News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Patrick_Mucci

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #75 on: November 12, 2005, 09:17:37 AM »

Patrick, Kennedy shined in the debates.  No question.  He still loses the election if not for the hijinx in Chicago.
And there was no other hijinx in any other voting district in the entire nation ?  Please, open up your eyes.
[/color]  

I don't know exactly where Attorney General stands in the power hierarchy.  I do believe it is one of the several key positions in the U.S, and therefore the world.  IMO no president should appoint his brother to that position.  The potential conflicts of interest and nepotism are too glaring.  JFK did it to put another building block in the growing Kennedy dynasty.  You don't think father Joe may have had something to do with that, do you?

No, absolutely not.

The Attorney General is an appointee.
Do you think a President is going to appoint an advesary ?
Bobby Kennedy was highly qualified and served with distinction.   How would you compare him to those who followed in his position ?
[/color]

Sexual affairs:  for most men that is their business and no one else's but maybe their family's.  A president is different.  It leaves him open to blackmail.  He can become compromised.  He can make poor or terrible errors in judgement.
Let's see, who's a prime candidate for blackmail ?
Oh, I know, let's blackmail the most powerful individual in the world.  The guy who has a little to say to the IRS, FBI, CIA and other agencies.  I wonder how the actuaries calculate the life expectancy of that fellow ?

How can having extramarital sex cause a President, who as reems of advisors, to make poor or terrible Presidential decisions ?
[/color]  


Clinton repeatedly refusing to admit the truth about Monica, and all that followed is one example.

Had Monica been an outsider, a model or an actress, nothing would have come of it.  Instead, she was an EMPLOYEE, a subordinate, and therein lies the major problem.
You should also have noticed the deafening silence from the Women's groups when this incident, the prototypical scenario they abhor, occured.  While they marched on the steps of the Supreme Court prior to and during the Clarence Thomas hearings, they were silent as lambs during this affair.
[/color]

There are also reports, UNSUBSTANTIATED, that JFK was blackmailed over at least one of his affairs, the one with Exner, who at the same time was a mistress of mafia boss Sam Giancana.

How can you offer Unsubstantiated rumors as support for your position ?  It's disengenuous.
[/color]

Exner is not the spy I was thinking of.  (Though the problem of a prez bedding the mafia chief's mistress is a vast problem by itself.)

JFK apparently had affairs with a German spy during WWII -- he almost got kicked out of the navy over it and may have been sent to the South Pacific because of it (where his service was mostly a mess) --

Apparently ?
Who was the spy ?
In what year and where did the affair take place ?
Is this fact or fiction ?
[/color]

and then again with an East German spy, Ellen Rometsch, after he became president.

Most chilling of all, Kennedy's womanizing may have contributed to his death.  Instead of constantly refining and working on safety procedures, he had his Secret Service agents finding women for him.  

I don't think Kennedy had any problem finding women.

If you're delusional enough to think that refining safety procedures would have saved his life, you're entitled to that fantasy.
[/color]

(And often sharing in the fun).  In fact, several of them spent the night of November 21 drinking in a Fort Worth bar.
So what ?
Would the outcome have been different if they went to a Walt Disney movie ?
[/color]

On November 22, the secret service broke procedure in what has been called unprecedented ways.  This made the assassination much easier.  If JFK had kept things more professional -- if he hadn't been conducting a womanizing free-for-all with the men who were supposed to guard his life -- history may have turned out very different that day.  


That's both absurd and delusional
[/color]

JFK's mind was sharp to the end?  I wonder how you know.  He reportedly was taking ten to twelve pain drugs per day.  Would surprise me if they did not muddle his thinking.
It's simple, look at his activities, listen to his speeches, look at his traveling, all were normal.

What were the names of the ten to twelve pain drugs that you allege he was taking every day ?

Who reported that he was taking ten to twelve pain drugs per day ?

I think you're short on facts and long on speculation.
[/color]

The health of a president should NEVER be private.  It's too important to the nation.  We need to know if the prez has a serious or fatal disease (as JFK did, though he always lied about that to the nation).

Why ?
And, what serious or fatal disease did JFK have that prevented him from carrying out his duties ?
[/color]

More generally, privacy is one privilege you must give up, if you want to hold that position.  

