David Von Pein: Q&A With President John F. Kennedy (April 19, 1963)

Source: David Von Pein-

Source:The New Democrat

The first questions in this presidential news conference asked to President Kennedy, was about Cuba. With someone actually asking President Kennedy did his administration have any plans to invade Cuba. As if President Kennedy would ever reveal to his plans or no plans to invade another country in public. Imagine if JFK said, "sure, we're going to invade Cuba. And we're going to do it Thursday afternoon at around 12PM coming from Miami. And we're going to send in a dozen fighter jets and a big Naval ship headed to Havana to take out the Castro Regime and anyone who tries to get in our way. So President Castro and your military, get ready for us because we're coming to get you." No responsible President in his right mind would ever make his military plans public before they were executed.

Tax cuts and economic policy generally, was a major part of the Kennedy Administration's agenda in 1963. Tax reform and lowering taxes across the board in exchange for eliminating tax loopholes to avoid deficits ( unlike a recent tax cut plan passed and signed into law ) since the American economy was till growing slowly in the early 1960s after getting out of the recession from the late 1950s. The top tax rate in 1963 was 90%. The lowest rate being 20-25% and if you're making what would be in today's dollars 40,000 dollars a year and you're paying 20-25% in Federal income taxes, plus 3-4% in Federal payroll taxes, plus state and local taxes, even with the tax loopholes back then you're still paying a lot in taxes on a very modest income. The tax reform plan that President Kennedy wanted, was finally passed out of Congress in 1964 under President Lyndon Johnson.

So-called Conservatives today ( borrow and spend supply siders, to me more accurate ) like to point to Jack Kennedy when they promote their tax cut and tax reform ideas. The difference being that JFK wasn't a supply sider. He didn't think a trillion-dollar tax cut would pay for itself because of the economic growth that it would generate. Especially on top of huge increases in Federal spending. He believed tax cuts if they were targeted right and encouraged spending in the economy could generate economic growth, but that those tax cuts should be paid for. JFK was a Liberal Democrat in the real sense and believed in fiscal responsibility as well as using government to encourage more independence, not discourage it. Which separates him from the Bernie Sanders Democratic Socialists today. And that tax cuts and Federal spending, needed to be paid for to avoid high budget deficits.

In case you don't own a calendar or have one on your cell phone and perhaps even don't have the time on your phone and have been using the same cell phone since 1997 or something, or have been vacationing in Mongolia, it's President's Day. Which is why I'm posting this piece about Jack Kennedy because he is my political hero. And when it comes to his politics and how he governed he's also my favorite President. I don't believe he's the best President of the United States, but he's my favorite in the sense of what he stood for and believed in. Which was liberal democracy and individual freedom for all. Not just for people who were born to wealth or have European ancestry, especially English ancestry who also happen to be male and Protestant.
Source:David Von Pein

C-SPAN: President John F. Kennedy's American University Peace Speech

Source:C-SPAN- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) speaking at American University in 1963.

Source:The New Democrat

I believe the whole point of President Kennedy’s speech here is that as different as the American and Russian form of government’s and system’s during the Cold War were, that the American and Russian people actually have a lot more in common that a lot of people tend to think. That we all live on the same planet, breathe the same air, cherish our children’s future and so-forth. That as bad as the Russian communist system was, there were plenty of things to actually like about the Russian people and Russian society. The only thing a superpower war would’ve brought America and Russia, is mutual destruction.

I think what President Kennedy was calling for was to find ways where America could work with Russia on their common interests and actually learn from each other. That both countries were going to do their things so to speak and promote their interests and system’s, but trying to destroy each other was simply not an option. Because both countries would end up destroyed essentially even if one of them were to come out looking a little better. As long as the Cold War was, the United States and Soviet Union, never went to battle with each other physically. Because they were both smart and sane enough to know the consequences of such a war.

I believe had President Kennedy lived and finished out his presidency, he probably gets reelected in 1964 against Senator Barry Goldwater. And this peace through strength strategy that I believe he was laying out here would have gone into effect. That America, would have continued to be as physically and economically as strong as possible, but not to physically destroy the Soviet Union. But to show them that they can’t destroy us and that are economic and political system’s are so much stronger than their’s and that it would be in their best interest to work with us. Simply because they would never even be strong enough economically to even compete with us with their Marxist system.
Source:C-SPAN

NBC News: ‘Huntley Brinkley Report- Outtakes From An Interview With President John F. Kennedy'

Source:NBC News- President John F. Kennedy, being interviewed by NBC News in 1963 

Source:The Daily Press

“Outtakes with President John F. Kennedy during an NBC-TV interview on September 9, 1963, two months before JFK’s assassination. Chet Huntley and David Brinkley of NBC News conducted the interview from the Oval Office in the White House.” 

