December 3, 2006
-- by Dave Johnson
In a continuing series, STF asks if it is legal for the Secretary of the navy to decide contracts based on the politics of the locality?
Secretary of the Navy Donald C. Winter vetoed plans to commission the Makin Island, the Navy's newest and most powerful warship, in San Francisco in 2008 because of a perception that the city is anti-military.So San Francisco is not Republican enough to get military contracts? Didn't we just have an election in which the public voted AGAINST corruption?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Reading the article I'm not entirely sure that there's an actual contract involved. It's just the commissioning of a ship, which is more of a formality, isn't it: A chance to show off in public? I don't know whether turning down SF for this is legal or not, but it's certainly a disgusting way to treat the city. SF certainly has its share of military serving in Iraq, and it's share of families supporting their sons and daughters there, doesn't it?
I think that SF should have accepted the battleship Iowa for the school kids' museum, though. Then it could sit there and get stuck in the mud, like the aircraft carrier Intrepid, our local kiddy museum is, just up the river from where I live. Digging it out so it can go to Jersey for renovation has become a major (army) project lately. What fun! They think they've freed it and are going to try again on Tuesday at high tide to move it. I don't know if they're going to try to repeat the huge, sentimental ceremony that turned into such a dud when the ship wouldn't move the last time they tried.
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)