# Shrub's landing on the aircraft carrier, WTF was the Secret Service thinking???? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 2, 2003, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567 "2003-05-02T04:56:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/81 "2003-05-03T00:54:50Z")
The fawning and frothing over the President notwithstanding, no alert observer can rationally see last night’s speech on the _EISENHOWER_ as anything except the opening act of the 2004 campaign. While many might reasonably think there was no substance to the talk, all must concede that it was a superb piece of public relations and salesmanship. The outline of the campaign is apparent–the President will wrap himself in the flag, waive the bloody shirt from the ruins of the WTC, allude in the most indefinite terms to general terrorism and claim that the invasion of Iraq was somehow vengeance for 9/11. Anyone who questions these glittering generalities will have his patriotism impugned. Anyone who points out that the President has done precious little to fix the economy will be told that it is all the fault of terrorists and a weak Congress that willfully refused to pass the President’s full tax cut. People who suggests that it may not be a good idia to deliberatly damage our international credibility and relationships will be told that they look French. The President will continue to cozy up to the Christian conservatives and give them a left handed almost promise of mandatory prayer, public funding of parochial schools, public funding of church run social services and restrictions on access to abortion. The Christian conservatives will wet themselves voting for W., and they will get nothing more from him than lip service for their devoutly held beliefs. The Second Amendment zealots will get the same treatment and will give the President’s reelection the same fervent support and get the same sort of lip service. The President is going to run a campaign the likes of which for slickness and mendacity has not been seen for years–we have just seen the beginning. George W. Bush will be sold like a box of corn flakes. An electorate that thinks that Rambo movies and the X-men are only a slight deviation from reality will buy it. The secret to making the whole thing work is to restrict the President to photo-ops. Under no circumstances will he be allowed to say anything in public that he cannot read off a Teleprompter and under no circumstances will he be allowed to talk to anything but an audience of syncopates and ernest supporters. As for the people who tell us that the Pres had to take a fix wing onto the carrier instead of a chopper because the carrier was too far off the coast – the _EISENHOWER_ was 30 or 40 miles offshore, just what do you think the range of those choppers is? How far is it from Washington City to Camp David? It is all public relations; it is all form without substance: it is a big hat and no cattle. Hang onto your bill fold! ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/82 "2003-05-03T01:07:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Spavined Gelding \* > \*\*…As for the people who tell us that the Pres had to take a fix wing onto the carrier instead of a chopper because the carrier was too far off the coast – the _EISENHOWER_ was 30 or 40 miles offshore, just what do you think the range of those choppers is? How far is it from Washington City to Camp David? It is all public relations; it is all form without substance: it is a big hat and no cattle. Hang onto your bill fold! \*\* GW went to CVN-72 ‘Abraham Lincoln’, not CVN-68 ‘Dwight D. Eisenhower’. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/83 "2003-05-03T01:07:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Spavined Gelding \* > \*\*The fawning and frothing over the President notwithstanding, no alert observer can rationally see last night’s speech on the _EISENHOWER_ as anything except the opening act of the 2004 campaign. While many might reasonably think there was no substance to the talk, all must concede that it was a superb piece of public relations and salesmanship. The outline of the campaign is apparent–the President will wrap himself in the flag, waive the bloody shirt from the ruins of the WTC, allude in the most indefinite terms to general terrorism and claim that the invasion of Iraq was somehow vengeance for 9/11. Anyone who questions these glittering generalities will have his patriotism impugned. Anyone who points out that the President has done precious little to fix the economy will be told that it is all the fault of terrorists and a weak Congress that willfully refused to pass the President’s full tax cut. People who suggests that it may not be a good idia to deliberatly damage our international credibility and relationships will be told that they look French. > > The President will continue to cozy up to the Christian conservatives and give them a left handed almost promise of mandatory prayer, public funding of parochial schools, public funding of church run social services and restrictions on access to abortion. The Christian conservatives will wet themselves voting for W., and they will get nothing more from him than lip service for their devoutly held beliefs. The Second Amendment zealots will get the same treatment and will give