PDA

View Full Version : Pelosi treats USAF as personal airline



Bob Gutermuth
03-10-2009, 08:26 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/10/study-pelosi-repeated-requests-military-aircraft/

Goose
03-10-2009, 09:09 PM
That woman is not right in the head. There's something mentally wrong with her. She believes she's part of the permanent ruling class that stands above the law and gets what she wants because she's an artistocrat and a democrat.

Google 'insane female leaders' and I bet her picture comes up.

Raymond Little
03-10-2009, 10:08 PM
Like this,,,,,,,,,,,

http://www.eccentric-cinema.com/cult_movies/kichiku.htm

Eric Johnson
03-10-2009, 10:19 PM
What sort of baffles me is that while she insists on a G5 to travel about the country, the heads of the auto firms were slapped silly for doing the same thing by the very representatives she leads.

Eric

Patrick Johndrow
03-10-2009, 10:26 PM
She is a nut...you can see her eyes spinning in the sockets.

YardleyLabs
03-11-2009, 07:19 AM
From factcheck.org:

"Pelosi has used the Air Force equivalent of a Boeing 757 to fly between Washington, D.C., and her San Francisco district. But she has done so exactly once, when no smaller aircraft was available, according to Air Force spokesman Eric Sharman. At other times she flies in a much smaller, 12-seat executive jet, the same type used by her Republican predecessor, Dennis Hastert.

As we pointed out in an Ask FactCheck item on Dec. 12, (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_order_up_a_200-seat.html) Hastert was given use of an Air Force C-20B (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=87) for security reasons following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The speaker of the house is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession.

When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood (who was appointed by a Republican-led House) proposed using a larger jet (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;/*1231870875777*/) that could make the transcontinental flight to her San Francisco district without refueling. This led to claims that Pelosi was demanding use of the Air Force C-32 (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=90), normally used by the vice president and first lady. It is fitted out with a fully enclosed stateroom that includes a private lavatory, separate entertainment system and a convertible divan that seats three and folds out to a bed – a "flying Lincoln bedroom," in the words of Republican House Whip Roy Blunt.

But the Pentagon told Pelosi (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070208_Pelosi_DoD_Letter.pdf) that – while it would make "every effort ... to provide non-stop shuttle support" – it could not guarantee it. As things have worked out, both Pelosi's spokesman and the Air Force say the only time she's flown in the C-32 was when no smaller aircraft was available. She also uses commercial airlines when not traveling on official business, according to her spokesman Brendan Daly."

(More details at http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_order_up_a_200-seat.html)

Personally, I question whether or not the policy implemented by the WH following 9/11 was ever justified. We might all be better off having our elected officials fly regular planes along with the rest of us -- if it's safe enough for me it's safe enough for them. Of course, maybe we're really saying that their presence on a plane endangers the rest of us. After reading through all 72 pages of the DoD documents sent to the self described conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, I don't see anything that stands out very much. The initial discussions of plane sizes were initiated by the Republican appointed Sergeat at Arms and related to identifying which aircraft were capable of flying to San Francisco non-stop. In the later correspondence, similar discussions of size had to do with the need for refueling stops on international trips. Pelosi routinely flies commercial flights for personal business. Personally, I don't care for her mush at all. However, given the WH policy implemented by Bush, her usage of military aircraft does not seem inappropriate.

road kill
03-11-2009, 09:15 AM
From factcheck.org:

"Pelosi has used the Air Force equivalent of a Boeing 757 to fly between Washington, D.C., and her San Francisco district. But she has done so exactly once, when no smaller aircraft was available, according to Air Force spokesman Eric Sharman. At other times she flies in a much smaller, 12-seat executive jet, the same type used by her Republican predecessor, Dennis Hastert.

As we pointed out in an Ask FactCheck item on Dec. 12, (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_order_up_a_200-seat.html) Hastert was given use of an Air Force C-20B (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=87) for security reasons following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The speaker of the house is next in line after the vice president for presidential succession.

