Sen. Maria Cantwell and Maj. Gen. Timothy Lowenberg of the Washington National Guard held a joint press conference today to attack the Pentagon’s decision to transfer an F-15 fighter unit out of Portland, OR. The move, proposed by the Base Realignment and Closure commission (BRAC), would leave only two F-15s to defend the entire Pacific Northwest.
The move would leave the Northwest with fewer air defenses than the rest of the country, said Cantwell, making the region more vulnerable to enemy attack. “That’s unacceptable,” she said at a news conference at the Museum of Flight in Seattle.
As it turns out, that’s not the only BRAC decision that poses a threat to the security of our region. In a recent post on Pacific Views, Natasha warns that the proposed realignment would leave six western states with no airlift capability.
If the BRAC sticks with the Pentagon recommendations, the governor of Washington State, along with governors of Idaho, Montana and Oregon will have no airlift capacity at their immediate disposal in case of emergency. At least 18 other states will be in a similar situation, but the entire continous northwest is out in the cold. And because Nevada and both of the Dakotas will also have no permanent airlift capacity, the airlift units in Wyoming, Utah and California will be the closest available to cover the whole region.
Natasha has posted the entire BRAC testimony of Gen. Frank Scoggins of the Washington Air National Guard… and some of it is quite alarming in terms of our region’s ability to respond to natural disaster or enemy attack.
Since September 11, 2001, many National Guard capabilities have been developed in order to support civil authorities in time of crisis. Those assets require air transportation in many instances. The impact of removing unit equipped KC-135s from the Washington Air National Guard and of C-130 aircraft from the Idaho Air National Guard will totally delete the Northwest Governors’ emergency capability to respond to Homeland Security events within the region.
I guess us “blue states” just aren’t worth defending.
Goldy: “I guess us “blue states” just aren’t worth defending.”
Can’t you see what they’re doing? They’re reaching across the aisle and giving you Lefties a chance to try your way of dealing with the world — through unilateral disarmament, peace, hugs and chats over tea. I bet if Maria asked, the DOD would gladly send over a few cases of tie-dyed T-shirts as a consolation prize.
Or are you saying that all of your protests wanting defense budget cuts, nuke-free zones and the Military-Industrial Complex out of our backyards are just bulls**t??
State rights… keep the military out of Washingtin State!
The bullshit is Mark’s claim that liberals are anti-defense. Oh and by the way Mark a lot of us liberals are veterans too. On the other hand, it’s nearly impossible to find anyone in the Bush administration or a Republican in Congress who served in the military.
Goldy, this sounds like a pretty technical issue and I can’t say that I know the answer. I have to rely on what the governors and their National Guard commanders say. The siting and closing of military bases is always highly political. The BRAC was conceived to lessen the politics of these decisions, and produce more rational decisions in terms of the military’s needs, but under the Bush administration everything is political. It would be interesting to take a closer look at BRAC’s proposals and see if there’s an overt pattern of favoring “red” states and disfavoring “blue” states. Given the partisanship of the Bush administration it wouldn’t surprise me a bit. The Republicans have already demonstrated their hostility to national security by consistently voting against homeland security funding, refusing to expand the armed forces, and compromising a CIA agent for the purpose of political retaliation. I have very limited expectations of this America-hating bunch.
Roger @ 3: “The bullshit is… that liberals are anti-defense.”
Uh-oh! You had better be careful or MorOn.org might label you as a DINO!
“a lot of us liberals are veterans too”
And if you’re spit on in public, chances are it was a Democrat that did it. At least those on the Right appreciate your service to your country. It is the LEFTIES that call you “baby killer,” etc. (And, yes, I have seen that happen to soldiers/veterans within the past year).
How come smarty pants Patty Murray isn’t wielding her considerable “clout” on this issue? Oh yeah, someone is out buying model planes to illustrate for her what air defense is..
righton @ 6
“How come smarty pants Patty Murray isn’t wielding her considerable “clout” on this issue? Oh yeah, someone is out buying model planes to illustrate for her what air defense is.. “
…and someone else is out sniffing model airplane glue before blogging….
dj, shame on you for blogging under the influence…
It’s amazing that Maria is pressing this issue. On June 3, Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon started this issue and now six weeks later Maria Cantwell decides to press the same issue? Where was Maria six weeks ago? Maybe she was trying to determine how she was going to finance her 2006 campaign. She finally determined a strategy.
