Talk:John F. Kennedy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John F. Kennedy article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
John F. Kennedy is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified John F. Kennedy as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Hebrew language Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] New film

Guess what, seems like there's a new film discovery on the assassination. Info has been added. I'll probably add more references to back it up. --Jbanning22 19:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

a secret film has been discovered which was taken when john f kennedy was murdered. this foot age has not been shown yet and there has been a an inquest to whether it will be shown to any one to the emotional stress it may cause some people to watch

[edit] New image

#1
#1
#2
#2
#3
#3

User:Cathytreks recently added a new image to the infobox. This was reverted, then replaced. I think the new image represents a significant improvement over the previous. I would strongly support using it. --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 22:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

How is it (image #2) of lead image quality? I don't see any other articles where the lead image has the person in question with their eyes closed. I have no problem with having the image in the article, but the lead image is supposed to accurately reflect the individual in question. In other words, the best view of their face. Cathytreks clearly feels strongly about the image because her uncle took it, but I don't see much value in it besides being in color. --tomf688 (talk - email) 22:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Kennedy's eyes were not closed, it was a photograph with the sun shining on his handsome face..note his sunglass straps hanging around his neck and down?,

#2
#2

JFK was asked by some reporters for a "face/head shot", and he went along with them, took off his shades for a moment in the late afternoon sun that day at the Kennedy Compound at the Cape....sigh, it was and is a great picture, because of it's very relaxed and "at home" nature, that last summer before he was murdered and we lost a true icon. (cathytreks 16:29, 27 November 2006 (UTC))

I prefer the color photo because it is a representation of how JFK would have looked to people during his lifetime. The fact that he's squinting isn't important to me because the other photos in the article show his eyeballs. And I would suggest not importing motives to other editors. It could be that Cathytreks prefers her photo because, in her opinion, it is simply better. If so, I agree with her, and I don't have any connection with either her or her uncle. Ramsquire (throw me a line) 23:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
The new image is far superior. My vote is to keep the black and white image as the lead article picture - it captures far better the sense of hope that Kennedy is remember and loved for. The colour photo seems to portray a rather remote character. Just my vote.Iamlondon 23:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Sense of hope? I thought he looked constipated :)
OK seriously, barring any copyvio issues, and all else being equal, I find image #2 more aesthetically pleasing at every level. The squint he exhibits there really is something of a 'trademark', the profile is more attractive, and yes, I'm prejudiced in favor of color...it gives a much more accurate picture of the man. --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 23:19, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Hah! All I can say is that the black and white one is the image most people relate to - it's such a famous image of JFK...indeed, it's the very one that hangs above my grandfather's mantlepiece in Ireland next to Pope John XXIII :)Iamlondon 23:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
When I think of Kennedy, I don't think of someone who squints, so "trademark" squinting is *prepare for bad word* POV. Furthermore, everyone squints when they are placed in bright sunlight. This article should stick to the general practice of other presidential articles of having an official portrait/photo portrait as the lead image, not an informal photograph. --tomf688 (talk - email) 23:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm a big fan of black & white, but I agree that a color image as the lead photo for this article is fully appropriate. Here's one that's color, PD, and of much higher quality than the proposed color image: [1] Rklawton 00:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Good find. I've gone ahead and uploaded the photo and added it, as this seems like a good compromise. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Behind door #3 we have a quality color image that's also "official". Rklawton, you get a gold star for your efforts :) Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 00:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Misc. Notes: The "Yad Memorial" image was tagged for Speedy Deletion, so I went ahead and pulled it out of the line-up. I also resized the "Wanted" image which was interfering with display of the text. Most articles limit images to one per section, but this page seems to be a bit cluttered. Would anyone else like to discuss, or is there a consensus that all of the current images are "necessary"? --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 16:09, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Ach, guys! That third picture is awful! Look at the amount of space above his head, the pained expression on his face...it captures so little of the man. I am certain we need more votes on this - the black and white is far superior. Just because #3 is in colour doesn't mean it deserves preference. I think it's dreadful. Can we please organise a proper vote? Obviously whatever the general consensus is would be perfectly acceptable, but when I clicked on the page today and saw that picture I thought, "Who's the small man with the pained face?" !Iamlondon 01:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Recropping the image would address one of your points. A better alternative might include going out and finding a more suitable color image. I'm always in favor of improvement. Rklawton 01:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The article lost several images recently, including some nice color shots, because of licensing issues and copyvio stuff. Also, there has been some effort to reduce image clutter. Getting a real good color portrait would be great, but rather than simply adding new images, let's continue replacing some of the less-representative ones. Doc Tropics 02:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I like your plan. Rklawton 02:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] More photo working

I was a bit disappointed when I saw how many unsourced photos were in the article, so I went through the Kennedy Library website and tried to replace/source them. I also added several more and removed some others. There are, however, three photos that will be deleted because I couldn't find a source for them, but if a source/higher res version can be found, that would be better. --tomf688 (talk - email) 16:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Good work tomf688, I really admire your dedication to replacing/sourcing images. There are some fine new additions to the article. My only concern is that the page currently contains 20 images, which seems a bit excessive. In other articles, editors have agreed to limit themselves to 10 - 12 images, which seems like a reasonable number. Even on my 22" monitor the screen sometimes appears cluttered and the text is a bit jumbled in places. Could we discuss cutting back the number of images on this page and focusing on those which best represent the subject? --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 23:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and trimmed two pics, one of the Kennedy brothers (its in the Kennedy Family article already, which seems more appropriate), as well as the Presidential portrait of him which didn't add much. Also, the three images near the top that are unsourced will likely be removed soon, which would reduce the number of images in the main body to around 13 or so, which isn't too bad. --tomf688 (talk - email) 00:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
Well done Tom. After all the work you put into finding new images, I wasn't going to touch any of them without discussion. I think you made good choices (esp. the "Kennedy brothers" image, which I was going to suggest), and the page definitely looks better. Thanks! --Doc Tropics Message in a bottle 00:46, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Refused Presidential Salary

See the attached link (http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/05/24/pay.raise/) apparently he refused to take the presidential salary whilst in office. Haven't checked the article thoroughly but couldn't see any reference. If so this should be added to the page I think. ny156uk 23:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

This is true. He chose to take the route of Washington.A c jacobs 01:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conspiracy theories

there has been loads of conspiracy theories but just one popped into the detectives head why would jack ruby vist lee harvey oswald then a few days later kill him it dosent make sense because the conspiracy therory which was made for this one was that jack ruby was invloved in john f kennedys murder and when lee harvey oswald told jack ruby that he was going to tell the police he knew who really killed john f kennedy jack ruby flipped and made a plan to kill him so that he would keep his mouth shut









Chanbabee (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] POV statements

It is also outrageous that the Assassination entry includes what is clearly a POV statement regarding the content of one book!! If any statements regarding 'subsequent findings' following the Warren commission are to be included, then they should all be included. This is, of course, ridiculous therefore there should be no such entry and discussions regarding the assassination should only be included on the appropriate page, not here.90.197.138.176 (talk) 12:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New article proposals

The "Trivia" section is getting pretty long - in an already long article - and should probably spin off into a separate article. Thoughts? Rklawton 01:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

The "Kennedy in film" section is getting pretty long - in an already long article - and should probably spin off into a separate article. Thoughts? Rklawton 01:49, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Trivia sections are discouraged in general on Wikipedia. If it is "trivial", then it shouldn't be in the article anyways because it isn't notable. As for the "Kennedy in Film" section, I feel the same applies; only include any films that were particularly notable. --tomf688 (talk - email) 17:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree entirely about the Trivia section. I think the film section should consist only of links to movies that have their own articles on Wikipedia (and not mixed in with some other article about actors or directors). Rklawton 18:02, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] That's not the only shamefull thing Kennedy did for the USA

Kennedy also distrusted the military a great deal. This is very well documented. The best book on the subject is Dereliction of Duty by HR McMaster.

As a result, he probably never read the CIA's plans for the Bay of Pigs invasion before he aproved it. Kennedy also refused to give any combat support to the cuban refugees either. This is one of the most shamefull things the USA has done, and both the reason for it happening, and the reason for it failing are debatably Kennedies fault. It should atleast be listed as a criticism of him.

Not only that, but Kennedy, who really loved the CIA, also used the CIA to put the Ba'ath party into power in Iraq (New York Times, March 14, 2003, Friday, A Tyrant 40 Years in the Making). I had a lot of trouble finding this out. For the longest time, every one I knew said saddam was put into power by the USA, and I couldn't find out why they said that. Only .5% of Iraqs money and arms came from the USA before the 2003 invasion, and of the congressmen and buisiness involved in that gun running all of the ones found where jailed. There was little historical backing so I set out to verify if the concensus was true. If the New York Times is to be beleived then it is, which stings me.

