|
|
| Line 83: |
Line 83: |
| [[wikipedia:H._L._Hunt|Haroldson Lafayette (H.L.) Hunt Jr.]] | Wikipedia</span> | | [[wikipedia:H._L._Hunt|Haroldson Lafayette (H.L.) Hunt Jr.]] | Wikipedia</span> |
|
| |
|
| ==JFK Assassination==
| |
| ''See'' —<br> | | ''See'' —<br> |
| | [[Conservatism#JFK_Assassination|Conservatism — JFK Assassination]]<br> |
| | [[Conservatism]]<br> |
| [[JFK_Assassination|JFK Assassination]]<br> | | [[JFK_Assassination|JFK Assassination]]<br> |
| [[Conservatism]]<br>
| |
| [https://www.texasobserver.org/the-john-birch-society-sees-a-renaissance-in-north-texas/ The John Birch Society Sees A Renaissance In North Texas]<br> | | [https://www.texasobserver.org/the-john-birch-society-sees-a-renaissance-in-north-texas/ The John Birch Society Sees A Renaissance In North Texas]<br> |
| [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/06/23/the-birchers-the-trumpers-john-birch-society-james-mann/?lp_txn_id=1385964 ''The Birchers & the Trumpers''] | | [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/06/23/the-birchers-the-trumpers-john-birch-society-james-mann/?lp_txn_id=1385964 ''The Birchers & the Trumpers''] |
|
| |
| Below is example of what Dr. Burke called a '<mark>dangerous new parlor game of "creeping socialism"</mark>' which after having begun in earnest in political Conservatism of the 1950s-60s, proceeded to reach a flashpoint around the JFK assassination, after which the "game" went viral into the 3rd Millenium where political Liberalism eventually became infected as well, with its own mutated strain of "woke" parlor game. —
| |
|
| |
| <span style="font-family:sans-serif; font-size:120%;">[http://www.orwelltoday.com/jfkjbs.shtml JFK & John Birch Society]
| |
| [http://www.orwelltoday.com/jfkjbsdallasad.shtml Dallas Hate-JFK Dealy Ad]
| |
|
| |
| [https://www.snopes.com/tachyon/2016/11/welcome-mr-kennedy.jpg Welcome Mr. Kennedy To Dallas...]</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>. ...
| |
| 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.'
| |
| — [[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.wikiwand.com/en/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_conspiracy_theories#Media/File:Wanted_for_treason.jpg Wanted For Treason]</span>
| |
| 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>.
| |
| — [[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?] 1983 —
| |
| When John F. Kennedy was assassinated, Dallas was my hometown.
| |
| For twenty years my neighbors and I have suffered the world’s blame.
| |
| Now it is time to lay our burden down.</span>
| |
| While everyone was religious, some were <mark>superreligious</mark>, and they <mark>thought of themselves as a spiritual vanguard</mark>. They were <mark>contemptuous</mark> of the rest of us—we might as well have been <mark>agents of the Devil</mark>. It was the same with politics. The political scale in Dallas began with Eisenhower conservatism and ran well past fascism to a kind of conservative nihilism. Earle Cabell was a far-right Democrat, present at the founding though not a member of the Dallas chapter of the John Birch Society, and yet he was routinely described by the farther right as “the socialist mayor of Dallas.” ...
| |
| Across the country, but particularly in <mark>this '''new world'''</mark>, there was a certain <mark>adolescent bitterness</mark>, a suspicious feeling of <mark>betrayal</mark>, a willingness to find <mark>'''conspiracy''' lurking in every corner</mark>. “The mood,” as Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., described it, “was one of the longing for a <mark>dreamworld [utopia]</mark> of no communism, no overseas entanglements, no <mark>United Nations</mark>, no <mark>federal government</mark>, no <mark>labor unions</mark>, no <mark>Negroes</mark> or <mark>foreigners [immigrants]</mark>—a world in which Chief Justice Warren would be impeached, Cuba invaded, the graduated <mark>income tax</mark> repealed, the fluoridation of drinking water stopped and the import of Polish hams forbidden.”
