Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Blue Angels: "Comedy" Vs. "Tragedy"

1

"Fatally crashing is about the only thing and off-duty fighter jet can do to make me happy." That made me choke on my water as the uncontrollable chortle burst forth. I completely agree - the sound of the planes is not only obnoxious but inspires a fear response, before logic kicks in and determines it is not a threat. I wouldn't be disappointed in the least if we never booked the Blue Angels again.

Posted by Aislinn | April 30, 2007 11:28 AM
2

I can't believe they got pissed over something that's been talked about before. There was a family guy where everyone keeps getting pissed when the planes don't crash. I always thought the potential for crashes was one of the main reasons the type of person that would go to an air show go there.

Posted by Leeerker | April 30, 2007 11:36 AM
3

@2 Yeah, but if everybody crashed, there'd be no more air shows. And, Mr. Schmader, as someone who has never seen (but often heard) the Blue Angels show at Seafair, I don't want the pilots to plunge to their deaths. I would prefer that they simply go away.

Posted by J.R. | April 30, 2007 11:40 AM
4

Yay! Our annual debate over the Blue Angels of Terror commences earlier than usual!

Posted by Amy Kate Horn | April 30, 2007 11:44 AM
5

Save Amy Kate from future Blue Angels debates! If you really want Seafair to ditch the Angels, act now. The city claims it received less than 20 call/letters about the Blue Angels last summer -- and none so far this year when I contacted the office last week following the SC accident. Give the mayor a call at 206-684-4000 and call the Seafair board at (206) 728-0123.

Posted by j | April 30, 2007 11:46 AM
6

People go for the "illusion" of danger and then are upset when the danger they supported gets someone killed. If he had died in a training accident it wouldn't have caused nearly as much angst. The audience's complicity forces the lionization of the dead as some sort of karmic payback. The Dale Earnhardt/NASCAR fiasco was awfully similar. Why exactly do we put up with these air shows turning our military into a circus?

Posted by dirge | April 30, 2007 11:48 AM
7

Still, his death makes you happy? Right-wing nutjobs love a good abortion clinic death for the exact same reason.

Posted by monkey | April 30, 2007 12:04 PM
8

She also in her second letter implied that your opposition to the war means you think soldiers dying is okay, despite your direct statement to the contrary.

Posted by Noink | April 30, 2007 12:04 PM
9

I thought you were better than this, David. Please *don't* keep us posted on this anymore. Tying your anti-Blue Angels rant to someone's death isn't going to win you a ton of support.

Posted by frederick r | April 30, 2007 12:17 PM
10

And for the record, I do agree that bringing in Blue Angels probably isn't the best use of city $$ for civic entertainment. Nor is it the worst.

Posted by frederick r | April 30, 2007 12:20 PM
11

"'Merrica, Fuck Yeah!"

Why don't we replace expensive & dangerous aerial circle jerks with Top Gun-style, homoerotic volleyball games features the ace PILOTS of said aerial circle jerks?

Instead of saying "Oh Jesus, the humanity!!!" when a plane finally demolishes 520, we'll all be saying "Nice abs, Iceman."

Posted by jackie treehorn | April 30, 2007 12:32 PM
12

Yes, it's sad that a pilot died, but it's a miracle he didn't take more people--people who didn't willingly engage in a bit of fighter-pilot show-offery--with him. Where's the concern for the innocent bystanders placed at risk by such mili-tainment?

And admittedly, my acknowledging the possible good that could come out of this pilot's unfortuante accident is in questionable taste, but it wasn't done thoughtlessly.

According to my math, the offensiveness of my item was perfectly matched to the offensiveness of using fighter jets for entertainment purposes during times of war. So we're even.

Posted by David Schmader | April 30, 2007 12:36 PM
13

You got called to task for your admitted "tastelessness" and got defensive about your right to it. Being tasteless is supposed to generate such a reaction--what are you bitching about?

Also--there's no math involved here. A lot of the people who go to airshows are military families, and they most definitely do not share your idea of offense.

Posted by Boomer in NYC | April 30, 2007 12:49 PM
14

Not bitching, just explaining.

Posted by David Schmader | April 30, 2007 12:56 PM
15

I'd bet it was no accident that he didn't kill anyone on the ground. It's probably the reason he went down with the plane instead of ejecting in time to save his own life. I've heard of enough black box recordings to know that's more often than not the case.