I'm a patriotic American and it really stings to find out that the USA was involved in such a shamefull act. I was already displeased with Kennedy, for Veitnam, and the failed assassination attempts in Cuba, for the successfull assassinations of South Veitnamese leaders, for the botched Bay of Pigs, and for recklessly indangering the USA in the Cuban Missile crisis for no better reason than he ignored all of his advisors and experts. It's that kind of crap that is generally not in line with traditional American values and really shames us to hear about, and to think that it was all perpetrated by one man (who became more popular for it) really stings me. Then I find out that HE is the one who put saddam in... well, I can't find the words to describe that. Many criticize Bush, and other American Policies, but if Kennedy didn't do half the things he did we would never have gotten into the mess we are in at all right now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.249.152.15 (talk) 17:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC).

More pointless mumblings from people too lazy too read an academic text so rely on National Enquirer. Yes...the oh-so-famous-and-well-supported story of Kennedy putting Saddam in power. Amazing what nonsense people will concoct. The entire above tirade demonstrates one thing - if you know nothing about American history just go ahead and make it up as you see fit. Iamlondon 19:41, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
umm.... thats the New York Times I sited there buddy. An exact date has even been provided. I've read a lot of academic texts (I did sight McMaster there too didn't I?) but you are too lazy to read one persons post in the discussion page very carefully. ShiverX26 13:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
You didn't "cite" anything...you rehashed someone else's prejudices to fit your own skewed version of history. "Recklessly endagering the USA.." etc etc..."but if Kennedy didn't do half the things he did..." etc etc. If it suits you to believe this nonsense then so be it. And FYI, some journalist in the New York Times is not a definitive source of trustworthy American scholarship. There are too many flaws in what you have stated above to even begin - you would do as well to state that Jesus Christ invented the Atomb Bomb.Iamlondon 06:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cuba and the Bay of Pigs Scandal

This sentence needs work, to say the least: I think this important information taken from the Allen Dulles page should be added in the Kennedy page:

The failed Bay of Pigs Invasion and several failed assassination plots utilizing CIA-recruited operatives from the Mafia and anti-Castro Cubans directly against Fidel Castro undermined the CIA's credibility, and pro-American but unpopular regimes in Iran and Guatemala that he helped put in place were widely regarded as brutal and corrupt. The reputation of the agency and its director declined after the Bay of Pigs Invasion fiasco; he and his staff (including Director for Plans Richard Bissell and Deputy Director Charles Cabell) were forced to resign (September 1961).

President Kennedy did not trust the CIA, and he reportedly intended to dismantle it after the Bay of Pigs failure. Kennedy said he wanted to "splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it into the winds."[3] Ironically, Dulles was later appointed to the Warren Commission, the official government investigation of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Some historians suggest that Dulles and CIA agents may have orchestrated Kennedy's assassination when the president attempted to control the agency's activities.

This is important stuff and should definitely be included in the Kennedy page !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


"In hopes of overthrowing the leftist Castro regime, Kennedy and his young cabinet drew the Bay of Pigs operation."

Letting bad English like that stand, while simultaneously limiting the ability of people to edit the entry, undoes what wiki does best, and coronates wiki's weakness.

If the author means to assert that JFK's administration gave birth to the Bay of Pigs plans, he or she is asserting something very controversial in very bad English (shouldn't it read, "drew up plans for"?).

And that bad English usage, as is so often the case, points to a weakness in the argument it tries to advance: if I'm not mistaken, plans for the Bay of Pigs invasion were drawn up during the Eisenhower administration.

The longer that sentence stands in this article, the more the people at wiki who decide who can, and cannot, contribute to selected articles should be ashamed of what they have wrought.

Douglas Barber

For heaven's sakes remove it then! And we'll support you. Of course it's trash - just demonstrate that it isn't. Please edit the article and cite a source...I fully agree that it needs changing, but unless people go ahead and edit it'll just stay there.Iamlondon 02:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I've corrected the badly written and unfactual assertions in the section. The plan to create an anti-Castro insurgency in Cuba existed long before Kennedy's administration, and was initiated under the Eisenhower presidency, NOT under Kennedy's tenure. The failure, as I have noted in that section, was ultimately military. The Church committee report documents the President's lack of information/communication from the military leadership and, furthermore, Maxwell Taylor's post-mortem of the fiasco also made clear that with efficient planning the invasion would have had a greater chance of success. Iamlondon 00:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a note: he couldn't edit it because the article is semi-protected. --tomf688 (talk - email) 01:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


It says there were 1,189 prisoners from the Bay of Pigs invasion. How is this possible when only 1,500 went to Cuba in the first place? From the main Bay Of Pigs Invasion article it says there were 1,113 prisoners. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.79.117.203 (talk) 04:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Popular culture

Since this article is about JFK, it seems to make sense to limit this section to JFK's involvement in popular culture - rather than the other way around. That is, if JFK made a guest appearance on some show, then it belongs here. If some show referenced JFK without his actual involvement, then this reference belongs in that show's article and not here - as JFK had nothing personally to do with it. If an editor would like to include a sourced paragraph on JFK's impact on popular culture, that would be great. However, many of the examples currently provided demonstrating this impact actually comprise original research regarding his impact on popular culture and are therefore not appropriate for Wikipedia. Thoughts? Rklawton 03:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

The Byrds rewrote the traditional folk song "He Was a Friend of Mine" as a tribute to Kennedy. It appears on their album "Turn, Turn, Turn" (1965). -Larry Siegel

The whole popular culture section seems now to consist of entries that JFK had nothing to do with. I feel the whole list should be removed. The items that just mention JFK in passing, where JFK is not even the main topic, I was bold and went ahead and removed. I suggest that we go ahead and delete the rest of the items too. The section "Kennedy portrayed in film and televison" includes all the relevant cultural references. Dr bab 23:06, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Secret Relation?

This: "Recent reports indicate that he had a secret relation with his secretary of state but no more information will be released." is unclear. I don't understand what it is trying to say about JFK and Adlai Stevenson, nor does it cite any references. Zahir13 14:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bad typing error

I'm not a "native speaker" of English, but I believe my knowledge of the language is good enough to be absolutely sure that in the quotation at the beginning of the biography, concerning Kennedy's rescueing members of his patrol boat crew, it's got to be "effected", not "affected". "Affected" distorts the meaning in a way that makes me suspect that the misspelling may have been brought about by a vandal. Hartwig Molzow GabrielMo 16:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I am glad someone else noticed that -- it's either a typo in the article or in the official citation itself. --ukexpat 14:32, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kennedy's religion

I seem to remember that Kennedy was catholic; wasn't he even the first catholic president of the U.S.? Like Nixon being the first Quaker president? Shouldn't that be mentioned somewhere at the beginning of the article? Like mentioning that Seymour Hersh and Richard Perle are from a Jewish background? I live in Germany, meaning my point of view is literally far removed from the U.S., so I wonder whether I'm deluded in believing that Kennedy did not do much to create the public image of being a devout man (not like Carter, whose religious convictions I felt to be sincere, unlike Clinton and especially the present president, both of whom - IMHO - tried or try to play the confessional card too ostensibly to be credible). Hartwig Molzow GabrielMo 16:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

What is going on? I deleted my request for mentioning Kennedy's religion, because it seems that I had simply overlooked the sentence where it is said that K. was the only Roman Catholic president so far. (I had been expecting something about religion in the paragraph about his early life, etc.) Now someone has undone my deletion. Why? I mean, when I realize that I've made a mistake, that my request was pointless, what's the use of putting it up again? GabrielMo 17:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Because you said far more than only this. Extremely sexy 16:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Bart, or whatever your name is, I suppose you meant no harm, but I really think you should leave it up to me if I want to withdraw a request. And I'm even more convinced that it is not advisable to make changes in the texts of this talk unless the texts are sent by yourself. I've just discovered that you made small alterations in the other 2-3 texts I posted, the most remarkable being that you added my name to my user name where I had left it out. (Replacing "so" by "meaning" in order to avoid a repetition is stylistically fine, but the meaning of the original sentence would have been understood all the same.)I really have to tell you that I find it extremely impolite to do such a thing without asking beforehand. Okay, I don't really mind the changes you have seen fit to make, but (except for adding one missing bracket) I'm by no means convinced that they were necessary, and I would find it ridiculous to enter into a discussion as to whose mastery of the English language is more perfect; to be honest, I don't really care! But I would care if someone messed around with letters written by me, rewriting them or whatever, and I do think that the messages sent to this talk page are pretty much like letters. So, please, do cut it out. What you are doing is, in my opinion, alright as far as the text of an article is concerned; here it's nothing but a silly waste of time. GabrielMo 17:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's definitely Bart, but it's allowed to correct someone else's contributions at this particular Wikipedia. Extremely sexy 18:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't do it, though, if I were you. (Which isn't the case, I know.) Not all things one's allowed to do are wise things to do.GabrielMo 16:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed so, Hartwig. Extremely sexy 22:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kennedy image abroad

