The US Navy's Blue Angels team to cancel April schedule.

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Chalk up another victim of sequestration, I'm afraid.


NBC News has learned the U.S. Navy is expected to announce that they intend to cancel the Blue Angels shows for all of April 2013. This includes a show scheduled for Tampa, FL.

The precision flight team wows spectators at air shows with their skills. Cancellations would also include shows in Texas, Georgia and South Carolina.
Source

When the total cuts are a fraction of the theoretical $600 and some billion of the overall DOD budget? Why must the cuts directly focus in THE MOST public areas possible? This just isn't right for how this is being done. The Blue Angels are an incredible thing to see in person and I'm sure it amounts to a pretty small cost in the overall scheme of things.
edit on 1-3-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Probably a small cut but in my opinion one of the few logical cuts that make sense. Better than the president's "DOD teachers will no longer be able to teach the children of our military members".....



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Only Congress could trim an angels wings.

or

"Breaking: Angels Dusted!"

or

"Breaking: Blue Angels now in the red"



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:28 PM
link   
That`s a good start now let`s see if the pentagon will cut any more unnecessary fluff from their budget.

This is a 40 million annual savings and our national security has not been harmed in any way. we as a nation can`t afford this kind of window dressing anymore. The pentagon and the government need to start tightening their belts like a lot of us have been doing for years ever since this ongoing recession started.
Maybe it will make it easier for them to tighten their belts if they think of this as trickle up economics. The effects of the recession have now trickled up to the government it`s time for them to practice what they have been preaching to us about tightening our belts in these hard financial times.
edit on 1-3-2013 by Tardacus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
I read somewhere that it is around 30 Million a year, but don't know if that is accurate.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
It's a bit over 30 million, actually.


The Pentagon spends $37 million for the Blue Angels, whose mission is to enhance recruiting for the Navy and Marines and to be their public goodwill ambassador. That's a fraction of the Pentagon's $926 billion annual budget, but that's not the point, critics say. They argue that lots of smaller programs will have to be eliminated to meet required spending reductions.
Source

As with many things we're seeing this target, it would make sense if MANY things were being hit in both high and low profile areas of Government. The way this is being done though,. they are cutting pennies off the dollars for overall effect . . . in the MOST high profile ways possible.

Make the cuts real and some trimming to demonstration teams makes sense. Make the cuts symbolic and political like this garbage is? I think it's unconscionable.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


This seems to be a calculated move to focus even more attention of the ongoing "battle" occurring within both U.S. political parties to fix the blame when the public begins to be effected by the automatic cuts. To cancel the Angels April schedule means, to me, that the Pentagon believes the two sides will have an agreement in place well before April, and the Tampa show (and the others) will go on as planned. The Blue Angels are now pawns in the game. (I've only seen them live flying over a city on the way to perform, they made at least two and maybe three passes).

edit on 1-3-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Make the cuts real and some trimming to demonstration teams makes sense. Make the cuts symbolic and political like this garbage is? I think it's unconscionable.


Agreed in part, but honestly if I were to go line-by-line, I would probably axe our demonstration crews easily too; along with NASCAR advertising, recruiting junkets (why does the Army/Air Force need a Humvee with a sound system?) and other areas that are not needed to conduct the mission of the armed forces. I would cut all travel that can be and force tel-con meetings. On and on these can help relieve the burden without really effecting our readiness or effectiveness.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


This seems to be a calculated move to focus even more attention of the ongoing "battle" occurring within both U.S. political parties to fix the blame when the public begins to be effected by the automatic cuts. To cancel the Angels April schedule means, to me, that the Pentagon believes the two sides will have an agreement in place well before April, and the Tampa show (and the others) will go on as planned. The Blue Angels are now pawns in the game. (I've only seen them live flying over a city on the way to perform, they made at least two and maybe three passes).

edit on 1-3-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)





It’s official.

Late Friday evening, President Barack Obama signed an order – as required by the “sequester” legislation – to enact broad cuts to federal spending, according to a White House release.

Those cuts will now officially go into effect at midnight Friday.


he signed it so i don`t know if they can still negotiate.Isn`t it kind of a done deal now?

nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com...



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 

not really, since government shutdowns have occurred 17 times since 1977, more often than not they do not last a full 2wks ... just long enough to rile the intended 'audience'



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Here's another few things that they could probably be cut: articles.latimes.com...

I don't think cutting the Blue Angels is a bad thing but then again I'm biased. Blue Angels used to do a show near a place I lived and although I didn't live that close to the airport, they did their stunts right over my home.
It's kind of unnerving how close they fly to each other sometimes. Scarred really (and I moved lol)...



