Cuts Ground Blue Angels, Hill Air Force Base Squadron, Other Navy, Air Force Aircraft

"You get what you're willing to pay for," as the old saying goes

Troubling news this morning from both the Standard-Examiner and Salt Lake Tribune, whose below-linked stories both painfully demonstrate that civil aviation buffs at Ogden-Hinkley Field aren't the only Utah airport devotees whose interests are threatened by impending, meat cleaver-style 2013 federal sequestration budget cuts.  "The U.S. Air Force plans to ground about a third of its active-duty force of combat planes — including a squadron based at Hill Air Force Base — and the U.S. Navy cancelled the rest of the popular Blue Angels’ aerobatic team’s season because of automatic federal budget cuts," according to the Tribune's AP wire story.

• Hill F-16 squadron grounded in budget cuts
• Cuts ground Blue Angels, Hill Air Force Base squadron, other Navy, Air Force aircraft

Bad news for our nation's air combat capability, and even worse news for the wildly popular Hill AFB-situated Utah Air Show, for sure.

"For affected units, the Air Force says it will shift its focus to ground training," according to yesterday's Trib story.

"You get what you're willing to pay for," as the old saying goes.

Standard-Examiner Guest Commentary: Utah’s Leaders Need to Tone Down Rhetoric Against President

Hopefully Utah's wing-nut federal legislative delegation write it down so they don't forget it and accordingly tone it down

The Standard-Examiner provides a tip-top guest commentary in this morning's online edition, with the below-linked Steve Olson editorial, containing an earnest admonition, among other things, against what Mr. Olson characterizes the "never-ending negative political grandstanding of Hatch, Lee and Bishop against President Obama and the Democrats, including pot shots at Hatch’s old Republican Senate colleague, new Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel."

Mr. Olson frames his editorial rgument in an entirely plausible scenario in the near future when Obama's Democratic Party administration, in an effort to wind down post-war military spending, will in all likelihood, consider closing down at least one Air Force base base in the western United States, in which connection he asks this probing question, which clearly lays out the dilemma which Hill Air Force supporters face:

Should we [Democrats] close Nellis, north of Las Vegas, just up the road from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s home in what will be a solidly Democratic state by [the time of the next base closure]? Or do we close Hill? It’s hard to see how we win that argument, despite the obvious merits in favor of Hill. Anyone who thinks these decisions are made in the absence of politics is loony.

"Politics ain't beanbag," as the old saying goes; and if future U.S. base closure decisions come down to politics, as Mr. Olson aptly points out, under an Obama administration, Utah - realistically speaking - is quite likely to be left holding the "short" end of the stick.

You can check out Mr. Olson's full guest editorial here, which is chock-full of practical political wisdom, wethinks:

• Utah’s leaders need to tone down rhetoric against president

We issued a similar warning here on Weber County Forum back in January of 2012, by the way, wherein we posed the question: "Would it be a good idea for our sole Utah Democratic Party House Representative Jim Matheson to waltz over to the Senate Office Building, slap Mike Lee upside the head, and then politely ask him to "cool his jets?":

• Another Perspective on the Possibility of a Hill Air Force Base Closure

Within that same article we also provided a link to Utah's own legislatively-funded 2004 Utah Defense Alliance study, which provides, in gripping detail, the potentially devastating consequences of a Hill Air Force Base closure:

• Economic, Demographic and Fiscal Impacts of Closing Hill Air Force Base: A Statewide and Regional Analysis

The prospect of further U.S. military base closures isn't hypothetical, by the way, inasmuch as the Obama administration is still keeping "inevitable" base closures right there "on the front burner":

• Panetta: More Rounds of Base Closures Are Inevitable

So in closing we'll just remark that it's one thing for Utah politicians to publicly pander to their right-wing Utah base; and quite another to recklessly place our heavily military-dependent Northern Utah economy at risk of political payback with overly inflammatory political rhetoric.

A Weber County Forum Tip O' the Hat to LDS Democratic Caucus vice-chair Steve Olson for contributing this morning's eye-opening S-E guest editorial.

