Run In With Mr. Edwards

[Jay Honeck]

After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
decided to check it out.

After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des Moines
Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport side
of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
Suburbans.

Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...

....and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?

Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had been
told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
notion.

This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
not to be disappointed.

As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing 727
plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut, tight
as a drum, as soon as he arrived.

Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
stupidity of it all.

After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport -- and
were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't be
far behind.

Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off the
ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our stuff
and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service agent
step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
depart.

Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.

This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just have
to wait.

So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers and
agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.

Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked. This
continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to which
he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.

By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said "Well,
screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
stuck here overnight!"

Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
departs." -- and that was that.

Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and held
for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had to
be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!

Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got the
message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.

Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
incredible security presence that had been there only moments before. They
all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
nothing at all had just happened.

Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet -- he's
just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.

As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your tax-dollars
at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
happened...

(BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have one.
It's as big as a car!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
>
> If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>

I disagree completely with your logic.

Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with these low
level security details. All this stuff has long ago been delegated well
away from them. If anything, Kerry's campaign has requested that security
of this sort be less rather than more. It is also quite arguable that the
opposition party candidate have reasonable protection.

In short, there is absolutely nothing you can conclude about the
"Kerry/Edwards presidency" from your hitting up against the boundaries of
their Secret Service protection.

[Joe Johnson]

Jay, I agree with your sentiments, but the "bucket of warm spit" quote is
attributed to John Nance Garner, one of FDR's veeps.

[Larry Dighera]

Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
more in the settings of his novels.

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote in
<p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::

>If this is what we have to look forward to under a
>Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.

I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.

But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, I agree with your sentiments, but the "bucket of warm spit" quote is
> attributed to John Nance Garner, one of FDR's veeps.

Hey, one of FDR's veeps is as good as another...

Maybe Truman just referred to the quote?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with these
low
> level security details. All this stuff has long ago been delegated well
> away from them. If anything, Kerry's campaign has requested that security
> of this sort be less rather than more.

I'd say my experience serves as evidence to the contrary.

The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
potential constituents like this? Heck, my family couldn't even approach
THE FENCE with a camera, let alone get close to Edwards himself.

Now, mind you, if Edwards was a "somebody" (I.E.: The Vice-President. The
President . The King. The Pope) I might understand this kind of
fascist-brand of security -- but he is NOBODY.

He is a vice-presidential CANDIDATE, which ranks him just ahead of Orca the
Whale in national importance.

The whole situation is absurd.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G. Burkhart]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.

Welcome to Iowa...

Every 4 years Iowa gets pounded by political candidates starting the
fall/winter before the election up until the Caucuses, then it's back to
'normal' for a few months then gets pounded again until the first Monday of
November. Then, 3 years of silence! (Iowa? Where's that?)

The local enforcement following the candidates are inconsistent on the
security depending on where they're at. I've seen various candidates running
around Iowa at the State Fair and the Hawkeye football games on election
years with little or no security (pre-911).

The Des Moines and Polk county patrol, SS, etc., were probably at the GA
ramp mostly for looks. I find it helpful to watch the local news and the
paper to see when someone is suppose to be around and try to avoid it if
possible. If you had known Mr. Edwards was going to be in Des Moines from
4-6 (or whatever), you could have planned to be in or out before or after
the 'security'.

[James Robinson]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with
> > these low level security details.
>
> I'd say my experience serves as evidence to the contrary.
>
> The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this? Heck, my family couldn't even approach
> THE FENCE with a camera, let alone get close to Edwards himself.

And you think that Edwards personally drew that line in the sand?

Sorry, I agree with the previous poster. The security details are set
up by the SS, and the candidate has little to say about how they are
executed.

[John Gaquin]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message

Jay, I think the only thing that happened is that you encountered a security
detail. This is less and less unusual in our society. It is always
somewhat demeaning to be presented with a public demonstration of the fact
that someone else's priority and security is more important than your own,
but that is the reality we live with. No one had the objective of
disrupting your weekend.


> ... marveling at the stupidity of it all....while Mr. Liability-Attorney's
727....officers
> and agents, all on the tax-dole... Mr. Perfect-Hair....Mr. Ketchup's
side-kick....
>... our favorite S.S. officer...