Patty is wondering, “I thought air was good for you, why do i need to defend against it?”
and/or she could revert to “Osama helped build hospitals”….maybe its “Osama helps poor Saudi women (are there any?) take plane flights” so it must be ok to go defenseless
BUSH REVISES STATEMENT ON FIRING LEAK
June 2004: Bush says he’ll fire anyone who “leaked” the CIA agent’s identity.
July 2005: Bush says he’ll fire any leaker who “committed a crime.”
Bush lied. This is news??? Bush ALWAYS lies — about EVERYTHING. I’ll bet the pardon is already signed.
Here is the real story from CSO Magazine of April 2005: CSO – Chief Security Officer
The city of Portland Oregon has had it up to here with the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, best known in that locale for its arrest of the wrong person in the connection with the Madrid train bombings. The L.A.Times reports that Portland Mayor Tom Potter and several city commissioners decided to withdraw the city’s cooperation with the Joint Terrorism Task Force because the FBI has repeatedly refused to share with them classified information. The Times reports that Mayor Potter, a former Portland police chief, earlier this year requested that the federal government grant him, the police chief and the city attorney top-secret security clearance — the same as task force officers — so that city leaders could have access to case files and more frequent updates. The FBI turned them down.
Mr Rabbit: What does your entry add to this thread about Maria?
The GOP is the anti-defense party. They’ve run the House of Representatives since 1994 and all three branches of government since 2001. And what do we have?
— Homeland security is an unfunded mandate
— Airport screeners consistently flunk weapon detection exercises
— Coast Guard ships are falling apart
— Military enlistments are plunging
— Veterans benefits are cut
— And now the Pacific NW’s air defenses are being eliminated
It’s not surprising given that Republicans hate America.
Hey, congratulations, righties — while you’re busy trying to score snideness points, you’re letting us liberals and progressives focus on actually keeping us safe. Your asses are on the line here, too (assuming you actually live in this corner of the country); but you’re so preoccupied with little political skirmishes that you’re willing to ignore our national defense. Pathetic. Some of us understand that this is a bipartisan issue.
Reply to 13
What does your post at 12 say about Maria? It says the same thing I’ve said in this thread — Republicans are doing such a lame job of protecting our nation and communities that the LAST thing we need in the U.S. Senate is another Republican.
Unfortunately it’s no longer a bipartisan issue because the GOP has turned EVERYTHING — including defense — into a partisan football! The Democratic Party is the only party left that truly cares about defending America from its real enemies and protecting ordinary Americans. The Republicans consider us cannon fodder.
I thought the Republicans were trying to answer Democratic charges of military overspending? The Peace Dividend? The BRAC started in the 60s.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/.....y/brac.htm – Please read before everyone throws around politics into the equation. Congress can override any proposed base closure action.
Did you know that the cover of USA today states “Army meets recruitment goals through re-enlistment”? If you read the PI or the Times, you’d never know this because they are suppressing the story. After crying the sky is falling, they couldn’t possibly print an article that shows that those who actually fought in Iraq are reenlisting.
Here is another one: Marines Exceed Reenlist Goals
http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....q-complete
This is just one more thing the liberals were wrong about regarding the war.
Roger@3,
On the other hand, it’s nearly impossible to find anyone in the Bush administration or a Republican in Congress who served in the military.
BS! Rep Steve Byer of Indiana currently serves in the military. However there is not one single liberal in congress that can claim the same!
Just for the record, Washington is gaining big time from the BRAC, so any pet theories about red state vs blue state are bunk.
Reoger@17,
Unfortunately it’s no longer a bipartisan issue because the GOP has turned EVERYTHING – including defense – into a partisan football! The Democratic Party is the only party left that truly cares about defending America from its real enemies and protecting ordinary Americans. The Republicans consider us cannon fodder.
Really? The facts don’t seem to support those remarks Roger. The fact that the only person to vote against us removing the Taliban from Afghanistan was Democrat Barbara Lee. The only comgressman to denounce his country on the soil of an enemy on the eve of war was Democrat Jim McDermott. Patty Murray thinks Osama Bin Laden is a great humanitarian and Democrat Howard Dean isn’t even sure if Osama Bin Laden had anything to do with 911. Democrat John Walker Lindh fought with the Taliban and was captured in Masar El Sharif. His comrades slit CIA agent Johnny Spans throat.
