Interesting account of JFK affair, Gore Vidal

[Cory Santos]

15 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

I think its only having a lot of time to think. I have thought long and hard about why there is this magnetism in JFK that has made me read so much about a buy that died 18 years before I was born. By far the most power answer I have relates to myself, I think I see myself in him or vice versa. Of course there are many aspects to his personality and his developmental/environmental influences that made him who he is. I gravitate toward idealists, thinkers, intelligence, fairness, logic, pragmatism, stoicism and passionate people. Like anyone out there, we need role models, heroes, people to strive to be like, that make us raise our own game. I am very grateful that I discovered this guy and the positive influence that he has had on my life. 
 

He did, he was a beacon of hope, inspirational. He made people feel of value, in a world where many people felt they were nothing. The speeches communicated with all. 
 

Another point; I think he was a dreamer, not in the way that people negatively characterise a person with dreams but, in a positive way that said to everyone with a dream that they should reach for it. He had dreams of lifting a whole world. There aren’t many in history who even attempted it. 
 

“Give me a place to stand and a lever long enough, and I shall move the world.” 
Archimedes

(Referenced in RFK’s Ripples of Hope)

 

That’s a very kind compliment. Thank you.

Have you ever read PT109? And sat and thought about what he did? The towing the injured crewman with a belt between his teeth for possibly 3 miles? The swimming/floating all night in the tide, trying to signal an allied ship to say they needed rescuing, could possibly have been eaten by sharks or captured by the Japanese. He is the only president with a purple heart. 
 

TBH I have often thought about writing a profile of who he was and what made him tick. 
 

Perhaps we should talk about Bobby too, his passion, conviction, courage, loyalty, forcing his way through his own struggles to run for Potus. My brother (being a younger brother, identifies with Bobby much more). RFK was a very interesting character. The nation really took him in to their hearts. 
 

I feel like I could sit for hours and talk about these guys with a few drinks. We’re lucky to have had them. 
 

 

Joe, I invite you to discuss your feelings for JFK with Cubans from that era.  They do not share your optimism.    I had grandiose views about Camelot growing up during high school but then, I met a survivor of the BOP.  I heard his feelings.  I then met two other survivors.  Their takes were fascinating and I opened my world view to understand there were two sides to every story.  Then I met someone who knew Marilyn personally.  Again my younger naive vision of Camelot was challenged.   During graduate school studying history, I began to understand that one either glorifies historical figures or tries to understand the full context of where they stand objectively.   Though Cliff Varnell and I rarely agree politically, except on music and food, we are close friends and as he has decided never to leave his invite in my guest house while he finishes his script-for those unaware I am an entertainment lawyer amongst other things-he changed my view of Kennedy and the Diem assassination.  So, no, not everyone thought as highly of JFK and RFK as you think.  He barely won the general election and was so worried about 1964 he agreed to take a foolish trip through Texas when it is debatable if he needed to with LBJ on the ticket.  If LBJ was so powerful couldn’t he deliver Texas on his own?   Certainly, if JFK was going to drop LBJ then he had no chance of winning Texas so why waste the trip?   Cliff coined the term JFK fanboy as a person who glorifies JFK and Camelot and ignores a whole lot of crap.   
While I respect them both I keep a healthy neutrality as to their historical context against the backdrop of American views of them at that time.   I understand statues and schools are named after them.  They should be.  But, that occurred later not during Camelot when they faced opposition and a divided America.  

Edited November 19, 2022 by Cory Santos

[Cory Santos]

I would add, after Cliff coined this term during our conversation, I mentioned there are worse things to be, namely like being a “Warren Commission fan boy”.  Lol.   That fan club is small, lonely, and can’t even sell out a free chicken dinner party.  

