Brains, Balls, and the "Kennedy Moment."

PB Forum :: Social / Political Issues
Brains, Balls, and the "Kennedy Moment."
  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag robholio
Posted: Jun 5, 2010 at 12:43 Quote
Brains and Balls...

It seems lately that, as a nation, we have them a little bit backwards. People screaming that they "want their country back," that we should support tougher laws in the south to stem the flow of illegal immigration, that we need to attack countries across the world prior to them attacking us, that we should "drill, baby, drill," etc. Many people feel so strongly about these things that they are brought to violence in heated confrontations. It almost seems like people are so busy posturing for a common cause that they lose sight of the prize. Well, it more than "seems" that way...

The American legacy of the first decade of the 21st Century will be partisan polarization, or as I call it, "he said/she said politics." People on both sides of the political divide are so firmly entrenched these days that they flatly do not hear what the other side is saying whether it contains merit or not, simply because they presumptively label it "liberal garbage" or "right-wing lunacy." Once your objectivity leaves you, it all smells like shit from where I'm standing. And all this "I want my country back" crap? Last I checked, it was my country as well, and it hasn't gone anywhere. Where was your country when the last administration distorted or blatantly ignored The Constitution, ignored habeas corpus, ignored the 10th Amendment, and chose to bail out failing private industry due to myopia and greed that were fueled by the deregulation espoused by that very administration? Oh yeah, THAT president wasn't black and started with a budget surplus.

Tougher immigration laws and standards? Please. Here's an idea that's time has come: THE NATIONAL GUARD. They call it that for a reason, folks. Yet, for some reason, we don't use it for its intended purpose. Personally, I think an illegal immigrant has more to fear from armed Strykers and Blackhawk helicopters patrolling the border than a few random Ford Broncos with night-vision scopes. Of course, that will impeded the flow of NAFTA money and Mexican and Canadian oil, but you choose your battles. As to that money, how about we prosecute every single person that employs illegal migrant labor? We have no problem kicking undocumented people out of the country, but casually turn a blind eye to those that offer them the promise of "under-the-table" work that causes illegals to cross over in the first place. Cause and effect. This also holds true for external threats to our country. Maybe if the border wasn't so porous and we made it harder to get into the country in the first place, we in turn wouldn't be so exposed to danger from abroad. Oh yeah...Foreign policy backlash...Oops...Which brings us to the root of the issue.

Everyone is so focused on our short-term energy problems that they're ready to start drilling for oil in their own backyards, and more or less make jokes about other forms of alternative energy (funny how no one is laughing in Louisiana). That in and of itself is the real joke. Putting partisan sentiment aside, I want everyone to remember President John F. Kennedy for a moment. Here was a young Democrat president, coming in on the heels of a well-respected Republican war hero president, that also had to make some very hard choices that put our country in harms way, that had an affair while in office, that had some very public failings, and was likely subsequently murdered by domestic terrorists that opposed him, and yet this man inspired a national mandate that put a man on the moon using far less technology in total than is used in one of our cellular phones now, and during a period when our country was far more divided than it is now, and during a time that we were deeper into a war than the two we currently find ourselves in now. And yet, it got done.

My question is this: if it was possible then with less, why not now with more? In less than 10 years, this country was able to engineer enough technological advancement to put people on another world. I see no reason why we as Americans can't muster up another "Kennedy Moment" and pioneer the next great leap in energy technology and rightfully take our leadership role in the world. Oil was the boom of the 20th Century, but it has also cost us far more that its per-barrel price in terms of war and foreign policy decisions that cause other nations to look at us in disrespect. Sure, we can bomb the shit out of them, but those bombs cost money, and last I checked, the ever-growing price tags on our current occupations far exceed our health care or foreign oil import debts. How about we collectively refocus and lead by example going forward into the 21st Century? We've done it before, let's do it again. Let's have the balls to use our brains this time around.

