Two men, RFK and Ronald Reagan, who had differences with each other, intelligenty and respectfully answered all of the questions directed at them and never uttered a nasty word for the other.
@What I think and it's only an opinion simple. they're both phonies. also Biden gets involved with scandals and is creepy (as you commented earlier) and trump didn't really help much with the pandemic and the civil rights movement, which were and still are two big priorities right now. also he's a dick. I know a person can be a good leader and be an asshole, but the election brought Trump's true colors out. it was after he praised the Biden bus incident that I lost my tolerance for him
@What I think and it's only an opinion woah, this is a lot to take in, and you definitely know more about this topic than me. I strive to be as politically unbiased as possible, but I'll definitely take that into consideration.
These leaders from the past seem to be much better informed and smarter than today's leaders. I miss the straight talk and honesty of Reagan and Kennedy.
Notice how the two dirtbag media interviewers kept defending the Communist North Vietnamese government who was committing horrific genocides in South Vietnam at the time. They were evil Marxists just as most journalists were and are today.
Like him or not, you have to admit that Bobby Kennedy had guts. As contrasted with the politicians of today, he was straightforward, not talking out of both sides of his mouth. To an audience of conservative pre-med students at a mid-western university, as they challenged him about who was going to PAY for the social programs he was advocating, he strode toward the front of the stage, extended his right arm & pointed with his index finger to each of the different sections of the crowds... "YOU ARE, YOU ARE, AND YOU ARE!". He didn't mince words.
As both Reagan and RFK were of Irish descent, I'm surprised neither of them yelled "We'll get out of Vietnam when you Limey bastards get out of Belfast!" That would have been unpolitic, but I would have loved to have seen the Brits face.
I know, I know that are alot of Northern Irish who want to retain the Union, I was just thinking it would be a nice comeback to the annoying questioner.
Jonathan Wright My old man was a Roman Catholic JFK Democrat and my mother was a Protestant Nixon Republican. One of my grandmothers was an Irish Catholic who immigrated from Galway and one of my nieces was an Irish Protestant who went to school in Belfast for a while. One of my ancestors was among the English Barons who helped Robin Hood force King John to sign the Magna Carta let me add. As President Kennedy said, "Freedom isn't perfect and democracy has many problems but we've never had to build a wall to keep our people from leaving." The hypocritical Marxist religious fanatic making his little anti-American hate speech scapegoating us for all the political violence in the world as a parrot for Pravda sort of lost the debate when the Berlin Wall fell.
Yep! He was like a broken radio we had in my house. We had to disconnect it from the wall, other wise it wouldn't shut up. The british guy was really annoying!
Two great statesmen--principled integrity, loved America, intelligent, learned, visionary, articulate, -one a Democrat and another a Republican. How far we have fallen! R.I.P. President Reagan & Senator Kennedy.
Reagan was far from having integrity he had scandals and opposed democracy. You can maybe claim that he loved the name “America” but he screwed this country over in so many ways. He is largely responsible for a lot of the problems we face today& have faced for 4 decades.
Interesting program, where both Senator Robert Kennedy and Governor Ronald Reagan were posed questions regarding the War in Vietnam and the mistakes; i.e., the errors, made by the US government; including the assassination of Diem; yet, both Kennedy and Reagan implored the opportunity of free and binding elections, no matter the outcome. "Profiles in Courage" and men of character - in spite of political differences on the continuum. The United States lost a man, who could have taken the first steps, to enter a greater porthole of global and domestic engagement and responsibility as well as living through his "character," the essence of man - in Robert Kennedy. Governor Reagan could have served as an ideal and compelling competitor, making both men and encouraging by leading the United States, in its constant interest on the pathway of a more "perfect" Union. Senator Kennedy and Governor Reagan - two unlikely; yet, two steadfast, compelling competitors, sharing a positive approach and a meaningful direction, for the future of the United States.
I love both Reagan and RFK. They both opposed the welfare state and much of Johnson's plans. Really, RFK was not a liberal; he was the guardian of justice.
+epicman004 It's because they have to respond via and are illiberally painted by American Liberal talking head media made up mostly of failed thespian wannabes. Although I must admit, and as you well know as a Brit "Cream isn't the only thing that floats to the top" and as a point of fact " too often is .... ".
