WT Forums

washingtonpost.com
Democrats Question Cost of Bush's Sea Landing



Reutershttp://www.washingtonpost.com/ac ... ge=printer
Wednesday, May 7, 2003; 6:47 PM



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats in Congress on Wednesday demanded to know the costs of President Bush's jet landing on an aircraft carrier last week that they branded a costly political stunt.

The Bush administration disclosed on Tuesday that Bush insisted on landing on the USS Lincoln in a S-3B Viking jet even though the carrier was within helicopter range because he wanted to share the pilots' experience. The ship was returning from the Gulf region after the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

Democrats on the House of Representatives Appropriations Committee said costs could top $1 million. They included delaying the USS Lincoln that was steaming from the Gulf to San Diego, California, an extra day of air patrols, keeping the crew at sea, presidential security and flying Bush to the ship.

The Democrats issued a news release headed 'shameless' in large red type that cited the 'nerve required to delay the return of 4,000 sailors to their families after 10 months at sea in order to stage (a) photo-op.'

Bush, wearing a flight suit, made a jet landing and posed with crew members to mark the end of major combat in Iraq. The landing was widely televised and received extensive media coverage throughout the day.

Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the House Government Reform Committee's top Democrat, called for the General Accounting Office to examine the costs.

A Navy official, speaking on condition of anonymity, disputed that Bush's visit added significant costs, and said it did not delay the carrier's return to its home port in Washington state.

'The operating cost of an aircraft carrier is about a million dollars a day. But it got to where it was supposed to be on time,' he said.

The White House said the Lincoln had made faster progress than expected and was 30 miles offshore for the presidential visit.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer rejected charges that the jet landing was political theater.

'I think that the 5,000 sailors on that ship recognized this for what it was, the president going out there to say thank you to those who risked their lives,' Fleischer said.

On Tuesday, he said Bush wanted to land by jet to 'allow him to see an aircraft landing the same way that the pilots saw an aircraft landing.

Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the Senate's senior Democrat, said: 'I am loath to think of an aircraft carrier being used as an advertising backdrop for a presidential political slogan.'


© 2003 Reuters

LOL $1 million? I bet it was the cheapest trip any prez has made in years!!! But the presidents "<u>ass</u>isitants made the goof of telling the press, that film of this would likely end up in campaign adds ( I heard one of the talking heads re-tell that as the prez walked from the Viking so the presidential aids must have put the word out quite early)

While we're at it , can the GAO do an analysis of the emotional cost of us having to look at Nostrilus Maximus (Henry Waxman) whenever he pops his little pinhead up?

"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would harm us". George Orwell

Fighting For Justice With Brains Of Steel !
<img src="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/atengun2X.GIF" border=0>

_________________
The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire.

O course, ol slick willy never used our boys n their toys as backdrop fer his po-lit-ical gain, nosirree!

Do you know what the founding fathers would say if they visited the capital today? "Oh look, there's Bob Byrd!" Why doesn't someone stick a pin in him so he flies around the room and deflates?



"The First Rule in a Gunfight: Have a gun. If you violate this rule, no other rules apply" Jeff Cooper

And, what was the total cost against when Slick Willy HALTED traffic at LAX for four hours or more to get a suitably styled haircut?

A sucking chest wound is life's way of telling you to slow down...