There have been no attacks on the American homeland since 911. Bush’s policies are working.
ohmygod……just when i think liberals can’t get any funnier than they already are….there’s this news flash.
wait a minute guys….weren’t you the ones that applauded the students attacking the recruiters?
aren’t you the ones against all military action?
aren’t you also against all wars?
so what’s the prob?
if the northwest is attacked [i am racked by a bad case of snickers at this point….pause…okay, i’m fine now] and WHY ON EARTH ANYONE WOULD DO THAT IS BEYOND ME……aren’t you all just going to go out and TALK to the bad guys or if they are really really bad….put them in time out?
why would anyone attack here? so they can steal some of the polluted water from the sound? a few trees? a bunch of hairy legged ugly “women” with men’s haircuts?
there is no reason.
besides….you washingtonians have always bragged that you are at ground zero…..so all you will see is a bright flash…for a bunch of not-so-bright people.
and david @15….NATIONAL DEFENSE???? oh, god, please stop ….my sides are killing me from laughing.
national defense????? okay…it’s obvious i have to tell you the truth. washington and oregon could disapear tomorrow and NO ONE WOULD GIVE A RAT’S ASS.
that’s the truth.
I looked at General Frank Scoggins’ testimony, and it looks like a lot of cutbacks are being proposed, not just in the “blue” states of Washington and Oregon, but in the entire NW of the USA (and also some other areas) — including about the same number of “red” states and “blue” states.
Of course, I would have to know a lot more — i.e. what military forces will be remaining after these cutbacks in Air National Guard forces, such as regular Air Force planes, Air Force Reserve planes, and Navy planes (both active and reserve).
As for nations, I think China and North Korea pose the greatest military threats to the USA. Washington is closer to these countries than any other state, except for Alaska and Hawaii (remember the Great Circle routing on the globe?). And terrorist threats can strike anywhere. If the Pacific NW is actually being left with less defense capabilities than other reasons (or anything less than having more defense capabilities), then I don’t think this would be a wise policy.
Roger@14,
The GOP is the anti-defense party. They’ve run the House of Representatives since 1994 and all three branches of government since 2001. And what do we have?
– Homeland security is an unfunded mandate
Democrat tried to keep us from even having a Dept of Homeland security because they wanted their union mob bosses to get a piece of the action thereby puting political payola ahead of natioanl security.
– Airport screeners consistently flunk weapon detection exercises
The Democrats were the ones who wanted to get rid of the private contractors and make these federal jobs.
– Coast Guard ships are falling apart
Well apparently not all of them because there were two escort ships that looked quite new that were protecting the ferry this morning.
– Military enlistments are plunging
Now this is a lie Roger. Front page of USA Today states that Army reruitment is up. Also the Marines have exceeded their recruitement goal.
Unlike you and your unsubstantiated allegations, I provide the link:
http://www.latimes.com/news/na.....q-complete
– Veterans benefits are cut
BS! Benefits under Bush are greater than under Clinton. The death benefit under Clinton was $6,000. Bush raised it to $250,000.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....Jan31.html
– And now the Pacific NW’s air defenses are being eliminated
No they are not bein eliminated, despite the Oregon’s governor squealing for his pork. I am surprised you are so concerned about our air defenses considering that liberals were all aainst the proposed part of the missile defense shield that was bein considered for our area.
It’s not surprising given that Republicans hate America.
Republicans don’t hate America – Democrats do. That is why I had to leave that party – the party of Jane Fonda atop an anti-aircraft gun trying to shoot down our pilots. The party of Rep Barbara Lee – who voted against fighting back in Afghanistan. The party of John Walker Lindh, captured on teh battlefield at Masar El Sharif while his comrades slit Johnny Spans throat. The party of Democrat Susan Lindauer – former Seattle PI repoert and aid to Democrat Carolyn Mosley Braun.
After claiming the Taliban are Democrats (lol), pbj-for-brains says, “There have been no attacks on the American homeland since 911. Bush’s policies are working.”
I hope the absence of attacks on our soil continues forever, but that fact does not lead to your conclusion. Were Blair’s policies, cooperating tightly with the U.S., “working” until the recent bombings in London? You shouldn’t get that complacent about our security. You’re succumbing to the logical fallacy of cum hoc, ergo propter hoc: “A and B happened at the same time, therefore A caused B.”
See The Simpsons, season 7, “Much Apu about Nothing”:
Reply@27,
After claiming the Taliban are Democrats (lol), pbj-for-brains says, “There have been no attacks on the American homeland since 911. Bush’s policies are working.”
I hope the absence of attacks on our soil continues forever, but that fact does not lead to your conclusion. Were Blair’s policies, cooperating tightly with the U.S., “working” until the recent bombings in London? You shouldn’t get that complacent about our security. You’re succumbing to the logical fallacy of cum hoc, ergo propter hoc: “A and B happened at the same time, therefore A caused B.”