You write a good story, Jay, but my sense is you're trying a little too hard
to be clever and witty. Just my opinion.


> ...Edwards isn't even THERE yet -- he's just a wannabee! He is nothing,
absolutely
> NOTHING -- yet we are treating him like royalty,

Well, not quite. He *is* a sitting US Senator, and *is* a designated
Vice-Presidential candidate, and is being treated as such, according to
law -- no more, no less.

> and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him.

Bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Mind you, I am not a Kerry/Edwards supporter. Quite the antithesis. Just
my opinions.

BTW.... this appears to be the second chapter of the "Run-in Series". More
to come?

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:oV3Wc.68220$TI1.10381@attbi_s52...
>> Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with these
> low
>> level security details. All this stuff has long ago been delegated well
>> away from them. If anything, Kerry's campaign has requested that
>> security
>> of this sort be less rather than more.
>
> I'd say my experience serves as evidence to the contrary.

With all respect, Jay, your experience is meaningless in that regard.

> The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this? Heck, my family couldn't even approach
> THE FENCE with a camera, let alone get close to Edwards himself.

The "Democrats" have absolutely nothing to do with this. This is the
security apparatus operating; nothing more, nothing less.

> Now, mind you, if Edwards was a "somebody" (I.E.: The Vice-President. The
> President . The King. The Pope) I might understand this kind of
> fascist-brand of security -- but he is NOBODY.

Again, with all due respect, you have not thought this out.

> He is a vice-presidential CANDIDATE, which ranks him just ahead of Orca
> the
> Whale in national importance.

I completely disagree. What do you think would happen if he were to be
attacked? Do you think that would be a good thing for this country? For
the world?
There are many things big and small that Washington does which I do not
agree with but due diligence security procedures are not one of those.
Sorry for your minor inconvenience. Weren't you saying GA in your neck of
the woods wasn't affected much by these security issues? In other parts of
the country we deal with stuff like this, AND MUCH WORSE, all the time yet
we deal with it and life goes on. Maybe you now have some small inkling
what a lot of the rest of us go through.

> The whole situation is absurd.

The whole world is absurd. The inmates are running the asylum.

[Martin Hotze]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:

>[...]
>...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
>presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>[...]
>This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
>not to be disappointed.
>
>As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing 727
>plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
>we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut, tight
>as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>[...]
>[...] the V.P.-wannabee
>[...]
>while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727
>[...]
>for Mr. Perfect-Hair.
>[...]
>Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out [...]
>[...]
>[...] Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet -- he's
>just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
>him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
>anywhere near him.

hmmm. you found the nicest words ...

>If this is what we have to look forward to under a
>Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.

what happens with the current administration?
what have you wished? a TFR for Edwards?
in 'days like these' this was the best that could happen to you as a pilot.

>As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your tax-dollars
>at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
>happened...
>[...]

I think that this also happened before 9/11.

#m
--
The more one is absorbed in fighting Evil,
the less one is tempted to place the Good
in question. (J.P. Sartre)

[john smith]

G. Burkhart wrote:
> Welcome to Iowa...
> Every 4 years Iowa gets pounded by political candidates starting the
> fall/winter before the election up until the Caucuses, then it's back to
> 'normal' for a few months then gets pounded again until the first Monday of
> November. Then, 3 years of silence! (Iowa? Where's that?)

DARN!!!
And my family may be moving to DSM in a year of two.

[The Weiss Family]

> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.

A bit off topic (and I don't want to diminish your point), but I just want
to make sure I understand the regulations...
Couldn't you or Mary just do three quick patterns (full-stop) and be legal
to fly at night?

Adam

[Bob Gardner]

This is all the work of the Secret Service. It wouldn't matter who the
politician du jour was. Don't blame their over-reaction on Kerry-Edwards or
Bush-Cheney. If the SS decided that the water commissioner needed
protection, you would have received the same treatment.