Edited November 19, 2022 by Cory Santos

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Joe, I invite you to discuss your feelings for JFK with Cubans from that era.  They do not share your optimism.    I had grandiose views about Camelot growing up during high school but then, I met a survivor of the BOP.  I heard his feelings.  I then met two other survivors.  Their takes were fascinating and I opened my world view to understand there were two sides to every story.  Then I met someone who knew Marilyn personally.  Again my younger naive vision of Camelot was challenged.   During graduate school studying history, I began to understand that one either glorifies historical figures or tries to understand the full context of where they stand objectively.   Though Cliff Varnell and I rarely agree politically, except on music and food, we are close friends and as he has decided never to leave his invite in my guest house while he finishes his script-for those unaware I am an entertainment lawyer amongst other things-he changed my view of Kennedy and the Diem assassination.  So, no, not everyone thought as highly of JFK and RFK as you think.  He barely won the general election and was so worried about 1964 he agreed to take a foolish trip through Texas when it is debatable if he needed to with LBJ on the ticket.  If LBJ was so powerful couldn’t he deliver Texas on his own?   Certainly, if JFK was going to drop LBJ then he had no chance of winning Texas so why waste the trip?   Cliff coined the term JFK fanboy as a person who glorifies JFK and Camelot and ignores a whole lot of crap.   
While I respect them both I keep a healthy neutrality as to their historical context against the backdrop of American views of them at that time.   I understand statues and schools are named after them.  They should be.  But, that occurred later not during Camelot when they faced opposition and a divided America.  

There is quite a bit to unpack here, Cory.  Firstly, I won’t hold your relationship with Cliff against you. I am sure he has his moments. Though I haven’t seen his convincing side yet. 🙂 

Let me start by pointing out the obvious; we can take any hero in history and find people who will vilify them. We can also find some of the most heinous figures in history still being worshipped in small pockets here and there (there is a whole battalion of them in Ukraine). Did you feel you were getting objective opinions from the Cuban’s? That’s putting aside the stereotypes of Latinos being full of emotion and passion. Are the facts settled on whether JFK was to blame for the failed BOP invasion, or was it the work of Dulles and Bissell (CIA)? I know the Helms and Sturgis version. 
What does a forensic analysis tell you? The plan failed, the exiles/emigre’s didn’t get their country back, they lost friends and relatives, saw tragedy. It was the last time that they came close to their dream. How should they remember it? Are these guys supporters of Batista, already battle scared, filled with hate from those experiences? They were missing a lot of the picture too. Their suffering was what they knew and saw. They are entitled to views from their experiences. They are no less vulnerable to groupthink than any other people. IMHO they were used / taken advantage of to a degree by the CIA and politicians.  
 

With your point about the Cuban’s views, you could also have asked some ex mob guys and even some Texan Republicans to recant their feelings on JFK. If we are to judge JFK after his short time in office, how many people mourned his death, shed tears, felt loss? They outnumber any of his critics not just substantially, emphatically. Where you are right is; there are always two side to a coin, one mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist. 
 

As for Marilyn Monroe, the whole thing has been debated here until people are blue in the face. You weren’t witness to it and neither was I. We really suffer when it comes to credible evidence. What we are not short of is salacious gossip and people who want to say that they knew something. The braggadocios nature of people looking to impress, or somehow raise their own social status by linking themselves to someone famous is never in short supply. Even memories are emotional, they change over time. 
 

57 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

So, no, not everyone thought as highly of JFK and RFK as you think.  He barely won the general election and was so worried about 1964 he agreed to take a foolish trip through Texas when it is debatable if he needed to with LBJ on the ticket.  If LBJ was so powerful couldn’t he deliver Texas on his own?   Certainly, if JFK was going to drop LBJ then he had no chance of winning Texas so why waste the trip?

This particular bit doesn’t sound very balanced at all, Cory. I guess he was foolish thinking that the Secret Service would do their job, stick to oaths they swore, and keep him safe. That again is something that has been debated to death. Foolish for thinking that he could visit a state in a democracy where he was elected president. What kind of a democracy do you have if the president can’t travel? What you call foolishness, I may call courage. What kind of a leader hides from the people? Not one i’d want.
 

