I hate to continue beating this drum, but my normally witty commentary is being squelched by my political frustrations. Consider this a purge that will cleanse this scribe's pallet.
Once again Speaker Nancy Pelosi has proven why party politics are vital in the American federalist system. According to the Washington Times, Pelosi is embroiled in a struggle against the White House and the Pentagon over her access to the coveted Air Force VIP fleet. She is demanding to be given regular access to one of the 3 largest and furthest ranging planes in the fleet. She claims that it is necessary for her to have Presidential-type range and passenger capabilities so that she and her entourage can fly non-stop between DC and the left coast. This may seem reasonable if you did not know that prior to September 11th, the Speaker of the House traveled commercially and post 9/11, the previous Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL), utilized a much smaller (and more common) aircraft. Hastert only used the type of jet that Pelosi requested one time (for Congressional business) before the USAF determined this wasn't proper and denied further access.
What frustrates, but doesn't surprise me is that no major media outlets (The Washington Times online is small potatoes) have decided to point out that this "friend of the environment" claims to NEED a plane that guzzles 100's more gallons of AvGas simply so that she doesn't have to actually touch the ground in the heartland to refuel.
Back to my original point. Why does this bolster my belief in party politics and partisanship? Because no matter how reasonable a Democrat seems in comparison to their Republican opponent, their election places Congressional power in the hands of those who are decidedly unreasonable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What I used to think
-
▼
2007
(139)
-
▼
February
(23)
- Al Gore loves the planet...and big houses...and pi...
- Slick Little Shooter
- The men who changed the world
- My public non-recommendation
- Fridays with Laura
- Funny story...
- Update: Non-binding Resolutions and the Victory Ca...
- Polls, polls everywhere without a drop of logic
- Football Baby!
- Clinton Legacy
- Appeals Court Determines that Gitmo is legal
- I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine
- Upon further review...
- Honest Assessment
- New Campbell Pics
- "A blue-eyed boy meets a brown-eyed girl" (and mad...
- Non-binding Resolutions and the Victory Caucus
- What exactly is Pucky?
- That's my boy!
- Speaker update
- Our Thrones Are No Longer Sacred
- Identify these quotes: Part 1 of 2
- Identify these quotes: Part 2 of 2 (the answers)
-
▼
February
(23)
Posts
It is indeed interesting that no major news outlet is covering this story. I want to know where the budget for the Speaker's entourage has historically come from, both pre- and post-9/11. How much more expensive is the Speaker's travel becoming to me as a taxpayer?
ReplyDeleteI am trying to be as fair-minded as possible here or my commentary would be essentially meaningless. I do not begrudge her a taxpayer-funded private transport as this has become a necessity security precaution for the next runner-up for the Presidency in the post-9/11 era. What does offend me is the sense of entitlement to unprecedented luxury at my expense coupled with her public rhetoric against my V-8 trucks while having a “carbon footprint” as big as her $25 million bank account. And all of this from the secular-progressive mindset that calls me a hypocrite for being a flawed human who nonetheless holds to a Biblical definition of morality.
ReplyDelete