So maybe you could show a little fucking sympathy regardless of your views on the matter.

Posted by monkey | April 30, 2007 1:13 PM
16

Somehow I doubt how unpopular it becomes that the Yearly Showing of the Stick (TM) will be cancelled.

Nonetheless we should all call those phone numbers listed above...


Posted by K X One | April 30, 2007 1:21 PM
17

A person died; this is tragic; everyone is in agreement.

More tragic: the death was the unnecessary result of a recruitment tool (blue angels) that aims to advertise the cool factor of the military to kids who count seeing 'Truckasaurus' at the Kingdome among their more cherished childhood memories.

Silver lining: Only one death occurred. Jet fighters crashing in populated areas, and I'm no TSA expert on airplane crashes, sound like they have wicked potential to kill/maim a lot of people.

Personally: They need to revert back to strongmen walking on the wings of biplanes constituting an "air show." I'd get drunk on a log boom and watch that shit.

Posted by jackie treehorn | April 30, 2007 1:21 PM
18

i heart you so, so hard right now david schmader

Posted by ruby | April 30, 2007 1:21 PM
19

Schmader: "This is the way I feel"

Dude: "You are wrong to feel that way!"

Schmader: "Well this is the way I feel."

Others: "We agree with Dude!"

Still Others: "We agree with Schmader!"

Me: "You're both wrong. This is funny, plain and simple. 10,000 videos of kids trying skateboard tricks and biting it can't be wrong. 'Jackass' was a box office hit for a reason: America loves show-offs who get what's coming to them. Nascar crashes = great entertainment (all whining aside) All your teary-eyed salutes and country music anthems won't change this fact. As long as this loser didn't take out civilians, it's funny.

Posted by Stuart Smally | April 30, 2007 1:53 PM
20

-- nice work dave, nice work.

Posted by Aaro)))n Edge | April 30, 2007 1:57 PM
21

My only objection was your use of the words "sky Rape." Is that to imply Jumbo jets are consensual sex?

Posted by elswinger | April 30, 2007 2:08 PM
22

My only objection was to your being happy someone died so you could prove your point of how much you hate the Blue Angels.

You know, like Fred Phelps is happy fags die from a brutal hate-inspired torture/beatings.

DON'T BECOME ONE OF THEM! Be a better person than that.

Posted by monkey | April 30, 2007 2:21 PM
23

I know I'm in the minority here, and I know that there will be a lot of reasons why Sloggers will color me wrong....

But, my two cents is that THE BLUE ANGELS ARE COOL.

They're the ultimate in design and performance -- one of the most advanced machines that humans know how to build. It's a pinnacle in our ongoing yearning to fly to farthest reaches attainable. I like the up close and personal nature of the show. It's all the more impressive. Thank you.

Posted by Lloyd Clydesdale | April 30, 2007 3:06 PM
24

My issue is what use is the F-18 hornet anymore. Its all conventioanl warfare these days and if they see any action it isn't going to be that plane (which its more than capable of doing a good job in a battlefield situation which has been proven in the past.
No the problem I see when the blue angels are zipping around over Seattle Sea fair weekend is the reminder that Billions of dollars are being wasted
building far more superior fighter jets that will never ever see any action except for a few strategic bombing runs. Fighter jets are real important and we must keep makeing new ones says the war machine because the enemy is building new ones too. Thats a crock. And its a waste of a lot of money that could go for helping humanity than destroying it. And flying around just to prove how badass they are when they are not deployed for war. Ever wonder how much military stockpile is junked and the waste of all our money and effort to build them again and again and again.
Nasa could use some of that time, money and research for far better means.

Posted by summertime | April 30, 2007 3:11 PM
25

Lloyd, thank you for your brave proclamation.

I don't actually know you, but still you qualify as the one person I know who actually likes the Blue Angels.

Posted by David Schmader | April 30, 2007 3:24 PM
26

It's (A) sad that a person died, but I completely agree that (B) the Blue Angels are a ridiculous, laughable farce and hope this will cause them to discontinue or limit their transformation of war into an action movie.