What were JFK’s approval ratings like just before he died? I think you’re perhaps presenting a lob sided perspective, not an objective or neutral one, which is what you aimed to do in the face of Joe and I expressing our admiration for the 35th president. 
 

i will say this; it is true that when a man or woman is cut down somewhere near their prime in life, or in JFK’s case, just past the midpoint (he was ill), that the result can be that they become larger in death, than in life, or they are remembered as perfect, because the world didn’t see them grow old and foolish. In JFK’s case, some will choose to revere him, a small minority will revile him and the rest will be apathetic. The words remain, as does the purple heart, as does enough evidence of his will to create peace, make rapprochement’s and secure detente’s. To stop the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. Remember the America that he inherited from old Eisenhower? The one where people of ethnic minorities daren’t hold their heads high? Their lives became a little bit better because this guy and his brother existed and spoke up. They paid in blood for their choices. Perhaps if we take a step back for a moment and ask; have you had a better president / leader since? 
Has America ever recovered? 

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

I would add, after Cliff coined this term during our conversation, I mentioned there are worse things to be, namely like being a “Warren Commission fan boy”.  Lol.   That fan club is small, lonely, and can’t even sell out a free chicken dinner.   

PS. 
WC fanboys are on another forum. 🙂 

On a serious note, I do think its important to have admiration, respect, to have role models or positive archetypes. They make us strive to be better. Anyone who really reads history, psychology or philosophy, surely understands that no man or women is perfect, they make mistakes, errors, that humans do. The modern thing is to find the smallest infraction and magnify it as much as possible. The result is a society without heroes, or strong role models. And a generation who has an identity crisis; who doesn’t know who they are, or who they should be. I’d like to see a few more JFK’s about. 🤷‍♂️

[Sandy Larsen]

10 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Joe,

...So, no, not everyone thought as highly of JFK and RFK as you think.  He barely won the general election...

 

Cory,

Having grown up in far-right Utah, I can assure you that even though JFK lost Utah's electoral votes in 1960, he became quite popular afterward. I don't recall anybody here saying a bad thing about him.

I had a history professor who informed our class that Kennedy had had an affair with Marilyn Monroe. (This would have been around 1975.) When I told my friends -- all conservative Republicans mind you -- they refused to believe it. (We all voted for Ronald Reagan just a few years later.) That's how pro-JFK they were. (I was pro-JFK too, though I assumed the Marylin Monroe story was factual, having come from the mouth of a professor.)

I'm sure that there were also a lot of anti-JFK folks around. But they kept their thoughts to themselves.

 

10 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

... and was so worried about 1964 he agreed to take a foolish trip through Texas when it is debatable if he needed to with LBJ on the ticket.  

 

That's an interesting thought, though I draw from it a conclusion virtually opposite from yours.

I think that JFK thought the trip to Texas was exceedingly important because he knew that LBJ would be off the ticket in 1964 due to his pending indictment in the Bobby Baker scandal.

 

10 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

If LBJ was so powerful couldn’t he deliver Texas on his own?   Certainly, if JFK was going to drop LBJ then he had no chance of winning Texas so why waste the trip?

 

JFK would have to convince Texans that he had nothing to do with LBJ's indictment. Maybe hint that there could be a pardon?

 

10 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Cliff coined the term JFK fanboy as a person who glorifies JFK and Camelot and ignores a whole lot of crap.

 

Is Cliff really living with you? Or is that an ongoing gag?

 

[Joe Bauer]

9 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

There is quite a bit to unpack here, Cory.  Firstly, I won’t hold your relationship with Cliff against you. I am sure he has his moments. Though I haven’t seen his convincing side yet. 🙂 

Let me start by pointing out the obvious; we can take any hero in history and find people who will vilify them. We can also find some of the most heinous figures in history still being worshipped in small pockets here and there (there is a whole battalion of them in Ukraine). Did you feel you were getting objective opinions from the Cuban’s? That’s putting aside the stereotypes of Latinos being full of emotion and passion. Are the facts settled on whether JFK was to blame for the failed BOP invasion, or was it the work of Dulles and Bissell (CIA)? I know the Helms and Sturgis version. 
What does a forensic analysis tell you? The plan failed, the exiles/emigre’s didn’t get their country back, they lost friends and relatives, saw tragedy. It was the last time that they came close to their dream. How should they remember it? Are these guys supporters of Batista, already battle scared, filled with hate from those experiences? They were missing a lot of the picture too. Their suffering was what they knew and saw. They are entitled to views from their experiences. They are no less vulnerable to groupthink than any other people. IMHO they were used / taken advantage of to a degree by the CIA and politicians.  
 

