It’s been nearly 50 years since President John F. Kennedy was assassinated during a visit to Dallas, Tex., but the case continues to fascinate.
How could such a thing have happened? More importantly, who did it?
In these trying times, there are great questions, and there are GREAT questions.
Hoopheads have long debated how to approach the final seconds of a ballgame ( up by three with seven seconds or less left) when the good guys (Illinois) have a three-point lead and the bad guys (Indiana, Duke, Michigan - take your pick) have the ball.
Jim’s Pseudo-Intellectual Book Club: Volume LI.
As a self-described pseudo-intellectual, I’m not pretentious about my pretensions. So when I say that “Tears in the Darkness” by Michael and Elizabeth Norman is all too real — a page-turning description of a heart-rending, four year nightmare — you can believe it.
Ah, Johnny, we hardly knew ye. That’s what they say, but they’re wrong.
Many Americans are familiar with the broad outlines of the life of martyred President John Kennedy, who was elected in 1960. As the youngest person elected to the presidency, the 43-year-old Kennedy was a hugely popular politician cruising toward re-election when he was shot to death on Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas.
University of Virginia political science professor Gerard Alexander wrote a commentary to that effect in Sunday's Washington Post.
It's pretty interesting and contains a fair amount of support for his theory. Of course, you can hear the liberals now, saying the conservatives are the ones who are condescending. Maybe they're both right.
But, for now at least, all there is to offer on the subject is Alexander's commentary.
So take a look. You can read, can't you?
Whoops, now I'm being condescending. Sorry.