22 / August
22 / August
The Ship Without a Port

The USS Iowa has served in more wars than any active duty service member, but it is not welcome in San Francisco. Voting eight to three, the city council refused to let the ship dock in San Francisco's famous bay. The historic vessel sailed south to Stockton. City Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi commented, "If I was going to commit any kind of money in recognition of war, then it should be toward peace, given what our war is in Iraq right now." In addition to opposition to the Iraq war, city supervisors cited the military's refusal to allow open homosexuals to serve as rationales for blocking the USS Iowa from setting down anchor in San Francisco.

The line drawn in Why the Left Hates America between leftists and liberals is highlighted by this controversy. Even Dianne Feinstein, a former San Francisco supervisor and mayor, labels the denial of safe harbor for the decommissioned USS Iowa "petty." And petty is what it is. While the supervisors can note their support of uncloseted gays in the military or their opposition to the Iraq war, neither of these things has any relevance to blocking the public display of the World War II-era icon.

posted at 10:38 AM
Comments

I’m getting Excedrin headache #44: Liberalism run amok!

Posted by: asdf on August 22, 2005 12:26 PM

Flynn: "While the supervisors can note their support of uncloseted gays in the military or their opposition to the Iraq war, neither of these things has any relevance to blocking the public display of the World War II-era icon."

I disagree. This icon of WWII, as alluded to by the City Supervisor's comments, would cost the city money. Given that the Supervisors are representing a largely anti-war population, why would they spend that money on a symbol that they construe as a symbol of war?

Posted by: theleft on August 22, 2005 02:49 PM

Flynn also leave out crucial information: the SF Supes aren't blocking the public display of the USS Iowa generally, only in SF, only when their city would have to pay for it.

Posted by: theleft on August 22, 2005 02:52 PM

Glad to hear the government of San Francisco hates World War II era American vessels. Disgusting.

Posted by: Ben-T on August 22, 2005 02:54 PM

You can choose to not pay for a display without hating it. Did you hate the last car you didn't purchase?

You didn't buy the Toyota? I guess you just Hate Japan and the combustable engine. Racism and Technologism!

Posted by: theleft on August 22, 2005 03:19 PM

Actually, I included that quote by the city supervisor to indicate that part of the ostensible objection involved allocating city funds--however paltry they would be--to house the floating museum on a dock. What I didn't include is that SF got millions of dollars from the federal government to bring the ship to them. Rather than costing SF something, they in effect got a federal subsidy to host the ship. So, I don't think these supervisors have the taxpayers' money in mind when they object to the USS Iowa.

Posted by: Dan Flynn on August 22, 2005 03:37 PM

The leftist Nazis in S.F. conveniently forget that that “Icon” of WWII that they refuse to allow to dock in their bay was and is a big part of the reason that they allowed keep it out in the first place and was in no small part the reason that they are all allowed their flamboyant and decadent lifestyles.

Posted by: asdf on August 22, 2005 03:46 PM

The Iowa should have cruise-missled Mirkarimi's office.

Posted by: Ralph on August 22, 2005 03:56 PM

Don't you just love when something like this is labeled "Why the Left hates America".
When Abortion doctors are murdered or Clinics are blown up or Timothy Mcveigh blows up Oklahoma city is that an illustration of how the Right hates America ?

Posted by: Rc on August 22, 2005 04:22 PM

Good call, Ralph.

Posted by: Curtis LeMay on August 22, 2005 04:27 PM

RC: there are kooks on the Right, but they rarely get embraced by mainstream conservatives. The kooks on the Left do find a welcome embrace by the establishment Left. After Mumia Abu-Jamal murdered a cop, for instance, he delivered commencement addresses at four schools. To cite another example, a left-wing publisher offered to print the Unabomber's manifesto after his murder arrest. Where are the Christian schools hosting abortury-bombers as commencement speakers? Where are the right-wing publishers seeking to print the murderer McVeigh's writings? Thankfully, these people don't exist--at least outside of our imaginations. Sadly, it's been commonplace for decades for establishment leftists to embrace criminals and crackpots.

Posted by: Dan Flynn on August 22, 2005 04:35 PM

If it wasnt for the USS Iowa and many other ships like her, you would be speaking Japenese or German right now RC.

Posted by: James on August 22, 2005 04:39 PM

Good catch! This is an embarrasment for every American no matter where you live. I hope that Congressman Pombo and all patriotic citizens in near Stockton appreciate, amid their celebration for being awarded the Iowa, how sad really this is. As if the Bay Area wasn't on the map before the 1960's! As if it wasn't a major point of departure for American soldiers and sailors headed to the Pacific theater of WWII.

Mayor Newsom's major achievements so far are launching gay marriage, landing a stem cell research center and, last but not least, his recently announced move to guarantee free WiFi access throughout the city. Go Gavin! (ahem...)

I remember observing Mirkarimi's campaign for supervisor last year. He's in the Green Party and was an aide to recent Green Party mayoral aspirant Matt Gonzalez (see below). Mirkarimi's fierce "opposition" came from: a human rights advisor for the non-profit 'Business for Social Responsibility', another Green (who's a UMass-Boston grad), and a female-to-male transgender, "Robert", who holds a seat on SF Democractic Party's Central Committee.

