I was watching mission to mars on the Discovery Channel last night when one of the astronauts quoted your President Kennedy.

“We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too. “

That portion of his speech got me thinking. Not about going to the moon or going to Mars, but thinking about the current political situation in the U.S. and how you guys are in a bit of an economic and sociological pickle (I’m not going to list them…I’m sure you can figure them out). I googled and re-read the speech a couple of times over and am still flabbergasted by this man’s (President John F. Kennedy) vision, insight, articulation and obvious intelligence. This was a man who was able to inspire an entire generation (of not just Americans, but Canadians, Europeans, and Asians) to go out into the world and explore its boundaries, and to try and go beyond them for the betterment of mankind in the name of science and exploration, all with a residual effect that continues to echo to this day. This man, who pretty much single handedly prevented complete global annihilation, was able to rally engineers, technician, laborers to work together and accomplish something, that only ten years before, seemed not only impossible but implausible; all the while getting the public to support his mission.

However, I’m not going to start bashing your current President by trying to compare him to the (arguably) greatest American president in recent history. Instead, I take this opportunity to remind you of how a leader should act and present himself as an example and inspiration to his people by being honest (of course that is relative), compassionate, attentive, strong enough to stand by convictions, but intelligent enough to recognize (and acknowledge) his and others mistakes.

In the next year you will be bombarded with political messages telling you about how the one guy wasted your money on this, and how the other guy wants to waste all your money on that, and he wants to let all those killers out of jail. I’m not going to tell you whose right or wrong because honestly I don’t know…Dems, Repps, they all have an agenda, be it personal or professional. But as Americans you have a responsibility to yourselves and the rest of the world, let’s face it, they don’t call you a Superpower because you can shoot laser beams out of your ass. You are a nation of wealth and power and as a Canadian I fully acknowledge that as fact. But in recent years there seems to have been an abuse of both the things in which you have in abundance and now you are left in limbo where a great nation is divided and the effects are being felt worldwide. Loss of life and cost of war not withstanding, your people need inspiration, a cause, a rallying point to unite your nation and in repercussion the rest of the world… (motherfucking Star Trek and shit). In order to return to greatness a great leader must emerge and be chosen by the people…I just don’t know who that person is.

What I do know is that they should have a lot more in common with Kennedy than with Bush.

Peace out bitches!

Flame on freshness lovers! Flame on!

Oh, but we can.... we can.

Very inspiring.... now if someone will run who's worth a damn...

Calling Kennedy our greatest president is a bit of a stretch.

Visionary? Yes.

He did win a showdown with the Russians on the Cuban missile crisis.

Now, on to the bad. While troops were going to Vietnam during Eisenhower's presidency, Kennedy truly set the tone for the Vietnam war. The difference was he didn't live long enough to have his reputation completely demolished by it. He cheated on his wife in office. He was a drug addict. History has just been very kind to the man, but if he were president today, he'd be torn apart by a much different media. Remember, electronic media was brand new then, and there was still a lot more censorship in the news, and newsmakers cared about the reputations of our politicians, unlike today.

A list of great presidents of the 20th century to me would include both Roosevelts and Reagan. Say what you will about Reagan, but his final standoff with the communist block brought the eventual downfall of Russian domination in eastern Europe. To me, that's a larger accomplishment than a 3 day standoff with Kruschev.

Still, your post makes some very valid points about the current state of affairs, and I can appreciate your perspective as an outsider looking in.

I thought the same thing as you Rat, about Kennedy being one of the greatest, but he does say one of the greatest in recent history. So depending on how far you want to say recent history is, he is probably one of the greatest in recent history. I myself would probably rate him 10-20th all time.

Pro US , Pro Industry , an actual adult candidate -

Duncan Hunter

Duncan Hunter aligns the closest with my views. The various "candidate calculators" found online match me at about 85% with his views. Next was Fred at around 70%. Too bad Hunter is too obscure and doesn't stand a chance in the primaries.

I'm leaning to Fred right now.

Despite the facts you listed about Kennedy’s flaws I believe what he accomplished by uniting the world for one event, by far outweighs his banging of the hottest chick ever (if she was hitting on you like she did to him in that birthday song, could you honestly have said no to her). He accomplished a feat that made history for mankind in the name of human exploration not for political conquest. As for the drugs; I believe he was a sick man with a lot of medical problems so as far as his addiction to pain killers…meh…could have been worse.

Vietnam, other than the fact that it made for some kick ass movies ideas and that a lot of soldiers where treated like shit when they came home I honestly don’t know enough about the situation to comment.

