Pelosi Gets Her Military Air Transport

[VP505]

"Defense Department agrees to furnish House Speaker Pelosi with 'jet big enough to fly nonstop coast-to-coast"

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Defense_Department_agrees_to_furnish_House_0205.html The whining and criticism has already started!

[katsy]

1. Good for her.

Fly safe Speaker Pelosi!

:hi:

Use your stateroom to maybe think about and reconsider impeachment?

:shrug:

[Psephos]

2. She could have sent a strong message by downsizing her requests a little

Instead, she upsized them.

Not exactly a green message.

Peace.

[Bucky]

3. If she did two impeachments, her transportation upgrade would be automatic

[Nostradammit]

11. LOL!

indeed!

Impeach two, Fly First Class!

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. Great point!!

[Sherman A1]

4. Granted

But let us remember that she is the #3 in line to the President and the Republican Administration seemed okay with this when it was one of their own who used the aircraft. True he needed only to fly to Illinois vs California, but that's the luck of the draw.

[Psephos]

5. Yes, but that's not my point

I'm unhappy about the size of plane and the size of entourage, and her special requests for perks. Her grant exceeds the demands of her predecessors by a large margin. Politics depends on good symbols, and this isn't one.

Meanwhile, I'm trying to cut down on unnecessary trips to lighten my carbon output, while her plane will be dumping several tons of CO2 per hour. She could have flown in complete comfort and security with a lot less waste.

Just like it burns me every time I see the effin' pResident flying in a jumbo jet.

That's my point. Shouldn't the Dem approach be greener than the repug approach? At least a little? She is LESS green than her counterpart.

[katsy]

8. Maybe her predecessor didn't work very hard.

Didn't they work 3 days or something in the 109th?

Speaker Pelosi has more than a full week and will probably work on her trips back & forth.

[wain]

9. I agree in your disappointment

but, why am I not surprised? Just when I think, finally change for the better, all I get is more of the same. Let's not lose the opportunity to set the right example.

[Sherman A1]

18. My point is succinctly summed up in post #17 of this thread

and my thanks to the one who did the FACT checking... Yes, those big aircraft burn a lot of fuel and seem elitist (and in some ways are). They are also working aircraft and I would much rather as a taxpayer provide the Speaker of the House transportation as opposed to some lobbyist or corporate CEO doing so and having their undivided attention for multiple hours flying while over my home. I also don't want the Speaker to be standing in line at the airport waiting for a flight. Their time is too important and there is too much work to be done. As for her staff and family... If the aircraft is big enough and they are all going the same place, what difference does it make if they go along on the same plane, the additional fuel costs would be negligible.

[shance]

7. I'm with you. Democrat or Republican this is pretty elitist and arrogant.

How about actually acting like regular citizens and actually taking the coach class instead of playing Queen Victoria and vying for the Concord.

I am growing increasingly alarmed and amazed at the growing attitudes of entitlement and grandeur by our supposed public servants on BOTH sides of the aisle.

Ms. Pelosi owns a pretty massive vineyard estate and is apparently known to be the third wealthiest member of Congress. Why not foot the bill herself and leave the American taxpayer off the tab of such a luxurious habit? She apparently has the money.

Terribly distasteful in my opinion. I don't care who and/or what party. Totally irrelevant. This is wrong and frankly, here we are again, paying for more trough hogging by the Washington elites. What else can one call it? There is no reason for such extravagance that I can see.

[OllieLotte]

12. Agreed. n/t

[terisan]

14. Democratic Leaders/Small Plane Crashes

Frankly I want her to fly a military jet. Too many liberal and progressive Democrats have had air crash fatalities. That's how Norm Coleman became a senator.

I also expect that she will be working a minimum of 80 hours a week and know she has to be prepared for every dirty trick Bush, Rove, and Cheney will be engaging in (referenced article is an example).

She is one of the few people in the US in a position to (possibly) restore Democracy in America.

[ruiner4u]

6. oh lord.... first john edwards house...now this....

[madrchsod]

10. she should walk

that way she`s not using the precious juice nor shedding little bits of carbon behind her.dam when are these politicians ever going to learn!

i`m not even comment on edwards mansion`s carbon and other assorted nasty bits

[terisan]

13. The source is the Moonie Washington Times, Bush adm official, and

a Republican (no names).

Hasn't the Libby trial testimony and the busting of the Washington Times Obama article showed us the difference between facts and propaganda?

This stuff about the jet reminds me of the propaganda Bush put out against the Clinton's when he came into office in 2001. For week, when he could have been dealing with terrorism, he had even the NY Times and the Washington Post filled with fslse stories about stealing , furniture, trashing the White House, and trashing AF One.

[Booster]

16. Damn, if I were Nancy I wouldn't want to fly on anything that Bush

is the Chief of.

[Alamom]

17. Did anyone actually read the LINK with the truth? I checked this story

today and it was spun by Brit Hume/FOX & WTimes on Feb 1. Raw Story provides the link with the truth and a note that the story is false as written.

Are we now believing Fox & Humes....:wow:





http://www.rawstory.com/news/2007/Defense_Department_agrees_to_furnish_House_0205.html

Updated: Paper claims Defense Department agrees to furnish House Speaker Pelosi with jet

RAW STORY
Published: Monday February 5, 2007


Note: The website Think Progress reports that "the central claims of the Washington Times piece are both false." For more, click on this link. Link info below.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-CA) request for a "big" US Air Force plane has been approved by the Department of Defense, according to a Capitol Hill newspaper.


http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/05/pelosi-military-aircraft/



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.”



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 .”

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 safety would be best ensured by using a plane that has the fuel capacity to go coast-to-coast,’” a Pelosi spokesperson


*********************************************************************************************
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,249640,00.html


House Speaker Pelosi Wants to Make Sure She Gets Her Perks
Thursday, February 01, 2007

By Brit Hume

Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:

Increased Access

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the White House for increased use of military aircraft for domestic flights — not just for herself, but also for staff, relatives and others. The Washington Times reports former Speaker Dennis Hastert was given use of military flights as a security measure after 9/11. But Pelosi's request is said to go beyond what Hastert got. One source says Pelosi's office is pressing the point of her succession — she's next in line after the vice president — and that the Department of Defense needs to "play ball with the speaker's needs."









edgr