DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Lanya on February 01, 2007, 10:35:38 PM
-
I heard a report that Nancy Pelosi is wanting to continue the Denny Hastert tradition of using military jets to take her around the country. This used to be done only in certain circumstances (going to US bases, for one) but came to be used willy-nilly. And she wants to extend the privilege to her family.
NO.
Thank you,
The Management.
-
The MATS flies all over the place, all the time. Frequently, they have space available on these flights. What is wrong with allowing congresspersons to occupy these otherwise available seats?
I am opposed to the military being used as a charter fight system, but I fail to see anything wrong with congresspersons hitching a ride if there is space available on already scheduled flights.
-
I used to fly space availible a lot .
I would get on a plane heading my way and go home for free , as an active duty serviceman on leave I was like priority eight with only one lower prioity , retirees.
I had to have enough money in pocket to buy a ride back because a space A flight can strand you anywhere.
I don't know what the basis for a Congressmans flying would be ,but I would want the military establishment and the militarys members to be open and accessable to congessmen.
-
The MATS flies all over the place, all the time. Frequently, they have space available on these flights. What is wrong with allowing congresspersons to occupy these otherwise available seats?
I am opposed to the military being used as a charter fight system, but I fail to see anything wrong with congresspersons hitching a ride if there is space available on already scheduled flights.
I didn't know this before, but the source of the story is the Moonie Times. I'll check into it.
-
I also heard that Pelosi's pledge of 5 day work weeks is still yet to see the light of day. Go figure. I'm shocked I tell yas, shocked :o
-
If it is just jumpseating like FedEx does, then I'm not really against it. I'm not for her freaking family getting a free ride though. Why not her extended family? Why not everyone?
Although if we were to really get nit picky about it, even with jumpseating, she's costing the government a few more pennies in gas. However, that is cheaper than a seat on a commercial flight maybe. Lots of ways of looking at it. But definitely no on her family getting freebies.
-
Clarifications.
FACT CHECK: Washington Times Publishes False Report On Pelosi’s Use Of Military Aircraft »
On February 1, the Washington Times published a story titled “Speaker pursues military flights,†which claimed that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had been “pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district.†Former Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) also used military aircraft to travel to his district. However, the Times reported, Pelosi is “demanding permanent access to a large military jet for herself, her staff, other Members and supporters.â€
The story was disseminated widely through right-wing talk radio and blogs, spurring posts like, “First Class Pelosi,†“Air Force Becomes Pelosi Air,†“Nancy Pelosi is Drunk With Power,†“The Imperial Speakership,†“Pelosi: Fly Me Awayyyyy,†“Pelosi wants military airlift,†and “Nancy Pelosi’s Private Military Plane.â€
In fact, the central claims of the Washington Times piece are both false.
1) The House Sergeant at Arms, not Pelosi, initiated inquiries into the use of military aircraft. House Sergeant at Arms Wilson Livingood, who has served in his position since 1995, released a statement today clarifying the facts. He writes, “In December 2006, I advised Speaker Pelosi that the US Air Force had made an airplane available to Speaker Hastert for security and communications purposes following September 11, 2001.†Additionally, Livingood writes, “I offered to call the U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense to seek clarification of the guidelines [which governed Speaker Hastert’s use of a plane].â€
2) A larger plane was requested because Hastert’s plane required refueling to travel cross-country. The Washington Times says a larger plane was requested to accomodate Pelosi, “her staff, other Members and supporters.†That’s not true. In fact, the plane used by Speaker Hastert was too small for Pelosi since it “needs to refuel every 2,000 miles and could not make the nonstop haul to California. ‘The Air Force determined that [Pelosi’s] safety would be best ensured by using a plane that has the fuel capacity to go coast-to-coast,’†a Pelosi spokesperson said.
-
Clarifications.
In fact, the central claims of the Washington Times piece are both false.
Hmmmm.... Lies or exagerations ...presented as true....
Don't worry this happens to the President all the time , it is a sign that Nancy Peloshi as "arrived".
-
Hmmmm.... Lies or exagerations ...presented as true....
More of that 'Republicans good, Democrats bad' crap. Seems like no one can get over their partisanship, though everyone calls for bipartisanship. Yeesh.
White House defends Pelosi plane request
WASHINGTON (AP)- The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi against Republican criticism that her desire to fly in an Air Force transport plane is an extravagance.
"This is a silly story and I think it's been unfair to the speaker," White House spokesman Tony Snow said.
Republicans are taking issue with the size of the plane Pelosi would need to fly in to reach her hometown of San Francisco without refueling. There are three Air Force airplanes that have the fuel capacity to make the trip nonstop, with the largest being a C-32 plane, a military version of the Boeing 757-200.
In an interview with Fox News Wednesday night, Pelosi speculated that Department of Defense officials were distorting the story as retribution for her stance against the war and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
"There are probably those in the Department of Defense who are not happy with my criticism of Secretary Rumsfeld, the war in Iraq, other waste, fraud and abuse in the Defense Department, and I guess this is their way of making their voices heard," she said.
The Pentagon this week informed Pelosi's staff that she would be provided with a plane but that its size would be based on availability and that it could not guarantee nonstop service.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Pentagon agreed to provide the House speaker, who is second in the line of presidential succession, with a military plane for added security during trips back home. Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert, an Illinois Republican, flew in a small commuter-sized Air Force jet.
Pelosi said she would be happy to fly on commercial airliners but said the House sergeant-at-arms office urged her to continue Hastert's practice of using Air Force transport. She said she was informed on her first trip home that her plane would not make it across the country.
"I said well, that's fine, I'm going commercial," she told Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren. "I'm not asking to go on that plane. If you need to take me there for security purposes, you're going to have to get a plane that goes across the country, because I'm going home to my family."
Rep. Adam Putnam of Florida, the No. 3 Republican leader, called Pelosi's desire for a large transport plane "an extravagance of power that the taxpayers won't swallow."
"It's important we see what the specific request was," Putnam said.
But Snow on Thursday said the negotiations over Pelosi's transport have been conducted solely by the House sergeant-at-arms and the Pentagon, with no direct involvement by the speaker or her office — or the White House.
The guidelines provided by the Pentagon 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 accompany her on the plane if the travel is cleared by the House ethics committee.
-
Hmmmm.... Lies or exagerations ...presented as true....
More of that 'Republicans good, Democrats bad' crap. Seems like no one can get over their partisanship, though everyone calls for bipartisanship. Yeesh.
White House defends Pelosi plane request
WASHINGTON (AP)- The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi against Republican criticism that her desire to fly in an Air Force transport plane is an extravagance.
I think that this story was twisted and spun in its presentation , a good sign for Nancy Pelosi , it means that she is worth the effort.
Are we sure who did the spinning? This report from the Whitehouse seems to have been intended to reduce the pressure on Pelosi.
-
Q: Are we sure who did the spinning?
A: "The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi against Republican criticism ..."
Duh.
-
I see no problem with Only-Two-Away-From-The-Presidency Nancy Pelosi receiving this service, especailly in the post light of 9-11. Now, if she wants a plane that is realistically larger (and more costly in maintenance, etc.) than is deemed necessary by non-partisan experts in the field, then that might be an issue. As I understand it, she wants it to fly back to California to see her family, etc. So be it. After all, she is only two away from the Presidency, if, God forbid, something were to happen to both the President and Vice President.
-
Q: Are we sure who did the spinning?
A: "The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi against Republican criticism ..."
Duh.
Well duh then , but the Witehouse is Republican , and was hopeing that the Republican dirty tricks departmet was taking orders from there.
-
...but the Witehouse is Republican...
And?
...and was hopeing that the Republican dirty tricks departmet was taking orders from there.
Now there ya lost me. Who was 'hopeing' - the 'Witehouse'? You? The Democrats? Me?
Well, certainly not me. But enquiring minds do want to know.
-
(http://cagle.com/working/070209/sorenson.jpg)
-
...but the Witehouse is Republican...
And?
...and was hopeing that the Republican dirty tricks departmet was taking orders from there.