The Medias role can never be underestimated. Perception is the key, I will always perceive Kennedy as a peacemaker, explorer, and diplomat because that’s the only information that I was exposed to; but despite the government censorship of the details of his administration his message was clear…

” For the eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding. “

Who here can read or hear those words and not be inspired about what could be and not what is the direction we as a species are currently heading.

What Kennedy did was bring Americans together. The mistake most politicians are making today is to try and handle the world's problems in a hope to make a name for themself. I believe a better plan would be to elect a leader that places their focus on our country and the world can follow by our example.

Currently the only candidate that fits that description is -

Duncan Hunter = Vietnam Vet 173rd Airborne & 75th Army Rangers
His son = USMC 2 terms in Iraq (& not behind a desk)
Also committed to bringing industry back to US

If we are to continue being a great country we can't dependent on the rest of the world to be our industrial base... My 2 cents...

So? He was human. I don't care what a president does with his personal and family affairs as long as he leads the country well. Kennedy did that, most presidents since then haven't.

I'm just saying that if he did that today, think of what the character assault that would come from the media. Think Clinton, and he wouldn't be remembered as fondly as he is.

Context, Firth, CONTEXT!

Kennedy had his vices, but at the end of the day, his greatest gift was an uncanny ability to truly inspire people. When we visited Arlington National Cemetery, I got an opportunity to explain that to my daughters, who were teenagers then. They wanted to know why many of the older people were crying at the eternal flame where Kennedy is buried. Camelot and all that meant a lot to people at the time.

It's interesting though to read books and articles about Kennedy written before he was killed. The rose-colored glasses are nowhere to be found and the overall tone is far less admiring.

Most of our leaders today have no courage. It's all about spin and political correctness and how their message sells to the increasingly ignorant masses. I'd gladly forgive a few imperfections in return for a candidate I can support as opposed to voting for the lesser of the evils who happen to be running.

GWB has huge amounts of courage. As it turns out, most of the country is disagreeing with his approaches, but you gotta give the guy credit for having the balls to stand by his convictions without folding to political pressure.

Now...

If we had someone that had courage AND a common viewpoint with the majority of citizens, we'd be on to something.

Some may call it courage.

Others may call it stubborn.

They were on their way there during Truman's presidency.

(Except they were only called "advisors.")

Impossible considering the country is divided on just about every viewpoint. He has to pick one side and unfortunately for him, he picked the sides that the media was against.

Gee and to think JFK had to use Mob influence just to get elected.

To bad that same influence got he and his brother Bobby killed.

I don't recall anyone in the media being against going into Afghanistan.

He didn't pick (in your words) "the side that the media was against" at that point.

NuDan.....

It's always interesting when Canadians seem to have so-called opinions on American politics. It's even more interesting when your own country is going down the road of national suicide with much of it's domestic policies.

You have a country that currently has one of the world's leading economies, yet your country has almost no capability of defending itself. I don't think President Kennedy would approve of a Western country with a major economy who has less military capability than your average Middle Eastern dictatorship.

You throw around President Kennedy's name, but I seriously doubt that you know a single thing about him. All you know is the propaganda that you have been fed. But then again Canada is a country saturated by nothing but political propaganda. Much of it anti-American.

If John F. Kennedy were alive today, he would be appalled at the state of his former political party. JFK was a staunch anti-communist and a staunch anti-Marxist. He was a firm believer in the power of the free market. He was a firm believer in tax cuts and the lowering of taxation in order for people and business to be able to keep more of their own money.

If JFK were alive today and running for office with the exact same values he held as president, he would be thrown out of the Democrat Party on his ass. He would have zero support from any Democrat. That is the sad state of the modern Democrat Party today.

Sometimes Democrats here in America hold up JFK as some kind of hero. That is almost beyond unbelievable because the party itself does not share any of the values held by former President, JFK.

You people in modern day Canada for the most part hold political ideals that are the antithesis of the values held by JFK.

Why do you even start a thread mentioning JFK when he had nothing in common with you?

You can believe whatever you want NuDan. There is nothing "Nu" about the propaganda you are pushing here in this thread.

You are full of shit if you think you can use a Democrat American president like JFK as a propaganda tool for whatever bullshit you are trying to push.

I don't know why you would even mention "Star Trek" in the same post as JFK. "Star Trek" is fantasy TV show that is all about futuristic socialism and even directly quotes Marx at times. A better title for the show would have been "Socialists in Space". If you get your politics from "Star Trek", then you must have some issues. A lot of issues.

Another thing you obviously don't know is that former President Kennedy probably had more in common with the current president, George Bush, than he does with any current Democrat running for president.

JFK did not believe in socialism. On the power of the central government, he was probably better on the subject than even George Bush. He was certainly far better than most modern Canadians.