When Pelosi became speaker, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood (who was appointed by a Republican-led House) proposed using a larger jet (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;/*1231870875777*/) that could make the transcontinental flight to her San Francisco district without refueling. This led to claims that Pelosi was demanding use of the Air Force C-32 (http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=90), normally used by the vice president and first lady. It is fitted out with a fully enclosed stateroom that includes a private lavatory, separate entertainment system and a convertible divan that seats three and folds out to a bed – a "flying Lincoln bedroom," in the words of Republican House Whip Roy Blunt.

But the Pentagon told Pelosi (http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/070208_Pelosi_DoD_Letter.pdf) that – while it would make "every effort ... to provide non-stop shuttle support" – it could not guarantee it. As things have worked out, both Pelosi's spokesman and the Air Force say the only time she's flown in the C-32 was when no smaller aircraft was available. She also uses commercial airlines when not traveling on official business, according to her spokesman Brendan Daly."

(More details at http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_nancy_pelosi_order_up_a_200-seat.html)

Personally, I question whether or not the policy implemented by the WH following 9/11 was ever justified. We might all be better off having our elected officials fly regular planes along with the rest of us -- if it's safe enough for me it's safe enough for them. Of course, maybe we're really saying that their presence on a plane endangers the rest of us. After reading through all 72 pages of the DoD documents sent to the self described conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch, I don't see anything that stands out very much. The initial discussions of plane sizes were initiated by the Republican appointed Sergeat at Arms and related to identifying which aircraft were capable of flying to San Francisco non-stop. In the later correspondence, similar discussions of size had to do with the need for refueling stops on international trips. Pelosi routinely flies commercial flights for personal business. Personally, I don't care for her mush at all. However, given the WH policy implemented by Bush, her usage of military aircraft does not seem inappropriate.

So....let's see if I have this right....it's President Bush's fault?:rolleyes:

YardleyLabs
03-11-2009, 12:39 PM
So....let's see if I have this right....it's President Bush's fault?:rolleyes:

The policy requiring the Speaker to use military planes for most official travel was implemented under Bush when Hastert was Speaker. All of the usage discussed in the Judicial Watch report happened under that policy while Bush was President. If Pelosi followed that policy, the costs are clearly attributable to a decision made by the Bush administration. If she abused that policy, the fault is hers.

Do I agree with the policy? I'm not sure. I have serious reservations but would have to listen to the security concerns of the CIA and DoD that presumably led to the creation of this policy by Bush. It may have been essential then and it may still be essential now. I'm not sure anyone is to "blame".

Hew
03-11-2009, 12:47 PM
I'm not sure anyone is to "blame".
Who is to blame for the disgusting sense of entitlement, self-importance and intimidation exhibited by Pelosi's staff? Surely you don't think this is the first time that Pelosi or her staff has acted like that. It's probably the tip of the iceberg.



In one e-mail, aide Kay King complained to the military that they had not made available any aircraft the House speaker wanted for Memorial Day recess.
"It is my understanding there are NO G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable ... The Speaker will want to know where the planes are," King wrote.

In another, when told a certain type of aircraft would not be available, King wrote: "This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset Speaker."

Sunshine-WI
03-11-2009, 12:48 PM
Let's just pray that Pelosi is never in the position to be President of the USA.

I have always looked down on other people saying they would move to another country to get away from having a certain president voted into office here.
But, if this country went crazy enough here to put her in the office of Pres, I would seriously think of moving to my Mum's home country of Australia.
Pelosi is definitely quite a few cards short of a full deck. ;);)

road kill
03-11-2009, 02:45 PM
Let's just pray that Pelosi is never in the position to be President of the USA.