From David Von Pein 

President Kennedy, getting a rare opportunity at a retake of an interview that he had before. David Brinkley and Chet Huntley, interviewing President Kennedy about Vietnam which of course in 1963 was going through a civil war between Communists in the North and Democrats in the South.

The Eisenhower Administration decided to back the Democratic North in Vietnam in a limited way through aid and other resources that the Kennedy Administration decided to continue when they came into office in 1961. Almost three years later in late 1963 President Kennedy was in a position where he needed to decide how much should America help the Democratic South after they sent advisers into Vietnam to assist the South. But I think it was clear that he wasn’t in favor of sending American troops in to fight the Vietnam Civil War.

The second question being about the Kennedy tax cuts of 1963 that President Lyndon Johnson finally got through a Democratic Congress in 1963 after the assassination of President Kennedy in November of 63.

The American economy of 1963 wasn’t that different from the American economy of 2011-12 as far as economic and job growth. The economy in both periods was growing and creating jobs, but not very rapidly and slowly recovering from previous recessions.

What President Kennedy wanted to do was put through an across the board tax cut and pay for it by cutting loopholes to drive consumer spending and economic growth. There were concerns in Congress about how a tax cut that size would affect the deficit. And that is what the President was dealing with then.

Jack Kennedy, was a true Liberal Democrat, because he believed that liberty was worth defending here at home. That America had to be strong at home first economically before we try to show strength abroad. And the we way we should try to show strength abroad was not to try to police the world by ourselves, but work with our allies to preserve peace and expand freedom to people who were looking for it, but didn’t have it because they were being held down by an authoritarian dictatorial regime. Where they have very little if any say on what goes on in their own country.

These were the reasons that the President wanted to help Democratic Vietnam, get the Senate to pass the Test Ban Treaty and to pass a large tax cut. Because he wanted to defend freedom at home and abroad and strengthen the American economy so more Americans could live in freedom.

President John F. Kennedy: Cuban Missile Crisis Speech: 10/22/1962

Source:David Von Pein- President John F. Kennedy's 1962 speech on the Cuba Missile Crisis.

“This high-quality version of President Kennedy’s 10/22/62 Cuban Missile Crisis speech is somewhat rare, because it is complete and unedited. Usually only small bits and pieces of the speech are presented on television and in documentaries. But this is the entire 18-minute address from start to finish.”

From David Von Pein 

What President Kennedy wanted to show during this crisis was that his National Security Council was on top of the situation from the beginning. And the question which was a huge question, was what to do about it to prevent missiles from being launched at the United States.

President Kennedy, obviously did not want to go to war with another superpower and risk destroying the world in the process. Which might have happened had the United States gone to war with the Soviet Union.

Trying to invade the Communist Republic of Cuba with Russian ships in the area was not going to happen without some war. Which meant that the Kennedy Administration, was going to need a negotiated settlement with Russia.

Russia, was literally able to stick their own nuclear weapons on the island of Cuba, just ninety miles from Miami, Florida. With enough power to eliminate the East Coast of the United States. So President Kennedy and his National Security Council knew they had to get those weapons out of Cuba. They also knew that going to war with a country the size and that was as powerful militarily as the Soviet Union, probably wasn’t an option at all. So they were going to have to work this out diplomatically to get the weapons out of Cuba, America was going to have to give Russia something they wanted as well.

What prevented World War III during the Cuba Missile Crisis was Russia agreeing to pull their weapons out of Cuba, in return for America pulling their weapons out of Turkey.

America, didn’t pass new economic sanctions on Russia hoping that Russia would eventually take the weapons out of Cuba. As well as hoping they would never use them, or give them to Cuba. And America didn’t go to war with Russia and try to settle it that way.

Both countries had something that the other wanted and wanted something that the other had. And both were smart and sane enough to settle the crisis diplomatically. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Helmer Reenberg: President John F. Kennedy's- '51st Press Conference: March 6, 1963'

Source:Helmer Reenberg- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) giving his 51st press conference in 1963, at The White House in Washington.

"THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Important steps are being taken in the Congress this week with respect to three major parts of the Administration's program and I want to take this opportunity to stress their importance to every American family.

