it <mark>'represented what the Dallas Morning News have been saying editorially'</mark>. | In 1963 the ''Dallas Morning News'' was published by a man named <mark>Ted Dealey</mark> [as in Dealey Plaza]. When criticized for it later, Dealey said that before agreeing to print the <mark>JBS ad</mark>, he'd read it meticulously and approved it, arguing that it <mark>'represented what the ''Dallas Morning News'' have been saying editorially'</mark>. | ||
— [[wikipedia:William_Manchester|William Manchester]], [[wikipedia:The_Death_of_a_President|''Death of a President'']] 1967 | [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Death_of_a_President/xX5dAAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 Google Books] | — [[wikipedia:William_Manchester|William Manchester]], [[wikipedia:The_Death_of_a_President|''Death of a President'']] 1967 | [https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Death_of_a_President/xX5dAAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 Google Books] | ||
<span style="font-family:sans-serif; font-size:120%;">[https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/why-do-they-hate-us-so-much/ Why Do They Hate Us So Much?]</span> | <span style="font-family:sans-serif; font-size:120%;">[https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/why-do-they-hate-us-so-much/ Why Do They Hate Us So Much?]</span> | ||
<mark>E.M. "Ted" Dealey</mark>, the son, succeeded his father as publisher of the [Dallas Morning] News, and in his hands it became the <mark>most strident, red-baiting daily paper in the country</mark>, excepting only occasionally William Leob's Union-Leader, in Manchester, New Hampshire. <mark>Like many intensely conservative people, he found his paragon in the movies and politics of John Wayne</mark>. As a matter of fact, <mark>reading the News each morning was like watching a brawl in a saloon</mark>, in which the newspaper's <mark>editorials flattened the "socialists" (read: Democrats), the "perverts and subversives" (liberal Democrats), the "Judicial Kremlin" (the U.S. Supreme Court), and virtually every representative of the federal government '''whose views differed''' from those of Ted Dealey</mark>. Immediately after the election the News's principal object of contempt became President John F Kennedy, who the paper suggested was a crook, a communist sympathizer, a thief, and "fifty times a fool". | <mark>E.M. "Ted" Dealey</mark>, the son, succeeded his father as publisher of the ''[Dallas Morning] News'', and in his hands it became the <mark>most strident, red-baiting daily paper in the country</mark>, excepting only occasionally William Leob's ''Union-Leader'', in Manchester, New Hampshire. <mark>Like many intensely conservative people, he found his paragon in the movies and politics of John Wayne</mark>. As a matter of fact, <mark>reading the ''News'' each morning was like watching a brawl in a saloon</mark>, in which the newspaper's <mark>editorials flattened the "socialists" (read: Democrats), the "perverts and subversives" (liberal Democrats), the "Judicial Kremlin" (the U.S. Supreme Court), and virtually every representative of the federal government '''whose views differed''' from those of Ted Dealey</mark>. Immediately after the election the ''News'''s principal object of contempt became President John F Kennedy, who the paper suggested was a crook, a communist sympathizer, a thief, and "fifty times a fool". | ||
Ted Dealey went to the White House in the fall of 1961 with a group of Texas publishers to meet the man he had maligned so frequently in his newspaper. He used the occasion to attack Kennedy in person. "We can annihilate Russia and should make that clear to the Soviet government", he advised the president, to the discomfort of his colleagues in the room. He accused Kennedy and his administration of being <mark>weak sisters</mark> (a favorite Dealey phrase). "We need <mark>a man on horseback</mark> to lead this nation", he concluded "and many people in Texas and the Southwest think that you are <mark>riding Caroline's tricycle</mark>". [Lyndon Johnson, a fellow Texan of Dealey's, was curiously "a man on horseback".] | Ted Dealey went to the White House in the fall of 1961 with a group of Texas publishers to meet the man he had maligned so frequently in his newspaper. He used the occasion to attack Kennedy in person. "We can annihilate Russia and should make that clear to the Soviet government", he advised the president, to the discomfort of his colleagues in the room. He accused Kennedy and his administration of being <mark>weak sisters</mark> (a favorite Dealey phrase). "We need <mark>a man on horseback</mark> to lead this nation", he concluded "and many people in Texas and the Southwest think that you are <mark>riding Caroline's tricycle</mark>". ... | ||
[Lyndon Johnson, a fellow Texan of Dealey's, was curiously "a man on horseback".] | |||
Kennedy was still thinking of his encounter with Dealey when he spoke later that year of people who “call for ‘a man on horseback’ because they do not trust the people. They find treason in our churches, in our highest court, in our treatment of water. They equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare state with socialism, socialism with communism.” With his prescient political eye Kennedy saw that the new world was being created, and it stood opposed to everything he represented: East Coast liberalism, mainstream Democratic party politics, Ivy League learning, the customary restraints of educated society. Although Kennedy was popularly understood as a man of his time, a thoroughly modern president, in many ways he was the last of the traditionalists. He called his administration the New Frontier, but his successors—Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan—would