Hopefully Utah's wing-nut federal legislative delegation write it down so they don't forget it, and accordingly tone down the silly and self-defeating political rhetoric.

Standard-Examiner: Election-Year Politics Keep Sequestration Threat Alive

Yes, gentle readers, there's plenty of congressional blame to go around

Top-notch story in this morning's Standard-Examiner, bringing to the local public forefront a federal budgetary "'knife' that threatens to lop 10 percent off 2500 defense programs starting Jan. 2," according to the Standard's syndicated military columnist, Tom Philpot:

• Election-year politics keep sequestration threat alive

Taking into account our local economy's dependence on the Hill Air Force Base cash cow, this is definitely a story with local implications, folks.

For those readers who may need a memory refresher, Washington Post columnist Robert J. Samuelson presents the background on this dilemma "for the 99.99 percent of Americans who aren’t budget wonks":

Last summer, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA), raising the federal debt ceiling and pledging to cut budget deficits by at least $2.1 trillion from 2012 to 2021. Of that, cuts of $900 billion were included in the BCA — with half from defense. Congress then created a “supercommittee” of 12 of its members to achieve the remaining $1.2 trillion of deficit reduction through more spending cuts or tax increases.
Sequestration aimed to promote agreement by creating an alternative that seemed worse: automatic cuts in defense and non-defense spending. The theory was that the fear of sequester would so upset Republicans (against deep defense cuts) and Democrats (against domestic cuts) that they would negotiate a more acceptable package. By the same logic, Congress would then approve the supercommittee’s plan.
Wrong. The supercommittee didn’t agree, and Congress didn’t vote. With hindsight, this is unsurprising, because the sequester is not neutral. Though defense spending represents 19 percent of the budget in 2012, it would absorb half the cuts. Moreover, many entitlements (Social Security, Medicaid) were excluded from cuts. As supporters of domestic spending, Democrats had less reason to fear sequester. Similarly, the sequestration imposed no automatic tax increases; this appealed to Republicans. And because sequestration itself wouldn’t start until 2013, failing to agree in late 2011 had little political fallout.
So: The sequestration now scheduled for next January means about another $500 billion in military cuts over the decade. These are in addition to the $487 billion in defense reductions already in the BCA and billions of earlier cuts ordered by former defense secretary Robert Gates, who ended some major programs including the F-22 stealth fighter. Nor do these cuts count the automatic reductions occurring from withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan. Even without sequester, defense spending is estimated to fall to 13 percent of the budget in 2017.

Just like clockwork, there's plenty of finger pointing from both sides of the congessional political aisle, of course, as this issue looms as a party-partisan major federal election issue this year, and our federal congress-critters continue to dodge their legislative/budgetary responsibilities, even a mere 73 days shy of the November election:

• Sequester blues: Congress faces buyer's remorse on defense cuts

Fascinating quote from Rep. Justin Amash (R) of Michigan, ("a libertarian lawmaker who frequently bucks his party for not being stringent enough on spending"):

I think it’s completely hypocritical for the people who voted to raise the debt ceiling, who voted for sequestration, now to be calling it ‘devastating.'

Yes, gentle readers, there's plenty of congressional blame to go around.

We'll be keeping a close eye on this story as it develops.

The floor's open for your ever-savvy comments, O Gentle Ones.

Don't let the cat get your tongues...

Wharton: Why is There a Hill Air Force Base?

HAFB: 24,621 jobs keeping Utah citizens off the federal welfare rolls

Blowing Up the Utah Desert

Informative "hot off the press story" of local interest this morning via the Salt Lake Tribune, asking and then answering the question, "Why is there a Hill Air Force Base?"  One helpful Trib reader volunteers an answer too, "Why? Because it turns out-Utah is a Pretty Great State -to bomb. They can practice bombing by blowing up sections of Utah."  The fact that HAFB is a short flight from the desert Utah Test and Training Range west of the Great Salt Lake, is part of the answer of course; but check out Trib reporter Tom Wharton's morning writeup for the full skinny:

• Wharton: Why is there a Hill Air Force Base?

