The W
Views: 95646310
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.4.07 0951
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Somebody Call Robert Byrd and Henry Waxman....
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
(1567 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (18 total)
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 123

Posts: 1427/4700
EXP: 21129215
For next: 102111

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1082 days
Last activity: 879 days
#1 Posted on 9.5.03 0551.06
Reposted on: 9.5.10 0554.20
Start the investigations and bitching about this:


Celebration to begin hours before ship docks


By David Olson
Herald Writer

EVERETT -- The USS Abraham Lincoln isn't scheduled to dock until about 10 a.m., but the celebrations will begin at 7 a.m. with a performance by the Jackson High School band on the Naval Station Everett pier.

The base celebration will be open primarily to the more than 8,000 family members of sailors. The public can participate at Pier 1, just east of base.

Even before the carrier docks, Gov. Gary Locke and 10 other officials will be flown to the Lincoln on a helicopter -- weather permitting. Expected are U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray; U.S. Reps. Rick Larsen and Norm Dicks; Everett Mayor Frank Anderson; Snohomish County Executive Bob Drewel; State Sen. Aaron Reardon; State Reps. Jean Berkey and John McCoy; and Tulalip Tribes Chairman Herman Williams Jr.

Politicians being flown on a Navy aircraft for a photo-op on the taxpayers dime? Sick'em Byrdie!!!
Promote this thread!
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1233/1759
EXP: 4825612
For next: 167258

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on 9.5.03 1023.29
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1025.55
Maybe one of them will solomly discover a pile of stones on the carrier, and arrange it in the shape of a cross, or right a flag touching the ground....
Michrome
Head cheese
Level: 39

Posts: 130/330
EXP: 384993
For next: 19782

Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3645 days
Last activity: 2712 days
#3 Posted on 9.5.03 1109.42
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1121.36
It's just asinine for Byrd and Waxman to pretend they care about how much things cost.
messenoir
Summer sausage
Level: 45

Posts: 62/449
EXP: 633991
For next: 26178

Since: 20.2.02
From: Columbia, MO

Since last post: 358 days
Last activity: 225 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 9.5.03 1154.27
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1157.02
This is just AS wrong as what Bush did. One does not make the other right.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1235/1759
EXP: 4825612
For next: 167258

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#5 Posted on 9.5.03 1247.11
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1247.52
No, but it is not THAT big of a deal either. I don't understand what Bush did that was so wrong. Bush is the Commander and Chief of a military force that had just won a war. He SHOULD have flown out and congratulated him.

And unlike that Clinton idocy, none of it was staged. The applause he got from the sailors was real. Their refusing to be seated in front of him was genuine. Yes, there was a bit of dramatics in the how and where of the speech, but there are far worse things than doing something that is designed to pump up the military who just fought a war.

Yes, I am sure some of this will be used in a campaign. Why the hell not. The War on Terror is Bush's legacy. He is intimatly involved in it, and he has the right to claim it when he campaigns. He also has the right and a duty to congratulate the troops. And he has the privilege of as much pomp and ceremony as he wants.

Not like Clinton, who had nothing at ALL to do with Normandy, spending tax dollars to position a Battleship behind him as he arranges planted stones.

If anything, I think this is an example of anger, that Bush is not only accomplishing what he promised, but he has the gall to take credit for it. Byrd is just part of an angry Democratic minority who are still fuming over losses in 2000 and 2002, and can't accept the fact that they are not in the driver's seat anymore.

I am sorry- after a successful military campaign, I WANT the President, regardless of party, doing things like this for the troops. It is for THEM, and they deserve that and a hell of a lot more....

If you can't see the difference between these two events, I pity you.

(edited by Pool-Boy on 9.5.03 1048)
IsaacYankem
Polska kielbasa
Level: 26

Posts: 116/130
EXP: 94488
For next: 7789

Since: 4.3.03
From: Cybertron

Since last post: 3752 days
Last activity: 3676 days
AIM:  
#6 Posted on 9.5.03 1306.08
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1309.27
I agree that in the grand scheme of things, who really cares how Bush makes his way to an aircraft carrier? The media will trumpet Bush as a heroic and dashing figure, and his detractors will snipe at the costs and bring up Bush's joining the Air National Guard to avoid serving in Vietnam and then going AWOL from that. In other words, nobody's opinion of the president is likely to change from this.

It is worth noting that when Michael Dukakis, who did serve in the army, rode around in a tank in 1988 he caught a lot of crap for it..
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 123

Posts: 1437/4700
EXP: 21129215
For next: 102111

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1082 days
Last activity: 879 days
#7 Posted on 9.5.03 1328.17
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1328.28

    Originally posted by IsaacYankem
    It is worth noting that when Michael Dukakis, who did serve in the army, rode around in a tank in 1988 he caught a lot of crap for it..


Here's why (image removed)

(image removed)
I'd say it's because Dukakis looks absolutely ridiculous and Bush doesn't....
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 1544/3273
EXP: 12517276
For next: 154708

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 11 days
#8 Posted on 9.5.03 1334.48
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1334.48
I dunno, the flight suit looks a little ridiculous to me. Maybe it's just that fact that I'm pretty sure he didn't ride in a Tomcat out there (if he did, feel free to correct me) and that you really don't need a flight suit and helmet for riding in a chopper.

-Jag
MoeGates
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1316/2085
EXP: 6376275
For next: 16524

Since: 6.1.02
From: Brooklyn, NY

Since last post: 40 days
Last activity: 17 hours
#9 Posted on 9.5.03 1339.21
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1342.17
Dukakais' "Mike Dukakis" nameplate on the helmet gives him the edge in looking ridiculous.

