Comments on: Central Arizona Project is a McCain water folly

By: tasha53

tasha53 — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 06:00:50 +0000

oops, mentioned

By: tasha53

tasha53 — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 05:59:36 +0000

MikeHunt,

The Keating Five has already been an issue mention in other forum. Next!

By: MikeHunt

MikeHunt — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 05:39:42 +0000

Better yet, Amnesia America - let’s not forget McCAIN and the KEATING FIVE!!

The Keating Five were five United States Senators accused of corruption in 1989, igniting a major political scandal as part of the larger Savings and Loan crisis of the late 1980s and early 1990s. The five senators, Alan Cranston (D-CA), Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), John Glenn (D-OH), JOHN McCAIN (R-AZ), and Donald W. Riegle (D-MI), were accused of improperly aiding Charles H. Keating, Jr., chairman of the failed Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, which was the target of an investigation by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (FHLBB).

After a lengthy investigation, the Senate Ethics Committee determined in 1991 that Alan Cranston, Dennis DeConcini, and Donald Riegle had substantially and improperly interfered with the FHLBB in its investigation of Lincoln Savings. Senators John Glenn and JOHN McCAIN were cleared of having acted improperly but were criticized for having exercised “poor judgment”.

By: AP

AP — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:52:02 +0000

Sullivan,
One can only presume that he was the recipient of favoritism or possibly it was his debilitating wounds that rendered him unfit for further military service, which prompted the JAG’s decision not to file charges under the UCMJ. Or perhaps the powers that be, by that time, realized that coming home to an ungrateful nation would be punishment enough for his obviously negligent loss of a military aircraft to Soviet supplied SAM missiles. Do you recall the song that was popular about that time “Downtown” by Petula Clark? When you are all alone and life is making you lonely, you can always check into the Hanoi Hilton. And just as an aside, the latest liberal charge is that John McCain can’t define “Honor”. In my dictionary, “Definitions for a grunt”, when you look up ‘honor’ it says “see John McCain.

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:41:36 +0000

Good point. I heard that he never had to pay a cent for room and board. Further, he had not received prior authorization for such an extended absence, but was never charged with AWOL.

By: AP

AP — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:35:55 +0000

Sullivan,
There are many on this forum who do not see that as a viable excuse. After all, if John McCain had taken the early release that was offered to him, because his Father was an Admiral, he would not have been lounging in the lap of luxury in that NVA hell hole for the next four years and three months. So as you can see, he had every opportunity to be back in the US in time to affect the cost overrun on the CAP. He chose to absence himself just because of his own personal belief in a military code of conduct. Now what kind of a leader would do a thing like that? I’ll just leave that up to the reader to decide. Sticky rice and fish heads anyone?

By: AP

AP — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:28:04 +0000

rm,
If McCain were elected President, then you would be his constituent, and I am sure he would represent the interest of this nation and her people to the best of his ability. And that is what you want, right? As for protection for Colorado, well, gee, we have a Democratic Governor and state Legislature. Don’t you feel they could do their job in representing their constituents? Do you recall when Los Angeles, CA diverted all the water in the Owens valley. That was a Democratic administration. Also I am sure you are aware that southern CA has been diverting water from the Sacramento River through the Central Valley Project. That was a Democratic administration. And are you also aware that there was a new proposal during a Democratic administration to divert water from the Feather River and Upper Sacramento River to southern CA? I believe the best defense for Western Colorado water is to build more impoundments and most Republican administrations have been in favor of doing just that. More recreation, higher quality water. Did you know there has been a dam proposed at West Water, and another a Whitewater since just after the turn of the century?
Environmentalists historically, oppose the building of impoundments. Not too long ago we were arguing about domestic and offshore drilling. My solution then and my solution now is that we must get population growth under control. If we do not do so, we can look forward to a future of shortages of food, clean water, energy and recreational space. Truly, some want to tackle these problems one at a time, but population is the key to solving all of these problems at the same time. But no one seems to want to consider that solution, and I fear that when the time comes that we must consider the population solution, we will be too embroiled in a world war over resources, and the war itself will become the solution.

By: Sullivan

Sullivan — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 03:26:34 +0000

My point was that this letter is short on specifics and long on insinuation. It it McCain’s fault that this went over-budget by 400%? He was sitting in a suite in the Hanoi Hilton at the time.

By: rm

rm — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:56:56 +0000

AP,

” but we can elect a man we know represents his constituents”

In this case we are not his constituents. If he as President orchestrates a “new” Colorado River Compact” in favor of AZ vs CO we the residents of Western Colorado lose. This what the politicians from Schaffer to Salazar see and oppose.

By: AP

AP — Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:43:17 +0000

rm,
What everybody seems to be missing here is that McCain was representing his constituents. I can tell you this, without the CAP, the economy of Arizona would have been in the toilet. Do you recall when the State of CA, I think it was during the Brown administration sent their agents into the state of Co to purchase water rights in droves? They were representing their constituents too. I am afraid electing Jerry Brown to the presidency is out of the question, but we can elect a man we know represents his constituents, and that would be all the American people. And I suppose it would be worth considering that the CAP is now a reality. Git er Done. Vote Republican.