| |
| No, it was not just Dallas, but my hometown was already gaining the reputation of being the <mark>capital of this '''new world'''</mark>. ...
| |
| It was November 4, 1960, Republican Tag Day in Dallas, and the downtown lunch crowd was being canvassed by three hundred women in red-white-and-blue outfits. ...
| |
| Several Tag Girls spotted the Johnsons arriving and rushed over to surround the car. As Lady Bird was stepping out of the Lincoln one of the pickets impulsively snatched her gloves from her hands and <mark>threw them into the gutter. '''Lady Bird went white'''. It was still a time when '''incivility''' was rare in politics, when public figures felt safe in crowds</mark>. No one, perhaps not even the Tag Girls themselves, was prepared to understand the ferocity of the anger in those otherwise happy and well-cared-for women.
| |
| Johnson rushed Lady Bird into the lobby of the Baker, which was packed with jeering Tag Girls. ...
| |
| Johnson was to speak at a luncheon across the street at the Adolphus Hotel. ...
| |
| As the Johnsons made their way through the Baker Lobby the crowd closed ranks behind them, becoming bolder, but it was nothing compared with the mob that waited in the street and, beyond that, the packed crowd of Tag Girls in the lobby of the Adolphus. ...
| |
| The demonstration in Commerce Street waited with catcalls and accusations. ...
| |
| What was more surprising was that the sign carriers and catcallers were for the most part well-groomed women from some of the finest homes in the city, and yet as soon as the Johnsons waded into Commerce Street the women in red, white, and blue began to <mark>curse</mark> them and to <mark>spit</mark>. (Later, some members of the “<mark>Mink Coat Mob</mark>,” as they came to be known, claimed that they were not spitting, exactly—they were frothing.)
| |
| Why? What accounted for the <mark>hostility</mark> (or to use her word, indignation) of the <mark>fashionable and affluent</mark> Dallas woman? In part she was simply a prisoner of her age: a women of <mark>unfocused ambition, intensely competitive</mark> but unemployed (the working wife was still a signal of economic desperation), <mark>lonely at home</mark> and given to <mark>causes</mark>. She may have been financially secure, but she was deeply troubled by some <mark>unnamed fear that her castle was built of sand and the coming tide would wash away her American dreams [fairy tale]</mark>. She named the tide International Communism, or '''<mark>Creeping Socialism</mark>'''. When Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev boasted to the West, “We will bury you,” the conservative Dallas woman believed him. Earlier that autumn Khrushchev had come to the United Nations and pounded on the table with his shoe—a gesture of such swaggering boorishness that it justified every qualm the Dallas woman felt about Russia, the United Nations, and American foreign policy. She worried about the missile gap and the spread of communism to Cuba. Moreover, people in her own country were talking enthusiastically about social change—Kennedy was already speaking of the “the revolutionary sixties”—and the Dallas woman knew those changes would come at her expense. She worried about the erosion of liberty caused by recent Supreme Court decisions (often delivered by <mark>Chief Justice Earl Warren</mark>, who was the <mark>creeping socialist personified</mark>). The court was <mark>taking rights away from the Dallas woman and awarding them to pornographers, criminals, atheists, communists, and Negroes</mark>. The Dallas woman felt herself to be under attack at home and abroad. ...
| |
| Although Nixon carried Dallas County by a landslide, Texas went for the Kennedy-Johnson. ...It was the <mark>closest presidential election in the nation’s history, and it was decided that day in the lobby of the Adolphus Hotel [where the Johnsons being accosted by the rich Republican Tag gals received television coverage]. People said afterward that they were not voting for Kennedy so much as they were voting against Dallas.</mark>
| |
| Against us. For the first time people in the city learned about guilt by association. Until then Dallas had had very little national identity, but we found ourselves now with a new municipal image: a <mark>city of the '''angry nouveau riche''', smug, doctrinaire, belligerent, a city with a taste for '''political violence'''</mark>. Many Dallasites were shocked to see our city represented that way, but it had <mark>little effect on the way we thought of ourselves</mark>. ...