Mr. Wharton reports that "[t]he fact that the Great Depression left 20 percent of Utah’s population receiving federal relief showed a need for a project to put people to work;" and that the project had the support of the "Ogden Chamber of Commerce, which even acquired 3,000 acres for the possible base...".

Bet'cha you didn't know that.

Wednesday Morning Weber County Forum News Roundup

A few interesting items assembled this morning whilst Googling, on an otherwise S-L-O-O-W news day

Here are four (count-em 4) interesting items for our readers' consumption this morning, submitted in the interest of inspiring a little WCF discussion:

1) Just as predicted by WCF Reader Official City Hall Souse yesterday morning, and subsequently confirmed by Dan Schroeder during last night's marathon City Council Live Blogging session, the Standard-Examiner now reports that 26-year OPD veteran Mike Ashment has been selected by the Caldwell administration, and was last night appointed by the City Council, to fill the permanent position of Ogden City Chief of Police, which has been vacant since Chief Jon Greiner's 12/28/12 "retirement":

• Lt. Mike Ashment to be new Ogden chief

Looks like a great pick to us; but what say our readers about this?

2) The Salt Lake Tribune reports that Senator Mike Lee is up to his old tricks, i.e., basically "[t]hreatening to hold his breath until he turns blue and faints, falling down on the floor screeching and squalling and pounding his fists and feet," like a two-year-old who didn't get his way:

• Lee may vote against Utah judicial nominee

Can we see by a show of hands how many of our gentle readers are proud to have this guy representing the State of Utah in the U.S. Senate?

3) The Standard provides this thought provocative Letter to the Editor, for our Weber County Forum friends who are planning to attend tomorrow night's GOP Neighborhood Caucuses:

• Hatch could help save Hill AFB

We're no big fans of Orrin Hatch, we'll disclose, but remember Hatch's Senate seniority. If tomorrow night's GOP caucus attendees are short sighted enough to replace Orrin with Davis County corporatist Dan Liljenquist, or any other unproven newcomer for that matter, we'll be stuck with yet another "freshman" Senate "new kid on the block" (like Mike Lee); and you can bet your boots the chances of the Hill Air Force Base local economic "cash cow" will have a heightened chance of being placed on the BRAC "chopping block." Something to think about for would-be Weber County GOP political apparatchiks... at least those who DO actually have that capacity.

4) The Tribune caries an informative story this morning, outlining the differences between nut-case House Rep. Bill Wright, R-Holden's ill-conceived HB363 and the current law:

• Sex education bill: How would it change instruction?

Gotta say we loved this Bill Wright quote, by the way, "Homosexuality does not relate to sexuality. It’s a whole different thing." This Wright guy obviously knows what he's talking about, right?

This idiotic bill hasn't been signed into law by Governor Herbert by the way folks; and "the governor likely won’t make a decision on whether to sign the bill into law until next week," the Trib reports. In the meantime, angry Utah citizens are raising quite a ruckus about this bill:

"[The bill] has spurred much of the opposition to HB363 — including veto requests from the Utah PTA, the Utah Education Association and nearly 40,000 people who had signed an online petition as of Tuesday afternoon," according to Trib reporter Lisa Schencker.

In that connection, we'll helpfully provide links to both the online petition and Governor Herbert's web-based email contact page, for those of you who haven't yet gotten around to giving the Good Guv an "earful" quite yet:

• Petition: Gov. Herbert Veto HB363 (sex education)
• Comments: E-mail the Governor

Remember folks; be firm... but extra polite.