Rant over.
flag schuttg
O+
Posted: Jun 5, 2010 at 13:02 Quote
Well said. As I see it, the biggest problem with how politics works at an individual level is that people are all too happy to let other people do their thinking. People love labels, love to belong to something. Tea party activists scream 'I love the Constitution!' Since when? What do you love about it? People of a more liberal bent will jump on the band wagon with any quasi-environmental issue, no matter how silly or ill-conceived. People need to take better stock of what they are accountable for and be responsible citizens and good neighbors. Let logic prevail and recognize when you are getting biased information or pure media-generated hype. Power to the people - now go ride.
flag nato
Posted: Jun 5, 2010 at 14:43 Quote
Did it "get done" or was it all faked. As many un-answered questions with the supposed moon landing as with the 911 "terrorist" attacks and collapsing towers. Media can be a scary thing.
flag husstler
O+
Posted: Jun 5, 2010 at 15:19 Quote
^ The moon landing happened, there are reflectors on the moon to prove it.
flag FS4M1K3
Posted: Jun 5, 2010 at 19:50 Quote
well said on all fronts.

an yeah, the mythbusters proved it...the landings happened. the conspiracy guys should go sniff jetplane vapour trails one more time. cuz they're loaded with government nerve agents right?

sheesh.
flag nato
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 7:31 Quote
FS4M1K3 wrote:
well said on all fronts.

an yeah, the mythbusters proved it...the landings happened. the conspiracy guys should go sniff jetplane vapour trails one more time. cuz they're loaded with government nerve agents right?

sheesh.
Conspiracy? You should check your facts before labelling there dude.
flag ezekiel
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 7:51 Quote
In case no one had noticed, the topic of this discussion is not conspiracy theories.
flag nato
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 8:44 Quote
ezekiel wrote:
In case no one had noticed, the topic of this discussion is not conspiracy theories.
"Kennedy Moment", conspiracy right there.
Gov. cover up, media playing along.
flag FS4M1K3
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 11:04 Quote
nato wrote:
FS4M1K3 wrote:
well said on all fronts.

an yeah, the mythbusters proved it...the landings happened. the conspiracy guys should go sniff jetplane vapour trails one more time. cuz they're loaded with government nerve agents right?

sheesh.
Conspiracy? You should check your facts before labelling there dude.

I'm not even gonna go there on that one buddy. Wasn't trying to garner attention as a labeller, just simply giving my open-minded opinion.

I could go into some long, drawn out explanation for how/why I chose my words. But I honestly don't think I need to justify why I think the way I do.

Everyone on the net calls it as they see it.

cheers.
flag FS4M1K3
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 11:05 Quote
as for the kennedy thing, yeah thats just government b.s. with the media put in place to orchestrate it all.
flag ezekiel
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 13:29 Quote
nato wrote:
ezekiel wrote:
In case no one had noticed, the topic of this discussion is not conspiracy theories.
"Kennedy Moment", conspiracy right there.
Gov. cover up, media playing along.

By that logic there are a million words that are segues into the topic of conspiracy theories.
flag robholio
Posted: Jun 6, 2010 at 13:56 Quote
nato wrote:
"Kennedy Moment", conspiracy right there.

"Kennedy Moment", as in capturing a moment and the passion and determination of a nation's people. Regardless of the escalating war (mind you, it wasn't on TV everyday yet when JFK was in office, that was LBJ) or the Civil Rights movement, he still set a seemingly impossible goal, and it was met with a year to spare. My point is that America is capable of setting a global precedent again if we choose. If we are capable of inventing telephony, the airplane, assembly lines, splitting the atom, breaking the sound barrier, putting a man on the moon, and inventing the microchip, I really don't think it's a stretch to stop kissing Canadian/Venezuelan/Mexican/Saudi/Nigerian ass and/or stop fouling our coastlines for oil and "reinvent the wheel" if you will as far as a paradigm shift to a better alternative. The technology exists, it's just that no one wants to invest in the short term for the long term gain. Why no one looks at the potential profit there astounds me...
flag TrophyWife
Posted: Jun 8, 2010 at 18:23 Quote
Ok, since I took the time to read this I’m going to respond.

I’m paraphrasing your question here, if I am correct you are asking:

Why are we not pioneering the next great leap in energy technology and rightfully taking our leadership role in the world? I think you know the answer but I’ll humor you…

-we are divided, as you stated, the divisions discriminate, no unifying identity as there was in the Kennedy era, legislation without riders doesn’t exist, scientific funding has been decimated. We don’t have the same motivating factors as in Kennedy era. We were racing to establish the new technology to show the world we could. That doesn’t concern us today and how the scientific community operates is entirely different now. Furthermore, consider Maslow’s hierarchy of needs…apply it to operations of a government. The US does not have the foundation to focus on self actualization type affairs like pioneering the next leap in energy technology. But what the hell do I know, just answering your question in my opinion.
flag robholio
Posted: Jun 8, 2010 at 20:34 Quote
TrophyWife wrote:
Ok, since I took the time to read this I’m going to respond.