WHY ?
[/color]

We darn well need to know the president's foibles, weaknesses, vulnerabilities.  

WHY ?
What are you going to do when he's in office, impeach him for having cancer ?
[/color]

The world's fate rests on his shoulders.  (At some point, maybe soon, "his" will be "hers".)

I really hope HIPPA does not apply to the prez.  If so, p.c. thinking has sunk to new self-destructive lows.  

Maybe the biggest difference in our point of view lies in admiration of the Kennedys, Bushes, Rockefellers, etc.  IMO they did not dedicate themselves to public service.  They dedicated themselves to power.  "Public service" was the means, the vehicle they used to achieve it.  They parlayed their vast wealth into vast executive and political power.  So much so that David Rockefeller SUPPOSEDLY considered the presidency a demotion from his own position.  

There you go again, using alleged third party hearsay to bolster your position.

Nonsense.

They had power, they had riches.
They sought public service and had to have the American people ELECT them to office.
[/color]

Thank God, or whatever entity you choose, that our system still puts some limits on what the powerful can do.  Even so, these multi-generational dynasties are a real danger to freedom.  They seem to have an almost rock-and-roll appeal to many of the people.  Sad.

If there were better qualified people, the electorate would have voted for them, but they didn't, they voted for the Kennedy's, the Bushes, the Rockerfellers, the Bloombergs and the people are better for their service.
[/color]

BTW, whenever we see corruption, lies or abuse in our government, I believe it is critical the world learns about it.  No matter which party is in power.  It's the only way to keep the old adage about power and corruption from drowning us.  

I'd agree, but, I'd differentiate between illusory and substantive.
[/color]


Jim Nugent

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #76 on: November 12, 2005, 09:34:41 AM »
Jim Nugent:

It seems like you're pretty down on American political dynasties particularly if they have a ton of money. I don't necessarily agree with you on that.

What does any of this stuff have to do with the GD article on Sebonac? Who the hell started all this OT Kennedy stuff? It surely couldn't have been me.

Tom, it's not just American, and they don't have to have money.

Think I get the blame, or credit, for escalating this discussion.  

Kelly Blake Moran

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #77 on: November 12, 2005, 09:48:19 AM »
I bet Tom D. is glad this thread has gone OT.  For all you Kennedy people I have shelves of Kennedy books and audio tapes of speeches I would be pleased to send to you.  I want to get rid of them before my kids start to snoop around them and get caught in the fanciful trap I got caught in because of the Kennedy mystique.  Read a book by Seymour Hirsch on the Kennedys, then read "The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt", by Edmund Morris and you will get a great lesson in what an American President should be. I may keep the White book on the Making of a President, the first political book I read and is one of the few books that sticks with you, it was such a great book.  Now I must get back to watching France burn which has been pure enjoyment for this stupid, idiotic American voter who drinks the piss of American Presidents.

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #78 on: November 12, 2005, 09:55:34 AM »
"Sexual affairs:  for most men that is their business and no one else's but maybe their family's.  A president is different.  It leaves him open to blackmail.  He can become compromised.  He can make poor or terrible errors in judgement."

Listen all you illogical political and presidential Monday Morning Quarterbacks----I already told you on this thread that JFK admitted seriously to Anothony Eden or Harold MacMillian (or whomever the hell it was the Brits sent over to meet JFK in the Bahamas) that if he didn't have sex everyday he suffered from severe headaches.

Now look, we all know Jackie wasn't around the White House or JFK every day so what do you Monday Morning Quarterbacks think was more dangerous to the making of world-effecting decisions and consequently the safety of the nation;

1/ A President who was boinking mob molls and international spies?

or,

2/ A president suffering from severe headaches every day?

I think it's pretty damn obvious that #2 would've been far more dangerous to his decision making and consequently the health and safety of the Nation.

And don't try giving me some crap like he could've taken a few aspriins every day along with the other 95 pain killers and drugs he was taking. Anyone knows that kind of answer is uninteresting, boring and no fun at all.