Anyone who can't understand why A and B can both be true needs to seriously question their relationship with the warmongering, propaganda and exploitation that currently defines this country's psyche, and what that really means for people's lives here and abroad.

Posted by lauren | April 30, 2007 3:29 PM
27

Summertime, I believe the F/A-18 is an integral part of "conventional warfare". It rapidly comes and bombs the shit out of stuff when ground troops need help.

Dave, thanks.

Lauren, I see what you're saying, but there's sure been a lot of warring going on prior to "currently" in/outside the good ole USA. It puts the toys in Santa's sleigh.

Posted by Lloyd Clydesdale | April 30, 2007 3:52 PM
28

People dying horrific, firey deaths is /always/ side-splitting comedy!

Posted by NapoleonXIV | April 30, 2007 4:28 PM
29

I simply don't want someone risking their life for my entertainment. I'm not entertained by the possibility of their death, even if the physics is cool.Even if there wasn't a war on. They are doing some amazing shit and its amazingly risky and has the potential to be more impactful than say boxing due to the fact the pilot is not the only one at risk. The communities below. Aren't we one of the only places that even allows this to take place over an entire city?

Posted by stone | April 30, 2007 9:21 PM
30

#27 Ok. so if it is doing so well why does the military need to spend billions of dollars replacing it with a new flying weapon. Do we really need more than what we already accumilated after the past 30 years. I'm sure if we just keep up with the maintenance and rebuild them it would be less money
needed for the pentagon. I'm for supporting the troops, but a thousand more new and improved stealth jets is not the answer to civilizations needs. Exspecially even Americas.

Posted by summertime | May 1, 2007 11:50 AM
31

Summertime -- i'm no hawk, though i'm kind of filling in as the military analyst here.

The B-52 is a good example of a plane that's gone well beyond the lifespan it was designed for. Nearly 60 years of flying, and it will likely make 100 before all's said and done.

The military is going to replace the F-18 with the F-22 Raptor. The Raptor is going to be even more expensive. It has performance characteristics that have to be truncated to what the human pilot can withstand. In fact, it will be the last piloted fighter that the military plans on producing. There's renewed competition in the arms race, so it will be our next push to stay ahead. For the moment....

Because then, it's on to robots. The military's strategy will be to keep the manned planes on-hand, but a new era will begin: The production of all manner of pilotless vehicles. Robots. Flown by video-gamer types (till they can be replaced by integrated computing, I suspect). It will be a quantum leap in capability. Costs will likely go down, allowing for huge numbers of small, even tiny vehicles to be built. Pretty fucked up, hunh? I don't know how free that future makes me feel.

I agree with you that focusing all this energy and generations of the citizenry's tax billions on bullets and bombs is mind-boggling. Yet here we are. Is the citizenry getting so much of a benefit from this approach that the desire to bring this manner of doing business to a different conclusion is not as big a deal? THAT, I posit, is the question.

Posted by Lloyd Clydesdale | May 1, 2007 12:58 PM
32

Hello everyone, wanna be part of some kind of community, possible here? anyone here?

Posted by Buy antivirus online | May 10, 2007 1:51 PM
33

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | May 12, 2007 4:38 AM
34

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | May 12, 2007 4:07 PM
35

MSN I NIIPET
MSN

Posted by Bill | May 12, 2007 4:07 PM
36

Well, most of these comments reinforce my opinion that America will never be the great nation it once was. It's just a shame that most of you find it satisfying that a man died. It's a sad state of affairs. And I bet most of you blame everything wrong in America on Bush and the Republicans. What a shame, do you think things will be any better if a Democrat wins the next election? How naive if you do. For my part, we should run EVERY politician out of D.C. and start all over. But that's just my opinion.

Posted by Vet | May 14, 2007 4:27 AM
37

Great News, they announced today that the Blue Angels will be returning to Seafair this summer! I can't wait for the show!

It's pretty sad that some of you can't remove your blinders and just sit back with a cold one (or organic wheat-grass smoothie) and enjoy the show for it's entertainment value. I consider myself pretty left leaning on most topics, but some of you are really making the left look extreme. I always look at those far-right wing nuts and shake my head in amazement... I ask myself "how can they be so freakin narrow minded?"

Now I can see why they look at us left wingers like we are nuts.

Posted by Tony | May 14, 2007 9:01 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).