I’m paraphrasing your question here, if I am correct you are asking:

Why are we not pioneering the next great leap in energy technology and rightfully taking our leadership role in the world? I think you know the answer but I’ll humor you…

-we are divided, as you stated, the divisions discriminate, no unifying identity as there was in the Kennedy era, legislation without riders doesn’t exist, scientific funding has been decimated. We don’t have the same motivating factors as in Kennedy era. We were racing to establish the new technology to show the world we could. That doesn’t concern us today and how the scientific community operates is entirely different now. Furthermore, consider Maslow’s hierarchy of needs…apply it to operations of a government. The US does not have the foundation to focus on self actualization type affairs like pioneering the next leap in energy technology. But what the hell do I know, just answering your question in my opinion.

Very nice, Sarah. I wish we could apply Maslow's hierarchy model to a governmental structure, but a government is far too broad and expansive to use that analogy. In the Kennedy Era, we were far more divided as a nation, just not along partisan lines. It was actually far worse than now, just without the instant internet news coverage to spin everything.

[Quoten]We were racing to establish the new technology to show the world we could. That doesn’t concern us today and how the scientific community operates is entirely different now.[/Quoten]

This can be isolated exclusively down to money and who has it. This also holds true for the aforementioned differences between now and the Kennedy Era. Nowadays, lobbyists can toss money at an issue, a policy, a developing medicine or technology, etc. and make it go away. Good or bad, that is the reality of it. It's called "Tucker Syndrome" after the Tucker automobile which, when it was debuted, was far ahead of any other car on the market in terms of design innovation and safety features. It would've also costs Ford, GM, and Chrysler billions of dollars to retool their infrastructures in order to compete, hence we never saw the Tucker enter the market because external pressures killed it before it ever got off the ground.

Now, replace Ford, GM, and Chrysler with Unocal, Texaco, and BP and the Tucker with Alternative Energy. As I said, the technology exists and has for some time now. It's all a matter of spending a dollar to make a dime instead of investing $5 to make $1,000 in the long run. But, as they always say, hindsight is 20/20...
flag TrophyWife
Posted: Jun 8, 2010 at 21:14 Quote
like you said...the technology exists. Once it has a greater margin than fossil fuels Unocal, Texaco, BP and the like will usher it in. Transnational corporations will likely be the next recognised group of world leaders. Royal families, countries, transcontinental unions, why not just face it, transnational corporations are next.
robholio wrote:
TrophyWife wrote:
Ok, since I took the time to read this I’m going to respond.

I’m paraphrasing your question here, if I am correct you are asking:

Why are we not pioneering the next great leap in energy technology and rightfully taking our leadership role in the world? I think you know the answer but I’ll humor you…

-we are divided, as you stated, the divisions discriminate, no unifying identity as there was in the Kennedy era, legislation without riders doesn’t exist, scientific funding has been decimated. We don’t have the same motivating factors as in Kennedy era. We were racing to establish the new technology to show the world we could. That doesn’t concern us today and how the scientific community operates is entirely different now. Furthermore, consider Maslow’s hierarchy of needs…apply it to operations of a government. The US does not have the foundation to focus on self actualization type affairs like pioneering the next leap in energy technology. But what the hell do I know, just answering your question in my opinion.

Very nice, Sarah. I wish we could apply Maslow's hierarchy model to a governmental structure, but a government is far too broad and expansive to use that analogy. In the Kennedy Era, we were far more divided as a nation, just not along partisan lines. It was actually far worse than now, just without the instant internet news coverage to spin everything.

[Quoten]We were racing to establish the new technology to show the world we could. That doesn’t concern us today and how the scientific community operates is entirely different now.[/Quoten]

This can be isolated exclusively down to money and who has it. This also holds true for the aforementioned differences between now and the Kennedy Era. Nowadays, lobbyists can toss money at an issue, a policy, a developing medicine or technology, etc. and make it go away. Good or bad, that is the reality of it. It's called "Tucker Syndrome" after the Tucker automobile which, when it was debuted, was far ahead of any other car on the market in terms of design innovation and safety features. It would've also costs Ford, GM, and Chrysler billions of dollars to retool their infrastructures in order to compete, hence we never saw the Tucker enter the market because external pressures killed it before it ever got off the ground.

Now, replace Ford, GM, and Chrysler with Unocal, Texaco, and BP and the Tucker with Alternative Energy. As I said, the technology exists and has for some time now. It's all a matter of spending a dollar to make a dime instead of investing $5 to make $1,000 in the long run. But, as they always say, hindsight is 20/20...
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.012187
Mobile Version of Website