Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Gov. Romney says "Hams are not needed" with agitation.....  (Read 108408 times)
NN4RH
Member

Posts: 506




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: January 08, 2012, 08:05:43 PM »

This seems like much ado over nothing.   

Yeah. Really, who friggin gives a hoot what any prez candidate thinks about ham radio. There are bigger issues with the country.
Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6251




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2012, 06:11:03 AM »

Quote
Geeeeez!!!!   Undecided This is old news, and the editorial comments look like they came out from the Boston "Blob", the New York "Slimes" or the Washington "Com"post.  This happened 6-7 years ago when Romney wasn't even thinking seriously about running for President.

And that is my biggest concern. Since he was not pandering, he must have been serious. Think about it.

But he WAS pandering, and this piece was part of an interview he did the first time he was 'considering' a run for the presidency.  To add to the insult, this interview was a discussion about how emergency situations were handled by the government.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2012, 06:14:08 AM by K1CJS » Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6251




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2012, 06:12:45 AM »

Mr. Romney also may have meant we dont to have to use ham radio. That could also mean that he wants a communication system that can withstand anything.
That's seems to be what he meant - our daily emergency communications shouldn't have to turn to amateur radio just because of a power failure. We can't be 100% sure if he meant he'd never use amateur radio even if the situation got so bad that the fail-safe system fails, unless we look closer at if he spoke about it at other occasions. However, the official word from the campaign, is that he recognizes the role of amateur radio, but was speaking about hardening the emergency response infrastructure, so it appears you can vote for Romney with good conciseness if the only issue is amateur radio.


You can guess all day, but you'll still be guessing.  See my last post.  BTW, I believe his exact words were something like 'We don't need ham radio.'
« Last Edit: January 09, 2012, 06:15:57 AM by K1CJS » Logged
K7RBW
Member

Posts: 506




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2012, 06:52:59 AM »

I wouldn't vote for Mitt in any event, but, in all fairness, while he may have uttered the words "we don't need ham radio," the context of the question that answer are such that you really can't read much into it. When pressed for clarification, later, he (his office) said that they were trying to say that they were building an emergency response capability that would not need to rely on ham radio (i.e. be self- sufficient), however, they still understood the need for ham radio as a backup to that system.

Of course, Gov. Mitt, like so many other candidates for public office, has been know to say whatever he thinks will resonate with his audience so who knows what he "really" means.
Logged
WA4VBC
Member

Posts: 27




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: January 09, 2012, 08:31:07 AM »

I know those hams involved with "emergency communications" don't want to hear it , but the honest truth is that ham radio is not needed as it was back years ago.  Most government agencies now have much better equipment than the average ham and hams are not the only ones that have expertise in radio related equipment.   A ham station with no emergency power or someone with only a hand held radio will not be needed during a real emergency.  Just my opinion and I am sure others disagree. 
Logged
ONAIR
Member

Posts: 3657




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2012, 12:56:11 PM »

Mr. Romney also may have meant we dont to have to use ham radio. That could also mean that he wants a communication system that can withstand anything.
That's seems to be what he meant - our daily emergency communications shouldn't have to turn to amateur radio just because of a power failure. We can't be 100% sure if he meant he'd never use amateur radio even if the situation got so bad that the fail-safe system fails, unless we look closer at if he spoke about it at other occasions. However, the official word from the campaign, is that he recognizes the role of amateur radio, but was speaking about hardening the emergency response infrastructure, so it appears you can vote for Romney with good conciseness if the only issue is amateur radio.


You can guess all day, but you'll still be guessing.  See my last post.  BTW, I believe his exact words were something like 'We don't need ham radio.'
  Just what we don't need, a President who will tell the FCC to cut our frequencies!!   Sad   Guaranteed that a CBer like Romney will move to expand the CB band down to 80 Meters.
Logged
LA9XSA
Member

Posts: 376




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: January 10, 2012, 01:06:10 AM »

1: Candidate wants resilient emergency communication systems that will work even if the power goes out.
2: ?? ?? 
3: Candidate will shut down amateur radio.