| |
| There was, in fact, a <mark>chip of defiance on the city’s shoulder, encouraged by the ''Dallas Morning News''</mark>. The ''News'' is the oldest business institution in the state, having been founded in 1842 when Texas was still a republic and Dallas little more than a heady presumption. Under George B. Dealey the ''News'' had been a <mark>'''progressive''' newspaper, leading the scourge that drove the '''Ku Klux Klan''' out of Texas</mark>. The name “Dealey” would become famous because of the queer, fan-shaped park known as Dealey Plaza, directly across the street from the Texas School Book Depository, where a bronze statue of G.B. Dealey stares at the now magnificent skyline of downtown Dallas. Many citizens believe it is perfectly appropriate that Dealey’s name should be irrevocably tied to the assassination, even though it is his son they blame. ...
| |
| <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> [e.g. Johnson?] to lead this nation", he concluded "and many people in Texas and the Southwest think that you are <mark>riding Caroline's tricycle</mark>". ...
| |
| Kennedy was still thinking of his encounter with Dealey when he spoke later that year of <mark>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.</mark>” With his prescient political eye <mark>Kennedy saw that the '''new world''' [of which Dallas is the "capitol"] was being created</mark>, and it stood <mark>opposed to everything he represented</mark>: East Coast liberalism, mainstream Democratic party politics, Ivy League learning, the <mark>'''customary restraints of educated society'''</mark>. Although Kennedy was popularly understood as a man of his time, a thoroughly modern president, <mark>in many ways he was the last of the '''traditionalists'''</mark>. He called his administration the <mark>New Frontier, but his successors—Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan—would show that the real frontier in American politics lay far away in the '''new world'''</mark>.
| |
| During his presidency the atmosphere in Dallas approached <mark>hysteria. “The historical conservatism of the city,” wrote Dallas’ most prominent merchant, Stanley Marcus [of Neiman-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.</mark> For the lack of courageous firemen in the business and intellectual segments of the community, the fire raged on.” ...
| |
| Dallas was gaining notice. The <mark>leader of the American '''Nazi''' party, George Lincoln Rockwell</mark>, opined that Dallas had “the most <mark>patriotic, pro-American</mark> people of any city in the country.” <mark>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</mark>. ...
| |
| Once again—it wasn’t just Dallas. But we who lived there had the feeling that we were in the middle of a <mark>political caldera</mark>, a grumbling, <mark>reawakening fascist urge</mark> that was too hot to contain itself. I wonder what might have happened in Dallas if Kennedy hadn’t died there.
| |
| The most conspicuous and despised symbol of fuzzy intellectualism was <mark>Adlai Stevenson</mark>, a former Democratic presidential candidate and the current American ambassador to the <mark>United Nations</mark>.
| |
| There was also something intensely personal about the hatred of Stevenson. He was the last word in <mark>eggheads</mark>, Mr. Humpty Dumpty himself. His urbanity didn’t wash in Dallas. Intellectual charm was suspect; besides if you took the trouble to be witty you probably didn’t have it where it counted. Stevenson was a <mark>weak sister</mark>.
| |
| In fact he was a sincerely courageous man, and he decided to beard his enemies by marching straight into their camp. He agreed to speak at the Dallas Memorial Auditorium on October 24, 1963—<mark>United Nations</mark> Day....
| |
| The mob immediately closed him in. The hysterical woman, who was the wife of an insurance executive, brought her placard down on Stevenson’s head. A college student <mark>spat</mark> upon him. When the policeman finally rescued him, Stevenson wiped the <mark>spit</mark> off his face with a handkerchief and asked aloud, “<mark>Are these human beings or are these animals?</mark>” ...
| |
|
| |
| [The "new" world: then as now, no matter how much things change, they still remain the same. That "world" may have toned it down a bit after the JFK assassination, but it was always roiling beneath the surface, and as soon as the effects of 1963 wore off enough, that world came boiling forth again with its usual vengeance.
| |
| Read on (the full article [https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/why-do-they-hate-us-so-much/ Why Do They Hate Us So Much?]); it only gets "better".]
| |
|
| |
| NOTE:
| |
| From mid to late 2000s, 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.
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Quotes== | | ==Quotes== |