the President’s reelection the same fervent support and get the same sort of lip service. > > The President is going to run a campaign the likes of which for slickness and mendacity has not been seen for years–we have just seen the beginning. George W. Bush will be sold like a box of corn flakes. An electorate that thinks that Rambo movies and the X-men are only a slight deviation from reality will buy it. > > The secret to making the whole thing work is to restrict the President to photo-ops. Under no circumstances will he be allowed to say anything in public that he cannot read off a Teleprompter and under no circumstances will he be allowed to talk to anything but an audience of syncopates and ernest supporters. > > As for the people who tell us that the Pres had to take a fix wing onto the carrier instead of a chopper because the carrier was too far off the coast – the _EISENHOWER_ was 30 or 40 miles offshore, just what do you think the range of those choppers is? How far is it from Washington City to Camp David? It is all public relations; it is all form without substance: it is a big hat and no cattle. Hang onto your bill fold! \*\* It was the Abraham Lincoln. ---
**Author:** ![Tony\_Montana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/278dde/32.png) [@Tony\_Montana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tony_Montana)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/84 "2003-05-03T01:32:16Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by catsix \* > \*\*Yeah, Mykeru registered that nick over a year ago just so he could mess with you now. > > In other news, Chewbacca has been sighted living on Endor… \*\* Machinehead? ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/85 "2003-05-03T01:39:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by World Eater \* > \*\*It was the Abraham Lincoln. \*\* Right! Lincoln, not Eisenhower. Easier to spell. Carrier named after some Republican President, one saved the Union and ended slavery, the other played golf and inflicted Richard Nixon on us. Different ship, same point. ---
**Author:** ![Skillet38](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8797f3/32.png) [@Skillet38](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skillet38)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/86 "2003-05-03T01:43:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Doctor Goo Fee \* > \*\*Was W. Bush actually a fighter pilot? Or did he pilot recon or refuel or cargo or something? > > As for the Landing… it was a photo op and a good one at that. Rove is smart. Bush still not too smart, but sometimes clever. > > Remember the silly questions around election time? It’s true… Dubya would still be my pick (over Gore) to go fishing with, or have a beer with, but when it comes to foreign (and domestic) policy issues, I’ll take the guy we elected, not the one they selected. \*\* … George W Bush flew the F-102, whose mission was to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft. It was the world’s first supersonic all-weather jet interceptor and the USAF’s first operational delta-wing aircraft He’s not too smart, but he learned to fly a supersonic interceptor? Doesn’t wash with me. Getting my private pilot’s license in a Cessna 172 was tough as hell and that’s nothing compared to the rigors associated with flying fighters. As for the guy who lost the election via the electoral college, ie Gore… That would be great, if you had the Burka market cornered in Afghanistan, with maybe a side interest in beheading axes, as I’m sure the Taliban would still be in power. Best to keep the girls uneducated I guess, if that’s your view. As for Iraq, surely the man we humiliated in the Gulf War held no ill will towards us, and Gore would’ve realized that he would Never even consider supporting groups like Al-Q. Hmmm Syria sure is close, might be a good place to store stockpiles. NAH, Gore wouldn’t have fallen for that. There’s more important things, like banning the internal combustion engine here in the states, after all, Earth is in the balance. One must shudder at the imagined consequenses of AlGore at the helm. Or this one does at least. ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/87 "2003-05-03T01:49:28Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skillet38 \* > \*\*… > > George W Bush flew the F-102, whose mission was to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft. It was the world’s first supersonic all-weather jet interceptor and the USAF’s first operational delta-wing aircraft > > He’s not too smart, but he learned to fly a supersonic interceptor? Doesn’t wash with me. Getting my private pilot’s license in a Cessna 172 was tough as hell and that’s nothing compared to the rigors associated with flying fighters. > > As for the guy who lost the election via the electoral college, ie Gore… That would be great, if you had the Burka market cornered in Afghanistan, with maybe a side interest in beheading axes, as I’m sure the Taliban would still be in power. Best to keep the girls uneducated I guess, if that’s your view. > > As for Iraq, surely the man we humiliated in the Gulf War held no ill will towards us, and Gore would’ve realized that he would Never even consider supporting groups like Al-Q. Hmmm Syria sure is close, might be a good place to store stockpiles. NAH, Gore wouldn’t have fallen for that. There’s more important things, like banning the internal combustion engine here in the states, after all, Earth is in the balance. > > One must shudder at the imagined consequenses of AlGore at the helm. Or this one does at least. \*\* Or what he could have done that would have topped his internet. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/88 "2003-05-03T01:57:37Z")
Your loyalty would be commendable if it were more worthily placed. Indeed, it is an accomplishment to learn to fly such an aircraft. It is even better to protect the skies above Amarillo from Viet Cong aircraft, while Al served in the cozy safety of Saigon. Pity that he wandered off-base for a beer and forgot how to get back. Indeed, Al Gore might very well have failed to free Afghanistan from the dreaded Taliban, and deliver it to the enlightened mercies of the thugs and warlords who rule it now. We shall never know. And you are wise to point out how GeeDubya does not suffer from the tree-hugging fanatacism of Al Gore. Al would never have come up with such a brilliant plan as GeeDubya did in Texas, that is, to place environmental laws in the hands of the petrochemical industry. Who better to guard the chickens than the foxes? As long as you’re making good money, who needs air? Yeah, good thing we were saved from the horrors of Al. Only two wars in two years, that ain’t much. We are free at last from eight long years of peace and prosperity. Oh, the horror! The horror! ---
**Author:** ![UncleBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@UncleBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBill)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/89 "2003-05-03T02:19:23Z")
An S-3B also affords “stick time” while in the front seat, something not available in most aircraft (A-6 slash EA-6B is another) I have piloted an S-3B, it’s a hell of a lot of fun! He would not have been allowed to fly the helo. ---
**Author:** ![Antonius\_Block](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/51bf81/32.png) [@Antonius\_Block](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Antonius_Block)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/90 "2003-05-03T03:11:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*The Gloat on the Boat. \*\* aka The Photo-Op on the Flat-Top. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/91 "2003-05-03T03:17:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Payton’s Servant \* > Point one: I will call The Craphat in Chief whatever I fucking well please. If I want to call him Commander of Goat Felching I will cheerfully and quite happily do so, as is my right. Did I say it’s not your right to be stupid? Did I say you don’t have a right to display your stupidity? [/quote] Point two: I’m supposed to believe the White house when “they” say that a tailhook landing is safer then a chopper landing on an aircraft carrier, rather then the fucking United States Navy?! What are you, high? [/quote] No, I’m not high. I’ve actually served on aircraft carriers and watched the numerous landings of both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. From what I recall, landing the rotary wing craft is a bit more complicated than it is for the fixed wing. > [@](#): > > Point three: See point two directly above. See my response to your point one. > [@](#): > > Point four: It’s actually a very clever nickname, but since you obviously don’t get it, you call it stupid. Actually, it’s not. “Shrub” is a rather mundane version of “bush.” I get it. I’m just not impressed by lackluster displays of “wit.” > [@](#): > > I’m so sure that you were just rolling on the floor whenever someone said “Slick Willie,” in reference to Clinton. Cite? > [@](#): > > Gee, that’s _so much more_ clever.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: See my response to your point one. ---
**Author:** ![Skillet38](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8797f3/32.png) [@Skillet38](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skillet38)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/92 "2003-05-03T03:18:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*Your loyalty would be commendable if it were more worthily placed. > > Indeed, it is an accomplishment to learn to fly such an aircraft. It is even better to protect the skies above Amarillo from Viet Cong aircraft, while Al served in the cozy safety of Saigon. Pity that he wandered off-base for a beer and forgot how to get back. > > Indeed, Al Gore might very well have failed to free Afghanistan from the dreaded Taliban, and deliver it to the enlightened mercies of the thugs and warlords who rule it now. We shall never know. > > And you are wise to point out how GeeDubya does not suffer from the tree-hugging fanatacism of Al Gore. Al would never have come up with such a brilliant plan as GeeDubya did in Texas, that is, to place environmental laws in the hands of the petrochemical industry. Who better to guard the chickens than the foxes? As long as you’re making good money, who needs air? > > Yeah, good thing we were saved from the horrors of Al. Only two wars in two years, that ain’t much. We are free at last from eight long years of peace and prosperity. Oh, the horror! The horror! \*\* well, obviously the political allegiences