ampage Tube Amps / Music Electronics	For current discussions, please visit Music Electronics Forum.

ampage archive

Vintage threads from the first ten years

Re: Big Daddy Bush

4/4/2003 8:02 PM
Doug H	Re: Big Daddy Bush Nor would baby brother be governor right now... Doug

4/5/2003 6:32 AM
Matt in TX	Double standards "Nor would baby brother be governor right now..." I doubt you guys would talk the same way about the Kennedys. I, for one, (almost feel like that is literally "one") am proud of Bush for having the balls to do the unpopular thing. You know, I have come to respect a great many of you from this bbs for your love of humanity and music. But I am amazed at the negativity and cynicalness coming from such smart, caring people. I have to say I am real disappointed.

4/5/2003 6:32 AM

Matt in TX

Double standards

"Nor would baby brother be governor right now..."

I doubt you guys would talk the same way about the Kennedys.

I, for one, (almost feel like that is literally "one") am proud of Bush for having the balls to do the unpopular thing.

You know, I have come to respect a great many of you from this bbs for your love of humanity and music. But I am amazed at the negativity and cynicalness coming from such smart, caring people. I have to say I am real disappointed.

4/5/2003 2:43 PM
Steve A.	Matt: I doubt you guys would talk the same way about the Kennedys. Wasn't Joseph P. Kennedy a rumrummer back in the days of Prohibition just as H.W. Bush and friends were gunrunners for Nazi Germany back in the 30's? Urban lore has it that the Mafia owed Joe a big favor, and the payoff was having one of Joe's kids elected president. Only when JFK became president (and RFK became Attorney General), the Mafia felt betrayed because of the strong campaign against organized crime so they arranged for him to be assassinated. Rumor has it that both the Kennedy and the Bush family fortunes were originally based on activities that were immoral if not actually illegal. I, for one, (almost feel like that is literally "one") am proud of Bush for having the balls to do the unpopular thing. Just because something is unpopular does not mean that it is right. I do not personally see George W. Bush following deep moral convictions but merely persuing an agenda which rewards the people and corporations who put him in the White House (no, not the Supreme Court! ) FWIW I believe that most politicians are in it for the money and the power, and it is the rare exception who entered politics to further their own personal moral beliefs (like Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"). Call me cynical if you want... "I'm just a wild and cynical guy!" (apologies to Steve Martin) Steve Ahola

4/5/2003 2:43 PM

Steve A.

Matt:

I doubt you guys would talk the same way about the Kennedys.

    Wasn't Joseph P. Kennedy a rumrummer back in the days of Prohibition just as H.W. Bush and friends were gunrunners for Nazi Germany back in the 30's?

    Urban lore has it that the Mafia owed Joe a big favor, and the payoff was having one of Joe's kids elected president. Only when JFK became president (and RFK became Attorney General), the Mafia felt betrayed because of the strong campaign against organized crime so they arranged for him to be assassinated.

    Rumor has it that both the Kennedy and the Bush family fortunes were originally based on activities that were immoral if not actually illegal.

I, for one, (almost feel like that is literally "one") am proud of Bush for having the balls to do the unpopular thing.

    Just because something is unpopular does not mean that it is right. I do not personally see George W. Bush following deep moral convictions but merely persuing an agenda which rewards the people and corporations who put him in the White House (no, not the Supreme Court!

)

FWIW I believe that most politicians are in it for the money and the power, and it is the rare exception who entered politics to further their own personal moral beliefs (like Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington").

Call me cynical if you want... "I'm just a wild and cynical guy!" (apologies to Steve Martin)

