The torch of ‘Camelot’ was passed to Senator Obama by Senator Ted Kennedy. Senator Obama’s early surging popularity was largely sustained by his youth, looks, family, education, soaring rhetoric, an absence of specificity and repetition of words like ‘change’ and ‘hope’. His speeches were very uplifting while woefully short on detail. An almost cult like following has emerged. He just sounded so darn good. Senator Obama fills a Democrat void that had remained empty for 47 years. Platitudes presented with charm and supercharged articulation has sparked latent press sentimentalities in search of the second coming. Thus hard questions and critical analysis were to await the general election.
Actually this particular resurrection is grounded in the mythology that has for years obscured the true nature of the central character of Camelot. The contemporary perception of J.F.K. among liberal activists is far removed from the reality of the actual lead character of that old story. Hence, we are confronted with the resurrection of a myth rather than the emergence of a contemporary John F. Kennedy.
Yes, superficially Senator Obama may seem to fit the emotional profile of an old political hero, but as a matter of political values and substance the two men are as different as right from left on today’s political measuring stick.
A good way to get past Obama’s compelling presence in order to discern how his political values diverge from John Kennedy’s would be to examine the President’s inaugural speech. Senator Obama could not give that speech. All those adoring Obama supporters, both young people who know little about J.F.K. and baby boomers who romanticize him should read that speech carefully. They will discover that the political values of Senator John McCain and Kennedy are much closer than those of Obama and Kennedy. Indeed the change that would occur if Obama gave such a speech today would be the abandonment by Obama of most of his positions.
Party labels aside that unforgettable speech was grounded in what is called conservative values toady. There would be no inconsistencies or contradictions were Senator McCain to give that speech today. All he would have to do is replace the communist threat with the Islamist threat. The message of lower taxes, personal service, a world wide commitment to liberty, military superiority and the divine source of our rights are solid Republican issues today.
“For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three quarters ago.” “…. the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.” Thus the prevailing take on God as our founders had conceived it prior to a late 1960’s historical rewrite. Kennedy refers to a divine source of human rights and a diminished role for government.
“….., that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and success of liberty.” Notice no pleading for French or German concurrence. We find an unqualified pledge to fight for liberty, unburdened by a cascade of qualifiers.
“Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion in the Americas.” These sentiments resonate with the inclinations of Reagan or McCain far more than Clinton or Obama.
Talking about our enemies, “We dare not tempt them with weakness. For only when our arms are sufficient beyond doubt can we be certain beyond doubt that they will never be employed.” This is the classic Reagan approach - peace through strength. Not just sufficient but “sufficient beyond doubt.” No calls for peace through equivocation, concession, or by gathering our enemies at a conference so they can tell us what it is about America that so irritates them. Kennedy was not ashamed to lead a strong nation in pursuit of a unique and exceptional destiny.
What would be considered a Constitutional faux pas among today’s Democrat activist is proudly included - Isaiah – to “undo the heavy burdens… and let the oppressed go free.” Sounds like an affirmation of America’s divine role in the world. A far cry from ‘bring the troops home’, no matter the carnage that may follow.
And finally J. F. K.’s most often quoted request of his fellow American’s, “… ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” A call to service, not a promise of billions of dollars in new programs paid for with other citizen’s money. Service and sacrifice were his themes, not doling out of government largess to satisfy each and every constituency. We find not a hint of class warfare. Kennedy’s inaugural speech was chock full of solid conservative political values. So if one were to adhere to President Kennedy’s vision, rather than the myth that has evolved over the years, one would have to vote Republican in November in memory of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