Now there ya lost me. Who was 'hopeing' - the 'Witehouse'? You? The Democrats? Me?
Well, certainly not me. But enquiring minds do want to know.
What does a Journalist mean when he says that the White house is defending against Republican criticism?
Does Satan now cast out Satan?
Or does critcism have to be branded?
-
What does a Journalist mean when he says that the White house is defending against Republican criticism?
Bush is only one Republican. The ones criticizing Pelosi are in the house and senate. Apparently they don't take their direction from Bush anymore. They want to squawk about bipartisanship, then snipe at Pelosi for getting the same perk Hastert got, even though she didn't ask for it and offered to pay her own way. Nice how they left those facts out, eh?
And all this time you accused the Dems of being the ones who twist the truth and conveniently leave out facts to suit their purposes. Seems it's a universal human condition, and the Republicans aren't immune.
-
What does a Journalist mean when he says that the White house is defending against Republican criticism?
Bush is only one Republican. The ones criticizing Pelosi are in the house and senate. Apparently they don't take their direction from Bush anymore. They want to squawk about bipartisanship, then snipe at Pelosi for getting the same perk Hastert got, even though she didn't ask for it and offered to pay her own way. Nice how they left those facts out, eh?
And all this time you accused the Dems of being the ones who twist the truth and conveniently leave out facts to suit their purposes. Seems it's a universal human condition, and the Republicans aren't immune.
Well yea but I hope you didn't catch me saying that the Democrats had some kind of copyight on the concept.
We woldn't want to pay royalties.
Seriously though, when this jornalist says "Repubican criticism" he can't mean the party as a whole ,so why the anonimity?
The sorce could be a single Republian for all I can tell , and the siuation is not a serious one , Pelosi , the Secret Service and the Air Force can fix the solution with little fuss if they want to.
-
What does a Journalist mean when he says that the White house is defending against Republican criticism?
Bush is only one Republican. The ones criticizing Pelosi are in the house and senate. Apparently they don't take their direction from Bush anymore. They want to squawk about bipartisanship, then snipe at Pelosi for getting the same perk Hastert got, even though she didn't ask for it and offered to pay her own way. Nice how they left those facts out, eh?
And all this time you accused the Dems of being the ones who twist the truth and conveniently leave out facts to suit their purposes. Seems it's a universal human condition, and the Republicans aren't immune.
ALTERNATE ANSWER
You Don't Mean that Lanya IS Now a REPUBLICAN?
Lanya
Hero Member
Posts: 1054
Pelosi Planes
« on: February 01, 2007, 09:35:38 PM »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I heard a report that Nancy Pelosi is wanting to continue the Denny Hastert tradition of using military jets to take her around the country. This used to be done only in certain circumstances (going to US bases, for one) but came to be used willy-nilly. And she wants to extend the privilege to her family.
NO.
Thank you,
The Management.
[][][][]][][][][][][][][][][[][][][]
I am sooo happy!
I knew that the light would finally dawn!
Congratulations Lanya! Welcome to the fold , you may now feel free to examine the truth without fetters and spell with imaginitation.
-
Awk~!
I am not A Republican. I am a Democrat.
Thanks very much!
-
Awk~!
I am not A Republican. I am a Democrat.
Thanks very much!
Where did you first find this criticism of NP?
I think that examining it will teach us very little about Nancy Pelosi , but it might be enlightening to see the wires and gears of the rumor mill.
-
You Don't Mean that Lanya IS Now a REPUBLICAN?
Naaaaaaaaa, then she'd be accused of wanting women to die of Cancer ;)
-
You Don't Mean that Lanya IS Now a REPUBLICAN?
Naaaaaaaaa, then she'd be accused of wanting women to die of Cancer ;)
Also laxity in Logic and rigor in spelling.
-
You Don't Mean that Lanya IS Now a REPUBLICAN?
Naaaaaaaaa, then she'd be accused of wanting women to die of Cancer ;)
Also laxity in Logic and rigor in spelling.
So true 8)
-
(http://www.cagle.com/working/070209/ramirez.jpg)