I must not be functioning at full capacity still. I’ve read this article 3 times, plus what other bloggers have to say about it, and I’m totally out of step with everyone. Hopefully somebody can help me here (from WaPo):
For emotional wallop, there are few rivals to the windswept, grassy field outside of Shanksville, Pa., where United Airlines Flight 93 crashed on Sept. 11, 2001.
But for three years, that field has made do with a makeshift monument while one member of Congress, Rep. Charles H. Taylor (R-N.C.), has blocked a $10 million request to buy the land for a permanent memorial to the 40 passengers and crew members who overpowered hijackers bent on crashing their jet into the Capitol or the White House.
I totally agree that there should be a memorial for Flight 93. Those folks were heroes, no doubt about it. According to the article, Rep. Taylor is blocking the request because:
The federal government is already the largest landowner in the country, and he believes that no additional tax dollars should go to more land buying for this or any other memorial. Beyond that, the families have committed to raising half the $60 million needed to build the memorial but so far have raised $7.5 million. Taylor is concerned that the federal government will be left holding the bag.
Now, Polimom isn’t impressed at all with his reasons; the concept of a National Memorial for Flight 93 shouldn’t be causing anybody any heartburn. America should remember those folks.
It’s the proposal itself that looks a bit off to Polimom. Why on earth would such a memorial need 1200 acres? That’s bigger than most National Parks! And even if there was a reason for that much land, $10 million seems like a lot to spend for it.
Could somebody ‘splain this? Please? Because even though my reasons would be different, I’d probably be blocking this, also…