Tommy Bruner Amen, and foreign money interests at that... "eyes wide shut". The only thing we can do is to enlighten our youth to the fact that virtually every cultural encounter they have may be one of passable subversion.
Amazing, a civilized, rational, measured debate about a real issue with genuine concerns raised and directly answered. How the world has deteriorated...
Behold, young ones, when the Democrats and Republicans disagreed on means but not ends.... and both loved and served our nation. Saul Alinksy has done his work well.
Rivenshield I know exactly what you mean. Unfortunately, 95% of our fellow countrymen have no idea what a worthless piece of "progressive," marxist-fascist garbage Saul Alinsky was. What a destructive, evil, and malicious man he was ... and all of it under the guise of "helping the 'poor' and the downtrodden." If anyone deserves to be in hell, he does with ALL of his followers.
Boris Badenovisback I'm not being instigative but... Can I see some links to your evidence? Because this quote by him creates some conflict. "One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're right.' If you don't have that, if you think you've got an inside track to absolute truth, you become doctrinaire, humorless and intellectually constipated. The greatest crimes in history have been perpetrated by such religious and political and racial fanatics, from the persecutions of the Inquisition on down to Communist purges and Nazi genocide"
My thoughts exactly. Bobby (RFK), when he gets a full Q&A, is so ready to just move beyond this guys. He gives a little smile . . . but the British dude (nor the moderator) seems to get the hint.
@@adamwsaxe Yeah, lol I think knowing how RFK was, personally I think all he wanted to do was tell the guy to accept the first answer given to him and shut the fuck up. Even Reagan looked like he was waiting for someone to say something to that guy... I just know that times were a lot different then than they are now. In fact, this was the first interview I've watched where the reporter was so rude, like he had some agenda....
@@marbury2403 Nope is a perfect response that sums up the political mindset of the day. It brings no reason or value to a conversation. Just a blunt statement without substance.
***** Actually it's no different from anyone else. Just because the nation's leaders oppressed third world peoples, doesn't mean the people in the streets agreed, any more than US policy in Vietnam or Iraq, etc.
MiserableOldFart The guys fake indignation is born of guilt at being British and his attempt to distance himself from the source of the wealth that paid for his ass to go to Oxbridge.
The charismatic electricity of both Reagan and Kennedy on one program is incredible. Its interesting to me that both these men respected each other's skills and political star power. I have to say that we were lucky to have had both serve this country.
As a Kennedy baby boomer and Reagan supporter I thought both men handled the international press extremely well! I admired both of these politicians. I wished RFK had stayed alive. To have an open mind to both parties can develope your own sense of values. Awesome recording!
They did, but it was sad that Americans did not catch on to the fact that the two media interviewers kept defending the Communist North Vietnamese government who was committing horrific genocides in South Vietnam at the time. They were evil Marxists just as most journalists were and are today.
Yeah, England is just appalled at US imperialism. Are they forgetting the last 600 years of their own imperialism? I think India, Australia, and South Africa would have something to say about that.
Tristan Mullen RFK would have destroyed Reagan if they were pitted against one another. RFK was a great man with the insight, the eloquence, the compassion, the experience, and the empathy to have been a great president. Watch his announcement of MLK's Passing Speech and you'll see why I believe this.
@@useyournogos6845 That's an absolute fact. JFK's killers would have brought to justice, along with many others whose aim is and was to destroy the country.
In tone this is like the questioning of the Prime Minister in Parliament. Both Reagan and RFK held their own. Kennedy comes off particularly well. Such a session would be unthinkable today, but in many ways it was a freer, more open time in the 60s.
haydn The reason it would be unthinkable today is that you have a person from another country (England) putting tough foreign policy questions to American political figures, backed up by some real knowledge of the situation on the ground in another country. In a political debate today, politicians would not tolerate the presence of a challenging, non-American questioner. They prefer to whitewash international relations; television generally ignores international perspectives on America. Back in those days, though, the propaganda machine seems to have been a little less comprehensive. Things have been tightening up ever since Reagan.