From Helmer Reenberg 

President John F. Kennedy at The White House in 1963 promoting his economic agenda that included tax cuts, plus tax reform, as well as a job placement program for America’s youth. And he said that he expected Congress (a Democratic Congress) to act and pass his agenda.

Source:Helmer Reenberg- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) giving his 51st press conference in 1963, at The White House in Washington.

John F. Kennedy, when he became President of The United States in 1961 wanted to do a few things as it relates to economic policy. Go further in social insurance so more people could have access to affordable health care, especially senior citizens. In the areas of health insurance, but also more hospitals and health care professionals. But also in tax reform, lowering marginal tax rates where back in the early 1960s income tax rates ranged from 25-90%. Which was a drag on our economic growth, because Americans weren't seeing much benefit from their success and production.

So President Kennedy, wanted to lower taxes rates, because the Federal Government got a big chunk of what Americans were making. Which is why President Kennedy wanted to cut tax rates across the board. See more money in the economy, more take home pay for Americans to spend that money to see more economic growth. And these tax cuts served as an inspiration for the tax cutters on the Right in the late 1970s and early 1980s. That led to tax cuts at the state levels in the late 1970s and of course President Reagan's Economic Recovery Act of 1981.

But a Kennedy tax cut and a Barack Obama tax cut, are very different from a Reagan tax cut, or a George W. Bush tax cut. President Kennedy, didn't have this idea that tax cuts automatically paid for them self. And unlike supply siders he believed that deficits mattered. And that if you cut taxes, you should do that by paying for them. And he did that by cutting wasteful loopholes in the Federal tax code. Jack Kennedy, wasn't a Conservative as some on the Right like to suggest. And he wasn't a big welfare state Social Democrat that today's so-called Progressives like to believe he was. He was a  Liberal in the true sense. Not anti-government, but believed a limited government could help people who needed it help them self. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CBS News: ‘President John F. Kennedy’s Inaugural Address’

Source:CBS News- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) giving his 1961 inaugural address in front of a joint session of Congress,

“On January 20, 1961, President John F. Kennedy was sworn into office and delivered one of the most famous inaugural addresses in U.S. history.”

From CBS News

Inaugural address’ are interesting at least for this reason and depending on who the President at the time says can be interesting for that reason as well, but they are at least interesting because it gives the President the opportunity to layout for the country the situation that the country is in and where he wants to take the country in the next four years.

And if the President is reelected an opportunity to layout where the country was four years earlier. The progress that has been made and the challenges that still lay ahead.

But inaugural address’ aren’t partisan in the sense that the President will hammer the opposition party, but to layout their own political and governmental philosophy which will be different from the opposition party.

These addresses are also for the President to layout what he  believes the role of government is. And based on that where he wants to take his administration and what direction he wants to lead the country. And that’s the opportunity that President Obama will have tomorrow: “This is where we were, this is the progress we’ve made and this is where I want to lead the country based on my thinking and the facts on the ground.”

As a Liberal Democrat I would like to hear Barack Obama tomorrow speak in the spirit of Jack Kennedy. Not to quote him exactly, but speak in his spirit of terms like: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

I would like to hear President Obama speak in terms of Bill Clinton’s opportunity society: “There’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be cured with what’s right with America. That we’ll expand freedom and opportunity for all as well as demand responsibility for all.” Speak in terms of individual freedom for all. Especially for Americans that don’t have it and are still struggling.

President Obama should speak in terms of how government can empower those who don’t have the individual freedom to take care of themselves to have the same freedom and opportunity that the rest of the country has and how we as Americans ourselves can build the best America. Rather than what government can do for us. Which is different from a speech by Franklin Roosevelt. (To use as an example) The difference between a liberal democratic speech and a social democratic speech.

To be honest, I’ll be surprised if President Obama speaks in these terms tomorrow and probably will give a somewhat safe speech. And go out of his way not to offend anyone and not leave much to be remembered. Or give a speech that’s full of great words and phrases that few other people can do as well. But not have a lot of meaning to them. A speech that sounds good, but with not a lot of meat to it.

But tomorrow is an opportunity for President Obama to not only layout for the country where he wants to take America, but where he wants to lead the Democratic Party and I hope he takes advantage of it. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CBS News: Walter Conkrite- Interviewing President John F. Kennedy (1963)

Source:CBS News- interviewing President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) in 1963.

Source:The Daily Press

“CBS-TV Interview With President John Fitzgerald Kennedy On Sept. 2, 1963”

From President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

In September, 1963, CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite sat down with President John F. Kennedy and interviewed him up in Massachusetts, to talk about the issues he was dealing with.