Bob Gardner

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>
> After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des
Moines
> Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
> ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport
side
> of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
> enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
> Suburbans.
>
> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had
been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>
> As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing
727
> plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
> we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut,
tight
> as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>
> Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
> take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
> could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
> parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
> uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
> stupidity of it all.
>
> After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport --
and
> were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
> once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
> same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't
be
> far behind.
>
> Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off
the
> ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our
stuff
> and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service
agent
> step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
> depart.
>
> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just
have
> to wait.
>
> So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
> while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers
and
> agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
> for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
> while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.
>
> Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
> and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked.
This
> continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
> the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to
which
> he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
> and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.
>
> By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said
"Well,
> screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
> I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
> stuck here overnight!"
>
> Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
> departs." -- and that was that.
>
> Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and
held
> for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
> for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
> Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had
to
> be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!
>
> Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got
the
> message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
> ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
> ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
> finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.
>
> Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
> incredible security presence that had been there only moments before.
They
> all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
> nothing at all had just happened.
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet --
he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your
tax-dollars
> at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
> happened...
>
> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
> absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
> and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have
one.
> It's as big as a car!)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Martin Hotze]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:57:28 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:

>> and my family was treated like criminals when we were
>> anywhere near him.
>
>Bit of a stretch, don't you think?

I can offer a first hand story of 2 scientists [1] (foreigners) near N.Y.
searching for the limo service to JFK after they attended a memorial
service and where held by about 10 officers of all sort (state police, FBI,
campus (?) police) for about 3 hours. The only thing they did was driving
slowly around the same block twice. All of them had absolutely NO clue, no
brain and almost no education (else they would have found out within 5
minutes what was going on and would have offered their help).

[1] I heard it from one of the two yesterday; and I know him all my life;
there is absolutely NO cause to believe that only one word is put to the
story to make it up.

#m, rather dissapointed

--
The more one is absorbed in fighting Evil,
the less one is tempted to place the Good
in question. (J.P. Sartre)

[Tony Cox]

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> This is all the work of the Secret Service. It wouldn't matter who the
> politician du jour was. Don't blame their over-reaction on Kerry-Edwards
or
> Bush-Cheney. If the SS decided that the water commissioner needed
> protection, you would have received the same treatment.
>

You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
Jay himself).

[Bill Denton]

"You're driving in a car, what do you need a limo for?'


"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:57:28 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:
>
> >> and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> >> anywhere near him.
> >
> >Bit of a stretch, don't you think?
>
> I can offer a first hand story of 2 scientists [1] (foreigners) near N.Y.
> searching for the limo service to JFK after they attended a memorial
> service and where held by about 10 officers of all sort (state police,
FBI,
> campus (?) police) for about 3 hours. The only thing they did was driving
> slowly around the same block twice. All of them had absolutely NO clue, no
> brain and almost no education (else they would have found out within 5
> minutes what was going on and would have offered their help).
>
> [1] I heard it from one of the two yesterday; and I know him all my life;
> there is absolutely NO cause to believe that only one word is put to the
> story to make it up.
>
> #m, rather dissapointed
>
> --
> The more one is absorbed in fighting Evil,
> the less one is tempted to place the Good
> in question. (J.P. Sartre)

[Martin Hotze]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:00:15 -0500, Bill Denton wrote:

>"You're driving in a car, what do you need a limo for?'

the other one (a permanent resident) dropping off the other one at the limo
station for JFK (and then flying back home to Europe)?

#m

--
The more one is absorbed in fighting Evil,
the less one is tempted to place the Good
in question. (J.P. Sartre)

[C J Campbell]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
> more in the settings of his novels.
>
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote in
> <p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::
>
> >If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> >Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.
>
> But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.

I sincerely hope not. They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone who
served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed babies
and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone else
was doing it, he left his one of his own men for dead while fleeing from an
imaginary attack and only turned around when shamed into it, two of his
Purple Hearts are for self inflicted wounds, he disgraced the medals that he
is now so proud of, and he plotted to kill United States senators. He does
not deny any of this; instead he resorts to personal attacks against those
who are exposing the truth about him. If personal attacks do not silence his
enemies, he resorts to threats of violence and lawsuits, which shows what he
thinks of freedom of speech.

It speaks volumes about the Democrats that they have sunk so low as to put
such a slimeball up for the Presidency. The Democratic Party no longer
respects America or Americans, but is solely focused on using fraud and
deceit to achieve power in any way that it can. If this behavior continues
the only outcome can be civil war.