Friday Morning Weber County Forum News Roundup

Feel free to chime in and address any of the lower topics, or start up a discussion topic all your own

We'll highlight four more interesting items we stumbled upon this morning whilst Googling:

1) Top notch editorial in this morning's Standard-Examiner, giving a strong thumbs-up to Gov. Gary Herbert's effort to support the Legislature in providing $500,000 to the Utah Defense Alliance, to advocate Hill Air Force Bases's "importance for U.S. defense in the 21st century" as the latest BRAC base closing process moves forward:

• OUR VIEW: Fund Utah's BRAC investment

Unfortunate as it is that Utah taxpayers will be forced to cough up the funds to save HAFB during the current round of U.S. defense cutbacks, the economic stakes for Utah are direly important, and despite HAFB's obvious logistical "defense-related advantages over other states" you can bet your boots that other competing states will be investing boatloads of cash to save their own federal military boondoggles. That's just how the system operates, folks.

2) Despite our earlier warning that "[p]ickin' a court fight with the feds on this issue is an expensive battle that Utah taxpayers are bound to lose," the Salt Lake Tribune reports this morning that "Utah lawmakers gave a quick green light to a bill proposing to let cities and counties take over federal land, despite strong warnings from legislative attorneys that it is almost certainly unconstitutional." Specifically, "[t]he Legislature’s lawyers said that cities and counties have no standing to exercise eminent domain over federal land and the law would violate a string of Supreme Court precedents and the Property Clause of the Constitution":

• Utah House panel OKs bill to let cities seize fed land

"When it comes to public lands, I consider it a badge of honor to have a constitutional note," said [constitutional scofflaw] Rep. Ken Sumsion, R-American Fork, referring to the note from lawyers cautioning about the bill’s legality."

Notably Rep. Sumison will be running for governor this year. Mindless pre-election message bill, anyone?

3) The Tribune reports positive news on the federal regulatory front this morning, with the following story reporting that "[t]he National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Thursday proposed voluntary guidelines for manufacturers, including a recommendation that they design dashboards so that distracting devices are automatically disabled unless the vehicle is stopped and the transmission is in park":

• Feds ask carmakers to curb dashboard technology

In the midst of a robust national public discussion about the dangers of texting while driving, regulations which would prevent drivers from fiddling with their dash-mounted GPS mapping devices seems to us to be a sensible approach. Our only reservation... will mere voluntary guidelines be sufficient to stop the "technology race" between auto manufacturers, who've been scrambling to one-up each other to plant high tech gizmos under the noses of auto buyers who are enthralled by 24-7, nonstop electronic input? Somehow we don't think so.

4) Yesterday's Standard-Examiner carried another guest commentary from Ogden Captain Of Industry Alan Hall, touting the advantages of a well laid out business plan in achieving success in a startup business venture. Lo and behold, here's a real-life case study, illustrating how a carefully and finely tuned business planning and execution can intricately enmesh:

• Customer at Vegas’ Heart Attack Grill suffers heart attack

There's one instance where a customer won't be complaining he didn't get his money's worth, we'll guess! Chalk it up as another business success, straight out of Mr. Hall's playbook.

That's it for now, O Gentle Ones.

Feel free to chime in and address any of the above topics, or start up a discussion topic all your own.

Deseret News: Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins Rails Against Property Tax Exemption for Utah Soldiers

Does Weber County's own fiscally tight-fisted State Senator Jenkins deserve a stern rebuke, or a pat on the back?

"Soldiers know what they're getting into when they enlist and already receive lots and lots and lots of advantages.
We give them all kinds of breaks. We pay for their clothing. We allow them to shop at the PX. And now you're forcing me, your bleeding heart is saying, 'OK, Sen. Jenkins, we want you now to pay for their taxes.' Well, I'm saying enough."

Senator Scott Jenkins
Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins rails against property tax exemption for Utah soldiers
February 15, 2012

"Hill Air Force Base is adjacent to Jenkins’ district. These men and women are his constituents.
Sen. Jenkins talked about our soldiers like they’re gaming the system. It was an attack on our American heroes, who protect our freedoms, day in and day out, on battlefields around the world."