Jack Kennedy, knew the power of TV about as well, or better than anyone in the 1960s and even 1950s. So he probably wanted to do this type of interview and to layout for the country what he was working on and wanted to accomplish. This interview happened fourteen months before the 1964 presidential election. And just a little over two months before he was assassinated and in late 1963.

President Kennedy, had an economy that was weakening and was trying to get a jobs plan through Congress. That included a large tax cut that cut taxes across the board. Including bringing the top rate down from 90 to 70% and the bottom rate from 25 to 20%. And this economic plan contributed to creating the economic boom of the 1960s.

President Kennedy was also dealing with civil rights and making sure that Federal Court orders were being carried out. And that African-American students were able to go to once segregated schools and so-forth.

And this is the time that President Kennedy came out strongly in favor of civil rights and introduced a civil rights bill to Congress. And of course President Kennedy was also dealing with the United States early involvement in the Vietnam Civil War as well.

President Kennedy, had a lot on his plate to deal with in 1963 and it would’ve been nice to see him at least try accomplish all the things that he wanted to do to deal with these issues.

A lot of what President Lyndon Johnson got passed in Congress was finishing off the agenda that President Kennedy put forward and sent to Congress. But was unable to get through the House and Senate. 

Public Resource: President John F. Kennedy After Two Years (1963)

Source:Public Resource-  President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) talking to the network news White House correspondents, in 1963.

Source:The Daily Press

“ARC Identifier 52813 / Local Identifier 306.6613. U.S. Information Agency. (1982 – 10/01/1999) Made possible by a donation from John and Paige Curran.” 

From Public Resource 

Jack Kennedy came to the White House in 1961 with a broad agenda that included civil rights for African-Americans, Federal aid to public education, health insurance for seniors and an economic plan to deal with an economy that was slowly coming out of recession from the late 1950s, that included a deep tax cut. And yet most of his domestic agenda stalled in Congress despite having large Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate. And spent most of the first two years dealing with foreign policy. With Cuba twice both involving Russia, the Bay of Pigs fiasco and of course the Cuban Missile Crisis.

President Kennedy, did have a foreign policy agenda as well and was a tough Liberal Cold Warrior that wanted to open discussions with Russia. But wasn’t prepared to be soft with them, but take them on. And spoke out for liberal democracy not only in America, but in Europe as well, but wasn’t looking for a war with the Soviet Union either.

And in the middle of 1963, finally took a tough stand when it came to civil rights for African-Americans and liberal democracy for them. Who were being discriminated and beaten in the South with the violent beatings that were happening in Alabama and Mississippi.

We’ll never know how successful of a President that Jack Kennedy would’ve made, one of the tragedies of his assassination. But he had all the tools of becoming not just one of the best Liberal Democratic president’s we’ve ever had, but one of the best president’s we’ve ever had as well. Just by what he believed in, but also how he handled the issues that came his way. The Cuban Missile Crisis and finally taking on Civil Rights as well in 1963.

The question is how effective President Kennedy would’ve been how he been able to complete his first term. And he been reelected, he effective he would’ve been at getting his agenda through Congress. Something he wasn’t very successful at in his first two years.

President Kennedy, was very popular when he died I believed, because of his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis and because he was very likable personally. Which are the advantages that President Obama has today. But wasn’t very good at making Congress go along with his agenda based on his personal appeal.

Had President Kennedy completed his first term, he would’ve continued to work on the issues, that he ran on as President. Across the board tax cuts, the health insurance program that later became known as Medicare, Federal Aid to public education, and civil rights. And then the question would’ve been how successful he would’ve been at pushing that agenda through Congress. 

Universal Newsreels: President John F. Kennedy- Proposes Tax Cut (1962)

Source:Universal Newsreels- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) talking about his tax cut plan in 1962.

Source:FRS FreeState

“John F. Kennedy speaks on his income tax cut that he wants to present to Congress in January next year (partial newsreel).”

From Universal Newsreels 

At risk of sounding partisan: Neoconservative supply siders like to use President John F. Kennedy as their inspiration when talking about President Ronald Reagan’s tax cuts from 1981 and saying that President Kennedy also not only believed in tax cuts, but that tax cuts pay for themselves, even when you are also dramatically increasing government spending, which is what President Reagan and that Congress of 1981-82 did. But President Kennedy didn’t believe that.