David Carpenter Yes, and many poor stupid socialists who shared your knee jerk anti-American dogmas went to be beaten and brainwashed into drinking cyanide in Guyana with a former Communist Party member who claimed to be Jesus, Foreign socialists who want to save Americans from overpopulation like the Nazis wanted to save Jews from by killing us and stealing all our property for themselves are clearly the ones we should trust instead of our fellow Americans who don't hate us, Totally get your point there. If I was a suicidal gay drama queen too I'm sure I'd agree.
What a fuckin' weird response. How the fuck do you think you know my politics? In any event, I can tell ya: you are totally, absolutely wrong about me. So gofukyaself, OK?
David Carpenter You may have a point. Some of these students seemed a bit hostile though. I wonder if they were coached to be tough and ask hard hitting questions. I wish all US Presidential candidates would be grilled in this format with foreign students. It would be both entertaining and help voters make informed decisions.
That would've been one hell of an election. I wanted RFK to win in 1968, just to prove as Trump wanted to build a wall, RFK was not going to remove half a million US troops at once if he became President. They are empty campaign promises. Nixon's "Vietmization" approach, was the best Nixon could do with what LBJ left him. RFK knew it, and just like Trump, knew he was not going to end the Vietnam war in several months, or a year!
GBoi1 Your first sentence describes the past. Your second sentence describes the present. I was specifically talking about the Kennedy brothers, yet your comment is a paradox. Therefore you don't have a counterargument.
And just in case anyone thinks im being biased I agree with RFK when he says the student should be consistent in criticising North Vietnam as well....Both the UK and US today are far too close to the House of Saud
Are you prepared to hold our education system accountable for the incredibly uninformed _voters_ we have today who are willing to hang on every word uttered by candidates who can barely master basic English let alone an erudite command of the facts? Who don't possess an original thought beyond what the RNC or DNC tells them to articulate? Our agenda-driven journalistic media, our politicians, our jurists, our corporate boardrooms, were virtually all products of the public education system at one point or another; and they who chose to attend universities were presented a steady diet of a single world view under the implicit threat of their GPA being impacted if they didn't recite the party line chapter and verse. As a consequence we collectively have so little knowledge of our own system of government and why it was designed the way it was, as well as a politically whitewashed presentation of our own history, that we can barely function as a nation anymore -- on account of factionalism and political polarization. While government may be failing us, in a system like ours we have to acknowledge the extent to which we citizens have failed each other, by failing to properly raise our kids, to demand better education at the local level, and take ownership of some basic civics, before spouting off about _who_ is right as opposed to _what_ is right as though everything our favorite politicians say is gospel. When did we gleefully accept the politics of personal destruction and the cult of personality as the standard by which we abide in the 21st Century? When was that? I don't remember that being an edict from on high; why are we accepting this as the status quo?
+ronstadtfanaz RFK was a seriously mentally unstable, and thin skinned, insecure individual, not made for the rigors of a presidency.. When in control he was better behind the scenes..He was in no way near the complexity in character, thought, intellect, and depth, as John, his brother..John, saw colors, and shades of gray. With Robert, it was just black, and white..But he did mean well...
Fair play to Reagan and RFK they at least engaged and argued with hostile opponents. Who among today's politicians would dare do that? Everything today is shamefully stage managed. Honest, open debate has been annihilated.
No he was just right Diem was instated by a RIGGED election ...and the USA helped him....he way over exaggerates his figures but Diem DID put people in concentration camps ....but only about 100k...unfortunately the communist govt put millions in concentration camps...
I love the irony of Governor Reagan's more staunchly defending the motivations and the actions of the American administrations of the 1960s (at the time of the debate, all Democrats) than Kennedy who was a member of the first administration of the decade. I love that conservatives' instincts are defend our country and its actions when challenged by foreigners even when those actions were directed by members of the opposite party. Good for Reagan.
Both Reagan and RFK were brilliant orators, both knew how to handle the electoral system and processes, but Reagan was terrifically brilliant at stagnating the middle class,.