"Now I must get back to watching France burn which has been pure enjoyment for this stupid, idiotic American voter who drinks the piss of American Presidents"

Kelly:

That's one of the funnier things I've ever seen on here. I mean it's almost incalcuable how enjoyable it is to sit comfortably in one's American livingroom and watch France burn. Perhaps Bush and Condi can send them some Sarah Lees!
« Last Edit: November 12, 2005, 10:01:44 AM by TEPaul »

Dan Kelly

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #79 on: November 12, 2005, 10:09:15 AM »
19,989 -- and a thread gone seriously OT.

This could be the day!

Mesdames et messieurs, les jeux sont faits! Les jeux sont faits!
« Last Edit: November 12, 2005, 10:09:43 AM by Dan Kelly »
"There's no money in doing less." -- Joe Hancock, 11/25/2010
"Rankings are silly and subjective..." -- Tom Doak, 3/12/2016

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #80 on: November 12, 2005, 10:12:09 AM »
"Mesdames et messieurs, les jeux sont faits! Les jeux sont faits!"

Little Danny Boy, go immediately to the bathroom and wash your mouth out for using that language!

A.G._Crockett

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #81 on: November 12, 2005, 11:33:56 AM »
Has this thread wandered a greater distance AND more quickly off-topic than any other in history?
"Golf...is usually played with the outward appearance of great dignity.  It is, nevertheless, a game of considerable passion, either of the explosive type, or that which burns inwardly and sears the soul."      Bobby Jones

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #82 on: November 12, 2005, 12:47:42 PM »
"Has this thread wandered a greater distance AND more quickly off-topic than any other in history?"

No Sir, another perfectly good golf architecture thread was co-opted OFF TOPIC by stockcar driver Glenn (Fireball) Roberts and it wandered a much greater distance off topic, from some golf course somewhere to Daytona Beach, Florida first and then to LeMans, France, and a whole lot quicker than this thread went OT too. Fireball had very little if anything to do with golf and definitely zero to do with golf architecture but he defiinitely was quick!

At least Kennedy played golf sometimes and here's a neat little story about Kennedy at a golf course;

Probably around '61 Kennedy came down from Palm Beach to Gulf Stream G.C. in Delray and since he was the President obviously there were loads of members and people there to see him. My Dad went up to the club to watch.

I already mentioned that maybe back around 1942 or so Dad went to motor torpedo boat school in Chicago with Kennedy and after that he didn't see him again.

So Dad being the kind of shy and retiring guy he was he was just standing way back behind the crowd that Kennedy was shaking hands with. Kennedy looked back there and saw him and just very casually said;

"Hi, Jim, how've you been?",

And on he went. Dad was just amazed that he could not only recognize him after maybe twenty years but that he could actually remember his name.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2005, 01:03:20 PM by TEPaul »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #83 on: November 12, 2005, 02:19:12 PM »
I am not sure how anyone gains pleasure from watching gangs of youths burn cars and buildings.  Would it be funny if the Philly ghettos were on fire rather than Paris ghettos?

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

wsmorrison

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #84 on: November 12, 2005, 03:35:34 PM »
Sean,

We've had our share of that in Philadelphia.  Perhaps the method that the US takes to assimilate immigrants in contrast to that of Europe prevents these sorts of outrages.  We may actually have learned a lesson 40 years or so ago in the Civil Rights movement.

But twenty years ago, Philadelphia's Osage Avenue was the site of a stunning use of force by city police. After a long standoff, police dropped a bomb on the headquarters of a radical group called MOVE, sparking a fire that gutted a neighborhood and left 11 people dead. Five were children.

MOVE was a radical cult-like group that preached revolution, advocating a return to nature and a society without government, police or technology. The group took up residence on Osage Avenue, a quiet tree-lined street of tidy row houses. Except for the MOVE house. The windows and doors of 6221 Osage Ave. were barricaded with plywood. The group hoarded weapons, built a giant wooden bunker on the roof and used a bullhorn to scream obscenities all hours of the night.

Frustrated neighbors turned to city officials for help. On the morning of May 13, 1985, dozens of Philadelphia police, fire fighters and city officials amassed around the MOVE house to force the group out. A standoff ensued, as MOVE members bunkered down inside the house exchanged gunfire with police outside. At 5:30 that evening, Mayor Wilson Good ordered a Philadelphia police helicopter to drop a bomb onto the roof of the house in an effort to drive MOVE members out.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2005, 03:36:08 PM by Wayne Morrison »

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #85 on: November 12, 2005, 03:41:44 PM »
Wayne

I remember the incident very well.  Though I don't recall being amused.  