Wow Madman...you completley missed my and everyone elses point...again. Keep up the hate man. And don't try to be smart, I doesn't suit you.

Really. What point did I miss?

If you want to debate... then debate. Just don't avoid everything by claiming your opponents are hateful. To make matters worse, don't avoid debate by claiming your opponent isn't smart. You are doing nothing but... avoiding making a response to defend your own comments. Regardless of how ridiculous they may be.

You started this thread and now you are being challenged. Don't be a coward.

I got your point. That is why I replied as I did.

You are now choosing not to debate. That makes it more than obvious that your original reason for starting this thread was for your own political propaganda purposes... and not debate of any kind.

Is that what a thread titled "Political Opinion" means to a Canadian like you? Maybe you need to start a blog if you want to espouse your political opinions without being challenged.

Maybe you should give some thought to the threads which you start. That doesn't seem to be the case. It also doesn't seem that you create threads with any possible responses in mind.

If you don't want to debate your own threads, don't start any more threads. That is how a mature person would behave.

Wow again Madman, trying to twist my words into communist propaganda.

The point of my original post (The one you missed by the way) was about a great leader who had the skill and foresight to inspire and unify a great nation with nothing more than a few words, neatly arranged to convey a simple thought...go to the moon. A skill which Bush has failed to master. Yes, they do say that actions speak louder than words but when Kennedy’s words can inspire so much action and accomplishment how can you debate the value of his feats and his communication skills.

To me Kennedy was a great man simply because he was able to bring the whole world together as one community, for one event, in the name of science and peaceful exploration, plain and simple. If you don’t see a connection there to Star Trek then your mind is more twisted than you think mine is.

Attacking Canada’s military is not only a national insult but a personal one, so my response to that is this; fellow Canadians soldiers are fighting and dying in Afghanistan along side your American brethren. They are fighting against the terrorist that attacked your great country. Your failure to acknowledge their sacrifice and your insults to them are not only a slap in the face to all Canadians but all the people who have died to fight terror including your fellow Americans. Good job man! Like I said before keep up the hate! We as Canadians rely on our allies for protection and we know they will help us in a fix because we have good diplomatic relations with the people we trade product and resources with. But don’t let that fool you, our metropolises may be filled with bleeding heart pacifists, but there are plenty of weapons here and real people who are ready to defend the best place in the world to live. Like they say “don’t confuse our politeness for weakness” ‘cause will kindly kick your ass Madman, but then we’d buy you a beer afterwards.

Considering the amount of spending it would take for Canada to defend itself to the same level as the US, I think it's quite a clever decision on their part. Taking into account nobody has ever attacked Canada or would want to!

Canada have it made. If the Ruskies or China attacked them, the US would step in to prevent them from hopping the border into the US. Those are after all the only 2 realistic threats to Canada. They don't need a huge military - because the US has one.

I think Canada actually have this right, rather than it being a negative thing.

This statement right there serves to illustrate the difference between American society then, and society now. And even more specifically liberal thought vs conservative thought.

There is some irony in the fact that Kennedy would most likely be a republican nowadays if you went strictly on his political views. He would even recognize the democrats of today and would most likely mistake them for socialists.

Kennedy knew that government should be there to protect us from each other, not protect us from ourselves.

The more you expect government to do things for you, the more you give them the power to do things to you. I think the population knew this back then, unfortunately I don't think they do any more.

You are assuming his views would have not changed a bit. Not a good assumption to make. Plus you are ignoring his social views. RFK had the same views - but his changed considerably in only 5 years.

TR would have been a democrat by today's standards - or even possibly a green.

Hey, Madman, you forgot that JFK was also a lifetime NRA member!

The difference between the Republicrats & Demoplicans is minimal to the point of stupid... There's only one thing we can do (short of armed revolt)... NO INCUMBENTS IN 2008 and DR.RON PAUL for Prez!

Yes. Too bad he didn't shoot his younger brother.

But, getting back to Kennedy.... there seems to be a trend whereby people look back at JFK with some type of unreal and romanticized notions of his presidency. The user who started this thread clearly is looking at it through that lens.

Kennedy wasn't all that popular or all that beloved in his short time in office. Half the country liked him and the other half couldn't care less about Kennedy.

He was barely elected. If Richard Nixon had contested the election, it is very possible Kennedy may not have won in the final result. He squeaked into the White House through corruption and manipulation of the voting process.

He also didn't make many friends in Washington. Making his own brother Attorney General right off the bat was an unprecedented feat of nepotism.

His fuckup of the Bay of Pigs didn't win him many friends nor did it instill much confidence in him. Even from members of his own party.