Not a Reagan fan, but a huge RFK and JFK fan. However considering who is President today 2019, I can only say Reagan certainly looks a lot better, at least he didn't embarrass us (the US) or insult people every time he made a speech.
jetetarro a President always should have the special perfect support charisma characters , an elected leader don’t run secrets even to the extend of endangered human trafficking that is the best
Today’s politicians would NEVER expose themselves to these kinds of hard-hitting questions. There has always been bullsh*t in politics, but at least these men were brave enough to face the fire.
Agree 100%.....but these people who think Reagan was honest are extremely lacking in their fact checking.......Reagan started us down the neo liberal economics path which has us in the toilet and looking very third world.....
Yeah - and that teleprompter is awesome lol. It apparently can be loaded many times faster than republican congressmen can think... www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/29/obama-goes-to-the-gop-lio_n_442331.html See if you can detect the moment when Obama's foot goes up their collective asses. Hilarious.
blakespower Western politicians have for the most part become quite silly characters, since the end of the Cold war. Soon it will be back to the oldschool sorta men ruling the West.
blakespower, Do you think any republican out there today is fit to lead our country? Yeah neither does the rest of the country! Good luck finding an electable candidate dumbass!
Don't worry I hate both parties they are both the same thing. the country is fucked because we have idiots like you who only vote democrat or republican
To be clear - it wasn’t united then…it was much worse with more people back then ignorantly believing black people were inferior and denying them housing, segregated schools, etc
After the assassination of JFK, RFK was Americas next great hope or beacon of light. Then after him the hope went to JFK Jr. Sigh. All 3 of them taken out. And last but not least, Ron, not Rand, Paul. Who is the United States of America's next great hope going to be that we desperately need as a country and people? So damn sad!
America's LOST PRESIDENT had intelligence, determination, courage and strove for peace and ending poverty. Let's all band together and elect this great man's son who shares his values. RFK JR. IN 24
Ronald Reagan and Robert Kennedy were honorable men who loved their country. I was privileged to have been alive when they were around, including John F. Kennedy, who by today"s standards would have been considered a staunch Conservative.
It shows how powerful the JFK presidency was, that many conservatives would like to claim him as their own. He ran as a moderate democrat who became more liberal over time. By the context of the time he was no conservative compared to Goldwater or William Buckley.
JFK would NEVER have been considered a staunch conservative. That's a myth being perpetrated by the right-wing. President Kennedy supported minimum wage increases, overtime pay, medicare (which LBJ eventually passed), and was planning his own war on poverty at the time of his death. JFK, in fact, called himself a liberal in the tradition of FDR.
The country wasn't ready for Reagan back then. It was FINALLY ready in 1980 after that trainwreck Carter. People forget that back then Reagan DID run for President when he was younger, in 1968 and LOST...to Nixon. He also ran in 1976 and barely lost to Ford. When he finally won in 1980, it was the THIRD time he had run for President. It was also the perfect time for him.
***** I know you are, but what I am? Btw my Mom says to tell your Mom that we're not allowed to talk on RU-vid anymore on account of we can't get along.
Regan is the type of president we need today ,someone that's stern and a true patriot ,i was blinded by the critisism of liberals as a kid and didn't see the big picture of government ,i now realize today that Reagan was a great president.
Just imagine the 1968 election had it been between these two men. Personally I think Reagan looked and sounded more presidential and stronger in his convictions but Kennedy would have been a better democrat nominee than was Humphrey.
If it was Robert Kennedy versus Nixon in 1968, and it was certainly heading that way after the California primary, it would have been no contest. Kennedy would have stayed on as President until '76. Think about everything that might have changed. Sigh.
THIS IS AMAZING! RFK and Reagan are both my political heroes from both sides of political spectrum. But don't criticize one without giving equal criticism to the other. Both were equally shady
I agree. Despite obvious "ideological" differences, John F Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, and Ronald Reagan were the last of the true politicians who were willing to honestly debate and in the end would do whats best for the American people. I am 66 years old and thank God I was alive during the times of these great American leaders. I fear for what lies ahead for my two sons and their children with the spineless leaders of today. Simply stated, I loved the Kennedy brothers and I loved Ronald Reagan. Many would say that is an impossible statement. But do your research, as the Kennedy family and the Reagans were far more closer than the media would have you believe. They were all very aware that, in the words of JFK, "we all inhabit this small planet, we all breathe the same air, we all cherish our childrens' future...and we are all mortal". We will all pass on, and the work we do today is really for future generations, not ourselves. I love the item that Ronald Reagan kept on his desk - that read: There is no limit to what man may accomplish, as long as he doesn't mind who gets the credit". Think about this. If we were to remove ego from the human spirit, and really recognize that our time on earth is really very short, just imagine what we could accomplish in the name of peace and security for the world. We do not have leaders like this anymore. So sad. Please let me know your thoughts. Kevin
@@biologicalentity7153 Carter was pretty decent and might of gotten reelected had Reagan's people not negotiated to have the hostages in Iran held till after the election.......