Also there are many other theory's to Kennedy's assisination that should be included and he is the first catholic president. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bballkid6424 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Like most English-language-Wikipedia articles the Kennedy article is obviously written from an exclusively U.S. point of view; understandably, but, in my opinion, not necessarily and not all advantageously so. I find it deplorable that Wikipedia continues the tradition of most printed American encyclopedias and similar works of reference(being a professional lexicographer I know quite a number of them quite well). Frankly, although (or because?)the U.S. are such a big country, there is much parochialism around, which extends to publications issued by large publishing houses and to the mass media, even if they operate on an international scale. There seems to be a widespread, possibly subconscious consensus that the American market is so big that concentrating on satisfying its needs and forgetting about the rest of the world is enough. This may be, if not good, but commercially viable policy of the publisher of a printed encyclopedia, but with regard to Wikipedia it becomes almost grotesque. For it is probably not a bad guess to assume that the worldwide number of users of Wikipedia that are not U.S. citizens is much larger than the number of users who are. There are not just 300 or so million Americans in this world, but billions of non-Americans. I'm sure that part of the problem is that too many Americans can read and write only one language. So only a very small percentage of what is published in the world but not translated into English escapes them. Compare the list of sources in American and, for an example, German encyclopedias etc.: hardly ever a non-English source is cited in an American work, while it is common practice to cite sources in English, French, Italian, Spanish, even Russian, in German works. In the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries this tendency may even be stronger. Having said that I would like to point out that there is practically no trace of what made Kennedy an international figure, so to speak, in the article. From a German point of view: for one thing, it is mentioned that K. visited "Europe" before the war, and the U.K. is singled out as one country he saw. But, as far as I know, he spent quite a while in Germany, even long enough to learn some German and, if I'm not mistaken, start an affair with a German woman. Quite possible that my memory fails me, but I believe there are even pictures of him showing him together with Marlene Dietrich and there has been gossip that there was at least a flirt going on. I mention this because I know from experience that Americans regularly fail to understand how important Kennedy was for German-American relations. There is no other American president who is the name-patron of German buildings etc. (bridges, places, streets) and institutions as often as Kennedy. In fact, I believe he is about the only American president honored in that way. The reason for this is the incredible affection the German population at large had for Kennedy, before and, of course, especially after his famous, yes, one may call it historical, visit to Germany, of which the Berlin-visit stands out. His "Ich bin ein Berliner" has become legendary and his, to my knowledge, even today often (and usually lamely) imitated by others visiting Germany and even other countries. Americans may be surprised to learn that the question "Where were you when Kennedy was shot?" will hardly ever fail to produce a prompt and specific answer in Germany as well as in the States. I personally remember that my sisters cried when they learnt of the assassination, and so did thousands, possibly millions of Germans. Never before and never after, except on 9-11, has there been in Germany such a feeling of closeness and sympathy with the American people. The positive image Kennedy had in Germany had a strong influence on the image of the U. S. in general; Eisenhower had certainly not done much to endear himself or the U. S. to the country where his ancestors stemmed from but which he himself had seen under the most horrible and off-putting circumstances, and later on Nixon wasn't exactly the man whose personal image could do anything to diminish the growing Anti-American sentiments caused by the Vietnam war and other aspects of American politics. - Judging from my personal experience Kennedy's role in the relationship between the U. S. and other western European countries was similar, but not as extreme as in the German case. I believe that there is also evidence that Kennedy - although he couldn't get on with the then German chancellor Adenauer (who could have been his grandfather) very well - had some sympathy with the Germans and knew how to relate to them. His old acquaintance with the country and the people probably helped a lot, and - although this is hard to prove - it was sensed by Germans that this man didn't think of them in terms of "Krauts, Huns, Nazis, Prussian militarists, Achtung and Pickelhaube"... etc. p.p. Unfortunately I lack the time to check whether the central idea of what I've been talking about can be traced in biographies of Kennedy and historical studies of his presidency. I know that there has been a lot about this in German magazines like "Der Spiegel" and similar serious journalistic publications. It would be nice if someone could put a few sentences into the article who would also be able to cite an acceptable printed source. After all, during the Cold War American politics had a lot to do with European politics, and the economically and militarily strongest European partner was Germany (except that Britain and France were also nuclear powers on a very small scale). So the impact Kennedy's presidency had on German-American relations does, in my opinion, has some historical relevance and should be mentioned in the article. Hartwig Molzow GabrielMo 18:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Lovely essay, and I agree with you. Extremely sexy 23:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
If you're going to write any section on how he was seen abroad then it should be from a far broader perspective than simply how he was seen in Germany. I'm 28, from London, and have a similar sense of Kennedy as you might - to me and my friends at school Kennedy WAS America - our parents grew up telling us about the Kennedy days and how so much was hoped for through him. My generation has, tragically, now come to view America (since the election of Bush Jr.) as a rogue state endangering us all. It is obvious from the myriad of web sources that Americans are themselves realising how far it has all fallen since 1963 - to have gone from friend of mankind to prime cause of anymosity and disillusionment. Everything that the 60s generation and Kennedy stood for and hoped for has been eroded by a succession of awful leaders and bad foreign policy. But such is the ability of man to "kill the thing he loves".Iamlondon 00:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I'm surprised to learn that the view of Kennedy of my generation (I'm 55) seems to have been passed on to yours. My present view of Kennedy does, of course, differ from that of the 1960ies: then most of us saw an idealized picture. It had a lot to do with his youthful appearance. He just appealed so effectively to the younger generation and stood out prominently from the gerontocracy we had been faced with in most countries: De Gaulle in France, MacMillan in the UK, Adenauer (87 in 1963!!!), Eisenhower,... .
Since I spent a very happy year of my life in the U.S. and consider myself a true lover of the country, I too regret the growing alienation from "America" deeply. There have always been instances of Anti-Americanism especially among the political left in Germany (to which I myself belong), and I've always been a staunch defender of the U.S. against exaggerated or unfair attacks. Nowadays I find it increasingly difficult to shed a friendly light on what is going on in the States and on their dealing with the "rest of the world". Hartwig Molzow GabrielMo 11:23, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

GabrielMo, why are you here? In fact, why do so many non-native English speakers hang out here and then bitch about the way it's written?? I don't go to the French or Dutch Wikipedias EVER (languages of which I am proficient). Is it because English (under the Anglo-American 'imperial influence') has been forced to the front as the 'language of the world'?? Well, seems to me that would be the exact reason for non-English speakers to avoid it at all costs and make their own versions of Wikipedia stellar. But no, the whole world cares about what the English Wikipedia says and therefore promotes the cultural domination of the UK/US. Ironic, don't you think?? TheQueensEnglish

[edit] Make John F. Kennedy article a public domain

I feel that the John F. Kennedy article should be a public domain, because people should be able to use the information because there is no other way to describe John F. Kennedy than using the information provided.(Dbag ownage 05:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Berlin governing mayor

Obviously since I have signed in to the English Wikipedia only recently I'm banned from editing the "Kennedy" article, so I have to ask for help from someone else: for one thing, it would be really nice if that typing error ("affected" instead of "effected") would be eliminated. And: there is a picture showing Kennedy during his visit to West Berlin in 1961 together with Willy Brandt. Instead of "Berlin mayor..." it should read "Berlin governing mayor" or "governing mayor of Berlin", because that is the correct translation of "Regierender Bürgermeister von Berlin". In the Federal Republic of Germany there are the "Länder", which can be compared with American states. Three of these "Länder" are actually big cities: Berlin, Hamburg and Bremen. So the mayors have, as it is laid out in the federal constitution, the status of "Ministerpräsidenten" (comparable to American governors), not of city mayors. That's why they have seats in the German second parliamentary chamber, the "Bundesrat", which, like the American Senate, consists of representatives of the states = "Länder". Willy Brandt would hardly have become chancellor if he had only been a mayor of Berlin; it was the office of "Governing Mayor" = Governor that qualified him to seek being elected into the highest federal office of the executive branch. Hartwig Molzow GabrielMo 17:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I will fix those errors you mentioned immediately. Extremely sexy 17:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Great! Thank you.GabrielMo 17:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
It's my pleasure though. Extremely sexy 18:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marilyn Monroe's not the only one who sang to JFK

In the book Enchantment by Donald Spoto, he says that Audrey Hepburn sang to the president on his last birthday. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.204.231.155 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Early education

I am an Academic Counselor, formerly Librarian, at the Canterbury School in New Milford, CT. The link to Canterbury School, which JFK attended for a little under a year, is our school in New Milford, not Florida. This is my first post to Wikipedia, so I hope I will do this correctly. 24.151.18.104 01:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and I just changed this accordingly. Extremely sexy 14:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Personal life and criticism

Having read the Seymour Hersh book "The dark side of the camelot", I feel it's not written enough about JFK's rather reckless sexual life. In his book former Secret Service members told how they used to deliver hookers to the president's hotel rooms when he was traveling. And that he used the White House pool for sex activities with among others an East German hooker whom Rober Kennedy had to send home to avoid a scandal. A Secret Service member told how he found the president sitting completely naked at a party in bing Crosby's home, while his aid had openly sex with another woman. Medical records shows he regulary got infected with sexual diseases. Another shocking accusation was that JFK used a shoulder bracelet when he was assassinated, because he had hurt his arm during sex activities a month before. If one studies the Zapruder film, one can see he didn't fall naturally. This unofficial version should also be told in addition to the official heroic one. Thanks. By the way, I will also show the hype JFK got in popular culture. The "cricism" section is not big enough. There is a reference to a more sober view of him at http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/worldwars/coldwar/kennedy_celebrity_02.shtml. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ergometer (talk • contribs) 22:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC).


It seems very spurious that the article on JFK makes no mention of his questionable sexual exploits. It needs to be added at some point for sure, despite the protests of the people who lionize him. Drstrangelove57 (talk) 22:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Change from Roman Catholic to Christian February 8, 2007

Kennedy was a Catholic. To change from the root to an offshoot is a questionable edit. Ronbo76 00:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Was Kennedy a Chrisitian or a Roman Catholic ?

Thank you for your observations, re the religion of John F. Kennedy. Please note, previous to my contribution, Kennedy showed a religion of Latin-Rite. It was I who clarified it, by contributing Roman Catholic. However, indeed, even that is insufficiently accurate. All Roman Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Roman Catholic. The religion is, therefore, Christianity. To be Roman Catholic or Protestant is to find differing expression or interpretation or branch of the Christian religion. Although to be a Roman Catholic or to be a Protestant is to be religious, neither functions apart from the tenets of Christ, each is a subset of Christianity - therefore, neither is a separate religion. So, there is no fatal detraction naming Kennedy's religion as Roman Catholic, or I would not have chosen it to begin with. However, this is an encyclopedia where comprehensive accuracy is desired. Is Christianity a religion? Originally, no, of course. It was a Jewish sect. With expanded adherants it developed into a distinct religion; Christianity became a religion. Did Roman Catholicism birth before Christianity? Of course, not. Did it come at the same time as Christianity? How could it? Again, of course, not. Its only when its tenents were developed later did it branch into a distinct expression of Christian thought and the Christian religion, but not separate from Christianity, not as a separate religion. For those who hold Roman Catholicism to be an actual and separate religion from Christianity, how does it differ? With that in mind, Kennedy's religion is more properly named as Christianity (Roman Catholic) showing the "root" to be Christianity, not Roman Catholicism. To do otherwise, is not a blatant error, just a less precise truth. Curiouscdngeorge 01:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I feel the proper label is Roman Catholic Christian. To discuss the origin of Roman Catholicism doesnt have any significannce discussing a 20th century president.

Your conclusion that the proper label is Roman Catholic Christian is absolutely correct. The noun is Christian, the adjective is Roman Catholic; therefore, the religion is Christianity: label should read for Kennedy's religion: Christianity (Roman Catholic), if accuracy were respected [not always the case among certain editors]. Still, Roman Catholic, the moniker I attached earlier is a good choice, if not the best choice. A brief look at the origins of Christianity and the advent of Roman Catholicism was warranted given the wayward thinking of those who hold Kennedy wasn't a Christian, but he was a Roman Catholic. Moreover, the 20th century is better understood acknowledging its historical-genesis perspectives - certainly, a discussion of events or personages of the 20th century does not, ipso facto, render sterile any earlier centuries' contributions, don't you agree. Please consider signing your contributions to this or other discussions using the four tildes, located below. Curiouscdngeorge 00:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Silly fellow. Ignore him. Masalai 04:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Masalai, for your singular "silly" observation and well-considered to be "ignored" conclusion. May I suggest you reach deeper next time, there might be a meaningful contribution to be had.Curiouscdngeorge 21:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Just one thing. The tenants of Christ would be people who rent houses from him and pay him, the landlord, for the privilege. What I think you're talking about are the tenets of Christianity, ie. its central beliefs. JackofOz 04:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, JackofOz, for pointing out my spelling error. I appreciate it.Curiouscdngeorge 21:53, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another Wikicrock

The movie is completely inaccurate, fabricates events, and flies in the face of historical consensus with regards to what is known about the actual shooting. No, don't ask me to provide references; they're out there, and not hard to find I might add. This article is just another example of what the average Wikipedian wants to read about when they search JFK(film). It's a tin foil fest. --Haizum μολὼν λαβέ 04:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Haizum for your contribution. The movie's perceived inaccuracies are one thing, Wikipedia's JFK article is yet another. What - specifically - is failing in the article ? --Curiouscdngeorge 01:48, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another item for the fictional TV References to JFK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikka_to_Ride Due to an accident involving time travel, the crew of the Red Dwarf accidentally push Lee Harvey Oswald out of the Book Depository window. They are unable to correct their mistake, which results in JFK's survival, political overthrow and a future in which atomic weapons are placed in Cuba after all. They explain the situation to an alternate future version of JFK who agrees to become the second gunman, firing "...from just behind that little hill over there covered in lawn..."

Atomicangelfish 00:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] full metal jacket

I've been buzzin' around and encountered this article about some new flick which surfaced. Apparently its interesting because:

"The film shows the president's coat bunched up on his back - a detail some will see as evidence that the bullet wounds on the president's body did not match those on his jacket."

Not sure if this was brought up before? It appears to be fresh revelation, well, thought that editors here might find it relevant/interesting. Lovelight 12:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assassination: the last two days

An editor added a considerable amount of unsourced material here recently. It's my thought that this new material makes this section rather disproportionate in comparison to the rest of the article. Considering that another article (presumably) already contains this material, I'm thinking it should be removed. However, I thought I might put this up for discussion first. Rklawton 19:40, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Concur. Some of the citations do not to be reliable sources such as the one at the end of the second paragraph (Houston Sun. (November 27, 1963 late edition)). Others cite videos which are contra Wikipedia:Attribution and the paragraph Wikipedia:Attribution#Wikipedia articles must be based on reliable sources. That paragraph states, In general, the most reliable sources are books and journals published by universities; mainstream newspapers; and magazines and journals that are published by known publishing houses. In this day and age, even I can manipulate a video to have it say almost anything. Furthermore, because of some of the implications or POV introduced, these citations could be viewed as contra no original research. Ronbo76 19:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mary Pinchot Meyer

Brief references to Mary are entirely appropriate for this article, it is after all nearing 50 years since these matters, she is dead, he is dead, long ago and within a year of eachother, & both from gunshots to the head, or are yall convinced we need to keep this classified?...Im open for a discussion on whether we should keep mention of Mary classified to the general wikipedia-viewing public...I'm not specifically attached to keeping it in or out of common knowledge as I myself know it, but I'll support a 100 year declassification hold if someone has a good argument. 83.78.160.112 06:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "spartacus" as source

Well spartacus is a rather reliable source for Meyer[2] or Kennedy[3], or a slew of other american public figures both right and left. The biggest flaw I see is that they need to focus more broadly, with more chinese and japanese political history for instance, as well as ancient historical empires like greece, rome, egypt etc., and also modern powerful nations, to give more a sense of perspective and balance. As it stands now with their site, it is quite good, rather centrist, very accurate in many cases, a better & more interesting/relevant source than most for info on american political happenings for instance, yet one might get the sense that, when hearing so many of the dirtly details, that these types of things are somehow unique to america or britain or something, at least they have germany & russia & stalin in there presently. So I am willing to reference some of the mary pinchot meyer stuff out to them as source as well. Are there objections to spartacus as a source?...Perhaps someone will suggest they are a conspiracy site or something as they do have some CIA people or intelligence people on the site, booo! mention CIA and its a conspiracy theory!...yet to suggest that political & personal intrigue doesnt happen in america, yet every other nation that has ever appeared on this planet, is something of a conspiracy theory as well, or are americans some new class of homo sapiens sapiens not subject to the common human weaknesses & failings & intrigues? Of course we cant go around copying everything the spartacus site has, yet to bring a few tidbits here and there to various wikipedia pages i am seriously considering 83.78.181.214 21:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

What's up with the Dr. Feel Good references in the Middle of a historical synopsis of the Cuban Missile Crisis? (unsigned comment)

I wouldn't use that source unless absolutely necessary, it looks a little unprofessional and POV. If you can get the same info elsewhere it would be better. Of course every source on this subject is bound to have some POV. Marcus Taylor 22:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meyer text in Assassination section

I removed the following text from the assassination section

Less than a year later the President's supposed former mistress Mary Pinchot Meyer was shot dead on the streets of [[Washington]] in what still is an unsolved murder.[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmeyerM.htm] Immediately her house was searched for her diary, and was there attained by CIA counterintelligence chief [[James Jesus Angleton]], who supposedly then destroyed it, or handed it over for destruction.[http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmeyerM.htm] [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0553106295/103-3639986-2819812?v=glance&n=283155|]

Prior to restoring it, please consider and potentially address the following concerns:

  • While I have no dispute to the inclusion of the information in a JFK article, it doesn't seem appropriate in the assassination section unless some credible source is claiming they are associated / linked in conspiracy.
  • Meyer isn't mentioned in the assassination main article; it shouldn't be here and not there. I would suggest that the addition be placed there first if its associated.
  • I see there is discussion as to whether spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk is a creditable source; it shouldn't be the first source in any case.
  • The third reference is to amazon.com selling the book. I believe this is against WP:EL, and the link should be to the ISBN using existing templates.

Thanks - Davandron | Talk 15:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia section

I noticed that someone flagged the trivia section as needed to be either integrated or removed. Why? I like the trivia section. All those random facts in bullet form. While they may need to be added to the story as a whole, I think the trivia section should stay.

vbimp 12:58, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I flagged the trivia section. Trivia sections should be avoided. The facts listed should be integrated into the main article where apropriate. Tangential facts that are too irrelevant should be removed. When the trivia section is empty, it should be removed. This is in accordance with wikipedia's trivia policy. Please see WP:Trivia and WP:Avoid trivia sections in articles. Also see my note under Popular culture above. Dr bab 13:32, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please, review this change

Experts might want to review this suspicious diff from a new user. Josh Thompson 12:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It looks like it was already reverted, so never mind. Josh Thompson 12:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cuban Missile Crisis

"Dr. Jacobson was known as "Dr. Feelgood" to his clients: some of his most famous clients were Andy Warhol, Anthony Quinn and Tennessee Williams. Dr. Jacobson was introduced to President Kennedy during the 1960 campaign and was asked to help the President's medical ailments, which included colitis, urinary-tract infections and Addison's Disease. Max Jacobson had established a general practice on the Upper East Side catering to writers, musicians and entertainers who nicknamed him "Miracle Max" or "Dr. Feelgood" for the "vitamin injection" treatments that made them happy and gave them seemingly limitless energy. Jacobson's panacea was 30 to 50 milligrams of amphetamines - the mood-elevating neural energizers also known as speed - mixed with multivitamins, steroids, enzymes, hormones, and solubilized placenta, bone marrow, and animal organ cells. This "vitamin injection" which Kennedy craved for during stressful times was also known to give one an elevated sense of confidence and invincibility."

-What does that paragraph have to do with the Cuban missile crisis? I understand its slight relevance, but there shouldn't be an entire paragraph discussing something else all together. If anything, I think that this paragraph be moved to another section of this article, or moved to a different article all together. Maybe this information about Dr. Jacobson should just be included in the article about Dr. Jacobson himself. I also understand why it would be necessary to include information about Kennedy's possible drug reliance in order to present as much information as possible, but the inclusion of specifics gives me the impression of a possible bias. --Bicklevov 21:34, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Much of that paragraph seems to be taken directly from the first paragraph of a 2005 NY Sun article (http://www.nysun.com/article/20251). If it remains somewhere, perhaps it should be rewritten? Paraegi 18:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of the Press

Please add link to his speech: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.77.178.79 (talk) 21:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC).

I did just now. Extremely sexy 21:44, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

hmm.. "This video has been removed due to terms of use violation."Joshl 22:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Life in a Northern Town by Dream Academy

I read the entry on this song and it has nothing whatsoever to do with JFK or even New England - it's about singer Nick Drake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_in_a_Northern_Town24.7.108.158 17:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Willi Brandt (under the photo in Berlin) is spelled with an 'i', not a 'y'

There is not edit link for this article, or I'd have corrected it myself. The 'y' ending of nicknames is an English convention, not a German one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.138.208.104 (talk)

[edit] POV

The final sentence in the opening section lays it on a bit thick:

"President Kennedy is now regarded as an icon of American hopes and aspirations to every new generation of Americans."

At best, this statement is gross exaggeration; at worst, it is shameless hagiography. In either case, it does not belong in an objective article. Plazak 20:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to say you have a point. Extremely sexy 23:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

To be more objective, I changed the sentence to note that he still ranks highly in public opinion polls (Historical rankings of United States Presidents). Plazak 11:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Great: well done, "Plazak". Extremely sexy 14:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] U.S. networks switched to 24-hour news coverage?

I don't recall that "U.S. networks switched to 24-hour news coverage;" in fact any 24-hour television (and even 24-hour radio, in most places) broadcasting would have been quite a novelty in November 1963. Can the author of this section (or anyone else) provide verification or a citation supporting this assertion? I would change it to "The three U.S. television networks broadcasting at the time switched to continuous sign-on to sign-off coverage of the story from 22-24 November 1963." BigJerME 06:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

How about "All three major US television networks suspended their regular schedules, and switched to all-news coverage." As I recall, the all-news coverage lasted for a week. Plazak 13:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Great choice of words, Plazak. I am a Wiki-newbie. How do we go about editing the article? BTW, I would estimate that the networks went back to normal programming, interrupted by periodic specials, by 26 November 1963 (the day after the funeral). BigJerME 19:30, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

The infobox needs to have Kennedy's profession as a congressman and as a senator, not only president. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.90.52.184 (talk)

That's true as well. Extremely sexy 14:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Ich bin ein Berliner"

Hallo, I would like to erase the phrase "(But the Berliners also used "Berliner" as the word for "jelly doughnut".)" of this article, because it gives a totally wrong impression of the reception of John F. Kennedy’s speech.

There was no misunderstanding. No one thought or thinks of jelly doughnuts in connection with Kennedy’s sentence "Ich bin ein Berliner". What on earth can I do to make that clear? I will try.

People in Berlin call that kind of doughnut "Pfannkuchen" (pancake). But not even southwestern Germans, who indeed call it "Berliner", think John F. Kennedy had declared himself a piece of bakery.

A short while ago I saw a tv-talkshow with Helmut Schmidt, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany from 1974 to 1982 and newspaper publisher since the end of his chancellorship. When the moderator referred to a "Hamburger", Helmut Schmidt replied, slightly angry: "There are no Hamburgers in Hamburg!" A male citizen of Hamburg is called a Hamburger, a female a Hamburgerin. Helmut Schmidt is a male citizen of Hamburg.

If someone would say "Ich bin ein Wiener!" or "Ich bin ein Frankfurter!" or "Ich bin ein Nürnberger!" the meaning would be quite clear: "I am a citizen of Vienna/Frankfurt/Nuremberg. Hardly anyone would give the matter a second thought, despite the fact that "Wiener", "Frankfurter" and "Nürnberger" are names of types of sausages as well.

Using an indefinite article when giving information about a person’s place of origin, profession or other group membership is not grammatically wrong. A person may just put it that way without any special reason. Or the expression can, for example, result from a regional dialect or accent. Or it can be a rhetorical figure, a way to emphasize something. Saying, for example, "sie ist Ärztin" means "she is a medical doctor". Saying, "sie ist eine Ärztin!!!" means,“ oh, look what she’s accomplished! She’s a medical doctor!" Saying, "er ist Bauer" means "he is a farmer". Saying, "er ist ein Bauer" means "he is a lawyer, but he has no manners". It does not mean that farmers had no manners; it’s a figure of speech. Saying "er ist ein Bauer" can just mean "he is a farmer". Saying "er ist ein Bauer" might mean "he is a farmer without manners".

If John F. Kennedy had said "Ich bin Berliner" it would have been understandable what he wanted to say, but he was no Berliner. He was from Boston, and at the time of his visit he lived in Washington, D.C. Of course, he could have said "Ich fühle mich im Geiste als Bürger von Berlin!" („In spirit, I am a citizen of Berlin“). It would not have been the same speech. Saying "Ich bin ein Berliner!" fits perfectly in the rhythm of his speech, is grammatically correct, emphasizes that he feels as a member of the great community of free men he calls "Berliner", and it is all very emotional. Critics then did not think of doughnuts. They thought it might have been a well-prepared show, which it was not. A listener today does not think of doughnuts either, if he or she has not read or heard of this idea.

Why Helmut Schmidt feels that there were no Hamburgers in Hamburg he did not say.

The German population gave John F. Kennedy a very warm reception. He reacted to that, and the people reacted back. If he had a great day, he certainly deserved it.

There are no doughnuts. Katharina01 19:19, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, that was most likely vandalism. This section isn't though. :) · AndonicO Talk 11:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Approval Rating Graph

I made that graph, maybe you would like to put it on the page.

--Jean-Francois Landry 17:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pulitzer above the fold?

I'm hesitant to make even a minor change to such an excellent intro section without getting some other opinions. I'm aware that JFK was such an accomplished man that it's hard to fit mention of everything into the intro. But for most bio subjects, being a Pulitzer prize-winning author is mentioned above the fold in the intro. I don't know how many other US presidents have won a Pulitzer - I seem to recall hearing that Clinton did, but that may have been after he left office - and it seems worthy to me of mention in the intro. Does anyone else feel the same? Kasreyn 14:47, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes: I do. Extremely sexy 14:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Agree. JFK is the only US president, US presidential candidate, US senator or representative to have won a Pulitzer Prize (Clinton has not won a Pulitzer Prize, nor has any US governor). 69.208.166.61 17:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
That would be good to note. Do you have a source on that? Kasreyn 06:51, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
The Pulitzer Prizes - FAQs
  • 16. Who was the only U.S. President to be awarded a Pulitzer Prize?
The Pulitzer Prizes - Search the Pulitzer Archives
  • 3) List winners or finalists by category
  • 4) List winners or finalists by year
  • No other US presidents, US presidential candidates, US senators, US representatives listed as Pulitzer Prize winners or finalists; no US governors listed as Pulitzer Prize winners or finalists.
69.208.161.31 18:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalising... revisited.

Undid some recent vandalism. Dr Alcohol 22:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Roosevelt

Quoted from intro section: "In 1901, Vice President Theodore Roosevelt, age 42, was elevated to the post following the assassination of President William McKinley." I may be missing something, but I can't see how this fits into the context. Robin S 01:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Citation

Hi, I was wondering if anyone have a quotation for the affirmation of the lost of faith in the goverment after Kennedy's death, as well as after King and Robert, and the Watergate Scandal. Y think that those afirmations shound't be there if they aren't whith a proper reference. In the spanish Wikipedia we are postulating the article for Featured articles, but there are some affirmations like that that dosen't seem like NPOV. And the Criticism section is really poor. Sorry about my english.--Domingo Portales 02:51, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kennedy in Ireland

I added some text about his stature there, but need a good citation for it. I know I've seen at least one collection of essays about his visit, but I can't seem to find it so I added citation needed in the hopes that someone else can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by IceJew (talk • contribs) 03:45, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moved here from article

[edit] Kennedy in fiction and song

[edit] Cartoons and comic books:

  • In the South Park episode Weight Gain 4000, Kennedy's assassination is parodied when schoolteacher Mr. Garrison goes into the Book Depository in an attempt to shoot Kathie Lee Gifford during a motorcade.
  • In an episode of The Simpsons, Homer Simpson and Abraham Lincoln sneak up on Lee Harvey Oswald and, in so doing, prevent the assassination of President Kennedy.
  • In "Superman" No. 170 and Action Comics Nos. 285 and 309 published by DC Comics, President Kennedy appears as himself within fictional comic story lines.
  • On the cartoon show Clone High, one of the main characters, "JFK", is a young, aggressive, hyper macho clone of Kennedy's who seems to very much look up to his forefather and namesake. Like Kennedy, he was outgoing, charismatic, a ladies man and athletic. Unfortunately, the clone only recognized those particular aspects of Kennedy's personality, and when told that Kennedy was a caring leader who inspired a generation of young people, the clone responded "I thought he was a macho womanizing stud who conquered the moon".
  • Kennedy's ghost appears in the comic book Hellblazer, in "Damnation's Flame", where he accompanies protagonist John Constantine across a Hellish version of America.
  • Kennedy's assassination is parodied in the cartoon Robot Chicken, when a mongoose is shown to shoot President Kennedy and, in doing so, frames Lee Harvey Oswald.
  • In an episode of Family Guy, Lee Harvey Oswald is seen in the infamous book store window where he states, "Oh my god, that man on the grassy knoll is going to shoot President Kennedy!" He then takes up a rifle, looks through the scope, and utters the words: "C'mon Lee, time to become an American hero..."
  • In the episode of Sealab 2021 titled "Craptastic Voyage", Captain Shanks yells out "Ich bin ein Berliner" when the miniaturized Deep Diver crashes into the language center of his brain, prompting JFK to appear and say "That's my line, tumourface!" He is then almost destroyed by Shanks when the Deep Diver runs into the testosterone center of Shanks's brain.

[edit] Films and television productions

  • In the 1986 episode "Profile in Silver" in The New Twilight Zone series, a future distantly-related descendant goes back to November 22, 1963 in Dallas to observe the murder.
  • In the 1997 episode "Tikka to Ride" of the British comedy series Red Dwarf, the main characters accidentally foil the Kennedy assassination, causing severe problems with their own timeline. They return, and after several failed attempts to correct the timeline, enlist the help of Kennedy, who survives to become his own second gunman. Kennedy dresses as a police officer, a reference to the Badge man photograph, and shoots from the "Grassy Knoll." This was a highly controversial episode.
  • At the end of the 1996 film The Rock, the main character Stanley Goodspeed discovers a roll of microfilm, and - when he examines it - asks his girlfriend 'You wanna know who killed JFK?'. He does not give the answer to this question.
  • In the 2002 film Timequest, a time-traveler arrives back in time and thwarts Kennedy's assassination.
  • On the soap opera "Passions", Rebecca Hotchkiss revealed to her daughter Gwen Winthrop on December 28, 2006, that her mother had slept with Kennedy during his marriage to Jacqueline.
  • The spitting scene in theSeinfeld sitcom The Boyfriend, Part 1 was a reference to the Kennedy assassination and the magic bullet theory, as dramatized in the movie JFK.

[edit] Songs:

  • Several popular songs deal with Kennedy and his assassination. These include:
    • "PT-109" by Jimmy Dean in 1962 became a Top 10 single and was written in honor of President Kennedy.
    • "Crucifixion" and "That was the President" by Phil Ochs.
    • "1963." by New Order. The song is loosely a fantasy about JFK having his wife killed so he could be with Marilyn Monroe.
    • "Abraham, Martin and John" by Dion, a memorial to Kennedy, his brother Robert, Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King.
    • "What the World Needs Now/Abraham, Martin and John" is an audio montage assembled by Tom Clay with the two songs in the title combined with radio soundbites from the Kennedy Assassinations, and Martin Luther King's mountaintop speech.
    • "Foreign Policy" by The Buckinghams released in 1968 has a portion of a speech made by JFK on the flip side of "Susan".
    • "The Day John Kennedy Died" by Lou Reed, in which Reed lists some things he dreamed he forgot.
    • "Brain of J." by Pearl Jam.
    • "Sympathy for the Devil" by the Rolling Stones contains the line "I shouted out, 'Who killed the Kennedys?' when after all, it was you and me."
    • "We Didn't Start the Fire" by Billy Joel, which lists 20th century events.
    • "Family Snapshot" by Peter Gabriel is an account of the assassination from the perspective of Oswald.
    • "Civil War" by Guns N' Roses contains the line "In my first memories, they shot Kennedy."
    • Rock singer Marilyn Manson referenced John F. Kennedy numerous times in his work:
      • "Valentine's Day" containing the line "[S]he was the color of TV. Her mouth curled under like a metal snake. Although Holy Wood was sad, they'd remember this as Valentine's day" which refers to JFK's wife Jackie and the grief that the country felt for the loss of their president on Valentine's day.
      • The music video for "Coma White" generated controversy as it featured a reenactment of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Manson said the video used the Kennedy assassination "as a metaphor for America's obsession and worship of violence." "My statement was always intended to make people think of how they view and sometimes participate in these events." Further, the video, "is in no way a mockery. In fact, it is a tribute to men like Jesus Christ and JFK who have died at the hands of mankind's unquenchable thirst for violence."
      • "Posthuman" opens with the line, "She's got eyes like Zapruder, a mouth like heroin, she wants me to be perfect like Kennedy" ("Zapruder" being a reference to the Zapruder film). The song also contains a reference to Kennedy's wife: "In all of her dreams, she's a saint like Jackie-O."
      • "Lamb of God" alludes to the martyrdom of JFK with the line, "The camera will make you god, that's how Jack became sainted."
      • The title of the song "King Kill 33" is a reference to JFK conspiracy theorist James Shelby Downard.
      • The album artwork for Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death) includes an autopsy report for John F. Kennedy. The enhanced CD also contains a video of Manson's artistic interpretation of the JFK autopsy.
    • The song "Bullet" by "The Misfits" is about the assassination of Kennedy as well as a fictitious account of his wife's slip into despondency following the assassination
    • The song "Catholic Day" by "Adam and The Ants", from the 'Dirk Wears White Sox' album, mentions JFK; "Kennedy died in '63/Poor John F.-"
    • The cover artwork of Wake up and Smell the... Carcass, a compilation album by Carcass is based on a JFK autopsy photo.

[edit] Kennedy portrayed in film and television

[edit] Film:

[edit] TV:

  • The Missiles of October (1974, TV): played by William Devane
  • The Private Files of J. Edgar Hoover (1977): played by William Jordan
  • Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ye (1977, TV): played by Paul Rudd
  • Young Joe, the Forgotten Kennedy (1977, TV): played by Sam Chew, Jr.
  • King (1978, TV): played by William Jordan
  • Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy (1981, TV): played by James Franciscus
  • Blood Feud (1983, TV): played by Sam Groom
  • Kennedy (1983, TV): played by Martin Sheen
  • Prince Jack (1985, TV): played by Robert Hogan
  • Robert Kennedy & His Times (1985, TV): played by Cliff De Young
  • J. Edgar Hoover (1987, TV): played by Art Hindle
  • LBJ: The Early Years (1987, TV): played by Charles Frank
  • Onassis: The Richest Man in the World (1988, TV): played by David Gillum
  • The Kennedys of Massachusetts (1990, TV): played by Steven Weber
  • A Woman Named Jackie (1991, TV): played by Stephen Collins
  • Sinatra (1992, TV): played by James F. Kelly
  • J.F.K.: Reckless Youth (1993, TV): played by Patrick Dempsey
  • Norma Jean & Marilyn (1996, TV): played by Perry Stephens
  • Red Dwarf: Tikka to Ride (1997, TV): played by Michael Shannon
  • The Rat Pack (1998, TV): played by William L. Petersen
  • Bonanno: A Godfather's Story (1999, TV): played by Matt Norklun
  • Jackie Bouvier Kennedy Onassis (2000, TV): played by Tim Matheson, who at the time was also playing a fictional vice-president on the series The West Wing
  • How to Marry a Billionaire: A Christmas Tale (2000, TV): played by Dabney Coleman
  • Jackie, Ethel, Joan: The Women of Camelot (2001, TV): played by Daniel Hugh Kelly
  • Power and Beauty (2002, TV): played by Kevin Anderson
  • RFK (2002, TV): played by Martin Donovan
  • America's Prince: The John F. Kennedy Jr. Story (2003, TV): played by Randy Triggs
  • Days That Shook the World episode JFK (2003, TV): played by Karl J. Morris

[edit] Correction

In the "Early political career" section there is a grammatical error. It says: "John Kennedy drafted a speech calling for McCarthy censure".

But it should be: "John Kennedy drafted a speech calling for McCarthy's censure". Ab2kgj 15:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Well spotted: indeed so, and I just corrected this then. Extremely sexy 12:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] First sentence of early life and education.

This looks like vandalism to me: "JFK most notably none for his involvement in the murder of Marylin Monroe." Bad grammar, non-neutral, and doesn't fit with the section in which it's placed. I'd like to remove it if others agree. Plumdiggity 23:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

It's gone. Gamaliel (Angry Mastodon! Run!) 23:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism Updates.

"Lee Harvey Oswald was charged with the crime many belive there was more then one shooter, but was murdered two days later by Jack Ruby before he could be put on trial."

Summarily eradicated. I will note others I find here as well. .Absolution. 05:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charismatic religious leader?

I'm sure nobody doubts JFK's charisma--it's quite well documented. He was a devoted (if imperfect) Roman Catholic so calling him religious is certainly acceptable. And as a naval officer, a Senator, and a President of the United States he was clearly a leader. But putting these three things together does not make him a "Charismatic religious leader" and the list cited as evidence for this awkward categorization clearly does not list JFK as a religious leader but a political one. Can I get a quick consensus that this category does not apply to this article? Having just won semi-protection for several presidential biographies I'm in no mood for an edit war. - Dravecky 04:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

This is not "sourced @ List of charismatic leaders as defined by Max Weber's classification of authority" as was claimed twice in edit summaries. That article does not categorize him as a religious leader. I am reverting to remove Category:Charismatic religious leaders from this article. Maralia 04:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Profiles in Courage

I would suggest that there should be some discussion of the disputed authorship of Profiles, which is discussed in the Wikipedia entry for the book.

Mje 23:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JFK and Fiscal Policy

I would also like to see some discussion of Kennedy's support for reducing the historically high marginal tax rates of the post-WWII period.

Mje 23:47, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

How is this a criticism:

Kennedy dated actress Gene Tierney, who was separated from her then husband fashion designer Oleg Cassini in 1946. In her book Self-portrait Ms. Tierney recalls how over an informal brunch Jack stated that he could never marry her because of her pending divorce, if he was to be the first elected Catholic President (moreover, she was also a Protestant). Subsequently, Tierney folded her napkin and left the cafe. Mr. Cassini was hired as the exclusive designer for the First Lady after the election.

? This seems to be just an event in his life. Sancho 16:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

This was just a smart political move though. Extremely sexy 23:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Then we don't need it in the criticism section. Sancho 18:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I fully agree then. Extremely sexy 20:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE DELETE THIS PORTION OF THIS PAGE? (SEE BELOW):

"It appears almost certain that the Warren Commission's initial findings, that Oswald acted alone in the shooting and that there was no conspiracy involved, was correct. Yet, the notion of a conspiracy persists amongst a majority of Americans due to their lack of awareness of the latest discoveries and their exposure to numerous conspiracy-promoting books and films such as Oliver Stone's movie, JFK.[citation needed]"

This is a silly arbitrary opinion without a single source, PLEASE DELETE IMMEDIATELY. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.86.136.177 (talk) 18:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes made 1/3/2008

Paragraph on Gene Tierney restuctured for more sense. (Could JFK have married her if she didn't divorce Cassini?) also shorter sentences; replaced odd italicization with quotes.

2nd paragraph on assassination: 1st sentence too long, bad commma. OT detail (belongs in article on assassination).

3rd paragraph on assassination: last sentence incoherent, OT detail (belongs in article on assassination).

--Rich Rostrom (Talk) 01:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] JFK

I would have loved to see what Kennedy would have done with the country if he had been able to live out the rest of his term but stupid oswald had to kill him. Anyway i believe that he would have been one of the top presidents along with Reagan and FDR. But like both of them he had poor family values and that is part of the reason of the fall of our nation today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.253.230 (talk) 03:46, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing you're new here. Just so you know: Wikipedia is not a place to espouse your personal beliefs with your own point of view. Happyme22 (talk) 00:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Addition to Memorials

A main street that runs along the southern shoreline of the western side of Istanbul is named "Kennedy Caddesi"(http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=kennedy+cd&sll=41.002314,28.918076&sspn=0.050524,0.160675&ie=UTF8&om=0&ll=41.015656,28.966141&spn=0.217081,0.6427&z=11&iwloc=addr), and a main street in the consular district of Ankara, capital of Turkey, is named "John F. Kennedy Caddesi".(http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=kennedy+cd+ankara&sll=41.015656,28.966141&sspn=0.217081,0.6427&ie=UTF8&ll=39.906905,32.86294&spn=0.013793,0.040169&z=15&iwloc=addr&om=0) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.184.170.40 (talk) 07:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)


There is also a JFK memorial in Dachau, Germany. There's a park with a beautiful sculpture named John F. Kennedy-Platz Alliekelley726 (talk) 02:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)alliekelley726

Hello. There is a memorial to John F. Kennedy at Runnymede England. For those who don't know, Runnymede is just a meadow by the Thames where King John was forced to place his seal on the Magna Carta in 1215 (it started a war, but I digress). Its also a place where there is a memorial to 20500 Allied airmen (KIA) of world war 2 with no known grave. The Memorial to Kennedy includes land (1 acre) given to the United States (in perpetuity) by Britain, much like a war grave or Embassy. It was unveiled by Queen Elizabeth II with Jaqueline and the family in attendance in 1965. You may want to include it (read the Portland stone).198.166.61.67 (talk) 09:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Um...

"Caroline is currently the only surviving member of JFK's immediate family."

Someone might want to reword this - i wasn't aware that JFK and Jackie could have any more children... PMA (talk) 08:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pakistan

After the Iraq section I think there should be a Pakistan section. I would like to add the following.....

In July 1961 Pakistani President General Ayub Khan visited Washington for talks with President Kennedy, Lyndon B Johnson and US Secretary of State Dean Rusk. President Ayub Khan wanted to strengthen relations further with the United States. At the time of the visit there was a squabble between Pakistan and Afghanistan over the Durand Line as Afghanistan did not recognise the border with Pakistan. During Ayub Khan's visit, President Kennedy recognised the Durand Line as the permanent and undisputed border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

However in 1962 the situation was tilted when the Indo-China conflict rose, and the United States supported India by providing military assistance to India. Pakistan’s only concern was to save itself from its hostile neighbor and President Ayub Khan believed that the assistance brought military imbalance in the South Asia region.

US military assistace to Pakistan slightly decreased after the Indo-China conflict and assistance continued to decline throughout the 1960s until President Richard Nixon increased it again during his term in office.

References:

http://zahranaqvi.wordpress.com/category/pakistan-foreign-affairs/pak-us-relations/ http://www.viewimages.com/Search.aspx?mid=2662013&epmid=1&partner=Google —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noorkhanuk85 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] High amounts of medication

According to a CNN documentary on Presidents as patients, JFK's doctor injected him with amphetamines among other things, partly due to back pain. Should we have a subsection on this if it is a source of controversy which the documentary suggested? Malick78 (talk) 21:28, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Inauguration

I find this in the article:

In May 2002, a National Geographic expedition found what is believed to be the wreckage of the PT-109 in the Solomon Islands. One of the Kennedy family also returned to the islands to give a gift to the scouts who are still alive today, but they were turned away when they traveled to the inauguration because of communication problems.

First off "today" should be "as of...", but I am puzzling over the part after that. The words "still alive today, but" imply that the "but" introduces something from 2002 or later ("today"), but if so, what inauguration does it mean? If it means his inauguration in Jan 1961, then the sentence is quite convoluted, and needs to be restructured.  Randall Bart   Talk  23:26, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Correction as Youngest US President

There seems to be a blatant error in the first section when it says "He is the youngest man and the only practicing Roman Catholic to be elected President." Actually Theodore Roosevelt was nearly a year younger when elected president at the age of 42. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wsidis (talk • contribs) 16:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Roosevelt was elected president in November 1904, when he was 46. -- Zsero (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Roosevelt became President in 1901 when he was 42 because of the assassination of President McKinley. Kennedy is the youngest ELECTED president - not the youngest president. Alex 686 (talk) 04:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Possible update since this needs to be corrected. "Kennedy was the only practicing Roman Catholic President. He is the yougest person to be elected President and the 2nd youngest to hold the office." I am trying to figure out a consice way to handle this. A lot of people I have talked to get confused between youngest and youngest elected. It is an important point but I don't want to get into massive details inn the header section. Alex 686 (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
There's no need for a correction at all. The text is fine as it stands. He is the youngest person ever to be elected president. Wsidis asked about Roosevelt, you and I both answered. I don't see the need to clutter up the article with traits for which he was not unique. He wasn't the youngest to accede to the presidency, but nor was any other president, and we don't note that in each president's article! -- Zsero (talk) 15:44, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Checking my grammer book I think "to be elected President" is only modifying Roman Catholic. Also, it is on the other end of the sentance which is why I missed it. Has there been any other Roman Cathoic presidents? I can't think of any. Would this work as a correction? "He the only practicing Roman Catholic and the youngest man elected President." By fliping the clauses around we could make this sentance more clear and keep it short. Alex 686 (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
"Grammer" book? No wonder you're having a problem. Changing the order of the clauses would obviously not affect the sentence. The meaning is clear. -- Zsero (talk) 19:08, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Lissun ta me, he iz ded so it donut mattur how old he wuz. It iz foolish ta argya bout it. Jes take thu hole sentunce owt.

BigBubbaUSA (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

The sentence is true as it stands, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's fine. Given that most presidents get to the White House by being elected, many readers might gloss over the word "elected" as a given, assume we're talking about all presidents, and fail to recognise that we're actually making a distinction between those who were elected and those who acceded from the Vice-Presidency. Since we're the ones making the distinction, it's incumbent on us to communicate the fact that there is a distinction, not just leaving it as something to be inferred by some and totally missed by others. Hence, I see considerable merit in making the distinction explicit so that we can avoid these misinterpretations and these discussions. I acknowledge this makes it less concise than it would otherwise have been, but on balance I think it's justified. How about :
  • "He is the only President who was a practicing Roman Catholic; he was also the youngest person to be elected President (but not the youngest to gain the presidency, as Theodore Roosevelt was younger when he acceded to the presidency on the death of William McKinley)". Or something like that? -- JackofOz (talk) 07:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Hows bout jes syun hez ded and be dun with it?

BigBubbaUSA (talk) 18:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another Kennedy Memorial

The Canadian Government named their nation's highest unclimbed peak after JFK. In memory of his older brother, Robert Kennedy became the first person to summit the 4,300 meter peak which lies in the Saint Elias Mountains of Kluane National Park in Yukon, Canada.[1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottenadd (talk • contribs) 22:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grammar in the Navay and Marine Corps Medal citation

I found a small grammatical problem that would be a quick fix and would make the article easier to read. I've noticed that in the Navy and Marine Corps Medal citation he received for his actions on PT-109, it says, "Unmindful of personal danger, Lieutenant (then Lieutenant, Junior Grade) Kennedy unhesitatingly braved the difficulties and hazards of darkness to direct rescue operations, swimming many hours to secure aid and food after he had succeeded in getting his crew ashore."

Unless the parentheses surrounding "then Lieutenant, Junior Grade" were originally part of the text, I believe they should be changed to [brackets], as they are the generally accepted mark for editorial insertions. Otherwise it's awesome. Keep up the good work!

me again, one more thing I've found: in the Vietnam section, "advisors" is spelled wrong. It should be "advisers" -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.149.105.133 (talk • contribs)

"Advisors" is fine. And I'm assuming the LTJG reference is in the citation, parens and all, until shown otherwise. -- Zsero (talk) 07:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Remove the link to Patsy

Please remove the link to Patsy or change it to one of the disambiguations like Scapegoat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.166.140 (talk) 02:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done -- Zsero (talk) 07:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of relevance between sections?

The article, especially between the sections, doesn't seem to flow. There is a lack of continuity in its narration, a collection of over-emphasized small events put into a timeline. It doesn't read well. I think it needs a minor but comprehensive rewrite - follow the example of other presidential articles, say, FDR and Theodore Roosevelt. Herunar (talk) 12:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] HSCA

"the House Select Committee on Assassinations declared in 1979 that there was more likely a conspiracy that included Oswald2

The HSCA declared a probable consipiracy not a likely one suggest that the wording is changed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.234.10.144 (talk) 10:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

"Probable" and "likely" are synonyms. -- Zsero (talk) 18:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Correction needed

I'm pretty sure this bit in his Early Life section needs to be removed. <quote> ANd then in 2007 he invented the lyrics to spider pig: Spider pig, Spider pig, does what ever a spider pig does! Can he swing from a web? no he can't hes a pig... look out! its spider pig! </quote>

[edit] Relation to Organized Crime

should there be something about JFK's relationship with organized crime and the mob? Like his father was an alleged bootlegger, and he did well in Chicago, a city known for voting fraud. Is the allegation that JFK was helped to win by the mob valid, or just a part of conspiracy theories? Rds865 (talk) 05:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC) ==Irish heritage.I find it strange that the county in Ireland from which the Kennedys'immigrated(Wexford) was not mentioned.Considering JFK is the most famous Irish-American in history.13:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)jeanne (talk)

[edit] A black man?

Under "early life" it says that JFK wa a black man. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snanaya (talk • contribs) 23:01, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Contreversy surrounding death

There are many contreversies surrounding JFK's assasination. If you research it enough you will find that Oswald had made a trip to the Soviet Union a few years before, and that he purchased his rifle there to. I think the Russian government authorized an assasination, but they knew that if their assasin was caught, they would be prosecuted, obviously. So they hired Oswald to kill him. And I think Jack Ruby was hired by the Russians also so Oswald wouldn't talk, because if you research enough you too will find that Oswald was a a coward, and the Russians knew that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.83.112.229 (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] One more addition to the memorials

One street in Naples (Italy) is named Via John Fitzgerald Kennedy (http://www.italy-map.net/maps/map_naples.php) In Paris (France), there is also "Av. du Pres. Kennedy" (see, for example, http://www.3dphoto.net/world/europe/befraluxmon/paris/paris_locator.html) Maryka (talk) 18:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)Maryka

[edit] About the destroyer Amagiri

There says in the Japanese article that on Kennedy's election, ex-crew members of Amagiri sent a letter of encouragement to him. I think this should be posted on the English article as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.121.162.163 (talk) 11:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] lie after lie

what some people didnt know was that one of the wemon who were at the scene were actually made to lie to the police and another woman had given a statement which had been changed. i was quite suspicious that both people were interviewed by the same person. also on the day of the shooting the police force that were suppose to be around were sent to the south pole so something funny must of been going on then. exactly 4 years after kennadys death his brother robert was murder no that mean that the person who murder him was obviously not be inlvoved in jfks murder because it would be to obvious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chanbabee (talk • contribs) 20:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Dallek

I think this is the correct spelling, not Dalek. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.140.57.113 (talk) 12:34, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


[edit] "GAY"

Was he? I need to cite this page for a report and I wanna know if it be true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.212.198.116 (talk) 11:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mafia Connection

Hasn't that always been said. Same with Joe Kennedy. Why is their no mention? Wasn't it rumoured the CIA had the mafia attempt to assassinate Fidel Castro. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.35.222 (talk) 15:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)