Fact: Blair controls his security, not George W Bush.
Fact: The bombers were homegrown locals (British citizens born in Britain), more akin to Timothy McVeigh than Al Qaeda.
Do I think an atack on the US is impossible? No. Heck there are gangs in LA that could do a bomb attack – Jose Padilla was a gang member. But Bush is instituting policies to at least try to deal with homegrowns. The Patriot Act would never have been passed had Al Gore been elected and it would have been repealed if John Kerry had been elected. The Patriot Act was responsible for the apprehension of the Lackawana Six, and Imam Farah – a terrorist who planned to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.
This idea that because there was an attack in London, that is refutes what liberals call the ‘fly paper theory’ is a fallacy. On 9/12/2001 liberals told us that it was useless to try to get gobal terrorists because they are all over and too numerous. Surrender and defeat was teh order of the day from the left. In Iraq, there is a draw point, like mohts to a light the terrorists come. Now does a moth occassionally go astray? Yup. But the MAJORITY go towards the light – where we know they are and it makes it easier to kill them.
You do realize, pbj, that our invasion of Iraq is not just attracting “moths” — it’s breeding them.
PBJ, David has quoted the cartoon character Homer Simpson before. David is Homer your hero? Maybe in David’s small intellectual prison the War on Terror is a Simpson cartoon episode.
David, where were the London TERRORISTS from? Leeds, up the road from Nottingham Forest. Is that in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, or Somalia? No David, England. I realize you are geographically challenged so I won’t embarrass you anymore.
GBS already chided PacMan for lumping all Vietnam war protesters as the Democratic Party. Point well taken and I’ll give GBS his due. But that being said, were Republican highschool and college age students spitting on our returning soldiers? Uhhh, No! They were wearing the dress shirts, pressed pants, and ties going to class listening to liberal professors berate returning soldiers as baby killers and mass murderers. I wonder what political party Lt. Calley belonged to?
On every civilian plane that contains returning soldiers, people in First Class gladly leave their seats for the soldiers returning on leave. No politics there. No one asks what party do they belong with. When the soldiers walk through Sea-Tac, people break out in spontaneous applause. The soldiers are humbled and you can see it in their faces. It is your side that politicizes everyday American actions.
**Fact: The bombers were homegrown locals (British citizens born in Britain), more akin to Timothy McVeigh than Al Qaeda.**
Um.. no
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07.....nted=print
“”By day, Mr. Khan, who was born in Pakistan but reared in Leeds””
gosh.. guess that wasnt a “fact” after all
but you knew that.
**On 9/12/2001 liberals told us that it was useless to try to get gobal terrorists because they are all over and too numerous.**
Uh huh… sure whatever you say.
also on 9/12/01 The 700 club told us that it was not Terrorists at all that had allowed this to happen but GOD himself
because we had become a nation of abortion loving homosexuals
So who attacked us?
The Terrorists or GOD?
cause if it was GOD then there isn’t much Bush or Blair can do about it.
20
Gee, you found 1! Of 536 congressmen and Senators, how many are Republicans? And how many of those Republicans have EVER served in the military? Most of them were children of privilege who avoided military service during the Vietnam War and afterward.
It’s never a good idea for a righty troll to get sucked into a comparison of military service by Democratic and Republican figures because here’s what you’ll get:
DEMOCRATS
Richard Gephardt – Served 1965-71
David Bonior – Served 1968-72
Tom Daschle – Served 1969-72
Al Gore – Served 1969-71
Bob Kerrey – Medal of Honor, Vietnam
Daniel Inouye – Medal of Honor, World War 2
John Kerry – Silver Star & 3 Purple Hearts, Vietnam
Max Cleland – Silver Star & Purple Heart, Vietnam
Howell Heflin – Silver Star
Ted Kennedy – Served 1951-1953
Tom Harkin – Served 1962-67, Reserves 1968-74.
Leonard Boswell – 2 Vietnam tours, 2 Distinguished Flying Crosses, 2 Bronze Stars, Soldier’s Medal
“Pete” Peterson – POW, Silver Star, Purple Heart, Legion of Merit
Gray Davis – served in Vietnam
Chuck Robb – served in Vietnam
George McGovern – One of World War 2’s greatest heroes, he commanded 455 Squadron, which at least one historian has credited with winning the war by destroying Hitler’s oil refineries; flew dozens of missions, awarded Distinguished Flying Cross & Silver Star
REPUBLICANS
Dennis Hastert – avoided draft
Dick Armey – avoided draft
Tom Delay – avoided draft
Trent Lott – avoided draft
George W. Bush – joined Nat’l Guard to avoid Vietnam; after completing pilot training was grounded for refusing to take flight physical and failed to show up for required drills, but falsely claimed he’s “been to war”
Dick Cheney – avoided draft by getting 5 deferments; said he “had other priorities than military service,” his last deferment was for marriage
John Ashcroft – avoided draft by getting teaching deferment
Karl Rove – avoided draft
Newt Gingrich – avoided draft
Ronald Reagan – served in a noncombat role, was stationed in Hollywood during World War 2
Bob Dornan – avoided Korean War combat duty by enrolling in college acting classes
Phil Gramm – avoided draft by getting 4 student deferments
Don Nickles – did not serve
Richard Shelby – did not serve
J. C. Watts – did not serve
Jack Kemp – did not serve
Dan Quayle – avoided Vietnam service by using family influence to get a slot in the journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard when the unit was at 150% capacity
Elliott Abrams – did not serve
Vin Weber – did not serve
Richard Perle – did not serve
Rudy Guiliani – did not serve
Paul Gigot – did not serve
Bill Bennett – did not serve
Pat Buchanan – did not serve
Bill Kristol – did not serve
Pat Robertson – used daddy’s connections to get off ship in Tokyo while buddies went on to Korea
MEDIA
George Will – did not serve
Chris Matthews – did not serve
Bill O’Reilly – did not serve
Rush “Fats” Limbaugh – are you kidding? did not serve
22
How did McDermott “denounce” America? Exact quote please.
23
“wait a minute guys….weren’t you the ones that applauded the students attacking the recruiters? aren’t you the ones against all military action? aren’t you also against all wars?”
No to all 3 as XmasGhost joins the ranks of righty trolls who are fucking liars.
24
“washington and oregon could disapear tomorrow and NO ONE WOULD GIVE A RAT’S ASS”
We already know what the GOP attitude is toward defense; no need to capitalize for emphasis.
pbj @ 26
“Democrat tried to keep us from even having a Dept of Homeland security because they wanted their union mob bosses to get a piece of the action thereby puting political payola ahead of natioanl security.”
Bullshit! It was the Democrats who proposed creating the Department of Homelan Security. The Bush administration opposed it, then delayed passing the enabling legislation for more than a year because their anti-labor agenda (no unions, no employee rights, termination at whim) was more important to them than the nation’s security.
The latest on homeland security: Driver’s licenses will become “very expensive” as the federal Department of Homeland Security imposes new unfunded mandates on states.
“It’s outrageous to pass this off on the states,” said Republican Mike Huckabee of Arkansas, incoming chairman of the National Governors Association, of the feds’ scheme to require driver’s license clerks to act as immigration and law enforcement agents.
Comment on 26
I wonder how many Iraq veterans DIDN’T re-enlist because they can make 10 times as much $$$ as “private security contractors” (a.k.a. mercenaries)? According to Truthout.org the feds doled out money to these guys in duffel bags from the backs of pickup trucks.
RR@36: Sorry again my furry friend, but you are wrong. The first salvo came when we found out many private security screeners were not citizens. Then, we found out some of the private security screeners were criminals. So as part of the HSD, the TSA employees had to be US Citizens. Democrats cried foul. It died down real fast, when they took their poll and found out >70% of the citizenry wanted their screeners US Citizens. Go back and do your homework while convalescing my furry one.
Under the federal labor-management statute, which became law during the Carter administration as part of the 1978 Civil Service Reform Act, the president can issue an executive order blocking employees from organizing under a labor union in any agency or part of an agency that “has as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence, investigative, or national security work.” However, it would first have to determine that collective bargaining would get in the way of national security. Every president since Carter has issued executive orders eliminating collective bargaining rights at certain agencies. – Find it!
Of course the Homeland Security bill did receive some opposition from the President’s critics. Yet did they attack the legislation because it threatens to debase the 4th amendment and create an Orwellian surveillance society? Did they attack it because it will chill political dissent or expand the drug war? No, they attacked it on the grounds that it failed to secure enough high-paying federal union jobs, thus angering one of Washington’s most powerful special interest groups. – Find it!
When Bush said he wanted to implement this executive order passed under a Democratic president voted in by the Democratic House & Senate, your side went ballistic.
Senate Democrats insist that workers transferred to the new department keep their union protections, while Republicans say the president must have the right to get rid of union rules. – Find it.
While the White House continues to slam Senate Democrats for not passing the bill, it’s actually the Republicans who are filibustering, voting down efforts by Senate Leader Tom Daschle to end the debate, CBS News Correspondent Bob Fuss reports.
Daschle, D-S.D., said the Senate may set aside the homeland security bill temporarily to debate on vote on an Iraq use-of-force resolution, but he added: “My hope and expectation is we’ll finish homeland security.”
But Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the assistant majority leader, isn’t so sure. “I have the distinct impression that they (the GOP) don’t want to finish the homeland security bill,” Reid said.
Republicans contend that Democrats have been unwilling to compromise enough because of the influence of labor unions, especially those representing government workers, over the Democratic Party.
“They have not been willing to choose between their friends, the big labor bosses, and national security,” said Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. – Find it!
Here is the ALF-CIO response. As always, liberals couched the argument to their slant. http://www.dpeaflcio.org/news/....._10_10.htm & http://www.aflcio.org/issuespo.....142002.cfm
In his best-selling book A National Party No More, maverick Democratic Sen. Zell Miller (Ga.) describes his evolution from a loyal Southern Democrat to a renegade one. As with most political conversions, Miller’s involved an event that he describes as “the straw that broke this old camel’s back.” That straw was the decision of Senate Democrats before the 2002 elections to insist that the new Department of Homeland Security extend all sorts of union-backed rules and protections to its employees, even when these rules clashed directly with America’s security needs.
As the debate unfolded, Miller found himself in full agreement with the mainstream Republican position hat “the President [must have] the flexibility to respond to terrorism on a moment’s notice” and “be able to shift resources, including personnel, at the blink of an eye.” He reasoned that civil-service rules that protect incompetent bureaucrats in backwater federal agencies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development have no place in the nation’s premier homeland security agency. He concluded that Senate Democrats were following not their best policy instincts but the dictates of the powerful union that represents federal employees, the American Federation of Government Employees.
Just before the elections, an increasingly frustrated Miller lashed out at his Democratic colleagues, predicting his party would suffer electoral losses due to its unwavering subservience to the federal employee union. Indeed, Miller’s own constituents arrived at precisely this conclusion when they opted to replace Democratic union loyalist Sen. Max Cleland with GOP challenger Rep. Saxby Chambliss, after Chambliss highlighted 11 particularly revealing votes where Cleland put union interests ahead of national security. Congressional analyst Charlie Cook concluded that “the decision by Senate Democratic leaders to focus on workers’ rights was . . . a costly miscalculation.” – Find it!
I wonder, don’t the Republicans think they are sending a message to terrorists, cutting money for Homeland Security, scaling back the orders for the F/A-22 Raptor, and now removing the obsolete F-15s from the West Coast. THe wierdest thing, is they cut money for transit securtiy, AFTER the London Bombings.
re #32: Great post, RR. That’s why these righties always back off one- on -one. They’re wusses. Frank Burns from,”Mash” is representative of a typical Rep.
Only a Rep. could see a lack of defense in his own state as a sort of victory for America.
You left out CMH Randy “Duke” Cunningham – Repub, Vietnam on purpose?
Hey Loocy: Where is our state losing defense installations? U said it, U prove it!
Roger Rabbit @ 32
Comparing cherry-picked politicians from much larger populations on both sides of the divide doesn’t mean very much. No more than would, let’s say, the fact that the Dems nominated a draft avoider (Bill Clinton) for President in 1992 and 1996, while the GOP nominated war heroes (George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole).
It would be much more meaningful to compare the entirety of a known population — let’s say all 435 members of the U.S. House and all 100 members of the U.S. Senate. Do a little bit of research of this, and let us know how the current members of Congress break down by party on the issue of military service.
I doubt having interceptors at Portland airport is going to make much difference. The 318th Fighter Interceptor Squadron was at McChord in Tacoma for about a zillion years. As a former Air Force pilot stationed at McChord twice,I can tell you that the 318th was a gentlemen’s flying club, and the guys down at Portland in the F15s proably have a nice time, too, flying the Eagle.
An attack in the Northwest by air is a pretty unlikely event. Bad guys would most likely use othe means to cause trouble.
re #42: Puddwhacker, I said defense not defense installations. Read the post to find out what I mean by defense. You can save your lameass arguments for the saladheads at uSP.
L H Smith: Maybe you can explain where the interceptors were on 9/11?
Loocy, you said ” Only a Rep. could see a lack of defense in his own state as a sort of victory for America.” Again you make BS generalistic claims that prove your headlessness. Your lame statements make no sense for WA state. I remember Ron Dellums, Democrat of Oakland really anti-military, who offered up Oakland Alameda Naval Defense Station for cuts and he lost is ass out of Congress.