Retired Army General Peter S. Cooke
Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins rails against property tax exemption for Utah soldiers
February 15, 2012

The Deseret News reports on a fascinating squabble which broke out on Utah's Capitol Hill yesterday, as Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins reportedly "went off for the second day in a row over a proposed property tax exemption for members of the military called to active duty, saying they don't need any more breaks."

• Senate Majority Leader Scott Jenkins rails against property tax exemption for Utah soldiers

As an added bonus, the D-News also carries this Youtube video, documenting Jenkins' Senate argument in opposition to legislation which, if enacted, would add a whopping $1.o3 to the average Utah residential property owner's annual property tax bill:


Notwithstanding Jenkins' strenuous opposition, the Senate on Wednesday ultimately voted 24-4 in favor of both a bill, SB116, and a resolution to allow the tax waiver. The resolution, SJR8, calls for an amendment to the state constitution for the exemption, which voters would have to approve in November, according to the Deseret News.

On Wednesday, retired Army general (and 2012 Utah gubernatorial candidate) Peter S. Cooke also called on Gov. Gary Herbert as commander-in-chief of the Utah National Guard to denounce Jenkins' "shocking diatribe," the Deseret News also reports.

So what about it, Weber County Forum readers, does Weber County's own fiscally uber-tight-fisted State Senator Jenkins deserve a stern gubernatorial rebuke, as retired Army general Cooke suggests; or should Jenkins instead be entitled to a pat on the back for keeping a close eye on the Utah public purse, right down to the very last taxpayer buck?

Update 2/16/12 5:54 a.m.: We just now learn that the Standard-Examiner is also carrying its own version of this story too, along its own link to the above-embedded video:

• Plain City legislator: Deployed soldiers get enough aid

Don't let the cat get your tongues...

Another Perspective on the Possiblity of a Hill Air Force Base Closure

Would it be a good idea for our sole Utah Democratic Party House Representative Jim Matheson to waltz over to the Senate Office Building, slap Mike Lee upside the head, and then politely ask him to "cool his jets"?

In the midst of another slow Northern Utah news day, we'll direct our readers' attention to a couple of back burner news items which appeared in the Standard-Examiner and the Salt Lake Tribune, a couple of days back. Although these stories didn't seem to be intentionally juxtaposed by the S-E and Trib editors, we can't help but believe that they may be interrelated, nevertheless.

Here's the lede from the S-E story, which appeared on the print edition front page on Sunday morning, and provides the gist:

HILL AIR FORCE BASE — Even without knowing the specifics of the upcoming military budget cuts and the recommendation of new rounds of Base Realignment and Closures, there is a lot of concern that the changes could affect Hill Air Force Base.
“It’s too early to know any of the details that they are thinking, but everyone should be worried,” said Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah.
On Thursday, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta announced plans to cut military spending as the military recovers from a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Part of that plan is to close military bases in 2013 and 2015 [emphasis added].

Read the full S-E story here:

• Proposed defense cuts bring worries to HAFB

With a Democratic Party President occupying the oval office and base cuts on the drawing board, the fact that Republican folks like Rob Bishop and Jim Hansen might be a mite nervous makes perfect sense, of course.

And here's the lede from the 1/28/12 SLTrib story:

President Barack Obama used his weekly address Saturday to rip Congress for blocking his nominees, focusing his ire on Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.

Earlier in the week, Lee vowed to oppose all of the president’s picks for open judicial and federal positions to protest the way Obama skirted the Senate to fill key jobs at the National Labor Relations Board and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

"One senator gumming up the whole works for the entire country is certainly not what our founding fathers envisioned," Obama said, not specifically identifying Lee but leaving no doubt which senator he meant to single out.

In his address, the president cited a comment Lee’s spokesman, Brian Phillips, gave to Fox News, saying the plan was to "delay and slow the process in order to get the president’s attention."

And here's the link to that (possibly interrelated) story:

• Obama takes aim at Sen. Mike Lee in nominee fight

Although Obama doesn't name him by name, it's pretty clear that Utah Senator Mike Lee is clearly on Obama's "obstructionist" radar screen, and that he's most certainly "captured" President Obama's individed "attention." (Hopefully at this point our readers are getting the drift when we suggest that these to stories may be interconnected.)