[C J Campbell]

Jay, weren't you the one who said your life had not changed because of 9/11
paranoia?

[G. Burkhart]

"The Weiss Family" > wrote in message
...
>> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
>> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
>> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
>> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
>> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> A bit off topic (and I don't want to diminish your point), but I just want
> to make sure I understand the regulations...
> Couldn't you or Mary just do three quick patterns (full-stop) and be legal
> to fly at night?

If it wasn't dark yet in DSM, it'd be hard to get night current to be able
to land at IOW an hour after sunset. I suspect that it'd take Jay about an
hour to fly from DSM to IOW. I guess he could have landed after dark
somewhere between DSM and IOW, let everybody out and done the 3 full stop
landings and continue on. Jay didn't state what time this was happening, but
if he could have gotten into IOW by around 9:15PM, he would be legal. He may
have just used the night flying excuse to try to get out sooner. The
security people probably don't know anything about night currency.

[Jim Weir]

Only if it is the Democrat. If it is the Republican, stand by for flowers and
poetry.

Jim



"John Gaquin" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->BTW.... this appears to be the second chapter of the "Run-in Series". More
->to come?
->

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Timo Koekenhoff]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Tony Cox wrote:

> You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
> actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
> poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
> amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
> of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
> Jay himself).

Isn't he a senator anymore? Did I miss anything?

[Bob Gardner]

I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.

Bob Gardner

"Tony Cox" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> "Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
> ...
> > This is all the work of the Secret Service. It wouldn't matter who the
> > politician du jour was. Don't blame their over-reaction on Kerry-Edwards
> or
> > Bush-Cheney. If the SS decided that the water commissioner needed
> > protection, you would have received the same treatment.
> >
>
> You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
> actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
> poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
> amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
> of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that matter
> Jay himself).
>
>
>

[Tony Cox]

"Timo Koekenhoff" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, Tony Cox wrote:
>
> > You mean _candidate_ for water commissioner, not the
> > actual water commissioner. Right now, Edwards is just another
> > poobah wanabee. Apart from the fact that there is a considerable
> > amount of money backing his candidacy, he is no more deserving
> > of protection than (say) the Libertarian VP candidate (or for that
matter
> > Jay himself).
>
> Isn't he a senator anymore? Did I miss anything?

It is my understanding that he is being protected because
he is the Democrat VP candidate, not because he is a NC
Senator. Did I miss anything?

[Dan Luke]

"C J Campbell" wrote:
> If this behavior continues
> the only outcome can be civil war.

You're out of your mind, Campbell.

[H.P.]

Your problem is that you're not a middle-eastern looking Muslim with an Arab
accent. The PC Enforcement Department of the Democrat Party would have
given you clearance in a heartbeat.


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>
> After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des
Moines
> Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
> ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport
side
> of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
> enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
> Suburbans.
>
> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had
been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>
> As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing
727
> plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
> we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut,
tight
> as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>
> Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
> take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
> could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
> parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
> uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
> stupidity of it all.
>
> After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport --
and
> were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
> once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
> same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't
be
> far behind.
>
> Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off
the
> ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our
stuff
> and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service
agent
> step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
> depart.
>
> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just
have
> to wait.
>
> So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
> while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers
and
> agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
> for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
> while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.
>
> Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
> and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked.
This
> continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
> the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to
which
> he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
> and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.
>
> By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said
"Well,
> screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
> I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
> stuck here overnight!"
>
> Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
> departs." -- and that was that.
>
> Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and
held
> for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
> for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
> Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had
to
> be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!
>
> Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got
the
> message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
> ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
> ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
> finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.
>
> Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
> incredible security presence that had been there only moments before.
They
> all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
> nothing at all had just happened.
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet --
he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your
tax-dollars
> at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
> happened...
>
> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
> absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
> and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have
one.
> It's as big as a car!)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Joe Johnson]

Oops, meant to say "one of FDR's other veeps." Pretty sure it was Garner.
Not sure whether Truman referred to the quote.

[Joe Johnson]

Whoa, CJ, don't hold back. Tell us what you really think...

[Chuck]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:oV3Wc.68220$TI1.10381@attbi_s52...