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Tardacus
 

not really, since government shutdowns have occurred 17 times since 1977, more often than not they do not last a full 2wks ... just long enough to rile the intended 'audience'



but those shutdowns happened while they were still negotiating and trying to work out a deal, right? not after a deal was signed.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Tardacus
 

Short term damage is a done deal but there is a deadline at the end of March and more to come after that. That is where the uncertainty comes for how it goes through the rest of the year, as opposed to just the next couple months as I understand all this.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tardacus

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Tardacus
 

not really, since government shutdowns have occurred 17 times since 1977, more often than not they do not last a full 2wks ... just long enough to rile the intended 'audience'



but those shutdowns happened while they were still negotiating and trying to work out a deal, right? not after a deal was signed.


A "new deal" can be signed which takes the first into account. This is an ongoing public relations cold war to pin the blame on the other party while secretly knowing that the money saved is a drop in the bucket compared to what could be cut - especially in the defense budget.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


No, actually it doesn't. The Blue Angels pilots are no longer carrier qualified because they don't fly out to the ship. They're also not technically qualified in the Hornet anymore, because they ones they fly in the show are modified to be lighter than the standard Hornet.

That means they have to requalify for Hornet ops, requalify for ACM, and requalify for carrier ops. All of which means adding flight time, which means it would actually cost more if they go ahead and disband the team completely like they talked about doing.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   
This is all theater folks they are jut trying to rile up the people to put pressure on reps... Its a joke they cut the amount they will expand so they will still expand just supposedly a little less. It's laughable that anyone buys into this nonsense or that they need to cut any programs because of it. They will still raise the debt ceiling next month and this whole thing will be forgotten as they drive this bus till the wheels fall off...

It won't hurt the phony economic bubble they are still blowing up. It's all political theater while these crooks continue to rape this country and everyone in it!



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 
Now that sounds entirely believable to Government thinking and planning.

Spend a dollar to save a nickle. The madness never ...ever.. stops.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   
The Blue Angels are owned by the Naval Recruiting Command. Their supposed entire purpose is recruitment for the Navy. Do we honestly think we need to spend money to convince people to join the Navy? When times are tough, guaranteed jobs like the military are a shoe-in and don't need any advertisement.

I had a good friend who did the Blue Angels tour (he was narrator so his entire tour was 3 years versus the standard 2). I was also based where they do winter training and worked very closely with them, and have a lot of respect for their organization, but if we are in austere measures, they are entirely unneccesary. Cancelling one month of shows is a pittance. If there was any concern in earnest, they'd do away with them.

Then again, they probably ought not to start inane wars to line executive pockets (like every war since WWI), but that's only my cynical opinion.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Then you'll especially love this.


The US Air Force has awarded Lockheed Martin an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract with a ceiling of $6.9 billion to upgrade the service’s fleet of F-22 Raptor stealth fighters.

theaviationist.com...

Two days before sequestration hit.



posted on Mar, 1 2013 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tardacus

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Tardacus
 

not really, since government shutdowns have occurred 17 times since 1977, more often than not they do not last a full 2wks ... just long enough to rile the intended 'audience'



but those shutdowns happened while they were still negotiating and trying to work out a deal, right? not after a deal was signed.
yes and no ... no because there is no 'deal' signed.
it is legislation recognizing the 'sequester', that's all.

negotiations will continue as they have ... www.cbsnews.com...

But House Speaker John Boehner has said he's done negotiating. The House, Boehner says, has twice passed legislation that would undo the sequester, and should not have pass a third bill before the Democrat-controlled Senate "gets off their ass and passes it once." He has also stated that Republicans will not play ball on new tax revenue, telling the president, "You got your tax increase; it's time to cut spending here in Washington."

In a statement this morning, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., added: "We promised the American people that we would cut Washington spending, and the President signed those cuts into law. Republicans have offered the President numerous solutions, including the flexibility he needs to secure those reductions more intelligently. I'm happy to discuss other ideas to keep our commitment to reducing Washington spending at today's meeting. But there will be no last-minute, back-room deal and absolutely no agreement to increase taxes."

all the sequester signing actually does is enact the 'auto' cuts ppl are crying about.

ps ... ppl should also be aware of the 'rules' regarding sequester behavior (cuts) ... they do exist.
link
near the bottom of pg2, please read under the following heading/question ...

What Activities Are Considered Directly Related to Protecting Life and Property?
An OPM memorandum from 1981, which remained in effect during the last government shutdown in 1996, provided the following determination of exempt activities:
in other words, these are activities that the sequester/cuts may NOT directly effect.
edit on 1-3-2013 by Honor93 because: add txt





top topics
 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join