The public was curious and fascinated by Kennedy because he was young, he had a young wife, and very young children while serving as president. He was a young president who was assassinated while in office. That in of itself created the romanticized version of the Kennedy years that everyone has been served up ever since his murder. He has been somewhat deified in the American lexicon.

Had Kennedy lived, he would have most likely been reelected, but the social strife of the times in the later 1960's would still have occurred and would have left huge stains on his legacy and his presidency. If he had lived, no one would be looking back on his time in office with a romanticized view of the times. Does anyone look at LBJ's time in office with any fondness?

Kennedy wasn't all that inspirational in his time. He was a curiosity. He had youth on his side. However, if the public at the time really knew the truth about JFK, they would have hated him. If they knew the truth about him, he may not have been reelected if he had lived.

Many people forget that JFK was protected by the media and they presented the image to the public that JFK wanted presented. If JFK had been a Republican, would the media back then still have been so kind knowing all they knew about him? I kind of doubt it.

I am still baffled at how anyone can make any type of bizarre connection between JFK and Star Trek.

Quote:

The difference between the Republicrats & Demoplicans is minimal to the point of stupid... There's only one thing we can do (short of armed revolt)... NO INCUMBENTS IN 2008 and DR.RON PAUL for Prez!

I agree that the differences between many of the Democrats and Republicans currently serving is minimal. However, the party platforms are very different. Their philosophies of government are different.

I agree that many incumbents are HUGE problems. The Senate is the biggest of all cesspools. It is by far the biggest problem with the US government. It is a cesspool of coagulated scum and vermin.

I disagree about Ron Paul. The guy is a kook. He may be a kook that occasionally says something right, but he is a kook nonetheless.

Ron Paul and Mike Gravel from the Democrat side of the aisle should get together and do a buddy film. Something like a new version of a Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau movie. Maybe "Grumpy Old Candidates".

I'm not trying to twist your words into anything.

I'm trying to figure out what type of peyote or other hallucinogen gets you from JFK to Star Trek.

I pretty much forgot about responding to this ridiculous thread until someone else bumped it back to the top.

Quote:

The point of my original post (The one you missed by the way) was about a great leader who had the skill and foresight to inspire and unify a great nation with nothing more than a few words, neatly arranged to convey a simple thought...go to the moon. A skill which Bush has failed to master. Yes, they do say that actions speak louder than words but when Kennedy’s words can inspire so much action and accomplishment how can you debate the value of his feats and his communication skills.

I think I answered that in a post above.

Kennedy was not as inspirational as you are led to believe. His time has been very over-romanticized.

I'm not saying he was a bad guy or anything. He just wasn't as great as he is made out to have been.

There are far greater American presidents much worthier of admiration than JFK. That also includes other Democrat presidents.

Quote:

To me Kennedy was a great man simply because he was able to bring the whole world together as one community, for one event, in the name of science and peaceful exploration, plain and simple. If you don’t see a connection there to Star Trek then your mind is more twisted than you think mine is.

Kennedy didn't bring the world together. The world was spilt during Kennedy's time. It was the Cold War. You are looking at the past with an emotional and romanticized view of things. Not an accurate view either.

A lot of the world was allied behind the Soviet Union for various reasons. Some because of politics. Some because they were forced into it by totalitarianism. Most of the free world was allied toward the US and NATO. None of them were forced and some were actually a disappointment.

Much of the world was never even allowed to see or hear a Kennedy speech during his time in office. The only people who saw Kennedy or heard any of his speeches intact were people living in free countries.

It's kind of hard to argue that he brought the world together when most of the world at the time only heard what their totalitarian governments allowed them to hear.

But then again. you probably recently read some bullshit article claiming Kennedy brought the world together the same day you created this thread. The romanticized Kennedy legend.

Quote:

Attacking Canada’s military is not only a national insult but a personal one, so my response to that is this; fellow Canadians soldiers are fighting and dying in Afghanistan along side your American brethren. They are fighting against the terrorist that attacked your great country. Your failure to acknowledge their sacrifice and your insults to them are not only a slap in the face to all Canadians but all the people who have died to fight terror including your fellow Americans. Good job man! Like I said before keep up the hate! We as Canadians rely on our allies for protection and we know they will help us in a fix because we have good diplomatic relations with the people we trade product and resources with. But don’t let that fool you, our metropolises may be filled with bleeding heart pacifists, but there are plenty of weapons here and real people who are ready to defend the best place in the world to live. Like they say “don’t confuse our politeness for weakness” ‘cause will kindly kick your ass Madman, but then we’d buy you a beer afterwards.

Attacking Canada's military is not that hard. You basically don't have any. That was my point.