Steve Ahola

4/5/2003 2:49 PM
Steve A.	More on Joseph P. Kennedy From cmeck@cs.tu-berlin.de Thu Mar 6 01:15:27 1997 Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:34:00 +0100 From: Robert Pohl To: ekelly@acpub.duke.edu Subject: Kennedy made money bootlegging Encouraged by Phil's statement that some of the early entries in the FAQ are not as well-documented as they should be and quite possibly wrong, I dug out my copy of _JFK:Reckless Youth_ (By Nigel Hamilton, ISBN 0-679-74880-6) and found the passages pertaining to Joe Kennedy Sr.'s money. It appears that Joe Kennedy was a fair businessman, even in college he was making more money than his father ever did. However, he was not someone with staying power. Furthermore, his executive ability was nil: "Joe Kennedy's arrival at Fore River caused the first major shipbuilding strike of World War I." [p.37] He is demoted and sent to another shipyard. Here, he found his metier in the careful control of all bills. After the war, he joined the firm of Hayden, Stone and Company in Boston as a stockbroker. The investments that he had made during the war had been mixed, so now "...he set about mastering the secrets of insider trading, management pools, and selling short. Soon he was hhead of the stocks department and on his way to his first million..." [p. 41] "Joseph P. Kennedy had made his first big killing in the winter of 1923. For an outlay of only $24,000---on credit---he'd used insider information given him by Galen Stone and had reaped a profit of more than a half a million dollars---$675,000---in fact---on Pond Creek Coal Company shares. [...] Sitting in his office, [...] Joe Kennedy now indulged in financial larceny on vast an unseen scale, manipulating share pricess with other hands in secret stock pools designed specifically to hoodwink investors. His growing expertise neeted him a second fortune in the spring of 1924..." [p.51] Joe's further dealings are many and varied, including film deals, and not all as profitable as the insider trading. He also tried to become a wire-puller in politics, and helped to elect Roosevelt president in 1932. However, he often overrated his talents and achievements. The next quote is the only on in the whole book that actually mentions liquor at all: "...November 1933. Mr. Kennedy had abandoned plans to see Mussolini. Instead, having used Jimmy Roosevelt to open doors that would have otherwise been closed to him, Kennedy managed to obtain the exclusive United States distributership for Haig & Haig, Gordon't Dry Gin, Pinchbottle, and other British liquors in anticipation of the repeal of Prohibition." [p. 101. Footnoted as coming from David E. Koskoff, _Joeseph P. Kennedy_ (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1974] And finally, a little irony: "On June 28, 1934, President Roosevelt finally rewarded Kennedy for his work in the 1932 election campaign. Countering all objections with the words "it takes a thief to catch a thief," he appointed Joeseph P. Kennedy the first chairman of a new regulatory agency to tidy up the nation's stock market: the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. To the consternation of all, the notorious stock-market swindler Joeseph P. Kennedy would become stock-market reformer." [p. 109] In short, Joe Sr. was a pretty ruthless and unethical businessman who made his pile with shady stock deals. He later tried to buy respectability in the political scene. He, however, never appears to have smuggled liquor, and, quite frankly, as he was making money hand over fist with the stock market (in many cases quite legally doing what the SEC was later set up to stop from happening) it seems unlikely that he would have bothered with something so patently illegal. Robert "Outsider trading" Pohl

4/5/2003 2:49 PM

Steve A.

More on Joseph P. Kennedy

From cmeck@cs.tu-berlin.de Thu Mar 6 01:15:27 1997 Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 14:34:00 +0100
From: Robert Pohl
To: ekelly@acpub.duke.edu
Subject: Kennedy made money bootlegging

Encouraged by Phil's statement that some of the early entries in the FAQ are not as well-documented as they should be and quite possibly wrong, I dug out my copy of _JFK:Reckless Youth_ (By Nigel Hamilton, ISBN 0-679-74880-6) and found the passages pertaining to Joe Kennedy Sr.'s money.

It appears that Joe Kennedy was a fair businessman, even in college he was making more money than his father ever did. However, he was not someone with staying power. Furthermore, his executive ability was nil:

"Joe Kennedy's arrival at Fore River caused the first major shipbuilding strike of World War I." [p.37]

He is demoted and sent to another shipyard. Here, he found his metier in the careful control of all bills. After the war, he joined the firm of Hayden, Stone and Company in Boston as a stockbroker. The investments that he had made during the war had been mixed, so now

"...he set about mastering the secrets of insider trading, management pools, and selling short. Soon he was hhead of the stocks department and on his way to his first million..." [p. 41]

"Joseph P. Kennedy had made his first big killing in the winter of 1923. For an outlay of only $24,000---on credit---he'd used insider information given him by Galen Stone and had reaped a profit of more than a half a million dollars---$675,000---in fact---on Pond Creek Coal Company shares. [...] Sitting in his office, [...] Joe Kennedy now indulged in financial larceny on vast an unseen scale, manipulating share pricess with other hands in secret stock pools designed specifically to hoodwink investors. His growing expertise neeted him a second fortune in the spring of 1924..." [p.51]

Joe's further dealings are many and varied, including film deals, and not all as profitable as the insider trading. He also tried to become a wire-puller in politics, and helped to elect Roosevelt president in 1932. However, he often overrated his talents and achievements.