For those who might be interested in reading a robust study on the probably devastating Utah economic effect of a Hill Air Force Base closure, here's a good scholarly study produced by a research team from University of Utah David Eccles School of Business in 2004, when the possiblity of a 2005 HAFB closure was last on the U.S. Executive Department table. It's sobering, to say the least:

• Economic, Demographic and Fiscal Impacts of Closing Hill Air Force Base: A Statewide and Regional Analysis

And remember, folks, these numbers are calculated in un-inflated 2001 dollars.

As for devastating projected local impacts, the study furnishes a VERY long list, so we'll just pick out one of them, for starters:

Short-Term Impacts
In 2009, the impact of closing Hill AFB will be a loss of 47,400 jobs, an annual decline of $2.35 billion in earnings and $2.29 billion in personal income. Hill’s closure shrinks the state’s economy by $3.58 billion (a decline of 2.6% from the projected baseline). The annual loss of state tax revenue will be $192.4 million.

Hopefully everyone, Utah lefties, centrists and righties alike, will take the time to read the above-linked analysis.

The proposed 2005 HAFB closure was removed from the table during the presidential term of GOP President G.W. Bush of course, to the great glee of out mainly GOP Utah federal legislative delegation.

Can we see by a show of hands how many of our gentle readers believe Senator Lee is playing with fire? Is there anyone who believes that our Democratic Party President Obama will cut our Utah federal legislative delegation the same degree of leeway in re: HAFB as did GOP President Bush in 2005? Would it be a good idea for our sole Utah Democratic Party House Representative Jim Matheson to waltz over to the Senate Office Building, slap Mike Lee upside the head, and then politely ask him to "cool his jets"? (Maybe Matheson could even ask that a more than slightly "nervous" House Representative Rob Bishop might accompany him.)

What say you on this topic, O Gentle Ones?

Standard-Examiner: HAFB a "Preferred" Site for F-35, Says Congressman

Whatever you do, GOP Senators Hatch and Bennett, and GOP Congressmen Bishop and Chaffetz, try to not screw this up

Good news for the local economy this morning, as the Standard-Examiner reveals that Hill Air Force Base is apparently on the inside track for deployment of the first two operational squadrons for the advanced F-35 stealth fighter.

Congressman Rob Bishop said he was informed Thursday by top Air Force Officials that Hill Air Force Base (AFB) has been selected as the Air Force's "preferred alternative" for the location of the first two operational squadrons for the advanced F-35 stealth fighter.
Operation could begin as early as July 2013, according to Bishop in a press release out of Washington, D.C.
Officials indicated that Hill would likely obtain a third operational squadron mid-2019, assuming the F-35 program remains funded and on-course, he said.

For those who are unaware, Hill AFB is "one of Utah's most significant magnets of economic activity," according to the Utah Economic Development Department:

Covering parts of Davis and Weber Counties, Hill AFB is the largest single site employer in the state. It accounts for nearly 50,000 direct and indirect jobs, pumps approximately $3.6 billion annually into the Utah economy, creating $2.3 billion in personal income and annual state tax revenue of $192 million, according to estimates for 2009 from the University of Utah's Bureau of Economic and Business Research, which studied the economic impact of closing Hill AFB prior to the last round of military base realignment and closure (BRAC) efforts.

With the recent paring down of HAFB mission capability, it's great to observe that we're first in line to replace the old with the new, technology-wise.

Yesiree, the F-35 is one hot bird; and it would be great to have a few squadrons of these parked in Emerald City's back yard for the next few decades. More... ? Just axin'

And a quick cautionary note to our Utah GOP congressional delegation. Please be extra nice to President Obama over the next few months. As this morning's article emphasizes, "the decision is not one-hundred percent concrete until the final Environmental Impact Statement is complete." Whatever you do, GOP Senators Hatch and Bennett, and GOP Congressmen Bishop and Chaffetz, try to not screw this up.