If you want to take it as a personal insult, then go right ahead. You should be insulted and ashamed that a wealthy country with your large population and resources has a standing army of what.... maybe 65,000. How much hardware does your "great" nation have to contribute to the NATO alliance? I'll tell you right now... it is not much. Not much at all.

We are still celebrating the fact that you sent maybe 150 troops to the Bosnian conflict. Thanks. We couldn't have done anything without you.

A country your size and with your wealth should be completely ashamed of itself as far as military capabilities are concerned.

The students in the New York City Public School system could beat the Canadian Army and probably bring more hardware to the fight. That even takes into account the fact that your entire country has a little over 100 helicopters that can be used against an enemy in an urban assault.

You went off on a tangent claiming that I don't appreciate Canadian involvement in Afghanistan. I have never said any such thing. That is your own ridiculous emotional tirade. Don't put words in my mouth.

It is also not just a conflict to fight those that attacked my great country as you have aptly described the US. The fight is yours too. It is not solely a US fight. It is a fight that involves all Western nations. The uncovered plots to attack targets in your country in recent years should be more than enough of a wake up call.

Regarding your reliance on your neighbor and ally to protect you, my previous point was that you could be doing a lot more along those lines. I think every Canadian knows that fact. You all sleep safely at night under the blanket of security provided by the the United States.

I don't know if most Americans view Canadians as a bunch of pacifists. For the most part, I would think not. Most of us do view you as a people who have decided to sit back and let someone else take care of you. A little less so-called "democratic socialism" on your part and spending a little more of your wealth in ratio to your population on contributing to NATO and other things defense related would be nice. Thinking about the American taxpayer and sharing more of the financial load, instead of always selfishly thinking about yourselves would be a nice change.

Don't get me wrong. Americans love Canadians. (At least the English speaking provinces) I love all the English speaking Canadians. We have our differences, but I don't think we have any differences that can't be worked out over a few Molsens, some Canadian bacon, and your country spending a lot more on your military.

We are very forgiving of Canadians here in America. We are aware that there are a plethora of newspapers and TV shows that are anti-American. You think that is the cool thing to do and you want to be like the elitist Europeans.

It's been a long time since Star Trek's Captain Kirk (William Shatner) moved to the US from Canada. I have no idea if he ever connected the show to JFK.

There may be a common thread between JFK and Star Trek. Both had "prime directives". Captain Kirk's prime directive was not to interfere with planets that didn't have a certain level of technology. JFK's prime directive was that the Secret Service was to confiscate all pictures of him with women who were not his wife.

So, NuDan. Why were you talking about kicking anyone's ass. Canada can't kick anyone's ass. Canada couldn't even kick New Hampshire's ass. You, yourself, couldn't kick anyone's ass.

Doesn't Canada also have a "prime directive" which is basically out of control political correctness?

But, we are not here to talk tough. I get sad when Canadians start talking tough.

I'll end the post because I don't want to think I am keeping you from watching 'Avi Lewis' on TV or anything because of reading this thread. For some reason I have a feeling you are a fan of "On the Map with Avi Lewis".

One of my favorite TV shows is from Canada; "Holmes on Homes". I think I'd like to see Holmes beat the hell out of Avi Lewis. That would be really good Canadian television.

NuDan, did you ever see the movie War Games? At the end, the computer plays out all the doomsday scenarios and concludes, "Interesting game. The only way to win is not to play." There's a lesson there for anyone interested in "debating" with Madman.

His views are what they are. He'll never change his mind. He is seldom interested in any point you make. He uses "negative association" tactics. For example, mention you heard that Hillary Clinton's motorcade passed through your town two weeks ago and he'll take that and cast you as a Clinton supporter who works tirelessly in her campaign and secretly writes love poetry in her honor. He claims you said things you never said and then uses that to paint you as an unpatriotic Commie sympathizer who probably smokes cigars with Fidel Castro and doesn't even like apple pie. All this results in keeping you completely occupied with correcting his BS rather than articulating your own point of view.

Sadly, any valid points he makes - and in fairness, he does make some - are obscured by this unnecessary approach.

Trust me, you'd do better putting on a steak suit and "debating" a tank full of starving sharks.

I dunno. NYMM's assessment of Kennedy is spot on, as far as I'm concerned, and he said the same exact things I said early in this thread, only in a far more wordy way.

It's clear, though, that some other people can't handle anyone interjecting a differing opinion, since clearly, I hurt someone's pussy in here, and it cost me a little truck. Rat bastages.

My observations are more of a general view on Madman.

Wow! That is an amazingly accurate figure. You must have spent hours researching that statistic.