Kennedy allowed the punk questioner's lies to stand unchallenged, while Reagan fought back with facts. For all those who regarded Ronnie as being dim or uninformed, here is (yet another) example of his knowledge and preparation for debate
He was making a point about the general behaviour of the U.S. in weaker countries---and remember that back then changes in administration generally resulted in few or no changes in our foreign policy (unfortunately still true).
You missed the OP's point. Yes, the tape was made in 1967, and that's the point. The student questioner was trying to make RR and RFK answer for what did or did not happen in 1954 when both RR and RFK were private citizens. In reality, the questioner was using his "question" opportunity as a platform to bloviate, grandstand, and espouse his own subjective reality.
Today's politicians will totally avoid answering questions and talk about something else that's meaningless. Or they will use ad hominem attacks on their opponents. The result is: the audience learns NOTHING!
Never liked RFK, but he handles this Brit. A Brit who sounds like the emotional basket cases we have today, twisting history. Accusing the USA of hypocrisy and meddling into the internal affairs of a country without being asked. Untrue.
Interesting, that today, our politicians are never subjugated to such questioning. No media outlet is asking tough questions like these. No one even questions why Republicans talk about "freedom of the individual" and "democracy" while they help export our jobs to the world's largest dictatorship--Communist--or rather corporatist--in nature. Liberals on the other hand, supposedly are financed and support by unions, yet any time they can get a new trade deals with a third world country, they not only negotiate it, but they fail or rather intentionally ignore the human rights and labor rights of those workers, and by doing so, make a competitive disadvantage to American workers, liberals, conservatives and other factions.
Are you nuts, we are discussing whether to keep or throw out the amendments to the constitution!! What is more important? What is happening in Nam or in America?? I am a Vet of that war!
What do you have against reality shows? Our leaders can't even complete sentences. Most are horrible with sound bytes. Avenatti was hyped for President not that long ago. Look where he is now.
Now this is how you have a debate. I grew up watching Reagan talk, but not RFK, and what a loss for me. The guy made every good faith effort to clarify things and be reasonable, and what a shame our culture shifted completely away from that, to the cesspool of vicious brattery we have today.
I am not a fan of either Kennedy but beyond party lines, look at the level of education, professionalism, and Presidentiality that is demonstrated by both candidates as they debate. These were gentlemen. Why don't we have this kind of quality in our current presidential candidates?
Because the voters don't want that anymore. That's exactly what Trump shattered, Jeb and others tried to be civil and he ate their lunch. People want a spectacle.
Here we see a rare glimpse of drumming great Keith Moon political aspirations of becoming the next Prime minister of Britain. Later on that day he ran into his old pal Roger Daltry and asked him to join his band. The rest is history.
As a Who fan, I think your analogy is hilarious (in a good way)! But as an American historian, I am perplexed by your analogy here. ;) I have always thought that Pete Townshend should have been/still could be a terrific Prime Minister of England though! :)
This kind of decent debate is long gone. RFK would be appalled at what the Democrat party turning to communism. he fought communism with all his might.
This was around the period when RFK was becoming a more confident and natural speaker. He was moulding into an original leading political figure. What a shame that he died a year later after this. He would have been a great asset for the USA. It still hurts me as a through and through British citizen born 20 years after his assassination. Anyway, better not think about it or my hair will turn grey before the typical age of possessing it.
This is back when the politicians had the mental ability to actually answer the question(s) ask - For years now, those in office speak a LOT of WORDS that don't answer the question asked... sad really.
At least RFK has the decency to acknowledge that "mistakes" were made by the United States. Reagan would never admit to such a thing. Big difference in thinking.
AtlasShruggery No, again the reason people are mad about the Nicaraguan Contras were, they were fighting socialist/communists. Period. Again, that is a FLAT OUT LIE! Islam has been on the rampage since about 650AD against the WORLD who ISN'T Islam...Reagan wasn't around...I think a Bush was though...The modern terrorists of Islam showed its face in the '72 Olympics. They are who they are just like communism is what it is. We didn't fund the Taliban in the '80s either, parrot. We funded, again, those against the SPREAD OF COMMUNISM under the Soviet Union which YOU YOURSELF HATE(D). NOW THE PRESENT POTUS IS FUNDING TERRORISM (the present Russia and China put a stop to that shit with Syria. Well, us helping them)...Makes you mad that they made this POTUS look like a fool. Al Qeada put the flag up in Falujah recently...crickets... Now, that little incident with China going to the moon. They didn't have that capability until ??? Takers?? Clinton. Remember John Wong and all those secrets missing from all over the place? Yep, missile technology, etc. Thanks to the "kum-by-ya" attitude of libs. Lots of pirates here as I hear so many parrots squawking the BS lib mantra. Just like this video shows. Nothing's changed. OH, and the Ayatollahs wouldn't be there if it weren't for the idiot Carter that allowed them to take over Iran and not HELP the Iranian people. Why? Libs love dictators of their liking. Many here posting it proves my point and doing a great job doing it. Probably a lot of wasted money going to a modern American university posting on this video. Krushev knew it would happen and told us so to our faces. Yep, and here we are....
What is surprising is the amount of comity and agreement between two men that modern interpretations would place at polar opposites. It just show how much agreement there was in this nation before Alinsky-liberalism took over the Democrat party.
I come back eight months later and my argument still stands. And it turns out that terrorism is even a great mess with ISIS. Russia in the Ukraine...Hamas loved by Utopian loving idiots. LOL
For a future President who was considered by liberals as a Hollywood idiot actor when elected in 1980, Reagan certainly knew about the history of US involvement in Vietnam going back to 1954. Reagan at the time was the governor of CA, he wasn't running as a world leader. It's possible this debate put Reagan on the ballot during the 1968 GOP convention. RFK's brother was President when Diem was assassinated by a CIA coup, just three weeks before JFK's assassination. Not to mention that the US Vietnam ambassador at the time was Henry Cabot Lodge Jr.. Lodge lost his Senate seat to JFK in 1952. The irony of this is Reagan only knew what he read in the press, RFK knew the real story. If you put Gore,GWB, Kerry, Hillary, Trump, McCain, Biden and Obama against this English crossfire, their brains would melt to mush. That's what today's America has become. If you need further proof the infamous Buckley vs. Vidal debates on ABC in 1968 prove that Buckley was supporting the then Democratic party establishment POV, and Vidal the opposite. It had nothing to do with conservatism vs. liberalism. It was pure belief in right vs. wrong. I forgot to add that I didn't include Mitt Romney because in 2012, Americans didn't elect the smart guy.
Time for some history here. Reagan was heavily involved with Goldwater and had been in the political theatre for a while. Many said, once hearing Reagan, that he should actually been the nominee in 1964, not Goldwater. Reagan did not just know what he read in the papers. It also was determined that Reagan should pursue his rise in steps afterwards, hence the Governorship of CA, then the run against Ford in '76. Unfortunately, after 1980, it was only a few short years into his terms that his mind was showing the effects of Alzheimer's. The problem in this country now is conservatism has completely taken over the Republican Party, propagandizing and preaching a no compromise brand of government - the John Birch Society without the name anymore. Government is about compromise, not winner take all. This isn't a wrestling match. ...and other than being a corporate raider getting rich with other peoples' money, what brain has Romney ever exhibited? Had he not just parroted the typical nonsense on the campaign trail, he might have won. He just stuck to the script, the usual propagandized talking points. Okay, during this election, calling Trump the fraud he truly is was one notch in his favor, but anyone following NYC and AC for the last 30 years would have known that in a heartbeat.