A word to the wise is sufficient, we hope.

Sunday Morning Emerald City News Roundup

A few Standard-Examiner hits and misses on a slow news day

By Curmudgeon

Another slow news day, so maybe there'll be space to look at a few of the SE's Sunday Morning hits and misses.

1. Hit: The long and photo-rich stand-alone section on Hill AFB, past and present. Nice job. The SE free on-line site has a long intro article by Mr. Trentelman, but you'll have to spring for the print edition to read the many many other articles in the Hill AFB section. It's worth it.

2. Miss [a little one]: On p. 10 of the Hill section ["The Sky's The Limit"] there's a photo of a six engine B-36. The caption reads: "A B-36 Peacemaker sits at Hill AFB." Well, there is a word they use in the Air Force to describe what the B-36 is doing in that picture [look at the shadow on the ground beneath it.] It's a technical term, but I'm sure the SE could have found a retired flier to help them out. The term is called "flying." It's in the air, guys. Landing but still airborne. "Sits?"

3. Hit: front page article headlined: "Admiral: It's Fantastic Here --- Mountains Lure Veterans to Retire in Utah Sans Tax Breaks." Well worth a read, and it highlights something I've wondered about for years [and mentioned a time or two here]: why the devil isn't Ogden promoted as a prime -- and I do mean prime --- retirement area? There are people who dream of spending their retirement sweltering in places where the season barely changes and for whom shuffleboard is their idea of getting exercise. There is a place for such people. It's called Florida. But for those who like their seasons to come in fours, who are looking for reasonable housing costs, small city environment, big city amenities close by and scenery and outdoor activities year round that just cannot be beat? There's a place for such people. It's called Ogden, Utah. I'm all for promoting Ogden as an outdoor adventure base camp for visitors. But we're missing a beat not promoting it as well as a retirement mecca, I think. As the admiral in the story says, there are those mountains....

4. Miss: the SE ran today a letter to the editor by one George F. Fleming of Farr West. Here is how it begins:

"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it. --- Barack Hussein Obama."

Mr. Fleming then goes off on a rambling attack on President Obama for having said that. Problem is, President Obama did not say that. The alleged quote was made up by a reporter satirizing both Obama and McCain as they campaigned, praising the US and calling for change in the speeches both gave. The quote then was picked up by right wing bloggers and talk show hosts, and attributed exclusively to President Obama. Snopes has the story here.

Recently, Mr. Trentelman has written on why blogs are not news sources as papers are, and one his reasons was that all sorts of false information gets onto blogs without anyone bothering to fact check. My my my. And here the SE prints a phony presidential quote without the slightest indication that it's not true. Evidently, no one on the editorial page staff bother to see if President Obama had in fact said what the letter quoted him as saying. [Doesn't anyone in the SE editorial offices know how to google something?] Nor did they ask Mr. Fleming to provide a source for the quote he insists is from President Obama --- before the paper printed it. Seems like some of the slipshod practices Mr. Trentelman finds in blogs have worked their way into the SE's offices as well. Not good.

Bishop Files for Fourth Congressional Term

Congressman Rob Bishop, that is... NOT that guy in a rumpled suit from your wardhouse

This morning's Standard-Examiner reports that U.S. House Representative Rob Bishop (R-Utah) has filed for re-election to his current seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. Charles Trentelman presents some of Rep. Bishop's rationale for seeking a fourth congressional term:

Bishop said he is running again because, “there are still some things that upset me, and some things that I’m making slight, but sure, progress on.”
For example, he said he is concerned that the Democratic leadership of Congress has submitted a budget for the federal government that includes “about $200 billion more in domestic spending and still, in my estimation, not doing enough for the military, especially for the Air Force.
“The Air Force chief of staff said he needed $200 billion right now for infrastructure, and that’s the low end of the game,” Bishop said.
He said the lack of sufficient support for military spending is especially frustrating to him because Hill Air Force Base is in his district.
He said he is constantly attacked by representatives who don’t understand the needs.
“We have to move forward on the F- 35 and F-22, and the hard part is to get through to people who don’t have military in their district, who don’t realize that the Air Force is very technology intensive. You can’t do any ground action, they have to be in a plane and they cost a lot.”

Rep. Bishop would appear to be closely adhering to the same game plan which successfully kept the 1st Congressional District seat firmly in the grasp of former Utah congressman Jim Hansen (Bishop's GOP predecessor in the same office for 22 years): being a very good friend to the military -- Hill Air Force Base in particular.

Find more information on Rep. Bishop's official website.

We have yet to hear an announcement from any Demo challenger.

And what say our gentle readers about this?

Air Force to Build 4-Season Resort...at Park City

More good news for Ogden's Ski Hub Visionaries:

Air Force to build resort in Park City
by G. A. Volb
Ogden ALC Public Affairs

Members of Team Hill will be some of the people who will enjoy reduced lodging costs and recreation opportunities in a future world-class, four-season military resort in Park City, Utah.

The Park City project would be the first Air Force lodging, recreation and conference facility funded, developed and managed by the private sector, with Department of Defense employees “reaping the benefits,” according to Jim Sutton, Ogden Air Logistics Center Director of Plans and Programs.

The project incorporates the use of 26.61 acres that has been deeded to the Air Force, known as the Silver Mountain site. The acreage is on the north side of State Highway 248 in Park City. When constructed, the facility will offer active duty and retired military persons and Department of Defense civilian employees a year-round recreational opportunity.

More....

"The authorization to trade the Air Force land at Snowbasin for another parcel in Park City was included in the 2002 DOD Authorization Act. "

[...]

"'While the Army’s Armed Forces Recreation Center provides a four-season Morale, Welfare and Recreation facility in Garmish, Germany, there is no parallel capability stateside adjacent to a major metropolitan area and airport,' Mr. Sutton said. Other facilities that offer similar discounted military lodging are in Hawaii and near Disney World in Orlando, Florida"

Here's more on the Garmisch facility.

Oops????

Did another Big Fish just get away?"

And what's this about Uber Ogden Lift Ogden/Weber Chamber ostensible booster Wynn Covieo, aka "program manager" for Hill AFB’s "Partnering and Business Development division," acting as eager spokesman for this deal that delivers the goods to Park City and screws Ogden over? Is he saying he's happy about this? Say it ain't so, Mr. Covieo! The least you could have done is bitch about it a little bit. I guess it all depends on which group you're sucking up to at the moment though, eh?

And what say our gentle readers about this?

Update 10/24/05 8:26 a.m. MT: The Salt Lake Tribune had some harsh words about this plan in this Saturday morning editorial.

BRAC: Red States v. Blue?

There was much local consternation and gnashing of teeth last week on the question of whether the BRAC commission would deliver a killing blow to Hill AFB -- a very mighty economic engine in Northern Utah, indeed. Our local daily newspaper went darned near apoplectic about it, publishing dire daily front-page articles designed to stir up the emotions of the reader public, create public anxiety, and sell more newspapers.

A sage friend of mine reminded me of a few facts when I spoke with him about this problem a few days ago. He reminded me that Hill AFB is on the edge of the western desert, and is an ideal test range for a nation that's hellbent to wage continuing war in desert regions. He reminded me that the base personnel in the "beehive state" are very culturally dedicated to the work ethic and extremely efficient, compared to other bases. He also reminded me that the policies of the current Presidential administration are now being run by a very smart fellow from Utah named Karl Rove... a graduate of Olympus High School in SLC (and very devout in his religion, I understand) ... and that the national government is now firmly under "local" control.

What he forgot to mention was plain old partisan party politics.

Seems he was right, at least as far as his predicted result. In that connection ... check this out. Interesting "bar-chart," by the way.
So much for the story that the BRAC process is politically unmotivated; and so much for the story that HAFB will be sacrificed in the political bickering that will occur down the road.

Comments, Please!