Puddybud: You’re just blabbering. You make not one iota of sense.
By September 11th, 2001, the 318th had closed down, but the F15 boys were in-place and on alert in Portland. Too bad it was Portland, Oregon and not Portland, Maine.
In order for the F15s from Portland, Oregon to repond to the Islamo-terroists in New York they would have had to have a couple of air-refuelings en rourte and a time warp to make any difference.
Sorry, headless lucy, but the laws of physics can’t be suspended. Even to prevent evil.
If you fish heads knew anything about the military you’d know that this BRAC round put icing on WA’s cake!
Puddy:
“David has quoted the cartoon character Homer Simpson before. David is Homer your hero?”
I don’t remember quoting The Simpsons before. But the show writers are pretty witty, which is why I quoted that bit. Thought you might understand it better.
“David, where were the London TERRORISTS from? Leeds . . . . Is that in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Egypt, or Somalia? No David, England.”
So, pbj and Puddy, Bush’s policy of letting people from England enter the U.S. without visas or additional security must be working like a charm to keep us safe from those terrorists. Right? Maybe you should re-read 27, this time for comprehension.
P.S. to Puddybud: Try making your posts more concise.
Loocy@50: that’s because you like RR are stoopid. You love to make generalizations about us. Calling us Nazis, is one of those generalizations. Now you type another stoopidity above. I supply a Congressional Democrat who decided he didn’t need the military in his district and he LOST HIS ASS out of congress!! What part of that don’t you comprehend, oh moronic one? No Republican is recommending this, but in your pea-brained mind, you generalize. IS THAT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU?
Response #50 is powerful. But you, attending Evergreen State College, they didn’t teach Newtonian Physics, Quantum Physics, or Einsteinian Physics. You majored in harrassing military recruiters. That was your resume entry for a Seattle School teaching job!
Response #51 is correct. More planes arriving at Spokane.
oh roger…you are insane ,aren’t you? that’s just so sad…….
and i’ll bet you are married to lucy too aren’t you?
it’s correct to all three………where was i wrong, hmmmm?
Hello David. Sometime one cannot make a concise statement using words from your side. I just post them for your enjoyment. I proved to RR that the Homeland Security Bill was held up by Democrats for their union paymasters. Besides why would I want to cut off Zell Miller’s words. He is a great American!
Roger@36,
“Democrat tried to keep us from even having a Dept of Homeland security because they wanted their union mob bosses to get a piece of the action thereby puting political payola ahead of natioanl security.”
Bullshit! It was the Democrats who proposed creating the Department of Homelan Security. The Bush administration opposed it, then delayed passing the enabling legislation for more than a year because their anti-labor agenda (no unions, no employee rights, termination at whim) was more important to them than the nation’s security.
The Democrats did not propose the DOHS. It was a Republican idea that Democrats wanted unionized so no incompetent people could ever be fired – kinda like we have now with the fed running the airport screening. Democrats saw an opportunity for politcal payola during time of war. That was more important than national security. Read what you wrote – you admitted it yourself!
Marty@31,
**Fact: The bombers were homegrown locals (British citizens born in Britain), more akin to Timothy McVeigh than Al Qaeda.**
Um.. no
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07.....nted=print
“”By day, Mr. Khan, who was born in Pakistan but reared in Leeds””
He was a British citizen who grew up in England from an early age.
Reply@31,
**Fact: The bombers were homegrown locals (British citizens born in Britain), more akin to Timothy McVeigh than Al Qaeda.**
Um.. no
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07.....nted=print
“”By day, Mr. Khan, who was born in Pakistan but reared in Leeds””
gosh.. guess that wasnt a “fact” after all
but you knew that.
**On 9/12/2001 liberals told us that it was useless to try to get gobal terrorists because they are all over and too numerous.**
Uh huh… sure whatever you say.
also on 9/12/01 The 700 club told us that it was not Terrorists at all that had allowed this to happen but GOD himself
because we had become a nation of abortion loving homosexuals
So who attacked us?
The Terrorists or GOD?
cause if it was GOD then there isn’t much Bush or Blair can do about it.
Trying to obfuscate Marty – how typical ‘progressive’ of you!
FACT: Shahzad Tanweer was indeed a British Born citizen!
