Jump to content

Sirhan Sirhan granted parole

Michael Knight

By Michael Knight
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89449

Posted
Posted

RFK is one of those "what if" scenarios that's pretty wild to play out - if he isn't killed, he could have nullified some of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  If he's elected, Vietnam is radically different, the civil rights movement is boosted.  We don't get Nixon until '76 at a minimum (if RFK got us out of Vietnam, he cruises to victory), which means no Jimmy Carter in '76, No Ronald Reagan in '80.  It's doubtful Nixon gets a shot at '76 because he would have been a two-time loser by then (but if he did, I imagine the Cold War of the early 80s is far different). Reagan might slide into '76, assuming the Dems don't have somebody else in the mix.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28691

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

RFK is one of those "what if" scenarios that's pretty wild to play out - if he isn't killed, he could have nullified some of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  If he's elected, Vietnam is radically different, the civil rights movement is boosted.  We don't get Nixon until '76 at a minimum (if RFK got us out of Vietnam, he cruises to victory), which means no Jimmy Carter in '76, No Ronald Reagan in '80.  It's doubtful Nixon gets a shot at '76 because he would have been a two-time loser by then (but if he did, I imagine the Cold War of the early 80s is far different). Reagan might slide into '76, assuming the Dems don't have somebody else in the mix.

Would RFK Jr still be a major antivaxer supporter?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bevo

Bevo 13527

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

RFK is one of those "what if" scenarios that's pretty wild to play out - if he isn't killed, he could have nullified some of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  If he's elected, Vietnam is radically different, the civil rights movement is boosted.  We don't get Nixon until '76 at a minimum (if RFK got us out of Vietnam, he cruises to victory), which means no Jimmy Carter in '76, No Ronald Reagan in '80.  It's doubtful Nixon gets a shot at '76 because he would have been a two-time loser by then (but if he did, I imagine the Cold War of the early 80s is far different). Reagan might slide into '76, assuming the Dems don't have somebody else in the mix.

I guess the mafia would play a bigger role in America and more coke for Jr. What would happen with Ted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hpslugga

hpslugga 4044

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

RFK is one of those "what if" scenarios that's pretty wild to play out - if he isn't killed, he could have nullified some of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  If he's elected, Vietnam is radically different, the civil rights movement is boosted.  We don't get Nixon until '76 at a minimum (if RFK got us out of Vietnam, he cruises to victory), which means no Jimmy Carter in '76, No Ronald Reagan in '80.  It's doubtful Nixon gets a shot at '76 because he would have been a two-time loser by then (but if he did, I imagine the Cold War of the early 80s is far different). Reagan might slide into '76, assuming the Dems don't have somebody else in the mix.

What makes you think RFK does anything different about Vietnam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUinHsv

AUinHsv 576

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

RFK is one of those "what if" scenarios that's pretty wild to play out - if he isn't killed, he could have nullified some of Nixon's Southern Strategy.  If he's elected, Vietnam is radically different, the civil rights movement is boosted.  We don't get Nixon until '76 at a minimum (if RFK got us out of Vietnam, he cruises to victory), which means no Jimmy Carter in '76, No Ronald Reagan in '80.  It's doubtful Nixon gets a shot at '76 because he would have been a two-time loser by then (but if he did, I imagine the Cold War of the early 80s is far different). Reagan might slide into '76, assuming the Dems don't have somebody else in the mix.

A lot of debate around whether he would have even been the Democratic candidate. His win in California was critical but McCarthy had a lot of support and probably a lot better organization than RFK. Plus the Democratic party was headed by LBJ who greatly disliked RFK. His power was evident by the party choosing Humphrey over Mccarthy. RFK versus Nixon would have been very interesting

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

The LBJ relationship with RFK can't be overlooked with regard to "what if/what may" regarding RFK in 1968.  The primary reason being LBJ had his brother killed and then called him moments later to verify if how LBJ was to be sworn in was in line with his interpretation of the Constitution.  Could have called some federal judge, or a Supreme Court Justice, or an assistant or deputy Attorney General.  But he called RFK for a reason.  Always thought that was a pretty cold move, but effective. 

Anywho, Bobby was the only member of that family worth a shit.  He would have great for America.  It was a tragic loss and I wish we could back in time and have him as President.  The real question mark does Reagan come to power in '76 (as was actually the GOP plan before Ford kinda seemed like he was gonna lose---people forget what a close race that was between Carter and Ford---all things considered).  Or would Reagan have bided his time again until 1980, assuming that RFK's Vice President or some other anointed political figure in the Democratic Party (by RFK) is the presumptive '76 winner?  In a perfect world, I guess it should have gone RFK '69-'77, Reagan from '77-'85.  And then Bush 43.  At least to end the Cold War.  