I think you panic guys skipped a logical step there.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2012, 01:08:14 AM by LA9XSA » Logged
KN4X
Member

Posts: 6




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: January 10, 2012, 07:37:41 AM »

Ignorance in it's PUREST form.   Sad

I don't think Mitt Romney understands the role that AR has, and still does play in Emergency Communications, plain and simple.  It's just another example of our need to continue to educate our elected "elite" rulers.

God help us all if this is the best we can find to be our leader.

David
KN4X
Logged
LA9XSA
Member

Posts: 376




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: January 10, 2012, 08:20:07 AM »

I suspect step 2 is "RON PAUL!!!1!"
Logged
KC2EIW
Member

Posts: 5




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: January 10, 2012, 08:28:02 AM »

We need Barry Goldwater back!  Seriously, I could care less what this clown thinks of amateur radio, his ignorance speaks for itself.  Ham radio will still be around when this idiot is a small historical footnote.
Logged
AJ4YQ
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: January 10, 2012, 08:53:29 AM »

Sadly, I think that even the door knob is better than what we have now, so if it's the doorknob, I'm voting for it. 

73
AJ4YQ
Logged
N2RRA
Member

Posts: 718


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #41 on: January 10, 2012, 03:19:29 PM »

I wouldn't vote for Mitt in any event, but, in all fairness, while he may have uttered the words "we don't need ham radio," the context of the question that answer are such that you really can't read much into it. When pressed for clarification, later, he (his office) said that they were trying to say that they were building an emergency response capability that would not need to rely on ham radio (i.e. be self- sufficient), however, they still understood the need for ham radio as a backup to that system.

Of course, Gov. Mitt, like so many other candidates for public office, has been know to say whatever he thinks will resonate with his audience so who knows what he "really" means.

I didn't mean for this to be a electoral debate for presidency but I guess a reminder ,or news flash for the ones that missed it like myself. Since it has become a political topic which I guess was inevitable let's think about this.

1. He needed his office to "clarify" what really means "clean up his screw up comment" to make peace with the millions of Ham's which can be possible votes.

2. He wants to build a structure that replace's Ham's for emergency use.

As an elected official in these times you don't want him/her to look for a way to spend more money in our devastated economy to increase the deficit.

Does it make sense to create more of a deficit by building something at cost when an alternative already in place that has no negatives that has worked for over a hundred years at no cost be done away with? HELLLOOOOO!!!

If government needed secret messages passed in time of emergency I'm sure they have something in place. As for state/city emergency communications the equipment used is not ,and will not be any more high tech than what we have now. Not to mention they'll probably turn to more digital crap and wind up leaving something out.

Going back to needing his office to clarify his screw up. Do we really need someone who can't clarify for himself. He's always been looked at as not the sharpest tool in the shed and now I know why.

Someone said Ham's are not needed anymore for emergency communications. That was a dumb ass comment because as seen in very recent times in this country alone with Katrina and 9/11 they sure were needed no questions asked.

They weren't only used for Red Cross and FEMA but the city of New York FDNY, NYPD and EMS surely needed them to transport and direct via communication all of them from all over the world all over the city.

73!

Logged
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6251




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: January 11, 2012, 05:44:30 AM »

That is what is known as spin, pure and simple--that is, the governor's spokesperson explaning what he actually meant.  It is otherwise known as the spokesperson pulling the governors foot--and shoe out of his mouth.  On second thought, not his mouth--his throat!

That's what is to remember here--Romney has foot in mouth disease.
Logged
KC9TNH
Member

Posts: 304




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: January 11, 2012, 10:35:15 AM »

That's what is to remember here--Romney has foot in mouth disease.
The all get innoculated with it when they decide to run. He's a wanker, but whoever's left to run against the current resident at the White House will get my vote. I will not let my Amateur ticket stand on ceremony over an ill-considered comment by someone who probably didn't understand what he was talking about & probably thought Amateur Radio means CB or Walwart bubble-paks.

Shakespeare's Much Ado about Nothing.


Logged

73
Wes -KC9TNH
"Don't get treed by a chihuahua." - Pete
ONAIR
Member

Posts: 3657




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2012, 11:09:37 AM »

Perhaps the ARRL should ask Romney to publicly clarify his statement, just for the record.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!