When JFK became President in 1961, the top tax rate in America was 90%. The bottom rate was 25% and he inherited and economy that was barely growing in his first two years as President, that was just coming out of the recession from the late 1950s. Whatever your political affiliation is I believe most Americans can agree that 91% is too high for a  top rate (regardless of your income) and that 25% is too high, especially for lower middle income Americans, who perhaps barely make enough money for pay any Federal income taxes.

When Ronald Reagan becomes President in 1981, the top tax rate thanks to President Lyndon Johnson getting tax reform passed out of Congress in 1964, was 70% and the bottom rate was 22%.

President Reagan got through a divided Congress a tax cut that lowered the top rate from 70 to 39 and the bottom rate from 22 to 15. While at the same time doubling the size of the Defense Department and increasing the rest of the Federal budget as well. So there’s no mystery to why four years later we had a budget deficit that goes from 60 billion, to 200 billion dollars under President Ronald Reagan, who talked like a fiscal conservative, but governed like a supply side borrow and spender.

What President Kennedy wanted to do and what President Johnson got passed in 1964, was yes, cut taxes across the board because they were too damn high across the board. While at the same time eliminating tax loopholes in the tax system and making sure the U.S. Government paid for its spending, instead of believing that tax cuts automatically pay for themselves.

If your definition of a fiscal conservative is someone who believes in spending less and not running high deficits and debt, Jack Kennedy was more fiscally conservative than Ron Reagan.

C-SPAN: President John F. Kennedy- 1963 Address on Civil Rights

Source:C-SPAN- President John F. Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts) addressing the nation about civil rights in 1963.

"President John F. Kennedy's Civil Rights Address" 

From C-SPAN

When I think of how Democrats should be and this is going to sound real arrogant, but I look at myself when I'm talking politically. Democrats should be Liberals and Progressives who believe in liberal democracy, because we believe in individual freedom. 

Liberal democracy is about economic, social, political, religious, freedom of choice, as long as we are not hurting anyone else with our freedom. That we get back to what Old School Liberalism is. Not how liberalism is stereotyped today, which looks more like socialism. Liberalism is about individual liberty, again as long as we are not hurting anyone else with our choices. But thats me. 

Every Democrat can have their own version of what Democrats should be. But to me we are supposed to be the Liberal Democratic Party in America, because we believe in liberal democracy. Not a Social Democratic Party, that some so-called Progressives today would like us to become. Or a Centrist Democratic Party, where those people could probably be Republicans as well. Like Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska. 

When I think of people who come the closest in representing what Democrats and liberalism should be, I think of Jack Kennedy with Bill Clinton being not that far behind. As well as some Liberal Democrats today like Senator John Kerry (another JFK with very similar politics as Jack Kennedy). People who are Liberals not because they believe in collectivism that government can solve all problems. But because they believe in individual liberty.

Jack Kennedy, in particular comes closest in representing what democrats are supposed to be. Not just because of his politics, but with his power to communicate his views. Just like Barry Goldwater represents exactly what Republicans are supposed to be because he was definitely a Classical Conservative. And communicated classical conservatism as well as it could be communicated and I would add Ron Reagan to that list as well. 

Even though President Kennedy was late to the dance on civil rights and had he got there earlier, maybe he could've got the ball rolling on it earlier, but he got there. And it wasn't that he didn't believe in civil and equal rights, but that it was politics that was keeping him from it. Losing the South in the 1964 Election, which is a weakness on President Kennedy's  part and I'm not excusing it. 

President Kennedy comes closest to representing what Democrats should be. Because he was strong and smart on defense not soft that a lot of Democrats after him got accused of being and to a certain extent for good reason. 

JFK supported equal rights, individual freedom. Didn't want the Federal Government growing indefinitely, that there was a limit in what it can do to help the country. Fiscally responsible, these are all things that Liberals actually believe in. That government can help people who are down get themselves up, with what's called a safety net. Not a welfare state and they are different.

JFK is what it means to be a Liberal Democrat. (Someone who believes in liberal democracy) Now I'm sure I'm farther to the left on a lot of social issues than President Kennedy. Like decriminalization of marijuana and prostitution and perhaps gambling as well. But those issues, weren't considered mainstream back in JFK's time. 

JFK comes the closest from every Democrat I've ever seen, as someone who doesn't believe in any form of big government. Doesn't believe in collectivism, but believes in individual freedom instead. Which is one of the reasons why he was such a strong anti-Communist, not only in Congress, but as President as well and I wish we had more Democrats today like Jack Kennedy. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.