Bad news is, no matter what Sirhan Sirhan did, no matter his parole situation.  It's become frighteningly apparent to me in the last 2+ years, we were always headed for a Donald Trump or someone like him.  

I always liked Bobby though.  The things he could have done.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
freyguy

freyguy 4245

Posted
Posted
On 8/28/2021 at 10:00 AM, Lobo said:

The LBJ relationship with RFK can't be overlooked with regard to "what if/what may" regarding RFK in 1968.  The primary reason being LBJ had his brother killed and then called him moments later to verify if how LBJ was to be sworn in was in line with his interpretation of the Constitution.  Could have called some federal judge, or a Supreme Court Justice, or an assistant or deputy Attorney General.  But he called RFK for a reason.  Always thought that was a pretty cold move, but effective. 

Anywho, Bobby was the only member of that family worth a shit.  He would have great for America.  It was a tragic loss and I wish we could back in time and have him as President.  The real question mark does Reagan come to power in '76 (as was actually the GOP plan before Ford kinda seemed like he was gonna lose---people forget what a close race that was between Carter and Ford---all things considered).  Or would Reagan have bided his time again until 1980, assuming that RFK's Vice President or some other anointed political figure in the Democratic Party (by RFK) is the presumptive '76 winner?  In a perfect world, I guess it should have gone RFK '69-'77, Reagan from '77-'85.  And then Bush 43.  At least to end the Cold War.  

Bad news is, no matter what Sirhan Sirhan did, no matter his parole situation.  It's become frighteningly apparent to me in the last 2+ years, we were always headed for a Donald Trump or someone like him.  

I always liked Bobby though.  The things he could have done.  

weren't he and Jack spit-roasting Marylin Monroe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DigglerontheHoof

DigglerontheHoof 21065

Posted
Posted
On 8/28/2021 at 10:00 AM, Lobo said:

The LBJ relationship with RFK can't be overlooked with regard to "what if/what may" regarding RFK in 1968.  The primary reason being LBJ had his brother killed and then called him moments later to verify if how LBJ was to be sworn in was in line with his interpretation of the Constitution.  Could have called some federal judge, or a Supreme Court Justice, or an assistant or deputy Attorney General.  But he called RFK for a reason.  Always thought that was a pretty cold move, but effective. 

Anywho, Bobby was the only member of that family worth a shit.  He would have great for America.  It was a tragic loss and I wish we could back in time and have him as President.  The real question mark does Reagan come to power in '76 (as was actually the GOP plan before Ford kinda seemed like he was gonna lose---people forget what a close race that was between Carter and Ford---all things considered).  Or would Reagan have bided his time again until 1980, assuming that RFK's Vice President or some other anointed political figure in the Democratic Party (by RFK) is the presumptive '76 winner?  In a perfect world, I guess it should have gone RFK '69-'77, Reagan from '77-'85.  And then Bush 43.  At least to end the Cold War.  

Bad news is, no matter what Sirhan Sirhan did, no matter his parole situation.  It's become frighteningly apparent to me in the last 2+ years, we were always headed for a Donald Trump or someone like him.  

I always liked Bobby though.  The things he could have done.  

Honestly, surprised you're a JFK conspiracy guy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

I don't know about all the second shooter/grassy knoll shit...I just happen to think whatever happened that day leading up to Kennedy dead on a table at Parkland was set into motion by LBJ.  

I need to read that Schlessinger book about Bobby Kennedy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13414

Posted
Posted

I get that RFK's widow is opposed to the parole but we also don't allow victims to solely decide parole decisions. They do and should always allow their feedback to be taken into account.

The guy has been in prison for 50 years, and by all accounts has been a model prisoner for the majority of that time. I don't know if justice is being served by keeping him in prison. Parole exists to allow rehabilitation when appropriate. If a prisoner does what they're asked for decades and meets parole standards, shouldn't we have room to believe they are rehabilitated?

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13414

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

But doesn’t that rehabilitation include taking responsibility and contrition?

According to his kids, Sirhan has never once done that in those 50 years.

How can someone who won’t even admit what they’ve done he truly rehabilitated?

He admitted in his trial that he shot RFK so I don't know what you mean by last sentence. As for remorse, can you provide some links to his kids saying their father isn't remorseful?  

From a quick google search, I gather CA has a list of factors but the only 2 requirements are % of time served and a good record in prison. Everything else is subjective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...