But really, elections are now decided on how good you look in military uniform and not actually what you did in military uniform? I say that makes the American electorate look absolutely ridiculous.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1237/1759
EXP: 4825612
For next: 167258

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on 9.5.03 1344.06
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1349.49
    Originally posted by Jaguar
    I dunno, the flight suit looks a little ridiculous to me. Maybe it's just that fact that I'm pretty sure he didn't ride in a Tomcat out there (if he did, feel free to correct me) and that you really don't need a flight suit and helmet for riding in a chopper.

    -Jag



He flew in a S-3B Viking jet- tailhook landing and all (not at all a chopper). Apparantly (I am not sure on this) he wanted to fly in on a Hornet, but the Secret Service would not allow it, since those planes only have a 2-man cockpit. The Viking, if I am not mistaken, seats 6 (enough room for the pilot AND guards for the President). Full flight suit was required. I somehow doubt Dukakis was required to wear that getup to pose in the tank...


(edited by Pool-Boy on 9.5.03 1145)
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 1546/3273
EXP: 12517276
For next: 154708

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 11 days
Last activity: 11 days
#11 Posted on 9.5.03 1400.23
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1400.36
Well then he's cleared of all charges regarding that photo.

-Jag
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 151

Posts: 2472/7534
EXP: 42816808
For next: 479768

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 292 days
Last activity: 292 days
#12 Posted on 9.5.03 1500.26
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1507.46
When I saw the title, I thought it was to inform Senator Byrd that there was a white sale occurring at a linen store near his office.
godking
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 98/274
EXP: 293880
For next: 14233

Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3718 days
Last activity: 3664 days
#13 Posted on 9.5.03 1544.12
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1553.08
I don't understand what Bush did that was so wrong. Bush is the Commander and Chief of a military force that had just won a war.

Yes, he is. He's also a civilian. The entire point of the President of the United States being a civilian is that the citizenry of the United States ultimately controls the military. It's an important point to remember - previous president who actually served in the military (as opposed to, for example, enlisting in the National Guard and then going AWOL) refused to wear their military uniform when enacting the duties of Commander in Chief, and so should he.
Pool-Boy
Lap cheong
Level: 81

Posts: 1238/1759
EXP: 4825612
For next: 167258

Since: 1.8.02
From: Huntington Beach, CA

Since last post: 1128 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#14 Posted on 9.5.03 1626.50
Reposted on: 9.5.10 1629.06
godking- Bush was not wearing a military uniform. He was wearing a flight suit. Anyone flying in that kind of aircraft, civilian or otherwise, is REQUIRED to wear a flight suit. A Flight Suit is not a uniform, it is a piece of technology- safety equipment.

Anyone complaining about Bush wearing a flight suit because he is a civilian is just demonstrating their ignorance.
godking
Chourico
Level: 36

Posts: 100/274
EXP: 293880
For next: 14233

Since: 20.10.02
From: Toronto

Since last post: 3718 days
Last activity: 3664 days
#15 Posted on 10.5.03 0214.22
Reposted on: 10.5.10 0220.39
godking- Bush was not wearing a military uniform. He was wearing a flight suit. Anyone flying in that kind of aircraft, civilian or otherwise, is REQUIRED to wear a flight suit. A Flight Suit is not a uniform, it is a piece of technology- safety equipment.

Anyone complaining about Bush wearing a flight suit because he is a civilian is just demonstrating their ignorance.


This can be easily countered with "he didn't need to fly in that type of aircraft". He was close enough to be choppered in, at much less risk (a tailhook landing? The leader of the most powerful country in the world should have enough common sense to avoid pointless stunts).

Anyone suggesting it wasn't a choice on his part to look as keen-ass soldierriffic as possible is demonstrating their naivete.
OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst
Level: 102

Posts: 1387/3018
EXP: 10965228
For next: 124777

Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 10 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on 12.5.03 1335.25
Reposted on: 12.5.10 1358.28

    Originally posted by Pool-Boy
    godking- Bush was not wearing a military uniform. He was wearing a flight suit. Anyone flying in that kind of aircraft, civilian or otherwise, is REQUIRED to wear a flight suit. A Flight Suit is not a uniform, it is a piece of technology- safety equipment.

    Anyone complaining about Bush wearing a flight suit because he is a civilian is just demonstrating their ignorance.



How odd. It says here that when Republican congressman Mike Pence was asked on CNN's Crossfire if he had to wear a flight suit when he made a tail-hook landing on the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman, he replied, "If they offered me one and if I could fit in, I would have put it on in a heartbeat." How very, very odd...
AWArulz
Knackwurst
Level: 106

Posts: 364/3278
EXP: 12539073
For next: 132911

Since: 28.1.02
From: Louisville, KY

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#17 Posted on 12.5.03 1601.41
Reposted on: 12.5.10 1608.57
The whole flight suit thing kind of depends on the Air Commander for the air group. He might require it of anyone making a tailhook or, it may be that they wanted to honor the highest military commander (aqnd a former pilot) by bestowing on him the same sort of Uniform they wear.

But safety? Not really. More a uni - unless you're going to pull Gs - which I doubt the Prez did.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 345/518
EXP: 789877
For next: 33671

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 373 days
Last activity: 19 hours
#18 Posted on 12.5.03 1805.01
Reposted on: 12.5.10 1806.20
I hope Byrd is going to go after Pat Leahy for using pics of himself in a flight suit on his web page

Click Here (leahy.senate.gov)
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: So much for WMDs
Next thread: The whole judges thing
Previous thread: California State Motto: We hate jobs!
(1567 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - Somebody Call Robert Byrd and Henry Waxman....Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.255 seconds.