“Yesterday, his uncle, Bashir Ahmad said he was deeply puzzled as to why British-born Shahzad, who was proud of the country to which his Pakistani parents emigrated, could have become a suicide bomber. ”
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/pub.....8;start=18
“The British-born Muslims, aged 19 to 30, were “cleanskins” from racially-divided West Yorkshire.”
http://www.news.com.au/story/0.....-2,00.html
“Three of the attackers were said to be from the Leeds area and were identified locally as British-born men.”
http://64.233.167.104/search?q.....#038;hl=en
So indeed the MAJORITY were British born with the fourth also being a British Citizen. SOunds more like Oklahoma City than Al Qaeda! So much for the liberal theories!
FACT: Bomber ‘mastermind’
Roger@32,
That old talking point? You forgot to mention Bob Dole, Goerge H W Bush, John McCain in your list there. And you STILL haven’t listed ONE traitor Democrat who is serving today.
Please name just one Democrat in congress who serves in teh military right now.
“I guess us “blue states” just aren’t worth defending.”
What a ridiculous, childish comment. Yeah, rite, we’ll let the enemy have all the blue states. You guys should listen to how idiotic you sound.
Loocy: What university, college or community college did you attend? I have been asking for over a month now but you won’t answer the question. Puddy surmises Evergreen State College, since you write as they act. It seems good to me. I visited their web page. A Distinctive College Liberal Arts College in the Pacific NorthWest. Yeah that’s your speed isn’t it.
On June 11, Priscilla spouted some garbage about Max Cleland. You immediately answered agreeing with her and bringing up your favorite butt boy Jeff Gannon/Guckert. Well from a well respected site: “Indeed, Miller’s own constituents arrived at precisely this conclusion when they opted to replace Democratic union loyalist Sen. Max Cleland with GOP challenger Rep. Saxby Chambliss, after Chambliss highlighted 11 particularly revealing votes where Cleland put union interests ahead of national security. Congressional analyst Charlie Cook concluded that “the decision by Senate Democratic leaders to focus on workers’ rights was . . . a costly miscalculation.”” So do you and Priscilla retract your statements? Probably not. A lefty never has to say he/she/it is wrong. The truth is unknown to you all!!!
If the blue states lost the cities in them they would be red states. And who controls the cities, cesspools of mess? Democrats!
ChristmasGhost @ 24
I have to agree with your comment “washington and oregon could disapear tomorrow and NO ONE WOULD GIVE A RAT’S ASS.”. Coming from the midwest and with most of my family firmly rooted in the nations mid section, if we were nuked tommorow it would take a week before anyone cared to speak about it. Really the few who thing about the northwest are those who live here, the rest promptly forget.
RR
you would think with all those repubs who did not serve that the military would overwhelmingly vote democratic… Do you think the republicans have some of those machines over at the military bases. Does anyone know where the votes for the military are counted?
I think they are counted “late”, thus not at all (only 1/2 kidding)
Hello.
Not to throw too much fuel on the fire, but I am surprised no one has mentioned Olympia and it’s City Council’s attempt to turn the city into a nuclear-free zone, barring nuclear submarines from docking there. The last I checked, the council was not overrun by Republicans.
Washington state avoided a bullet with the base closures here, so now Senator Cantwell has to actually make straw out of something happening in ANOTHER state. Instead of advancing the idea of possibly moving the F-15s up here, she has decided to attack the Republicans. It’s so much easier to appear to be the hero of the people during an election year I guess…
After seeing how some politicians behave (and yes, in this case I mean more Democrats than Republicans) I have come to a conclusion that I shall call the Marlboro Dilema: It is that basically the military has become like cigarettes and tobacco to certain politicians. They despise what then and they do, but are addicted to all the money they bring in.
Domo.
PS- I have to agree with Richard Pope about Roger Rabbit’s list. Kinda funny you would include Al Gore but not Clinton, or Cheney but not McCain. If you really want to prove a point, include ALL from both parties.
Left Behind: “the military has become like cigarettes and tobacco to certain politicians. They despise what then and they do, but are addicted to all the money they bring in.”
Those politicians are few and far between. People who despise the military don’t get elected to office in military towns, for one thing. And just about everyone truly appreciates our armed services and the men and women who volunteer to put their lives on the line to protect us and our country.
But Democrats, much more than Republicans, question and take issue with the way our nation’s civilian political leaders have used the military, unnecessarily invading Iraq (with no increase in our national security) and putting American lives in harm’s way (with no exit strategy).
It’s also true that local politicians of all stripes and political parties want to keep the economic benefits of military installations (and defense contractor work, cf. “the military-industrial complex”) in their towns. That’s why the BRAC was set up in the first place.