With your point about the Cuban’s views, you could also have asked some ex mob guys and even some Texan Republicans to recant their feelings on JFK. If we are to judge JFK after his short time in office, how many people mourned his death, shed tears, felt loss? They outnumber any of his critics not just substantially, emphatically. Where you are right is; there are always two side to a coin, one mans freedom fighter is another mans terrorist. 
 

As for Marilyn Monroe, the whole thing has been debated here until people are blue in the face. You weren’t witness to it and neither was I. We really suffer when it comes to credible evidence. What we are not short of is salacious gossip and people who want to say that they knew something. The braggadocios nature of people looking to impress, or somehow raise their own social status by linking themselves to someone famous is never in short supply. Even memories are emotional, they change over time. 
 

This particular bit doesn’t sound very balanced at all, Cory. I guess he was foolish thinking that the Secret Service would do their job, stick to oaths they swore, and keep him safe. That again is something that has been debated to death. Foolish for thinking that he could visit a state in a democracy where he was elected president. What kind of a democracy do you have if the president can’t travel? What you call foolishness, I may call courage. What kind of a leader hides from the people? Not one i’d want.
 

What were JFK’s approval ratings like just before he died? I think you’re perhaps presenting a lob sided perspective, not an objective or neutral one, which is what you aimed to do in the face of Joe and I expressing our admiration for the 35th president. 
 

i will say this; it is true that when a man or woman is cut down somewhere near their prime in life, or in JFK’s case, just past the midpoint (he was ill), that the result can be that they become larger in death, than in life, or they are remembered as perfect, because the world didn’t see them grow old and foolish. In JFK’s case, some will choose to revere him, a small minority will revile him and the rest will be apathetic. The words remain, as does the purple heart, as does enough evidence of his will to create peace, make rapprochement’s and secure detente’s. To stop the testing of nuclear weapons in the atmosphere. Remember the America that he inherited from old Eisenhower? The one where people of ethnic minorities daren’t hold their heads high? Their lives became a little bit better because this guy and his brother existed and spoke up. They paid in blood for their choices. Perhaps if we take a step back for a moment and ask; have you had a better president / leader since? 
Has America ever recovered? 

 

 

HERE HERE!

[Kirk Gallaway]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Cory,

Having grown up in far-right Utah, I can assure you that even though JFK lost Utah's electoral votes in 1960, he became quite popular afterward. I don't recall anybody here saying a bad thing about him.

I had a history professor who informed our class that Kennedy had had an affair with Marilyn Monroe. (This would have been around 1975.) When I told my friends -- all conservative Republicans mind you -- they refused to believe it. (We all voted for Ronald Reagan just a few years later.) That's how pro-JFK they were. (I was pro-JFK too, though I assumed the Marylin Monroe story was factual, having come from the mouth of a professor.)

I'm sure that there were also a lot of anti-JFK folks around. But they kept their thoughts to themselves.

 

 

That's an interesting thought, though I draw from it a conclusion virtually opposite from yours.

I think that JFK thought the trip to Texas was exceedingly important because he knew that LBJ would be off the ticket in 1964 due to his pending indictment in the Bobby Baker scandal.

 

 

JFK would have to convince Texans that he had nothing to do with LBJ's indictment. Maybe hint that there could be a pardon?

 

 

Is Cliff really living with you? Or is that an ongoing gag?

 

Yeah Cory, I may be wrong but you seemed to want us to know that you're housing Cliff, and keeping him to his screenwriting.

Are you  like a Eugene  Landy figure? Couldn't Cliff have locked himself in his own apartment,  turned off all of his clocks, and shut off all the shades to make his apartment completely dark and set to his screenwriting like Sylvester Stallone did in "Rocky? "

 

Some interesting thoughts and feelings here about JFK!

[W. Niederhut]

9 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

PS. 
WC fanboys are on another forum. 🙂 

On a serious note, I do think its important to have admiration, respect, to have role models or positive archetypes. They make us strive to be better. Anyone who really reads history, psychology or philosophy, surely understands that no man or women is perfect.

