1 posted on
03/08/2007 8:06:52 AM PST by
SmithL
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
So, the city that hates the Navy now wants favors from the Navy. How special is that? Maybe the Navy should suggest Hunter's Point as the new home for USS Iowa.
2 posted on
03/08/2007 8:07:15 AM PST by
SmithL
(si vis pacem, para bellum)
To: SmithL
The Navy should agree, but only it SF agress to take the battleship memorial..
3 posted on
03/08/2007 8:07:58 AM PST by
ken5050
(The 2008 winning ticket: Rudy/Newtie)
To: SmithL
The city will not assume responsibility for the site cleanup. Once they get it, they'll sue the Feds or petition the state for the $$.
To: SmithL
Why do I get a mental image of the Village People when I read that headline? :)
6 posted on
03/08/2007 8:09:41 AM PST by
NonValueAdded
(Prevent Glo-Ball Warming ... turn out the sun when not in use)
To: SmithL
Take my advice SF, it's not worth it!
Tell the 49er's they are a private business, and private businesses don't get facilities built with public funds.
Take a stand.
Let the b*stards move if they think that's what they have to do.
Then you can develop your appreciation of college, or high school ball. You have great programs out there.
7 posted on
03/08/2007 8:10:10 AM PST by
brownsfan
(It's not a war on terror... it's a war with islam.)
To: SmithL
The Navy has agreed to consider the proposal, but only if they can first use San Francisco's Castro district for a 3 day Live Fire exercise.
8 posted on
03/08/2007 8:10:46 AM PST by
theDentist
(Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
To: SmithL
Mayor Gavin Newsom's office is pushing the Navy to transfer ownership of Hunters Point Shipyard in San Francisco...I guess that his rehab is not going well. I wonder if Coulter added this 'faggot' to the list of people she can't talk about.
To: SmithL
Reply from the Department of the Navy:
"Take a Dudley."
11 posted on
03/08/2007 8:18:51 AM PST by
Beckwith
(The dhimmicrats and liberal media have chosen sides and they've sided with the Jihadists.)
To: SmithL
Okay, lemme get this straight. Close a naval facility so it can be converted into a professional sports arena.
Doesn't sound too bright.
Is this Rome? Cast off our military capabilities so the serfs can indulge in some bread and circuses distractions.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
17 posted on
03/08/2007 8:37:48 AM PST by
JOAT
To: SmithL
Hunter's Point is all wrong for a stadium - nowhere near a freeway and with street approaches through the worst neighborhood in town. Unless the city is prepared to build a stadium futher north in Mission Bay (fat chance), the 49ers should loftily ignore this nonsense and press on to Santa Clara.
20 posted on
03/08/2007 8:41:37 AM PST by
Mr. Jeeves
("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
To: SmithL
Eddie DeBartolo made a lot of money for San Francisco. Were the team still in Eddie's hands, I'd say go for it.
With Susan York in charge, having expressed no intent to make anything of a rotten team, let them move.
21 posted on
03/08/2007 8:41:48 AM PST by
Carry_Okie
(The fourth estate is the fifth column.)
To: SmithL
"Our primary objective is to expedite the cleanup and transfer of the shipyard so that we can create the public benefits the property holds, and one of those is the possibility of creating a stadium for the 49ers," said Newsom's base reuse director, Michael Cohen. Let me see if I've got this straight... San Francisco/Newsom have a public employee whose job it is to aquire military bases in the city/county of San Francisco. Probably pay him $100,000 plus per year to write these memos.
Who do these people think they are? ... Congressmen?
Another absurd waste of taxpayer $$$.
To: SmithL; Peanut Gallery; SAMWolf; snippy_about_it
I'd like to see the headline:
Navy To San Francisco: DROP DEAD
29 posted on
03/08/2007 9:06:51 AM PST by
Professional Engineer
(Be silent, friend. Here heroes died to blaze a trail for other men.)
To: SmithL
Without even reading this thread I am laughing out loud. The same SF that wants to kick all the recruiting offices out of town and off campuses, refuse the Missouri Battleship, that Navy?
32 posted on
03/08/2007 9:08:52 AM PST by
fish hawk
(The religion of Darwinism = Monkey Intellect)
To: SmithL
This is the same San Fran that REFUSED to berth the IOWA?. The Navy owes them nothing. Tell Newsome to sit on it.
39 posted on
03/08/2007 9:11:41 AM PST by
PzLdr
("The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Darth Vader)
To: SmithL
It's obvious that the mayor will do anything to avoid having the 49ers skip town on his watch. He's turned out to be such a weasel.
To: SmithL
It's liberals who have made cleaning up contaminated sites hugely expensive and very time consuming. Tell 'em to shove it.
To: SmithL
S.F. seeks Navy's help in effort to keep 49ers Clear Hunter's point? Sure thing, Gavin.
Mission Accomplished!
47 posted on
03/08/2007 9:29:59 AM PST by
Michael.SF.
(In this (political) War, Republicans are gutless appeasers. -- Ann Coulter)
To: SmithL
Why should the Navy do ANYTHING for a city in which hatred of all things military runs rampant?
48 posted on
03/08/2007 9:31:27 AM PST by
JimRed
("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help m)
To: SmithL
" ... "
49 posted on
03/08/2007 9:33:18 AM PST by
martin_fierro
(</obscure Aliens reference>)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson