NCclimber 0 #151 February 8, 2007 QuoteOK, what model year was O'Neill's limo? Was Delay's a later model year or did he use O'Neill's hand me down limo? So now you're going for the "technology improves over time, so it must have been better" rationale? Pathetic. Really. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #152 February 8, 2007 QuoteThis thread sucks. You're right. You haven't gratuitously insulted me even once. I'm getting bored waiting for you. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #153 February 8, 2007 QuoteQuoteThis thread sucks. You're right. You haven't gratuitously insulted me even once. I'm getting bored waiting for you. Ok. "GO FUCK YOURSELF!!" -Or- "KILL YOURSELF." Happy?Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #154 February 8, 2007 QuoteWill your taxes in any way shape or form change for the better or worse based on the decision which plane she flies in? Which is the reason why the budget grows seemingly exponentially. The harm is spread so that it reaps great rewards for one and almost unnoticeable harm to everyone else. By the way, your argument is the reason why class-action lawsuits exist. Compare the US Government to Halliburton, and see how puny Halliburton it. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,147 #155 February 8, 2007 QuoteWhich is the reason why the budget grows seemingly exponentially. The harm is spread so that it reaps great rewards for one and almost unnoticeable harm to everyone else. I agree with that. Though the planes in thise case have already been purchased. I would assume that running them is covered in the current budget. Net increase or decreae is likely to be very small. I said before, the whole argument is silly and completely politics driven. One speaker got to fly non-stop, the new speaker gets to fly non-stop. This is about as big a non-issue as it really gets. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #156 February 8, 2007 QuoteQuoteOK, what model year was O'Neill's limo? Was Delay's a later model year or did he use O'Neill's hand me down limo? So now you're going for the "technology improves over time, so it must have been better" rationale? Pathetic. Really. Are you now arguing that technology doesn't improve with time? Weak, and this entire topic is an attempt to distract from the real issues of the day. Even the White House says the whining is silly. Snow's comments apply perfectly to you and DaVinci "This is a silly story,'' Tony Snow, White House spokesman.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #157 February 8, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteOK, what model year was O'Neill's limo? Was Delay's a later model year or did he use O'Neill's hand me down limo? So now you're going for the "technology improves over time, so it must have been better" rationale? Pathetic. Really. Are you now arguing that technology doesn't improve with time? Just pointing out that it stupid to claim Delay got more than O'Neill because they both rode in current year limos. It's just a shallow attempt to divert attention away from your failing to produce anything to support you claim. Must be a day that ends in "y". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #158 February 8, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteOK, what model year was O'Neill's limo? Was Delay's a later model year or did he use O'Neill's hand me down limo? So now you're going for the "technology improves over time, so it must have been better" rationale? Pathetic. Really. Are you now arguing that technology doesn't improve with time? Just pointing out that it stupid to claim Delay got more than O'Neill because they both rode in current year limos. It's just a shallow attempt to divert attention away from your failing to produce anything to support you claim. Must be a day that ends in "y". I think Thomas Jefferson mentioned some things called "self evident truths". I guess some people have a hard time even with truths that are so self-evident they slap them in the face. As White House spokesman Tony Snow so perceptively said, your entire position on this non-issue is SILLY.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #159 February 9, 2007 The title of this thread suggest that Pelosi said "I want my jet" when in fact she never said such. Inappropriate use of qoutation marks. White House Defends Pelosi Plane Request Feb 8, 8:28 PM (ET) By JIM KUHNHENN WASHINGTON (AP) - Democrat Nancy Pelosi received some rare help Thursday from the White House against a barrage of Republican criticism over how the new House speaker intends to get back home. For security reasons, Pelosi is entitled to fly to her San Francisco district on military planes. The House sergeant-at-arms, who helps oversee security for the House, suggested that flying nonstop would be the safest way home for Pelosi, next after the vice president in the line of presidential succession. Republicans, led by aggressive junior lawmakers, seized on the most extreme possibility: Pelosi's flying on the military equivalent of a Boeing 757 with the latest in travel comforts. Too expensive, some critics said. Too polluting, others said. Too much ado about nothing, the White House weighed in. "I have never asked for any larger plane," Pelosi said. "I have said that I am happy to ride commercial if the plane they have doesn't go coast to coast." To presidential spokesman Tony Snow, "This is a silly story and I think it's been unfair to the speaker." During debate on a bill that encouraged research on advanced fuels, Republicans proposed an amendment urging planes diversify their fuel load to include "domestically produced alternative fuels." The amendment singled out "passenger planes with 42 business class seats capable of transcontinental flights" - exactly the specifications of an Air Force C-32 jet. "The jet that Pelosi has produces 10,000 pounds of carbon dioxide an hour, far more than the previous speaker used," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C. Pelosi's predecessor was Rep. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill. Flying in a large Air Force plane, Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said, "appears to remove any spending controls from our operations and dramatically increases our impact on the environment especially climate change." Snow, too, came under criticism. "He does not have a duty, as I do, to come to this floor and to discuss the consequences for our taxpayers," said Rep. John Shadegg, R-Ariz. After the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush administration agreed to provide Hastert with a military plane for added security during trips back home. Hastert flew in a commuter-sized Air Force jet. Livingood said in a statement he recommended the Pentagon continue the practice, begun with Hastert, of flying the speaker back home. "The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making nonstop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable," he said. The Pentagon this week informed Pelosi's staff that she would be provided with a plane but the size would be based on availability and nonstop service could not be guaranteed. The Pentagon's guidelines say Pelosi could be accompanied by family members, provided they pay the government coach fare. The plane could not be used for travel to political events. Members of Congress could join her if the travel is cleared by the House ethics committee. Pelosi speculated that Defense Department officials were distorting the story as retribution for her stance against the war and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. "Why would the Department of Defense be not denying this information that has been conveyed?" she asked. "Why are they feeding the flames?" Snow called Pelosi's office to make sure she knew the White House supported her use of a military plane. He also distanced the White House from the GOP's take on the matter. The Republican National Committee said Pelosi was on a "power trip." Snow, asked whether the RNC is free to go after Pelosi on its own, said, "Well, apparently they did this time." -- Associated Press writer Anne Flaherty contributed to this report."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #160 February 9, 2007 QuoteI think Thomas Jefferson mentioned some things called "self evident truths". I guess some people have a hard time even with truths that are so self-evident they slap them in the face. Instead of backing up your claim or admitting you were wrong (can you imagine?), you try to put the onus on me. How predictable. DURRR Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lauras 0 #161 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteThis thread sucks. You're right. You haven't gratuitously insulted me even once. I'm getting bored waiting for you. Ok. "GO FUCK YOURSELF!!" -Or- "KILL YOURSELF." Happy? Holy crap. You two need to take a couple of xanax and meet up at the Ranch's Fight Night this summer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #162 February 9, 2007 QuoteAre you sure, given prevailing winds and obligatory IFR reserves? I've been on an AF "commuter" jet that had to refuel mid continent on account of winds. 5500 nm is nearly enough range to fly across the continental US, twice. QuoteNo-one has yet answered why it's OK for a GOP vice president and GOP first lady to get a C32 for ANY trip at all, but not for the 3rd highest official in the nation to fly coast to coast. "First Lady" isn't even a government official at all. I missed this question. I understand why the VP gets a big plane. It doesn't bother me regardless of who's in office. VP Gore probably had a nice spread. No big deal, and I'm sure his environmental consciousness was set aside for such times when he flew on such a nice plane. The first lady...never thought about it and didn't know about her travel arrangements.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #163 February 9, 2007 QuoteHoly crap. You two need to take a couple of xanax and meet up at the Ranch's Fight Night this summer. Me? Nah! I don't fight. I just like to watch. And exafo is FUN to watch. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #164 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteAre you sure, given prevailing winds and obligatory IFR reserves? I've been on an AF "commuter" jet that had to refuel mid continent on account of winds. 5500 nm is nearly enough range to fly across the continental US, twice. . Yet the Air Force cannot guarantee even one non-stop crossing in the smaller planes. Is it JUST POSSIBLE that the US Air Force knows more than you?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #165 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteI think Thomas Jefferson mentioned some things called "self evident truths". I guess some people have a hard time even with truths that are so self-evident they slap them in the face. Instead of backing up your claim or admitting you were wrong (can you imagine?), you try to put the onus on me. How predictable. DURRR If I wrote "The Sun rose in the east this morning" you would demand a cite, and then bicker about it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #166 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteI think Thomas Jefferson mentioned some things called "self evident truths". I guess some people have a hard time even with truths that are so self-evident they slap them in the face. Instead of backing up your claim or admitting you were wrong (can you imagine?), you try to put the onus on me. How predictable. DURRR If I wrote "The Sun rose in the east this morning" you would demand a cite, and then bicker about it. If you'd put up or own up, instead of consistently resorting to diversionary tactics, we could avoid so much. Kind of sucks being pressed to back up your claims, eh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #167 February 9, 2007 I find it kinda idiotic that skydivers (at least us who actually skydive) would be arguing about fuel waste, considering the vast amount of fuel that is wasted soley to jump out of an airplane when we all can easily become BASE jumpers and save the fuel for better use. If Pelosi actually demanded this plane then I could understand the arguement but, she didn't demand anything so, the arguement is completely meritless."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #168 February 9, 2007 Quote... { a bunch of petty shit deleted } ... FYI, I think most everyone here has caught on that you hash up these threads just to amuse yourself. Yes, you can make a big mess of other people's conversations which is an accomplishment of sorts, I guess. But nobody actually believes that the crap you spew is sincere. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #169 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuote... { a bunch of petty shit deleted } ... FYI, I think most everyone here has caught on that you hash up these threads just to amuse yourself. Yes, you can make a big mess of other people's conversations which is an accomplishment of sorts, I guess. But nobody actually believes that the crap you spew is sincere. Funny how your MO is to merely attack my style or me personally, but rarely to you refute my factual assertions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #170 February 9, 2007 QuoteYet the Air Force cannot guarantee even one non-stop crossing in the smaller planes. Is it JUST POSSIBLE that the US Air Force knows more than you? Indeed, the certainly do when it comes to planes. A good friend of mine is a pilot with Special Air Missions, I'm going to ask him. All the articles I've read, I've not seen the Air Force say they couldn't guarantee non-stop service with any particular plane. I've only seen that they couldn't guarantee non-stop service "period", based on actual aircraft availability: QuoteThe Pentagon informed Pelosi's staff this week that she would get a plane, based on availability, and that nonstop service could not be guaranteed. --*underline mine* http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070209/ap_on_go_co/pelosi_plane Based on what it costs SAM to operate the 757 variant on an hourly basis ($22,000/hr), I'd be all for her office just buying First Class commercial tickets for her and a couple members of her staff or family. It would be cheaper, and the exposure certainly wouldn't hurt her image...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #171 February 9, 2007 So did you catch today's revelations? From CNN.com Quote House security chief: Pelosi didn't ask for plane; I did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not request a larger plane for personal use to travel cross-country without stopping, Bill Livingood, the House sergeant at arms, said Thursday. Livingood said the request was his, and he made it for security reasons. "The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable," Livingood, who has been at his post for 11 years, said in a written statement. "I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue," the statement said. Pelosi is striking back against accusations she asked for a plane larger and more expensive than the one used by former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, a claim published last week in The Washington Times.(Watch Pelosi call the GOP charges "a myth" ) The Times article, headlined "Pelosi's Power Trip -- Non-stop Nancy Seeks Flight of Fancy," led the Republican National Committee to send out a research briefing and blast Pelosi on the House floor. The article said Pelosi asked the Pentagon for "routine access" to a military plane "not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation," quoting sources "familiar with the discussions." "I have never asked for a larger plane," Pelosi said. "This is a myth that they are talking about on the floor." The White House also stood behind Pelosi. "As speaker of the House, she is entitled to military transport and ... the proper arrangements are being made between the Sergeant of Arms Office in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Department of Defense," White House spokesman Tony Snow said. "We think it's appropriate," he added. "And so, again, I think this is much ado about not a whole lot. It is important for the speaker to have this kind of protection and travel." On Wednesday, the Pentagon sent a letter to Pelosi's office with guidance about travel regulations. The letter said the military would make "every effort" to provide a non-stop flight to Pelosi's home district, but "such support is subject to aircraft type and availability and therefore may not always be guaranteed." (Read the Pentagon's letter to Speaker Pelosi -- PDF) Pelosi's family would have to reimburse the Air Force if they used the aircraft, the letter stated. Meanwhile, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania, chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, said on Thursday that he's planning hearings this spring on executive and congressional travel on military aircraft. Murtha said he's requested from the Defense Department records on travel and logistics from the past two years. He asked the Defense Department to hand those over within a month. Some House Republicans on Thursday were pressing for an amendment on the floor on Pelosi's use of a military plane, according to Murtha. Murtha predicted that Pelosi would end up getting a plane that would be able to fly across country without stopping to refuel. "I'm seldom wrong on these kinds of predictions," he said. Too bad the title of this thread is completely wrong. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
narcimund 0 #172 February 9, 2007 QuoteSo did you catch today's revelations? I bet a nickle we hear a great big silence from the OP about this. First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #173 February 9, 2007 QuoteSo did you catch today's revelations? From CNN.com *** House security chief: Pelosi didn't ask for plane; I did House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not request a larger plane for personal use to travel cross-country without stopping, Bill Livingood, the House sergeant at arms, said Thursday. Livingood said the request was his, and he made it for security reasons. "The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable," Livingood, who has been at his post for 11 years, said in a written statement. "I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue," the statement said. Pelosi is striking back against accusations she asked for a plane larger and more expensive than the one used by former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, a claim published last week in The Washington Times.(Watch Pelosi call the GOP charges "a myth" ) The Times article, headlined "Pelosi's Power Trip -- Non-stop Nancy Seeks Flight of Fancy," THE WASHINGTON TIMES Wow, there's a surprise!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #174 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteSo did you catch today's revelations? I bet a nickle we hear a great big silence from the OP about this. You reckon? Facts are important and should be checked before drawing conclusions.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #175 February 9, 2007 QuoteQuoteSo did you catch today's revelations? I bet a nickle we hear a great big silence from the OP about this. You'd lose. Aside from my cut and paste in the original post (and one other post) my participation in this thread has been about her not being "entitled" to a C32. Hey Kallend, Do you still think she's completely entitled to a C-32? Livendive, I'd change the title to "Another tempest in a teacup" if I could. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