More on Mirkarimi's mentor, Matt Gonzalez (who only narrowly lost the race for mayor against Newsom). Here's an article + pix of him and some of his 'comrades' in their antiwar 'struggle'. You gotta admit, Lynne Stewart and Cindy Sheehan have more testosterone than does the would-be mayor: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17915

Posted by: Jeremiah on August 22, 2005 05:09 PM

Dan, I beg to differ.
David Koresh was painted as a sympathetic figure after he set fire to the Waco compound. He had no right being defying the law. It wasn’t liberals lionizing him.

I haven’t heard any outrage from the right regarding outrageous behavior at “abortion clinics”.
Monitor Pat Robertson for any period of time. He is an absolute nut. Just today he is calling for the assassination of another countries leader. He also claimed the USA brought the 911 terrorist attacks upon ourselves because we are so sinful. His 700 show is kooky as it gets.
To be clear as a liberal I do not support San Francisco’s decision not letting the USS Iowa dock in their port. This is not politics just stupidity

Posted by: Rc on August 22, 2005 08:10 PM

I've spoken out about the "outrageous behavior" at abortion clinics, but no one heard me because I was in the womb. Now I'm dead.

Posted by: Fetus on August 22, 2005 08:34 PM

RC: You are equating David Koresh with the murderers and terrorists McVeigh, Mumia, Unabomber, etc. Why? The guy was a weirdo, and he possessed many illegal firearms, which he used against the ATF's army attacking his weirdo communal home. He's no hero of mine, and I won't defend his behavior. He was an idiot, in some legal and some illegal ways.

But watch your mouth accusing him of burning to death his own infants and children and friends and friends' children. Because it is not supported by the evidence, and because the whole episode was a tragic explosion of stupidity on both sides, your flip accusion is not merely unjust. It's obscene.

Posted by: Justice on August 22, 2005 09:16 PM

RC, it was the Federal agents that set fire to the Branch Davidian complex. Also, not one single conservative was ever quoted supporting Koresh. The questions raised, particularly in the wake of the Ruby Ridge fiasco, concerned why the siege when Koresh made frequent trips to town and could have been taken at any time without resorting to the methodology which slaughtered close to 90 people. Incidentally, in a scene eerily reminiscint of Viet-Nam, when the Army officer stated "we had to destroy the village in order to save it", Janet Reno's excuse for the assault which killed over 40 children was "we were concerned for the safety of the children".

No wonder Elian Gonzalez never had a chance.

And leftist Louie or whatever your name is, the City of San Francisco was to receive in excess of three million dollars of federal taxpayers money to house and display the Iowa. Wake up and smell the coffee: the idiots in San Fran would oppose the military under any circumstance. Like the French and the Germans, their memories are quite short.

Posted by: Thom McKee on August 22, 2005 09:31 PM

Dan Flynn:

"What I didn't include is that SF got millions of dollars from the federal government to bring the ship to them. Rather than costing SF something, they in effect got a federal subsidy to host the ship"

You haven't disproved the Supe's claim that the ship would cost them money. Would the subsidy have covered the costs? You've implied that the Supe is disingenuous, but you haven't supported the claim.

Anyway, derisively labelling "petty" the people with whom you disagree is hardly a means to distinguish yourself from an intellectual moron. If they are ardently anti-war during a period of foreign aggression, they obviously do see a relevant connection between militarism and a WWII icon.

tom f (previously "theleft")


Posted by: tom f on August 22, 2005 09:35 PM

Dan Flynn:

"The kooks on the Left do find a welcome embrace by the establishment Left. After Mumia Abu-Jamal murdered a cop, for instance, he delivered commencement addresses at four schools."

But you're ommitting crucial information (again). First of all, those who support the retrial for Abu-Jamal believe he did not murder a cop and was wrongfully found guilty.

Secondly, I do not believe you can support the theory of an "establishment Left" that embraces Mumia. Exaclty how are you defining this social group and what is "embracing".

Posted by: tom f on August 22, 2005 09:41 PM

I love it when libs try to turn the tables but have no proof of looney Right behavior.

Do we automatically assume that because some nut bombs an abortion clinic he's a radical religious Rightist? Is there any proof of this? How do we know their politics sway right of center and categorize them as such?

Furthermore, you libs assume that a guy like David Koresh was not left because his compound was established on religious bounds?

Again, you don't know.

What I know is that if Bush gave the order through his attorney general the way Clinton did to burn those people out, the press would have wanted him convicted of murder.

What a confused joke you libs are.

Posted by: asdf on August 22, 2005 10:03 PM

Mirkarimi's district has one of the highest %-age of 25-34 year-olds and renters and the least %-age of senior citizens and homeowners of the SF supervisorial districts. The people who said by their votes "We want Ross" are among the farthest from living the American dream. Last I year I ran into a former housemate from college who lives there and turns out works as an erotic dancer (stripper).

Posted by: Jeremiah on August 22, 2005 10:45 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?