Mourning the death of JFK, America's first neoconservative president

JFK is America's first neoconservative president because he embodied so much of what today's neoconservatives espouse.

There are John Fitzgerald Kennedy's famous tax cuts that he said would help energize our economy--and which he did. There was his pledge to go anywhere to support the cause of freedom--kind of what the George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush did.

A neoconservative is a former liberal who now is a conservative. That's me, as a prior Barbershop post explains. But a former liberal who still believes in many of the things that made him (me) a liberal jkf2long. Equal rights, for example. Equal rights, as defined by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., who advocated for a color-blind society, in which people are judged  by the "content of one's character" and not the "color of one's skin."  Instead of today's corruption of equal rights--affirmative action programs that do exactly that.

Here's an earlier post about Jack Kennedy's policies on tax cuts and his democratic ideals. Here's why, if JFK were running today, he wouldn't win the support of the radicals who control the left.

So, I and millions of other neocons (as we are pejoratively called) pause today to remember the man whose ideals we espouse, and unlike the so many on today's extreme left who corrupt those principles.



Join me and 36 other Chicago authors at the Chicago Book Expo this Sunday, Nov. 24  for a signing of my historical novel, "Madness: The War of 1812." Details are here.  



Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    As a liberal, I agree that JFK was more conservative than most conservatives or liberals currently understand.

    JFK was "prudent" on Civil Rights before Bush 41 made "prudent" an "uncool" word. He was tough on communists and believed in military deterrence long before Reagan.

    It is ironic how much liberals embrace JFK's legacy and how jealous most conservatives are of "Camelot."

    Liberals see JFK for what he might have been. Where conservatives point to his failure at the Bay of Pigs, liberals believe JFK learned not to trust his military advisers during the Missile Crisis. Where conservatives note his inaction during the early civil rights protests so as not to alienate the blue dog Democrats he needed to win in '64, liberals note his speech on civil rights and the way the blue dogs turned into Reagan Democrats in 1980.

    JFK bucked the party system that both individualists and anti-establishment types love. But JFK started to raise the stakes in Vietnam, and LBJ - he of the Great Society - doubled down.

    In short, conservatives scoff at JFK's legacy and, thus, refuse to embrace who he really was. Liberals forget who he really was and embrace who he might have become.

    Neither approach is wholly satisfying.

  • fb_avatar

    Not so fast Dennis! JFK and his family grew up in a right wing home. The children gave their all to public service. JFK was helping the middle class, helping end our involvement in Vietnam and was trying to negotiate with Cuba which would have helped American interests. Lets re-open the assassination investigation and you shall see who was behind the act that hurt the middle class and hurt America in so many ways. And while we are at it ,opening up the MLK and RFK cases are important too. Three men who big business did not like. We need more JFK's today. Not Bush 41 or Bush 43.Our country has been in peril since 11/22/1963 .

  • You demean the memory of JFK by lumping him with the likes of Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz and Bolton.

  • fb_avatar

    As a neoconservative, I appreciate this article and agree with it fully. It offers up a good explanation, however indirectly, as to why modern day liberals are so eager to discard the legacy of JFK. They know full well that they can no longer lay claim to his greatness while simultaneously continuing to protest President George W. Bush's wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, both of which were absolutely necessary because of the reality of foreign affairs. You would think they have accepted that reality by now, some fifty years later. Instead they appear to be intellectually displaced in the 1960s with their incessant cries for affirmative action, deeming everything unfair and unequal simply because they find it morally disagreeable.

Leave a comment

  • Advertisement:
  • Advertisement:
  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Visit my new website

    I'm a freelance writer, editor and author. I can help you with a wide variety of projects. Check out my new website at

  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Like me on Facebook

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement: