Weird Historic Deaths

Most of my regulars know that I do like me some history and I try to find cool and interesting stuff to help my readers learn about our distant past.

Deaths!

We know about Julius Caesar and Spartan kings and Socrates….among others.

These deaths are pretty straight forward….assassination, poison, combat….but there are also deaths that can be explained as…well….weird.

There is never an easy time to be alive. The New York Times claims that, in 3,400 years of recorded history, humanity has only been at peace for a grand total of 268 years, or eight percent of the time. And as world diplomacy becomes increasingly complex and national interests rub up against one another, it doesn’t seem like we’ll be adding to that total anytime soon.

But perhaps it’s fair to say that some periods of time are more unpredictable, or rather that societies were so ungovernable that very strange things could occur. This is true especially of the ancient world, when democracy was experimental and science was equal parts observation, interpretation, and superstition, a way of looking at the world that was both searching and naive.

From domestic life to war, from private passions to public performance, the lives of ancient people have suddenly ended in the most unexpected ways. That’s not say that each of the ancients in this article should be receiving a long-overdue Darwin Award, but their deaths constitute such overwhelming weirdness that their stories have been transmitted down the millennia. There’s an element of timelessness to them, and once you read about them, you won’t be able to get them out of your head.

Draco–Death By Applause

https://www.grunge.com/244727/the-weirdest-deaths-from-ancient-history/

Strange deaths…..stuff that is not taught in your typical history class….and that is why the Old Professor is here……to teach the stuff others ignore.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

How War Is Fought

In college I studies war in all forms and solutions that lead to war……

For centuries war was fought with cavalry and foot soldier attacks…..but then slowly the way war was being fought began to change…..

The weapons that changed the way we fight wars…..

Humanity fought its earliest wars using fists, clubs, and rocks. At some unknown point in time, a forward-thinking adversary learned to propel rocks towards the enemy through the use of a sling. Later improvements in military efficiency included edged weapons, and the use of spears, flung with the force of a strong arm. Smaller spear-like projectiles used the flexibility of yew wood and the strength of leather to be launched towards their target. Each advance, as it were, allowed attacks upon the enemy from a greater distance, rather than assault and hand-to-hand combat.

As weapons evolved, so did the means by which they were employed and countered. Bladed weapons were countered with shields and armor. Body armor remains a feature of 21st century combat troops. Strategy and tactics evolved to better take advantage of modern weaponry and to counter its effects on the battlefield. The latter itself changed, expanding to ever increasing areas of conflict. Each advance has been followed by others superior to it, a trend throughout history which continues today. Here are 10 weapons which changed the manner in which war was, and still is, fought around the world.

10. Gunpowder

Ironically, gunpowder first appeared in 9th century China as a formula for medical use. First created by alchemists in the futile search for the elixir of life, medicinal uses of gunpowder were limited. But its use as a weapon was self-evident, as a means of starting fires. During the Song Dynasty, in the early 11th century, the use of gunpowder as an incendiary rather than an explosive appeared, documented in ancient texts of the time. Fire arrows became both an offensive and defensive weapon. About two centuries later, explosives in the form of bombs appeared. By the late 13th century, Chinese hand-held cannons were a feature of the battlefield.

….read more….

https://www.toptenz.net/weapons-that-changed-the-way-war-is-fought.php

Learn Stuff!

Class Dismissed!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Remember The War On Poverty?

Well I do.

And president-elect Biden is promising so much for the poor…..will he deliver?

Let us look at the LBJ version of the War on Poverty……

It was the program of the Johnson Administration….as the Encyclopedia Britannica remembers it….

Johnson announced an “unconditional war on poverty” in his first State of the Union address, in January 1964. He considered the depth and extent of poverty in the country (nearly 20 percent of Americans at the time were poor) to be a national disgrace that merited a national response. Furthermore, he identified the cause of poverty not as the personal moral failings of the poor but as a societal failure: “The cause may lie deeper in our failure to give our fellow citizens a fair chance to develop their own capacities, in a lack of education and training, in a lack of medical care and housing, in a lack of decent communities in which to live and bring up their children.” The speech was historic in its idealistic call for the creation of a more-just society. Johnson concluded it by saying:

On similar occasions in the past we have often been called upon to wage war against foreign enemies which threatened our freedom. Today we are asked to declare war on a domestic enemy which threatens the strength of our nation and the welfare of our people. If we now move forward against this enemy—if we can bring to the challenges of peace the same determination and strength which has brought us victory in war—then this day and this Congress will have won a secure and honorable place in the history of the nation and the enduring gratitude of generations of Americans yet to come.

The rhetoric of the War on Poverty quickly found its way into law and the creation of new federal programs and agencies. The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 was passed by Congress and became law in August 1964. The act created the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO), which provided funds for vocational training, created Job Corps to train youths in conservation camps and urban centres, and established VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America), a domestic counterpart to the Peace Corps, and Head Start, an early-education program for children of poor families, among other programs.

The fight never really got into full swing for starting with Nixon each admin started chipping away at the Act and it never reached its full potential.

For those that break out in a rash if they must read….I have a short video to explain this…

There are lots of competing opinions on just how successful this fight had become…..the Urban Institute sees the outcome thusly…..

President’s Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) declared that the War on Poverty launched by President Lyndon Johnson in 1964 is “largely over and a success.” Although it is premature to declare an outright and absolute victory, it’s great that policymakers at the highest level of government recognize that our social safety net programs are working.

But if we are to continue to reduce hardship and promote mobility from poverty through access to good jobs, work and other means, we have to understand the nature of poverty today. It’s important that we draw the right lessons from the past so we don’t underestimate our current challenges and cede our hard-won progress in the War on Poverty. 

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/have-we-won-war-poverty-not-yet

I want to be fair….so I will offer the analysis from the uber conserv think tank, the Heritage Foundation…….

The U.S. Census Bureau has just released its annual poverty report. The report claims that in 2013, 14.5 percent of Americans were poor. Remarkably, that’s almost the same poverty rate as in 1967, three years after the War on Poverty started. How can that be? How can government spend $9,000 per recipient and have no effect on poverty? The answer is – it can’t.

Census counts a family as poor if its “income” falls below certain thresholds. But in counting “income,” Census ignores almost all of the $943 billion in annual welfare spending. This, of course, makes the Census poverty figures very misleading.

https://www.heritage.org/marriage-and-family/commentary/the-war-poverty-50-years-failure

Of course they do not mention much about their attempts to screw the poor by leading the charge to repeal the Act……but I seldom expect conservs to admit to their lunacies.

What can we surmise about the War on Poverty?

Contrary to myths propagated by many critics, the War on Poverty was not narrowly focused on “expanding welfare.” “No doles,” stipulated President Johnson, and his legislative initiatives included aid to schools and universities, new job training programs, public housing initiatives, new Medicare health coverage for the elderly and Medicaid coverage for the poor, and other programs that have endured, such as Head Start, Job Corps, and Community Health Centers.

The War on Poverty’s pivotal assault on racial discrimination often goes unmentioned. In addition to persuading Congress to pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the Johnson administration used the federal purse to desegregate schools, hospitals, community boards, and neighborhood programs. As new grants flowed, threats to withhold funding made

Nor should the War on Poverty be discussed only in the past tense. It is still being fought today. Although the original coordinating agency, the Office of Economic Opportunity, was disbanded in the early 1970s, many programs are still funded under new names in other agencies.

(read on)

https://scholars.org/contribution/accomplishments-and-lessons-war-poverty

Of course…this program will always be viewed through the lens of political ideology….no amount of successes will ever be recognized….and that is the shame of this society.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

America’s First Foreign Policy Dilemma

College of Political Knowledge

I studied international relations in college and along with that I took several courses about the history of American foreign policy.

I thought I would try to get back into the swing of posting on our foreign policy history while the country prepares for the election in November.

After the War and the country coming together to form the United States of America what was the first dilemma the country had to face with our foreign policy….what did Washington do?

The first problem has been called the “Citizen Genet Affair”.

During 1793 and 1794, a series of explosive controversies divided followers of Hamilton and Jefferson. Washington’s administration confronted a French effort to entangle the United States in its war with England, armed rebellion in western Pennsylvania, Indian resistance, and the threat of war with Britain. These controversies intensified party spirit and increased voting along party lines in Congress.

In April 1793, “Citizen” Edmond Charles Genet (1763-1834), a French minister, arrived in the United States and passed out letters authorizing Americans to attack British commercial vessels and Spanish New Orleans. Washington regarded these actions as a clear violation of American neutrality and demanded that France recall its minister. The Genet affair did have an important effect–it intensified party feeling. From Vermont to South Carolina citizens organized Democratic-Republican clubs to celebrate the triumphs of the French Revolution. Hamilton and his supporters suspected that these societies really existed to stir up grass-roots opposition to the Washington administration.

American foreign policy in the 1790s was dominated by the events surrounding the French Revolution. Following the overthrow of the monarchy in 1792, the revolutionary French Government clashed with the monarchies of Spain and Great Britain. French policymakers needed the United States to help defend France’s colonies in the Caribbean – either as a neutral supplier or as a military ally, and so they dispatched Edmond Charles Genêt, an experienced diplomat, as minister to the United States. The French assigned Genêt several additional duties: to obtain advance payments on debts that the U.S. owed to France, to negotiate a commercial treaty between the United States and France, and to implement portions of the 1778 Franco-American treaty which allowed attacks on British merchant shipping using ships based in American ports. Genêt’s attempt to carry out his instructions would bring him into direct conflict with the U.S. Government.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1784-1800/citizen-genet

Just a small note:  The State Department use to keep a data file with updates to our foreign policies and its history…..under the Obama admin it was decided to stop keeping the historical record….a shame in my opinion for it was an excellent source.

Here is the notice…..

This publication, “Milestones in the History of U.S. Foreign Relations,” has been retired. The text remains online for reference purposes, but it is no longer being maintained or expanded.

Why retire “Milestones”? In mid-2016 the Office of the Historian completed a review of its online offerings and concluded that extensive resources would be needed to revise and expand this publication to meet the Office’s standards for accuracy and comprehensiveness. At the same time, the events described in the “Milestones” essays are amply covered by numerous respected secondary sources. Rather than duplicate these efforts, the Office of the Historian has decided to focus its resources on areas where it is uniquely suited to make a contribution, such as coverage of the Department of State’s institutional history. In keeping with the publication’s new status, it can now be found under “More Resources” in the site-wide menu.

Notice posted on May 9, 2017.

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Pan Am Flight 103

Does anyone remember this tragedy?

No?

How about the Lockerbie bombing?

Still nothing?

On December 21, 1988, on a cold and ultimately chilling evening just four days before Christmas, Pan Am Flight 103 took off from London’s Heathrow Airport bound for New York City. Among the 259 passengers and crew were 189 Americans.

They never made it home. Less than 40 minutes into the flight, the plane exploded over the sky above Lockerbie, Scotland, killing everyone on board and 11 Scots on the ground.

Until 9/11, it was one of the world’s most lethal acts of air terrorism and one of the largest and most complex acts of international terrorism ever investigated by the FBI.

Solving the case required unprecedented international cooperation—and hours upon hours of painstaking work. With the mid-air explosion 30,000 feet up, debris rained down over 845 square miles across Scotland. FBI agents and international investigators combed the countryside on hands and knees looking for clues in virtually every blade of grass, eventually turning up thousands of pieces of evidence. They also traversed the globe, interviewing more than 10,000 individuals in dozens of countries.

Participating in the investigation were an array of international police organizations from such countries as Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and, of course, Great Britain (including Scotland).

Ultimately, forensic specialists from the FBI, the CIA, and elsewhere determined that one of the fragments found on the ground, no bigger than a thumbnail, came from the circuit board of a radio/cassette player. That tiny piece of evidence helped establish that the bomb had been placed inside that radio and tape deck in a piece of luggage. Another small fragment, found embedded in a piece of shirt, helped identify the type of timer.

https://www.fbi.gov/history/famous-cases/pan-am-103-bombing

The family of the person convicted of the bombing has asked for the evidence and documents to be made public……

The family of the only person convicted in the deadliest terror attack in British history say documents held by the UK government could clear his name—but the government is refusing to unseal them. Scotland’s most senior judges have ruled to uphold the secrecy order for documents connected to the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which killed 270 people, the Guardian reports. Earlier this year, the family of former Libyan intelligence officer Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, who died in 2012, was granted permission to posthumously appeal his conviction. They say the secret papers will prove that the bombing was actually carried out by a Syria-based extremist group called the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, acting on orders from Iran.

The documents, which allegedly name a Jordanian intelligence agent as the bomb-maker, are believed to have been sent by King Hussein of Jordan, per the Guardian. When he issued the order protecting the documents, UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said releasing them to the defense would harm national security, the National reports. “The documents were provided in confidence to the United Kingdom Government by another state,” Raab said. “Disclosure of the documents would harm the United Kingdom’s international relations with that state.” In a 2007 ruling, however, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission said the documents raised questions about al-Megrahi’s conviction. His appeal at the time was abandoned before he was released on compassionate grounds in 2009.

Let me insert this before the question I have.

I am by no means saying this person was innocent of the crime….just that there are some questions on the decision to keep info classified.

Now I asked if there was a trial and a person convicted of the crime….why are these documents still secret?

What are they protecting?

Was the person railroaded?

Why not make the information public and let everyone see the evidence?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Hammurabi’s Laws

Most people that ever been in a world history class will remember that Hammurabi gave the world its first categorized laws….

As an Assyriologist I studied the Laws in great detail…..but most people have no idea what is in the Laws other than they were the first on record……besides these laws were not exactly what you were taught back in the day.

Found in 1901 by a team of French archeologists in the ancient city of Susa in Iran, the Hammurabi Laws seem to have been created to govern day to day life in Babylonia. While the Hammurabi Laws are not the earliest written laws nor the first of its kind, they are the most complete and incredibly well-preserved. 

The laws were created while Hammurabi reigned in Babylon from 1792 till 1750 BCE. It is widely believed that the Hammurabi Laws have been created on the grounds of Sumerian documents that predate Hammurabi Laws. They seem to have been written by the king of Ur, Ur-Namma, and Lipit-Ishtar of Isin. The Hammurabi Laws have been carefully collected and written on a diorite stela in the temple of Marduk. 

The laws, 282 of them, centered around economic dealings such as commerce, prices, trade and tariffs, as well as family law, civil law, and criminal law. The punishment for breaking any of the laws was different and dependant on the circumstances as well as the offenders’ status. 

There were three distinct social classes in ancient Babylonia – the elite (amelu), the free man (mushkenu), and slaves (ardu). Interestingly enough, while the elite had various privileges and their births and deaths were recorded, under the laws, they were also subjected to harsher punishments and pricier fines.

Written in cuneiform (a system of writing used by Sumerians) and the Akkadian language, the laws are divided into several parts: prologue, legal procedures, family law, slavery, economic dealings, religion, and epilogue. More than just being a vital part of history and allowing people from the 21st century a glimpse into life and culture long gone, the Hammurabi Laws also introduce many concepts we still find relevant today.

Some of the issues mentioned include the necessity for providing evidence if a crime has been committed, making sure there is a minimum wage for workers as well as presuming the accused is innocent until his guilt is proven. The laws also have a rather modern take on incest, divorce, and property rights.

Naturally, there are also segments, especially those about punishment, that most of the people today would find shocking such as cutting off son’s hand if he hit his father or if one man broke the bone of another, the same shall be done to him. Nota bene, these are some of the more “tame” punishments. Parts of the Hammurabi Laws so seem barbaric, as we mentioned, especially when it comes to “an eye for an eye” practices. However, some parts prove that the ancient Babylonians had some rather forward-thinking ideas such as refusal to accept marriage by capture or blood feuds. 

There are also some interesting parts concerning women’s rights. While women were, in a sense, considered to be the property of the husband, the husband was also responsible for providing the woman with an income should they divorce at some point. He also had to return her dowry, and the woman got the custody of children. On the other hand, if a woman was judged to be a bad wife, she could become a slave in her former home or be sent away.  

Be Smart!

Lern Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Dick Yanking?

I saw this term in the title of a historical piece and had to read….surely this term meant something different than what my mind came up with…..seriously ‘dick yanking’?

You know the old saying ‘learn something new everyday’?

I did just that!

For as much as modern life can suck, it’s always good to remember how grateful we should be not to have lived in other, worse places at shittier times in the past. For a good example of this, consider what it was like to get a divorce—and have a bunch of people pulling on and inspecting your bits—in medieval England.

An article called “The Distinguished Medieval Penis Investigators” from Narratively explains just how awful the process of divorce could be for the 14th century English. In order to end a marriage, women of the time had “few grounds” other than to claim their husband was impotent—and to prove it before a court through some really creative experiments.

The article cites an annulment case from 1370 where a woman “filed for divorce … claiming that her husband was impotent.” To make her case, she produced a witness before a church court. The witness said he saw the pair “applying themselves with zeal to the work of carnal intercourse” in a barn and that, even with the husband’s brother looking on and (sorry for the detail) helping out by literally lending a hand, the husband’s “rod was lowered and in no way rising or becoming erect.”

The church court would also consider evidence from “the defendant’s friends and neighbors,” who would perform “physical inspections of genitals and breasts… to determined impotence, virginity, and pregnancy.” Married or widowed women or sex workers “might be tasked by the court with inspecting the man’s genital equipment, or they might expose their breasts and genitals to the allegedly impotent man, give him ale and tasty snacks, kiss him, and rub his penis in a warm room to see whether he became aroused.” While “ale, tasty snacks” and a handy in a warm room might not sound so bad, other divorces entailed even more invasive forms of junk-assessment.

One of the other cases mentioned in the article is from 1433. In a divorce recorded that year, a bunch of people got together at a tavern to check out the wiener quality of a guy named William as his marriage fell apart. “One Robert Lincoln testified that William placed his ‘manly rod’ in his hand,” we learn. “On another evening, three men examined William’s ‘secret manly members’ at a friend’s house. They also gave his penis rave reviews, often comparing it to their own. One testified that he himself had fathered 10 children and that ‘William’s was better in length and girth than [my] rod ever was’. Another reported that William Barton had ‘large and fit testicles…’” Some of the women involved disagreed, with one testifying that “his rod was of no value.” We can picture William, moping at this comment after his dick had initially received such glowing public praise.

Read the entire piece

Now aren’t you glad I had to foresight to include this in today’s posts?  That I wasted my time reading it and you did not have to?

I do what I can to expand my readers historic knowledge…..

Be Well….Be Safe….

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Another Can’t Fix Stupid

It is Sunday and I am always amazed just how stupid Americans are about history….especially those that want to help rule the country….

I am referring to the Senator-elect from Alabama, Tommy Tuberville.

This is his reason for the US fighting in World War 2……

“It’s concerning to me that a guy can run for president of the United States and have an opportunity to win when he leans more to a socialist type of government, you know, one-payer system in health care, raise taxes 20 percent, when the other half the country is basically voting for freedom, let us control our own lives, stay out of our life,” said Tuberville, a former college football coach. “You know, as I tell people, my dad fought 76 years ago in Europe to free Europe of socialism.”

Think about that for a moment…..

Did you spot the stupid in that statement?

In case you are confused…..

In World War II, the United States was fighting against the Axis powers, which were mostly right-wing fascist governments. In fact, Americans fought alongside the socialist USSR as allies.

I guess he took too many hits to the head….or maybe his bad knees go all the way to his head…..either way….

There is No Fixin’ Stupid

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

When Was The Last Successful Rebellion In The US?

We have just celebrated our Veterans Day where we give thanks for all the hard work and sacrifice that our veterans have given this country.

This past election has brought about op-eds that are predicting a possible armed rebellion within the United States….

If you try to think back in our history then the last one that comes to mind is the Revolution that gave us our independence.

If that is your answer then you are mistaken.

The Battle of Athens ( that is Tennessee not Georgia (the state) or Greece (the country not the oil for frying)….

The year is 1945 and the returning GIs as they try to put the War behind them….but one county in Tennessee would not let them do it.

In McMinn County, Tennessee, in the early 1940s, the question was not if you farmed, but where you farmed. Athens, the county seat, lay between Knoxville and Chattanooga along U.S. Highway 11, which wound its way through eastern Tennessee. This was the meeting place for farmers from all the surrounding communities. Traveling along narrow roads planted with signs urging them to “See Rock City” and “Get Right with God,” they would gather on Saturdays beneath the courthouse elms to discuss politics and crops. There were barely seven thousand people in Athens, and many of its streets were still unpaved. The two “big” cities some fifty miles away had not yet begun their inevitable expansion, and the farmers’ lives were simple and essentially unaffected by what they would have called the “modern world.” Many of them were without electricity. The land, their families, religion, politics, and the war dominated their talk and thoughts. They learned about God from the family Bible and in tiny chapels along yellow-dust roads. Their newspaper, the Daily Post-Athenian , told them something of politics and war, but since it chose to avoid intrigue or scandal, a story that smacked of both could be found only in the conversations of the folks who milled about the courthouse lawn on Saturdays.

Since the Civil War, political offices in McMinn County had gone to the Republicans, but in the 1930s Tennessee began to fall under the control of Democratic bosses. To the west, in Shelby County, E.H. Crump, the Memphis mayor who had been ousted during his term for failing to enforce Prohibition, fathered what would become the state’s most powerful political machine. Crump eventually controlled most of Tennessee along with the governor’s office and a United States senator. In eastern Tennessee local and regional machines developed, which, lacking the sophistication and power of a Crump, relied on intimidation and violence to control their constituents.

https://www.americanheritage.com/battle-athens

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

I Remember JFK

I am an old fart and us old farts remember JFK……a young good looking dude that became the president….

It was 1960 and I was 13 and recall the debates in my household over who to vote for…at times it got as ugly as some of the debates and accusations we have heard this year….but most of them did not have social media to pass the crap around.

My grandfather despised Goldwater and my father was in the GOP camp completely…..my mother even in 1960 would not stand by silently…she let the house know who she would vote for….JFK……and it had nothing to do with him being considered handsome….(at least that was her story and she stuck to it)……

I do this remembering because some things that JFK set into motion for a campaign that are still in place….even in the days of social media controlling everything……NPR looks at those situations….

1. The Self-Selected Candidate

Kennedy ushered in an era of successful presidential candidates who weren’t anointed by the party establishment — they chose to put themselves forward as presidential candidates. After Kennedy’s 1960 run, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama all followed his model of elbowing aside other candidates with seemingly more claim to their party’s nomination.

2. Television Debates

It can’t be said often enough: Kennedy’s charismatic and poised performance in the first-ever televised presidential debate set the standard for all future debates. A solid television debate performance has now become a way for nominees, especially those running against a much better nationally known opponent, to level the field and erase doubts, just as Kennedy did against Richard Nixon in 1960. Since then, the importance of nominating a telegenic candidate has only grown.

3. Primary Strategy

While primaries existed before the 1960 campaign, no prior candidate used them as strategically as Kennedy did to establish his electability. That’s now the conventional approach for well-known and lesser-known presidential aspirants alike. Kennedy proved he could garner votes by winning both the Wisconsin and West Virginia primaries. The latter primary was especially vital to proving a Catholic could win in a largely Protestant state.

4. The Tolerance Speech

Kennedy pioneered the political use of a speech to address broad concerns about a candidate being from a racial, ethnic or religious minority. In West Virginia and elsewhere, Kennedy spoke directly about why his Catholicism shouldn’t bar him from the presidency. But he made his most famous speech on the issue in September 1960 before the Houston Ministerial Association. In 2008, Obama’s speech on race in Philadelphia and Mitt Romney’s 2007 speech on why his Mormon faith shouldn’t be an issue in the Republican presidential primary came straight out of Kennedy’s playbook.

5. The Candidate As Rock Star

Long before Obama, it was Kennedy who first embodied both Hollywood-like celebrity and charisma in a presidential candidate. Indeed, JFK was first to link presidential politics to Hollywood in a big way, only to be followed in that by Reagan and Obama. Kennedy’s personal star power helped him win the 1960 Democratic nomination; later, candidates like Reagan (who had real Hollywood bona fides), Clinton and Obama had leading-man chops that helped to separate them from political rivals. While a candidate can win the presidency without that aura, the absence of that quality makes it a far tougher task to raise the vast sums of money necessary to run, or to energize enough voters, or to win the White House in the screen age — whether we’re talking TVs or smartphones.

Just a few things that JFK brought to the campaign and that has stuck around for over 50 years….

How would history have changed if JFK had made it full term?

Here are five intriguing ways history may have changed if Kennedy had survived the assassination attempt, or if gunman Lee Harvey Oswald had never taken the shot.

https://www.livescience.com/41412-jfk-best-alternate-histories.html

https://www.historyextra.com/period/20th-century/what-if-jfk-had-lived/

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”