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Kelly Blake Moran

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #86 on: November 12, 2005, 04:00:56 PM »
Sean,

It is not so much the burning and mayhem that is so amusing, rather there are so many small bands of misunderstood people it's hard for the French army to know who to surrender to.

George Pazin

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #87 on: November 12, 2005, 04:09:14 PM »
S-A-R-C-A-S-M

It's Kelly's specialty. :)
Big drivers and hot balls are the product of golf course design that rewards the hit one far then hit one high strategy.  Shinny showed everyone how to take care of this whole technology dilemma. - Pat Brockwell, 6/24/04

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #88 on: November 12, 2005, 04:28:15 PM »
Oh, I get it.  This is the anti French element over the French not supporting the Bush/Blair mess in Iraq.  Are y'all still anti-whoever dares speak against the war?  I would have thought you folks would have found some other whipping boy by now.  Say, some South American country.  I am sure there must be one that has wronged the US somehow.

While in NC, I was sure that I heard loads of news reports about insurgents in Iraq.  As this was a completely new term to desribe anti-American action in Iraq, it took me a few minutes to figure out what the report was about.  I was thinking American and British forces were the insurgents.  Of course, this report was a uniquely American spin on events.  Everything suddenly clicked, I was back in the Home of the Free.  

I was heartened to see Blair lose the parliamentary vote on 90 day detainment.  At least there are a few politicians that have sifted through the rhetoric of our times.  

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

wsmorrison

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #89 on: November 12, 2005, 04:48:49 PM »
"Wayne

I remember the incident very well.  Though I don't recall being amused.  "

That is because there is no humor in these sorts of tragedies.  

As to the French.  Well they make their own problems and can't solve them.

How proud can you be of a nation that conducts policies to undermine allies just because they are weak and ineffective and have been for generations and wish to feel important?  They are a sorry lot when it comes to doing the right thing for its own sake.  They have so much national pride and many reasons for feeling so.  Yet they constantly abandon good sense just to remind the world that they are important and try to create situations that demonstrate it.  Like Clinton saying he still was relevant after all his scandals, France keeps reminding us (really themselves) of how relevant they are when in fact they are hardly that.

Then you look at how they treat minorities in their country where they take measures to inhibit any sense of multiculturalism.  It is no wonder they are having these problems.  Sorry, but the only thing the French support are the French.  They wouldn't let us fly our planes over their country in the first Gulf War.  Our pilots were at greater risk because they cared more about how much money Iraq owed them than doing the right thing.

France is a great country, too bad there are so many Frenchmen in it  ;)

TEPaul

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #90 on: November 12, 2005, 05:10:05 PM »
"France is a great country, too bad there are so many Frenchmen in it  :)"

Wayne:

Actually that was a sentiment of Charles de Gaulle. It would be nice to find a way to get rid of all the Frenchmen in France and then if we wanted to take care of France in our foreign policy we could spend some green-backs on all those lonely french women over there. Hell, I might even volunteer for the new Peace Corps and go to France.

wsmorrison

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #91 on: November 12, 2005, 05:47:36 PM »
I'll volunteer for that Piece, er Peace Corps.   I had a boyhood crush on Claudine Longet.



Here's some funny magazine spoofs:







A few one-liners:


"France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by prostitutes." —Mark Twain

"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." —General George S. Patton

"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion." —Norman Schwartzkopf

"We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it." —Marge Simpson

"As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure." —Jacques Chirac, President of France

"As far as France is concerned, you're right." —Rush Limbaugh

"The only time France wants us to go to war is when the German Army is sitting in Paris sipping coffee." —Regis Philbin

"The French are a smallish, monkey-looking bunch and not dressed any better, on average, than the citizens of Baltimore. True, you can sit outside in Paris and drink little cups of coffee, but why this is more stylish than sitting inside and drinking large glasses of whiskey I don't know." —P.J O'Rourke (1989)

"You know, the French remind me a little bit of an aging actress of the 1940s who was still trying to dine out on her looks but doesn't have the face for it." —John McCain, U.S. Senator from Arizona

