Forrest,
I wonder if the problem you point to is very widespread. San Francisco is a basket case, but even San Diego, hardly an example of county and city operational efficiency, has done/is doing some work to upgrade its facilities.
In Texas at least, there has been quite a bit of activity by various city and county governments to upgrade their facilities. For example, Dallas has had major renovations of two facilities Tenison-West and Cedar Crest (Tillinghast). San Antonio is redoing Beckenridge (Tillinghast). Summeral (sp) County is redoing the original Squaw Valley course (Brauer). Grand Prairie completed a three year project on a major renovation of the 27-hole Prairie Lakes (Plummer), and I think it is now in the process of redoing the greens on its fine Tangle Ridge course (Brauer).
MPCirba,
I'll take your word for it. One man's musings is another's tirade or political editorializing.
But Mike, you really should not be putting words in my mouth.
"When you tell me that the equipment companies have absolutely no responsibility to try and protect anything beyond shareholder earnings, you're technically right, and sadly also reflect an attitude that is responsible for many of our current problems.
"An equipment company like Callaway and/or Taylor-Made or Titleist have absolutely no reason to respect the game or what might be in the long term interests of the game...you're absolutely right."
This is what I said. "It is not the role of the manufacturers to protect the game in the form you deem appropriate. The USGA does have the responsibility of weighing the relatively wide variety of interests and constituencies in golf and making sound judgements to further the long term well-being of the game."
I am merely suggesting that what you call respect and believe is in the long term interests of the game is hardly established as fact, or for that matter, widely shared opinion. If it was, I suspect that the USGA would be right there with you. By the way, my bringing this up is no attack on you, but simply a note to the record providing other plausible explanations why the game is presently in a spot.
Regarding the introduction of politics into these discussions and the personal attacks that sometimes ensue, I never start them and seldom personalize them. I do try to explain to the best of my ability why things aren't always like they are described by the numerous posters who come to their views of the world from the left. That I am sometimes a lonely voice here should be welcomed by fair, open-minded folks, and I do get some behind the scenes support.
"I'll even probably vote for McCain...just please let me agree with Rush and Hannity on only 80% of the issues and hold onto some type of independent, individualistic, intellectual thinking, or should I dare risk being called socialistic, unpatriotic, and even traitorous by failing to tow the complete lobotomous litany of litmus-test laborings of the new "Christian" right?"
Mike, I could care less who you vote for or to what degree you concur with the commentators noted above. But really, do you think that what you wrote does not betray just a tad "the least angry guy in the planet" claim at the beginning of your post?
BTW, I never suggested that equipment companies, corporate America, or the global economy are infallible. Nor have I claimed that the "the present economic model is perfect and beyond intelligent discussion or criticism". The only thing I ask in any discussion is the consideration of alternatives which themselves have negative consequences. Personally, I think the socialist model of tax, regulate, then subsidise as an alternative bears much greater scrutiny given its history.
There is a book by John C. Bogle, the founder of Vanguard family of index funds, "The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism" which I think is highly instructive. It is certainly much closer to where I stand on economic issues and corporate governance than how you've attempted to caricaturize me.
Finally, I'd like to think that this site is big enough to tolerate threads like your Cobb Creek (which, frankly, after a couple of pages totally bores me) and this one. You may believe that the relevant issues to the well-being of the game reside in the harnessing of technology. I happen to think that bigger problems lie elsewhere. What is wrong with allowing the reader to pick and choose where he invests his time? Given your very high popularity on this site, you have little to worry about.