For example, I would have experienced the same shock had it happened to Nixon, or Eisenhower, or any president or vice-president of the time. The shock did not grow over time, for me—it was greatest at the beginning. It was the shock of something that (to me) had been literally unthinkable, happening. I knew about Lincoln and McKinley, of course, but they were fusty old historical figures, not a living president.

It’s something like academically knowing that all humans are mortal, and then having the experience of a death in the family. You either feel it that way, or you don’t. I think most people at the time felt it that way, whether they idealized JFK or not.

I WAS there. However, I’m older than you so I know how the press treated JFK before his assassination and how the Camelot legend was created and fed. The assassination of JFK was shocking, but it became obsessive as time went on.

A real look at JFK would have done wonders to put the legend to rest. JFK played around a lot and took a lot of drugs. He and his brother used the FBI to hurt his political enemies. Where was Camelot?

Jackie had a great influence on style, and her redecorating of the White House was terrific. She was also a terrific book editor. Laura Bush wasn’t so stylish, but she was a similar type. A classy first lady. But Camelot?

Anyway, Kennedy’s death wouldn’t have been so shocking if the MSM had provided a bit of perspective. They were eager to cash in on the public interest. JFK was sort of a Princess Diana.

I suppose I’d better read your posts and threads now that I’ve responded to your response. 😉

If you read the comments thread on that post, you’ll see a discussion of this.

There’s a huge American world out there that one will never see by staying in the urbanized areas.

**********

I love love love Sarah Palin. I don’t know if she would be a great President, because that’s a very specific job. However, I’ve reevaluated many things I learned in school about our past Presidents. Now Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge are looking pretty good, while Woodrow Wilson looks much more vile than he ever did before. Eisenhower has risen to a very high level because he knew how to use the executive office.

So, I think all of us need to rethink what we think we know about good and bad Presidents. Re Neo’s look at the death of President Kennedy, I didn’t read these posts or comments. I’m sorry, Neo, I’m just sick of the Kennedys. They were all slick media manufactured creeps. J. Kennedy’s death affected Americans, but I know that we can attribute much of that angst to the MSM.

So, to whom should we be comparing Palin right now? Why is Jindal on one commenter’s list ahead of Palin? What’s he done that’s so much better? We all need to get the MSM out of our heads and start looking at candidates’ qualifications for the job. Right away, I’ve learned to put governors higher up on my list of potentials as well as other people with executive experience. My perfect candidate would be a younger and healthier Dick Cheney. But Palin still seems like a very strong candidate.

Oh? The Won was the Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives?

If she isn’t qualified to handle the gritty work of leading America to reclaim its “heritage and values,” to recover its exceptional place in the world again, I don’t know who is. Does she need to run for President to do that? I don’t think so: I think she has already begun the task.

I am hoping this TLC program will help the more gentrified of the lower 48 understand who Sarah Palin is and how life in Alaska has made her that way.