Posted on 05/18/2005 10:21:08 PM PDT by davidosborne
The Dem convention? I remember the Mighty Mouse story Kerry's daughters told. LOL
Morning Everyone! Who could forget the Mighty Mouse story!
Ready for the Rino hunt!
It was earlier on this thread.
Post 1833 <--
Post 1833 & replies <--
nope that wasn't me, 1st I've heard of that...
I saw that as well! LOL Rino's will learn, get back in the tent or pay the price!
Personally, I think attaching base closures to votes on matters of other principle is just as bad as the vote-trading on nominees. Actually, thinking about it, it's even worse.
And being in Maine, and knowing how important these bases are to the local economy, as a conservative I generally prefer that employment exist at the pleasure of the private sector.
If the military and its support system can be streamlined, and that involves base closures, then them's the breaks. As a taxpayer, I want the military to balance expenditure and might.
Put another way, if we're willing to pay even higher taxes, we could not only keep all these bases open, we could open new bases, one in every town! And give everybody a job!!! Woohooo!! Not ;-)
I don't think that the base closures are political in nature, but when somone is appealing one, then I would assume and know that if it was me that I would tend to be more sympathetic towards people who actually vote with me than to those who consistently knife me in the back!
Just the nature of the situation. Costs in Maine for the military may be to high to be practical. It's hard to say. I can't imagine that anyone that is losing a base is happy about it. But someone has to lose. Indiana went to Bush approching 70% and we still lost some bases, but over all did pretty well. So if it were all politics, we should not have lost anything! IMO
The bases made sense, militarily, at some point. Brunswick does anti-submarine patrol off the coast; Loring had B-52's IIRC, Kittery is a nuclear refeuling station. Not a military base, but Bath Iron Works makes all sorts of ships. Cranked out 1 Liberty ship per week during WWII. But times change, and with that comes changing needs. Some capabilities that were essential in the past are felt less important today.
I don't think it is "cost of the location" per se. Maine isn't that expensive. Cheaper than Connecticut, for example. Locating military capability is a complex choice, with lots of variables.
Anyhow, we agree on the principle that politics should be tangential to base decisions, and base decisions should be tangential to unrelated political votes in Congress. Pique and spite are child's tools, not adult's tools.
Anyhow, we agree on the principle that politics should be tangential to base decisions, and base decisions should be tangential to unrelated political votes in Congress. Pique and spite are child's tools, not adult's tools.
Yes we do agree on this, I can imagine that everyone was someone disappointed, but the Military has to do what they think is best and everyone of the lawmakers will get a chance to plead their case and if their case is convincing they may get a reprieve. Don Rumsfeld has a big vision plan and I am guessing that details will come out along the way as to why they are trying to close some places and leave others open. I remember in Ohio when they closed Rickenbacher and moved everything to Wright-Patterson, it made sense, but Columbus sure didn't like Dayton getting those jobs. But it happens.
But I agree with what you wrote about the APPEALS. That will be time for payback or punishment, IMHO.
I am certain that Rumsfeld and the boys did not vet thier list with the WH, so yes, some will get their bases back on the appeal. I am sure that they have tried to be fair and pracitical. As with everything else, we do not have all the gory details so it's hard to know why.
Also Ms. Snowe, is probably under a lot of pressure, what with all of us yammering at her and other Senators and the leadership and the WH, she probably was just having a bad day! That's why I laugh about them getting so upset that Bolton might have yelled at someone!
LOL, I have worked on campaigns and for Elected officials! If a Elected official can't occasionally blow off steam by yelling at a staffer or two. Who can they yell at? Let's face it, if you are in charge and there is a mistake, what would you do? Pat them on the head or kick their tail? I know I would kick a few tails! LOL
I might add as well that most elected officals and people in power are overwhelming 'type A' personalities! They are hard charging and passionate, that's how they got where they are. I never took it personally when I got yelled at by my EO's it's part of the job, better he yell at me, then loose it in front of the press or the public.
I later saw the folks to whom I guess the reference was made. They were a group of very impressive black evangelicals, chief spokesman being a Bishop Harry Jackson.
The man is a powerful, powerful spokesman for conservative values! I just emailed one of my black friends that "I have a new black American hero". ;o)
I know you were replying to Howlin, but I also was very impressed by Bishop Jackson and all the people he had with him and I am glad they are on our side!
We are on a new thread for day three! It's already up to 86 posts, catch the train before it leaves the station!
Ping me with the thread link please!
That the nomination lie on the table, it was determined in the negative: Yeas, 18, Nays, 19.
I found it. The year was 1828, not 1830. There was a motion to table the nomination, which failed, so the nomination was still before the Senate. The Senate proceeded to vote on the nominee, who was confirmed with a vote of 26 - 12.
http://memory.loc.gov/ll/llej/003/0600/06250617.gif
Executive Proceedings of the Senate - 1828 <- Browsable from here
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.