"They've taken their own precautions against Al Qaeda. To prepare for an attack, each Frenchman is urged to keep duct tape, a white flag, and a three-day supply of mistresses in the house." —Argus Hamilton

"The only way the French are going in is if we tell them we found truffles in Iraq." —Dennis Miller

"I would call the French scumbags, but that, of course, would be a disservice to bags filled with scum. I say we invade Iraq, then invade Chirac." —Dennis Miller

"You know why the French don't want to bomb Saddam Hussein? Because he hates America, he loves mistresses and wears a beret. He IS French, people." —Conan O'Brien

"I don't know why people are surprised that France won't help us get Saddam out of Iraq. After all, France wouldn't help us get the Germans out of France!" —Jay Leno

"The last time the French asked for 'more proof,' it came marching into Paris under a German flag." —David Letterman
« Last Edit: November 12, 2005, 06:00:32 PM by Wayne Morrison »

Kelly Blake Moran

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #92 on: November 12, 2005, 06:12:15 PM »
George Pazin: You're making me out to be some sort of bad, bitter guy.  It's just been a week of T.O. coverage  that may be showing through, I'm not so bad. :)

Wait Tom Paul, before you get rid of all the Frenchmen basketball has started and I like the Spurs and we need Tony PArker.

Sean, Sean, maybe you need to take a break from the mosque, you know instead of going to prayers everyday just take a walk, play some golf, everythings going to be okay.

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #93 on: November 12, 2005, 06:43:00 PM »
Wayne

The Schwartzkopf is very good.  

Kelly

I need more than a break!  For the moment, I would be satisfied if Tony and George would take a permanent break.  Soon enough, my day will come.

Ciao

Sean
New plays planned for 2025: Ludlow, Machrihanish Dunes, Dunaverty and Carradale

Chris Munoz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #94 on: November 13, 2005, 09:36:47 AM »
Aren't we supposed to talk about the Golf Digest Article, regarding Sebonack Golf Club and not about politics.  This is the trend that I see this forum going to.  We need to all stop this and concentrate on the topic being presented.

Chris Munoz
Christian C. Munoz
Assistant Superintendent Corales
PUNTACANA Resort & Club
www.puntacana.com

Neil_Crafter

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #95 on: November 13, 2005, 07:17:42 PM »
Way back on the first page of this topic - when the topic was still Sebonack, rather than France and the Kennedys, Tom Doak indicated that there would be an article on the Doak / Nicklaus collaboration in the upcoming 2006 issue of Golf Architecture magazine (yes, appreciate the plug Tom and the cheque is in the mail!). The chosen format is a question and answer one, so people will be able to see Jack and Tom's responses to the same questions, so the contributions are clearly identifiable. If they had collaborated on an article together, we wouldn't have known who wrote which particular words, and who was responsible for the beautiful semi-colon in paragraph three! ;D

Any interested people can subscribe on our website www.sagca.org.au and all our 8 back issues are still available.

As someone with limited interest in American politics, can I suggest you start an OT thread if you want to discuss such subjects, or better yet, do it on a political discussion group :o Still enjoyed the French quotes though!

cheers Neil

Jeff_Mingay

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #96 on: November 13, 2005, 07:25:07 PM »
Amazing, the direction this thread has taken. Wow.

I just read Ron's article today, and enjoyed it very much. I thought it was very well done. And, boy, those photos of Sebonack are a tease! The golf course looks very, very interesting in those aerials, doesn't it.

Great idea for the Q&A with Jack and Tom, Neil. I look forward to it. I better get to work on my contribution to GA2006, knowing the Nicklaus/Doak feature's in there!
jeffmingay.com

Jim Nugent

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #97 on: November 14, 2005, 02:43:28 AM »
Back to JFK!  

Patrick -- Kennedy's drug use is well documented.  From the NYT: "By the time of the missile crisis, Kennedy was taking antispasmodics to control colitis; antibiotics for a urinary tract infection; and increased amounts of hydrocortisone and testosterone, along with salt tablets, to control his adrenal insufficiency and boost his energy."

And, "The records show that Kennedy variously took codeine, Demerol and methadone for pain; Ritalin, a stimulant; meprobamate and librium for anxiety; barbiturates for sleep; thyroid hormone; and injections of a blood derivative, gamma globulin, presumably to combat infections.