I have always looked down on other people saying they would move to another country to get away from having a certain president voted into office here.
But, if this country went crazy enough here to put her in the office of Pres, I would seriously think of moving to my Mum's home country of Australia.
Pelosi is definitely quite a few cards short of a full deck. ;);)

Or, you could always move to the UP!!
(UP is the Michigan Upper Peninsula, a very special place)

That's where me & Elvis will go!!:cool:

IowaBayDog
03-11-2009, 06:32 PM
Or, you could always move to the UP!!
(UP is the Michigan Upper Peninsula, a very special place)

That's where me & Elvis will go!!:cool:


Hey, that's my hiding spot!! And the only way it will be a safe one is if you take out the might Mac and keep all the liberal trolls out.

YardleyLabs
03-11-2009, 11:41 PM
Who is to blame for the disgusting sense of entitlement, self-importance and intimidation exhibited by Pelosi's staff? Surely you don't think this is the first time that Pelosi or her staff has acted like that. It's probably the tip of the iceberg.

Read the actual report. It includes every piece of email concerning aircraft between Pelosi's office and the military from the time she became Speaker (I wonder why they didn't request Hastert's correspondence:rolleyes:) and February 2009. There are (I believe) 72 messages back and forth.

The "sense of entitlement" was perceived on both sides. That is, the military views providing the aircraft for congressional leaders as being only slightly lower in priority than providing similar transport for the President. That is not a priority set by Pelosi, or Hastert before her, but by the President's directive following 9/11. It is also clear that, when Pelosi first became Speaker, that it took a period of time for her staff to become familiar with procedures and policies governing travel.

Do I agree with the Presidential directive on travel by Congressional leaders? Not really, as I noted before. Hastert had a plane fully dedicated to his personal use. Pelosi has used the same plane for almost all of her travel. Her travel seems to have been more extensive because San Francisco is further away than Illinois and because she seems to be more involved in foreign policy. The one time there was an issue with the size of the plane was for an oversees trip involving more than 30 people -- all traveling in an official capacity. Some of the passengers had to be dropped because of capacity considerations.

My own experience is that providing such benefits creates attitude issues where the beneficiaries do develop an unwarranted sense of their own importance. I tend to think we would be better off if the President and all other elected officials traveled on commercial flights as long as they were not in hostile territories. Of course, I feel the same about all those corporate execs using company helocopters to go golfing on Thursdays and corporate jets to go on vacation, and I felt the same about the government car I was provided when I was in politics (I returned it to the car pool) and the golf club membership that i was required (but refused) to maintain, at company expense, as a Partner in a major accounting firm. However, if security considerations require that military flights be used, I would not expect the officials affected to travel less. As it is, flights on the aircraft used regularly by Pelosi (and Hastert before her) take longer than commercial flights because of the more limited range and speed of the aircraft. When her family is involved, they also cost more than she would have had to pay buying tickets commercially since her husband and children pay full commercial airfares without discounts. Maybe that's why they normally travel on commercial flights for all personal travel. Personally, I won't fly in 12-seat planes (which is what Pelosi receives) for long travel because I don't believe they are safe. When that is my only option, I normally drive or cancel the trip.

I'm not a fan of Pelosi. However, she has a job to do and it is clear that she works at it very hard. Much of that work involves high volume travel -- much of that for events that may need to be rescheduled with little notice. Using our military to provide such a service is probably a misuse of resources that ends up with poor service and high cost. I suspect that all involved would be happier if the military were taken out of the picture.

Bruce MacPherson
03-12-2009, 02:11 AM
Pelosi is certifiable. Like that little junket to Rome, I'm sure to straighten out the Popes uninlightened views. I'd say the third in charge is running the show, hard left rudder.

Lush Lumbago
03-12-2009, 02:42 AM
Or, you could always move to the UP!!
(UP is the Michigan Upper Peninsula, a very special place)

That's where me & Elvis will go!!:cool:

Hey, youse guys. We got enuf people here. Might let IowaDB back in if he takes a sauna and sings da "Second Week of Deer Camp."

For da rest of yous, da visa costs a six pack of Bosch beer.


Da Gipper lives!