The next quote is the only on in the whole book that actually mentions liquor at all:

"...November 1933. Mr. Kennedy had abandoned plans to see Mussolini. Instead, having used Jimmy Roosevelt to open doors that would have otherwise been closed to him, Kennedy managed to obtain the exclusive United States distributership for Haig & Haig, Gordon't Dry Gin, Pinchbottle, and other British liquors in anticipation of the repeal of Prohibition." [p. 101. Footnoted as coming from David E. Koskoff, _Joeseph P. Kennedy_ (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1974]

And finally, a little irony:

"On June 28, 1934, President Roosevelt finally rewarded Kennedy for his work in the 1932 election campaign. Countering all objections with the words "it takes a thief to catch a thief," he appointed Joeseph P. Kennedy the first chairman of a new regulatory agency to tidy up the nation's stock market: the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. To the consternation of all, the notorious stock-market swindler Joeseph P. Kennedy would become stock-market reformer." [p. 109]

In short, Joe Sr. was a pretty ruthless and unethical businessman who made his pile with shady stock deals. He later tried to buy respectability in the political scene. He, however, never appears to have smuggled liquor, and, quite frankly, as he was making money hand over fist with the stock market (in many cases quite legally doing what the SEC was later set up to stop from happening) it seems unlikely that he would have bothered with something so patently illegal.

Robert "Outsider trading" Pohl

4/5/2003 7:49 PM
LFOscalator	Re: Double standards Plain and simple, the Kennedys were put into power partly because they also had a rich Daddy -- being Joseph Kennedy senior. Matt, not to be disrespecful but it appears that perhaps you judge in terms of black and white. Do you think all Republicans are good and all Democrats are bad? Is this your reasoning? Bush had an ex-prez for a father and undoubtedly that helped him get where he is today. I don't side with any one party. I based my statement on objective reasoning rather than subjective emotional dogma. LFO

4/5/2003 7:49 PM

LFOscalator

Re: Double standards

Plain and simple, the Kennedys were put into power partly because they also had a rich Daddy -- being Joseph Kennedy senior.

Matt, not to be disrespecful but it appears that perhaps you judge in terms of black and white. Do you think all Republicans are good and all Democrats are bad? Is this your reasoning?

Bush had an ex-prez for a father and undoubtedly that helped him get where he is today. I don't side with any one party. I based my statement on objective reasoning rather than subjective emotional dogma.

LFO

4/6/2003 2:43 AM
David Mitchell	I wonder if people are ever going to get over the fact that Bush won according to the rules of election in America. Get over it! As a Red Sox fan I guess I have more experience in losing than some BTW I didn't vote for Bush or Gore! Dave

4/6/2003 5:36 AM
Matt in TX	Why complain? "Matt, not to be disrespecful but it appears that perhaps you judge in terms of black and white. Do you think all Republicans are good and all Democrats are bad? Is this your reasoning?" Nah, not a bit. There are a ton of Republicans I'd like to see replaced, and I don't agree with a lot of the social policies. I consider myself to be one of those more rare people that can understand both sides of an arguement. Sometimes that makes it hard for me to make up my mind. But in this situation, it's very suprising to me how people are so entreached on their side. How can everyone ignore the oppression of the Iraqi people, and not want them to be liberated from such an evil, bloody regime? Even if the major reason behind it is really oil... (which I don't totally discount, but believe it is greatly exaggerated)... it's still a good thing. Why complain?

4/6/2003 5:36 AM

Matt in TX

Why complain?

"Matt, not to be disrespecful but it appears that perhaps you judge in terms of black and white. Do you think all Republicans are good and all Democrats are bad? Is this your reasoning?"

Nah, not a bit. There are a ton of Republicans I'd like to see replaced, and I don't agree with a lot of the social policies.

I consider myself to be one of those more rare people that can understand both sides of an arguement. Sometimes that makes it hard for me to make up my mind. But in this situation, it's very suprising to me how people are so entreached on their side. How can everyone ignore the oppression of the Iraqi people, and not want them to be liberated from such an evil, bloody regime? Even if the major reason behind it is really oil... (which I don't totally discount, but believe it is greatly exaggerated)... it's still a good thing. Why complain?

Page 12 of 13