delineate the choice of facts presented and not visa versa, and that would apply to both of us of course. It’s just that the “W really isn’t too bright” card gets played so often that it’s mere repetition by dem pundits and the raised eyebrow of Peter Jennings and his ilk that it’s become something of a “given” among some of the (from my viewpoint) ill informed masses. He learned to fly jets over Texas, while Gore was kept safely at a typewriter in Saigon. I personally don’t think Gore is stupid. I don’t call him that, just because people feel free to lambast our current commander in chief in that way. I just disagree with his ideology. I disagree with many of Bush’s political stances, especially on the domestic front. As a conservative, I think that our president is trying to please everyone at once, and ramping up spending is anathema to those of us with a somewhat libertarian bent (Farm bill last year springs to mind). As for your 8 years of peace and prosperity, lobbing cruise missles at The Sudanese (hello Islam) aspirin factory, bombing the hell out of Yugoslavia so that a differant sort of genocide could begin, lobbing cruise missles at Saddam (to no effect - except to divert attention from Monicagate), giving North Korea nuclear technology which they are now attempting to blackmail us with, selling China missle guidance systems… and inheriting a great economy from Bush Sr. oh, and teaching our children what “oral sex” was and how it “wasn’t sex” and other uses for cigars. Come on, Clinton left no legacy or coatails for Gore to use, he left him with the usual “dependent class” vote, which is pretty damn big in this country. I will say this, Clinton/Gore did at least fix the Israel/Palestine issue. Those were some great photo ops at Camp David… oh wait, it was a total disaster. Par. man I really didn’t want to get started, but my fingers just took a life of their own… happy trails ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/93 "2003-05-03T04:41:19Z")
**Skillet:** _man I really didn’t want to get started, but my fingers just took a life of their own…_ Next time hook 'em up to your brain first. Clinton “inherited a great economy from Bush Sr.”??!? Huh? The recession of the early '90s is widely considered the worst economic shape we’d been in since the Great Depression, and unemployment was at 7.5%. (It was about 4.2% when Clinton left office.) Jeez, I’m no fan of Bush, but at least I don’t go around spouting absurdities just in order to smear him. Looks like the PR blitz that **SG** referred to is already taking effect. ---
**Author:** ![Payton\_s\_Servant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3da27b/32.png) [@Payton\_s\_Servant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Payton_s_Servant)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/94 "2003-05-03T05:03:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Skillet38 \* > **oh, and teaching our children what “oral sex” was and how it “wasn’t sex” and other uses for cigars. Come on, Clinton left no legacy or coatails for Gore to use, he left him with the usual “dependent class” vote, which is pretty damn big in this country** Nice try, but it was the Republicans who had the Starr report with all of it’s sordid details released to the Internet, not Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Payton\_s\_Servant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3da27b/32.png) [@Payton\_s\_Servant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Payton_s_Servant)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/95 "2003-05-03T05:13:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Brutus \* > \*\*You are un-smart. Clinton did indeed block LAX, while having his tender locks sheared by ‘Christophe’, hair-dresser to the stars. [Here](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/anecdotes/2.html#10) is his former Press Sec., Dee Dee, talking about it. \*\* Look, CrapHat, if you’re going to post a link in which you try and prove me wrong, at least read the entire article first, so you don’t make an ass of yourself. Which you do. Make an ass of yourself. To quote from the linked article: "_Well, somehow, somebody called the FAA or soemthing. Some unamed source at the FAA said ‘delayed aircraft’-- which became a delayed aircraft all over the country which was never really true…You know, he is my friend, Christophe, so I defend him, but then when it was married to this notion that air traffic was delayed."_ So in other words, you **Brutus** are full of shit on this one. ---
**Author:** ![Payton\_s\_Servant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3da27b/32.png) [@Payton\_s\_Servant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Payton_s_Servant)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/96 "2003-05-03T05:14:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by World Eater \* > \*\*The reason he didn’t fly out in a chopper was… > > THE CARRIER WAS OUT OF IT’S RANGE!!! > > The helipcopter needs enough fuel to make a roundtrip, not just enough to barely make it one way. > > Also helicopters don’t have ejector seats. \*\* No, it wasn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/97 "2003-05-03T05:46:25Z")
> [@](#): > > Another gesture that would have been lost on Clinton is that Bush is flying off that