Hew
03-12-2009, 05:37 AM
Was bored and read the emails. The most interesting/disgusting item:

In '07 a handfull of Democrats wanted to take a military jet to Mexico and Honduras with a convenient, 24+ hour layover in the Virgin Islands. They were told that since no Republicans were on the trip it was considered partisan and not available for military aircraft support. They recruited a Republican Congresswoman from Wyoming who'd already announced she wasn't running for re-election to go and then they were able to get their military taxi service and free vacation. :rolleyes:

Steve Amrein
03-12-2009, 09:18 AM
Why doesnt Pelosi just fly on her broom........

road kill
03-12-2009, 09:25 AM
Hey, youse guys. We got enuf people here. Might let IowaDB back in if he takes a sauna and sings da "Second Week of Deer Camp."

For da rest of yous, da visa costs a six pack of Bosch beer.


Da Gipper lives!

Been huntin' and ridin' up dare for years.
Probably be there again, soon.
Was last there about 6 weeks ago, fisin' in da bay in Escanaba!!

Little Bay, was cold!!

Mike Noel
03-12-2009, 09:50 AM
Needing military aircraft for her safety reasons???? I believe the terrorists are smart enough to know that a living Nancy Pelosi can do a lot more damage to our country than pretty much anything they can do.......I think she is safe.

sinner
03-12-2009, 12:08 PM
Blah BLAH..............BLAH!
Why not worry about something that you can do something about!

How about you find something in the our governments plans that you do like and work your ass off to make it happen.

Do something good for one American, volunteer spend some money to help the economy.

All your nervous tight butted wall streeters quit bitching and make something good happen!

Dogbonez

John Kelder
03-12-2009, 12:14 PM
Do you lead by example ???

sinner
03-12-2009, 12:24 PM
I do! I am a member of the Area Agency on Aging. Our purpose is to identify low income seniors and improve their lives and care.
I give free rehab services to the low income and homeless.
We both spend time with special ed children and my wife helps at the local library.
We don't watch FOX Or MSNBC!

Patrick Johndrow
03-12-2009, 12:37 PM
I do! I am a member of the Area Agency on Aging. Our purpose is to identify low income seniors and improve their lives and care.
I give free rehab services to the low income and homeless.
We both spend time with special ed children and my wife helps at the local library.
We don't watch FOX Or MSNBC!

Good for you…those are admirable endeavors but you are making the assumption none of us do anything which is wildly incorrect. I know several people on this board that donate their time and/or resources to the less fortunate…they however don’t seek public appreciation for these acts. So do not assume you know anything about us personally.

road kill
03-12-2009, 01:14 PM
Good for you…those are admirable endeavors but you are making the assumption none of us do anything which is wildly incorrect. I know several people on this board that donate their time and/or resources to the less fortunate…they however don’t seek public appreciation for these acts. So do not assume you know anything about us personally.

You, sir, are correct!!

sinner
03-12-2009, 01:22 PM
Patrick you asked I replied.
I did not assume anything. I am just tired of the bickering and fear pedaling and negativity from all of us myself included.
Now do something positive for our nation at this point in time!

Patrick Johndrow
03-12-2009, 01:57 PM
I don’t think I asked a question I made a statement and I don’t think asking the gooberment to be responsible with the money the take from us…AND in the course of that discussion some bickering occurs so be it….I for one will not stick his head in the sand.

Mike Noel
03-12-2009, 02:26 PM
Blah BLAH..............BLAH!
Why not worry about something that you can do something about!

How about you find something in the our governments plans that you do like and work your ass off to make it happen.

Do something good for one American, volunteer spend some money to help the economy.

All your nervous tight butted wall streeters quit bitching and make something good happen!

Dogbonez

I am a "Wall Streeter" and my butt is tight but it's because I do a lot of squats in the gym.

Printing money on the bond desk regards,

Raymond Little
03-12-2009, 02:46 PM
Patrick you asked I replied.
I did not assume anything. I am just tired of the bickering and fear pedaling and negativity from all of us myself included.
Now do something positive for our nation at this point in time!
I get up every morning and try to provide for my family and only want the government to stay the hell out of my way.

I'm a Giver Regards;)