You're only speculating that facing near death after the failed assassination 3/81 led to Reagan's Alzheimer's earlier than reported. Had Hillary won this election, she would've been the same age as Reagan was in 1981 when it's obvious she's hiding other health problems. That's not important. Trump has destroyed conservatism in the Republican party, well, the neo-cons are finally destroyed! He blew it up, and won by spending his own money compared to Hillary's ground game, and cash. If one could find the financial ratio of what Trump spent vs. Hillary, it proves that: 1) Hillary maybe the most hated woman in America if you're white no matter your gender, and 2) Trump attracted white "Reagan democrat" voters the GOP couldn't dream to get in the rust belt states since 1988. So far despite the hand wringing from the traditional media, Trump's hiring the correct people for important positions. They only one I question is Jeff Sessions. The only President who was considered successful from the US Senate was JFK, and he didn't complete his term. Hillary Clinton has ruined this country because of her blind ambition. She's made one democratic long shot who didn't deserve office from his experience POTUS in 2008. In 2016, Hillary and her henchmen were prepared to make sure this Dem nomination was "fixed", yet she couldn't shake off a socialist. How many times does Hillary need to see that despite the charisma of her "husband", white women hate Hillary Clinton? They chose an implied "misogynist" over Hillary. Despite what the press wants to dump on Trump's head, I'll take an inexperienced politician, over a rookie US Senator every time. A CEO of a Fortune 500 company, or former state governor knows how to delegate authority.
SisterRayVU68 Alzheimers is something that happens at different times in individuals. Reagan's near assassination can't be used scientifically as any excuse. Clinton is not a relevant example here, nor does she have health issues, unless you believe fake news postings. Trump has not killed the Neoconservatives, as his National Security Adviser nominee is clearly one. The Republican Party is what has died here as this is and has not been for the last 35 years, the party of Eisenhower, Roosevelt, nor Lincoln. It has just been the John Birch Society without the name. Eisenhower clearly defined the stupidity of conservatism to his brother in 1954. Unfortunately, the propaganda spewed by the likes of Fox have made the masses accept it, even though it clearly does not work. A return to normalcy (pre-1980) within the Republican Party would ensure both the Party going forward, and the survival of this country.
Your propaganda is duly noted, thanks for your "fake news". Unless Hillary is staging that she needs help up the steps by the SS holding her by both shoulders back in NH in February is "fake", she has health issues. Trump is a Nelson Rockefeller northeast Republican by default, so if you, mini Oliver Stone believe that Trump has been bought by the GOP machine that tried to destroy him at every turn until election day, prove it! The one line I loved was "return to normalcy", so cute (pre-1980), were you alive during the late 1970's? I guess the country would've been better off if Jimmy Carter was re-elected, a person who had no answer to the economy. So if Reagan won in a landslide in 1984 without Fox News, despite the recession of 82-83, why didn't Hillary win despite how "great" our country is now? The fake news is no longer under Fox, CNN has taken over.
Thanks for the shenanigans, but I was a teenager during the Reagan administration, and I know the truth. Despite the propaganda the Clinton's made about "trickle down " economics in 1992, I know it worked. I witnessed it. I lived in a state that was slow to desegregate. In my kindergarten class, there was one African American girl (1976). By the time I graduated in 1989, a flood of African American's from city neighborhoods were able to move to the white suburbs. I witnessed the ones who wanted to get out of the city to prosper, and not rely on welfare. That went away years later.
That would had been the match up for the political ages. Reagan v. RFK for the White House. It would had been the most watched and participated presidential election day ever. What could had been 😔
The very articulate British man questioning Reagan and Kennedy certainly does, on review these 50 years later, come off as something of an irritating character. But I choose to consider him young (and we can all be forgiven for not refining ourselves by that age), zealous, and rather erstwhile. To his credit, he was challenging U.S. policies in Vietnam, which were criminally stupid. Bobby recognized that by the time he was assassinated one year later. One would hope that Reagan had the intelligence, maturity, and capacity for learning to likewise reach that conclusion.
What a sanctimonious English prat. From his questions he sounded very sympathetic to communism and, like most self-righteous pro-communist westerners, he's blind to the fact that the kind of debate they were engaged in would never happen in a communist country.
“My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life; to be remembered simply as a good and decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it,”