carrier today rather than ride it into port, because he didn’t want the chaos of having the president on board to interfere with the homecomings of those sailors. So he took an additional risk to make their lives easier. A little thing, but to the guys who are there, it’s a big deal. Yes, he cared so much about not getting in the way of their homecoming that he delayed it an entire day: [http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/122/nation/Bush\_proclaims\_a\_victory+.shtml](http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/122/nation/Bush_proclaims_a_victory+.shtml) As for the helicopter/jet dispute, shouldn’t we estimate some actual figures? The carrier was 30 miles from shore when he landed on it, and apparently slowing so that it would not reach port until the next day. Using the normal cruising speed for both carrier and jet for your estimate, about what distance from shore was the carrier when the jet took off? Now, what range do most helicopters have? Could any of them have reached the ship at roughly the same distance from shore (by having to take off much earlier I assume)? It could simply be that the President was busy, and taking a plane saved precious schedule time, with the photo-op being an added benefit. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/98 "2003-05-03T06:40:03Z")
Man, this partisan stuff is getting out of hand. > [@](#): > > It could simply be that the President was busy, and taking a plane saved precious schedule time, with the photo-op being an added benefit. If he wanted to save precious time, he wouldn’t have stayed on the ship _overnight_. This is what is. Someone had the idea of flying out to the carrier. Rove went, “Man, that would be a great photo-op.” Bush is thinking, “Hell, if I’m going, I’m going in in an F-18.” All Air Force pilots secretly want to find out what it’s like to land on a carrier. The Secret Service went nuts, and they all came to a compromise. Fly on in a safer plane, helicopter off in Marine one. But I will guarantee you that in Bush’s mind was that he just wanted to hang with his military. And that’s why they like him. The admiration is mutual. Bush enjoyed this a whole lot, and that’s partially why it was done. And this business about keeping them away from home for another day - I kind of look at it like, "Hey guys, guess what? We’re going to take an extra day and throw one wang-dang of a party! Trust me, every sailor on that ship was thrilled about the whole thing. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/99 "2003-05-03T07:13:09Z")
Let’s face it, the whole bleedin’ incident was one fat showboat production – empty on substance, high on photo ops, and another step towards the George W. Bush 2004 “War on Terror” Presidential Campaign. Complaining about the carrier landing is like nitpicking a man’s performance in a debate because his tie was the wrong shade of red. And if Bush wanted to do something gutsy, he could try admitting that the whole “Iraq has WMDs and is going to use them any day now!” bit was fabricated bullstuff to justify an unjustifiable invasion. ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [May 3, 2003, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567/100 "2003-05-03T10:08:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by rjung \* > And if Bush wanted to do something gutsy, he could try admitting that the whole “Iraq has WMDs and is going to use them any day now!” bit was fabricated bullstuff to justify an unjustifiable invasion. yup, it looks like it more and more. This CNN page says it was a severe case of the US believing what they wanted to believe rather than thinking rationally. > [@](#): > > [http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/05/02/sprj.irq.wmd.hunt/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/05/02/sprj.irq.wmd.hunt/index.html) > The problem isn’t that the INC was dishonest, per se. What it is, is that they were willing to believe anything bad about Saddam Hussein that could help their cause of regime change," said Albright, the former U.N. inspector. “And I think the Pentagon, particularly the hard-liners, suspended their analytical judgment in order to adopt some of these points of view and information.” > \ > “One of the questions about whether the U.S. government or officials lied is if the U.S. believed its own story, that there were so many weapons of mass destruction, you would expect them to be completely panicked right now, because they are not protected, and they could go easily missing and get into the hands of terrorists,” he said. “And yet they’re not panicked. So you do have to start to wonder whether the … people who believed these stories, really were the American people and not the U.S. government.” In other words, not even the Americans who claim they believe the WMD existed do really believe it because if it were true it would men there is a serious possibility the WMD have been distributed to a lot of bad guys out there which would be much worse than the previous situation. The article pretty much says the US government still publicly says the WMD existed but it is becoming quite clear they most probably did not. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/shrubs-landing-on-the-aircraft-carrier-wtf-was-the-secret-service-thinking/172567.md?page=6)