Replies

They were quite a ways off the coast. Given the weather, you probably couldn't see much of San Diego even if they had turned around.

Agreed. It just shows the abject stupidity of the left's complaints. Somehow ALL of the journalists were fooled into looking the other way and completely missed that they were within sight of land.

The cost was either a wash or a *cost* of around $6k (something I doubt, but I'll mention it, anyway).

Luckily, we in America do not have to choose between flying an airplane or a hospital bed....yet. Our fuel costs are still quite affordable compared to the rest of the world's.
We have so far avoided a Federal fuel tax, as well.

As to Hollywood production values, this girl has it all wrong. Our President wore boots and hats before he was President, even if he is a *windshield cowboy*. He once wore a US airforce flight suit, before he was even a Governor.

I will bet some journos tried to get a shot of land and failed.

I appreciate that she watches Fox and Friends, though. Perhaps on some level she realizes that the guests and the reportage are more balanced than those on the other morning shows.

I told someone during the war that those who were marching against it would not be eager to admit that, afterwards. She mumbled some doubts. Good to see that it turned out to be accurate.

What I heard was 40 miles off. A general rule is that you can see 13 miles away from sea level (in perfectly clear weather), before the curvature of the earth interferes too much. But, they weren't at sea level, of course-- that carrier deck must be several stories high in the air. At any rate, from 40 miles and that height and given the weather, my guess is that the coast was barely visible, if that. Actually turning the cameras would have made the case for complaint more difficult to make, not less so, which is why they didn't do it. ;)