"In the White House, Kennedy received "seven to eight injections of procaine in his back in the same sitting" before news conferences and other events, Dr. Kelman said."

Again from the NYT, "As president, he was famous for having a bad back, and since his death, biographers have pieced together details of other illnesses, including persistent digestive problems and Addison's disease, a life-threatening lack of adrenal function."  (Pat, there's the life-threatening illness you wondered about, that JFK hid and lied about.)

"But newly disclosed medical files covering the last eight years of Kennedy's life, including X-rays and prescription records, show that he took painkillers, antianxiety agents, stimulants and sleeping pills, as well as hormones to keep him alive, with extra doses in times of stress."

If you have any question about the side effects of just one of these drugs, do a quick google search.  Now throw them together into a twelve, ten or eight-drug cocktail.  You get the potential for explosive abuse.

The nation should have been told about Kennedy's health problems and need for drugs, before JFK got elected.  It is a key issue.  Instead, Kennedy lied to the nation, to project his false image of strength.  

JFK's womanizing: the fact of it is beyond question.  It created problems for him.  Here is how JFK biographer Robert Dallek describes Kennedy's affair with the East German woman in 1963...

"The most reckless one, of course, was the affair he had with a woman named Ellen Rometsch, who was of German origin.

"She grew up and lived in East Germany for a while.

"There were suspicions that she may have been an East German spy.

"That's never been proved, and is probably false, but even the perception that he was having an affair, or had sex, with an East German woman who could be accused of spying was a very dangerous thing to do.

"In the background, of course, in the spring of '63, was the Profumo scandal.

"The minister of war in Great Britain and the Macmillan Government, that was driven out of power over this scandal because the call girl, Christine Keeller, that Profumo was having an affair with was also having an affair with a Russian Embassy official.  (And you question, Patrick, that Kennedy could be blackmailed?)

"So Kennedy knew about all this, and Robert Kennedy, Jack's brother, in cahoots with J Edgar Hoover, the director of the FBI, they deported this Ellen Rometsch, sent her back to Germany so that she could not be around to talk to the press or testify before a Senate committee because there was some discussion on the possibility of having a Senate committee investigation.

"Now, Kennedy got wind of it and he told Ben Bradlee, this Washington Post editor, that if the Senate decided on some kind of investigation of sex activities at the White House, it was going to rebound against them because Kennedy said a lot of these senators were carrying on as well and the Kennedy White House, it was implied, was going to leak to the press all the information about the senators' transgressions."

How sweet.  JFK screws around with a woman who may have been a spy.  (Many others have no doubts on that count.  e.g. George Stephanopolous, on CNN, called her an East German spy.)  Kennedy's brother, who conveniently happens to be AG, immediately deports her.  JFK then threatens blackmail to keep the affair secret.  As Bradlee wrote in his book, "Conversations With Kennedy": ''There is something incredible about the picture of the President of the United States and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation looking at photographs of call girls over lunch.''  Of course, it's not incredible, if Hoover is using that information to influence JFK.  That is called blackmail.  

A little more from Dallek, on how Kennedy's thirst for women led him into dangerous waters...

"Kennedy would use the White House swimming pool for these sex parties, and there was a guy named Bobby Baker who was the secretary of the Senate and he would bring over call girls to the White House.

"But it wasn't just at the White House - Kennedy would go off on these trips and they would bring call girls to him."

It's also well documented that the Secret Service procured women for JFK.  

Sex scandals can and have brought down national leaders.  Knowing this, Kennedy still went way over the top.  He put his presidency in peril.  He then abused his power to cover it up.   Stephanopolous even called that technique the Rometsch Strategy.      

This is getting long.  So part two -- I'm sure everyone is waiting for it with bated breath -- to come.  




Brian Phillips

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #98 on: November 14, 2005, 03:01:51 AM »


Sex scandals can and have brought down national leaders.  




Not in France..... ;)



« Last Edit: November 14, 2005, 03:10:08 AM by Brian Phillips »
Bunkers, if they be good bunkers, and bunkers of strong character, refuse to be disregarded, and insist on asserting themselves; they do not mind being avoided, but they decline to be ignored - John Low Concerning Golf

Patrick_Mucci

Re:GD article on Sebonac
« Reply #99 on: November 14, 2005, 12:55:42 PM »

JFK's womanizing: the fact of it is beyond question.  It created problems for him.  Here is how JFK biographer Robert Dallek describes Kennedy's affair with the East German woman in 1963...

"The most reckless one, of course, was the affair he had with a woman named Ellen Rometsch, who was of German origin.

"She grew up and lived in East Germany for a while.

"There were SUSPICIONS that she may have been an East German spy.

Rumor also has it that she was a Soviet spy
[/color]

"That's never been proved, and is probably false, but even the perception that he was having an affair, or had sex, with an East German woman who could be accused of spying was a very dangerous thing to do.

SURE, Like he would say, "I'll give you the launch codes, if you'll take off your clothes"
[/color]

"In the background, of course, in the spring of '63, was the Profumo scandal.

"The minister of war in Great Britain and the Macmillan Government, that was driven out of power over this scandal because the call girl, Christine Keeller, that Profumo was having an affair with was also having an affair with a Russian Embassy official.  (And you question, Patrick, that Kennedy could be blackmailed?)

YES.
People who get blackmailed have singular or a few indescretions, not thousands of women as you claim.
[/color]

"So Kennedy knew about all this, and Robert Kennedy, Jack's brother, in cahoots with J Edgar Hoover, the director of the FBI, they deported this Ellen Rometsch, sent her back to Germany so that she could not be around to talk to the press or testify before a Senate committee because there was some discussion on the possibility of having a Senate committee investigation.

J. Edgar Hoover and Robert Kennedy HATED each other.
How on earth can you allege that they were in cahoots.
In addition, Hoover would have NO say in a deportation, that's DOJ, INS, not the FBI.

In addition, Ellen was very popular with members of Congress, not just JFK.
[/color]

"Now, Kennedy got wind of it and he told Ben Bradlee, this Washington Post editor, that if the Senate decided on some kind of investigation of sex activities at the White House, it was going to rebound against them because Kennedy said a lot of these senators were carrying on as well and the Kennedy White House, it was implied, was going to leak to the press all the information about the senators' transgressions."

How sweet.  JFK screws around with a woman who may have been a spy.  (Many others have no doubts on that count.  e.g. George Stephanopolous, on CNN, called her an East German spy.)  

George Stephanopolous wasn't even born when Kennedy was elected to the Presidency.
[/color]

Kennedy's brother, who conveniently happens to be AG, immediately deports her.  JFK then threatens blackmail to keep the affair secret.  

Who did he blackmail and what were the terms of his demands ?
[/color]

As Bradlee wrote in his book, "Conversations With Kennedy": ''There is something incredible about the picture of the President of the United States and the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation looking at photographs of call girls over lunch.''  

Don't try to convolute your presentation,
Stick to Ellen Rometsch.  She wasn't a call girl.
[/color]

Of course, it's not incredible, if Hoover is using that information to influence JFK.  

What information ?
[/color]

That is called blackmail.  

No it's not.
Blackmail only exists if there's and extortion of threats, usually of public exposure or criminal prosecution.
Or, if a payment is extorted.

What payment did Hoover extort ?

Do you think that JFK was the only President that Hoover had information on ?

And, what was Hoover's payment, offered in exchange for his silence, or failure to prosecute ?
[/color]

A little more from Dallek, on how Kennedy's thirst for women led him into dangerous waters...

"Kennedy would use the White House swimming pool for these sex parties, and there was a guy named Bobby Baker who was the secretary of the Senate and he would bring over call girls to the White House.

"But it wasn't just at the White House - Kennedy would go off on these trips and they would bring call girls to him."

It's also well documented that the Secret Service procured women for JFK.  

Sex scandals can and have brought down national leaders.
Which ones ?
[/color]

Knowing this, Kennedy still went way over the top.  

Knowing what ?
[/color]

He put his presidency in peril.

HOW ?
[/color]

He then abused his power to cover it up.  

HOW ?
[/color]

Stephanopolous even called that technique the Rometsch Strategy.

You're confused and don't understand the meaning of "The Rometsch Strategy"  It's not something JFK would implore.

Again, Stephanopolous wasn't even born when Kennedy was elected President.
[/color]

This is getting long.  So part two -- I'm sure everyone is waiting for it with bated breath -- to come.