What about Dolly Parton?  🤥

 

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

What about Dolly Parton?  🤥

 

I can see a couple of obvious advantages of having her around. 🙂 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Yeah Cory, I may be wrong but you seemed to want us to know that you're housing Cliff, and keeping him to his screenwriting.

I picked up on that too. Sort of like Hugo being in the attic in that Halloween episode of the Simpsons, being fed buckets of fish heads. ☺️

[Joe Bauer]

Cory, JFK and Jackie K. had no where near the celebrity exposure and fame ( both here and worldwide ) before and right up to JFK's election to office.

However starting from that point on combined with the massive media coverage of the world's most powerful man and most glamorous political couple, by 1963 they had ascended to the unprecedented celebrity icon level I described.

I don't present this JFK and Jackie attraction and popularity sensation proposition because I was personally in love with them and specifically Jackie. I was just 12 years old in 1963.

However, if one just reads and studies even a little of the reported and recorded massive political and celebrity media coverage of them both here and worldwide during that time, it's irrefutable that they were on a level of celebrity unlike anything we and the rest of the world had ever seen.

With every parade trip abroad, JFK's popularity ( and Jackie's if she accompanied him ) just increased exponentially. Wherever JFK went, the crowds were huge and cheering wildly. It was serious adoration.

I later knew people who traveled abroad during JFK's presidency and they related that JFK and Jackie's faces graced the covers of pop culture magazines in every big city. Always in a glamorous way.

Jackie became the most celebrity media followed woman on Earth. Her looks and bearing were the epitome of inspiring and envied physical beauty, fashion and education class.

As JFK hilariously once joked in a public speech, Jackie and her latest hair and fashion styles were of more interest to the world press than his and LBJ's doings.

JFK and Jackie had become the world's most fascinating and media covered celebrities. That's not an exaggeration born out of my own adulation and attraction to them.

I posted the Santa Monica Ca. beach scene photo of an almost naked dripping wet JFK being chased and groped by a mob of squealing carnal desire crazed women because imo this photo perfectly exemplified the effect on American women JFK had after his image and news coverage videos had been thrust thousands of times into their everyday lives and world.

Sex appeal in political election candidates does effect voters, especially women regards male candidates imo.

In all the presidential elections I have witnessed, I have seen hundreds of early entry candidates that you just knew were never going to garner enough of the physical attraction vote from the get go.

I do not know the official percentage of the female vote JFK won in the 1960 election.

However, my guess is in the 1964 election he would have won at least 10 to 20% more, just because of his unprecedented crazed sexual attraction effect on women.

Are that many women voters that susceptible to such a visceral emotion based bias? 

In JFK's case, I believe so. Look at that JFK crazed women attack beach scene photo again.

Those wild-eyed women were sexualized zombies and obviously "in love" with JFK!

The thousands of female sidewalk crowd persons in the 11,22, 1963 Dallas motorcade were also excitedly screaming, smiling and waving at JFK and Jackie as well. OMG, there he is! Ohhh he "is" as handsome as he looks in the magazines and on TV! Poor LBJ wasn't even noticed or waved at in his plain, unadorned follow up car.

Same with that Love Field airport crowd that went screaming turned on nuts when JFK and Jackie actually came to them and shook their hands!

That was the physical attraction effect reality with JFK and Jackie!

These millions didn't want their fantasy couple removed from office. It was too pleasurable to see them in the news and magazines every day.

And lastly, my guess is also that JFK may have naively trusted his security people to have at least kept a binocular check on opened high building floor windows along his parade route as he was passing underneath them.

Edited November 22, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[Cory Santos]

All interesting responses.   

[Cory Santos]

Btw you won’t see Cliff on for a while as his WiFi has been shut off until a final script has been done.   Any questions for him can be directed to me for a response.   

[Joe Bauer]

Just now, Cory Santos said:

All interesting responses.   

CS...any way I can send you a message outside of the forum?

 

[Cory Santos]

1 minute ago, Joe Bauer said:

CS...any way I can send you a message outside of the forum?

 

Sure 

Lots of ways

Cory@SantosLawOffices.com

Or

CorySantosLaw.com

Edited November 19, 2022 by Cory Santos