show that the real frontier in American politics lay for away in the new world. | Kennedy was still thinking of his encounter with Dealey when he spoke later that year of people who “call for ‘a man on horseback’ because they do not trust the people. They find treason in our churches, in our highest court, in our treatment of water. They equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare state with socialism, socialism with communism.” With his prescient political eye Kennedy saw that the new world was being created, and it stood opposed to everything he represented: East Coast liberalism, mainstream Democratic party politics, Ivy League learning, the customary restraints of educated society. Although Kennedy was popularly understood as a man of his time, a thoroughly modern president, in many ways he was the last of the traditionalists. He called his administration the New Frontier, but his successors—Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan—would show that the real frontier in American politics lay for away in the new world. | ||
During his presidency the atmosphere in Dallas approached hysteria. “The historical conservatism of the city,” wrote Dallas’ most prominent merchant, Stanley Marcus, “had been fanned to a raging fire by the combination of a number of elements: the far right daily radio ‘Facts Forum’ program by Dan Smoot sponsored by the ultraconservative wealthiest man in town, H. L. Hunt; the John Birch Society; the oil industry’s hysterical concern for the preservation of what they considered a biblical guarantee of their depletion allowance; the ‘National Indignation League’ founded by a local garageman, Frank McGeehee, in protest of the air force’s training of some Yugoslavian pilots at a nearby air base; the consistently one-sided attacks on the administration by the Dallas Morning News and the semi-acquiescent editorial policy of the Times Herald, which had previously been a middle-of-the-road, fair newspaper. For the lack of courageous firemen in the business and intellectual segments of the community, the fire raged on.” ... | During his presidency the atmosphere in Dallas approached hysteria. “The historical conservatism of the city,” wrote Dallas’ most prominent merchant, Stanley Marcus, “had been fanned to a raging fire by the combination of a number of elements: the far right daily radio ‘Facts Forum’ program by Dan Smoot sponsored by the ultraconservative wealthiest man in town, H. L. Hunt; the John Birch Society; the oil industry’s hysterical concern for the preservation of what they considered a biblical guarantee of their depletion allowance; the ‘National Indignation League’ founded by a local garageman, Frank McGeehee, in protest of the air force’s training of some Yugoslavian pilots at a nearby air base; the consistently one-sided attacks on the administration by the ''Dallas Morning News'' and the semi-acquiescent editorial policy of the ''Times Herald'', which had previously been a middle-of-the-road, fair newspaper. For the lack of courageous firemen in the business and intellectual segments of the community, the fire raged on.” ... | ||
Dallas was gaining notice. The leader of the American Nazi party, George Lincoln Rockwell, opined that Dallas had “the most patriotic, pro-American people of any city in the country.” The compliment may have embarrassed a few, considering its source, but we believed that about ourselves. To the radical conservatives, Dallas had become a kind of shrine, a Camelot of the right. ... | Dallas was gaining notice. The leader of the American Nazi party, George Lincoln Rockwell, opined that Dallas had “the most patriotic, pro-American people of any city in the country.” The compliment may have embarrassed a few, considering its source, but we believed that about ourselves. To the radical conservatives, Dallas had become a kind of shrine, a Camelot of the right. ... | ||
[Then as now, no matter how much things change, they still remain the same.] | [Then as now, no matter how much things change, they still remain the same.] | ||
NOTE: | NOTE: | ||
The position of 'conservative' editorialist for the Dallas Morning News was a major rung in the career ladder climb of talking head, political pundit and self-appointed 'culture warrior' Raymond Oliver Dreher Jr. (aka 'Rod'), ardent player of the parlor game of "creeping socialism" (already several or more decades old when 'Rod' began playing) that was newly popularized in the early '60s. | The position of 'conservative' editorialist for the ''Dallas Morning News'' was a major rung in the career ladder climb of talking head, political pundit and self-appointed 'culture warrior' Raymond Oliver Dreher Jr. (aka 'Rod'), ardent player of the parlor game of "creeping socialism" (already several or more decades old when 'Rod' began playing) that was newly popularized in the early '60s. | ||
Dreher is the antithesis of the scholarly informed and well reasoned Dr. Alfred E. Burke and emblematic of the condition of USA today, where someone with nothing more than an undergraduate degree in journalism, an egghead, years of accumulated reading high mileage, an above average vocabulary, and the right connections can become a political "influencer" who's put on a pedastal as if he actually knows something about that which he mouths. | Dreher is the antithesis of the scholarly informed and well reasoned Dr. Alfred E. Burke and emblematic of the condition of USA today, where someone with nothing more than an undergraduate degree in journalism, an egghead, years of accumulated reading high mileage, an above average vocabulary, and the right connections can become a political "influencer" who's put on a pedastal as if he actually knows something about that which he mouths. | ||