<snip>

>
> > He is a vice-presidential CANDIDATE, which ranks him just ahead of Orca
> > the
> > Whale in national importance.
>
> I completely disagree. What do you think would happen if he were to be
> attacked? Do you think that would be a good thing for this country? For
> the world?


Ya know... I think that many people *would* think that would be good for the
country! :)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> [...] If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.

Of all the idiotic posts you've made, this is certainly one of them.

Couldn't you at least *pretend* to hide your prejudice? Do you have even a
shred of evidence that the exact same thing wouldn't have happened to you
had Dick Cheney showed up at the same airport in 1999? No, of course not.

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:


> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again.

Iowa always claims this but in reality they are a distant second to the
Minnesota State Fair. Take a trip to a real fair Jay, it starts this
Thursday and continues thru Labor Day. Land at STP and you'll be
minutes away from heaven.


http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/4939996.html

[Roger Long]

Remember Jay, they aren't protecting Edwards. They are protecting their
jobs. The reason they didn't let you on the ramp had nothing to do with
whether they thought you were a threat. The real reason is so that they
won't be standing ramrod straight on the carpet later explaining to their
superior why you and your kids were running around on the ramp.

Don't waste your breath about how you are being inconvenienced or even
endangered. No one with the kind of power they have will ever give a flying
f__k. Prior to 9/11 our society understood better than most, and the
conservatives best of all, why government power should be minimized. Now,
that's out the window and the conservatives seem to have become the
strongest proponents of unlimited governmental power.

A preview of this hysteria was the onset of the war on drugs. Friend of
mine spent 45 minutes lying face down while his sailboat was searched by the
Coast Guard as the tide carried them among the rocks and shoals in a very
tricky part of Maine. This was before electronic navigation when everything
depended on dead reckoning pilotage and keeping track of where you are.
When the Coast Guard finally let he and his wife up, the sun had gone down
and they didn't have a clue where they were. They asked for a position and
were told that the Coast Guard couldn't give them one because of the
liability if they subsequently ran aground. It was too deep to anchor. The
Coast Guard could not give them a tow because there was no imminent danger.
They would call a private salvor who would arrive in about six hours at a
cost of several thousand dollars. No, they they couldn't stand by because
they had to hassle more yachtsmen. Good night, have a pleasant evening.

--

Roger Long

[Brien K. Meehan]

C J Campbell wrote:

> I sincerely hope not. They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
> criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed
everyone who
> served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
babies
> and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that
everyone else
> was doing it, he left his one of his own men for dead while fleeing
from an
> imaginary attack and only turned around when shamed into it, two of
his
> Purple Hearts are for self inflicted wounds, he disgraced the medals
that he
> is now so proud of, and he plotted to kill United States senators. He
does
> not deny any of this; instead he resorts to personal attacks against
those
> who are exposing the truth about him. If personal attacks do not
silence his
> enemies, he resorts to threats of violence and lawsuits, which shows
what he
> thinks of freedom of speech.

Now CJ, be fair. There are good indications that one of those
self-inflicted wounds was NOT intentional.

[Geoffrey Barnes]

"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
> I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
> senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.

SS protection can be refused. Nixon, for example, released the SS several
years after he resigned. I'm not sure if he retained private bodyguards, or
whether he just gave up on having bodyguards altoghether, but it does show
that a "principal" can tell the SS to get lost if he or she wants to.

But if I were the "principal", I certainly wouldn't want to. Both Kerry and
Edwards are entitled to SS protection, and they are wisely making use of it.
I'm reasonably sure that Edwards is now entitled to make use of any security
arrangement that Cheney has at his disposal. To be sure, Vice-Presidential
TFRs aren't anything close to the pain in the butt that Presidential ones
are, but even a baby-TFR -- which Edwards certainly could have had if his
people had asked for it -- would have been enough to ruin Jay's whole trip.
So my own personal take on Jay's (very well-written) story is that we should
be thankful that Kerry-Edwards is at least holding off on releasing the TFR
hounds right now. An hour's wait in the FBO lobby is a pain, but not nearly
as painful as having to cancel the entire trip.

If I had been in your shoes, Jay, my own reaction would have been to treat
the security people with over-the-top politenes and kid gloves. As a
resident of a swing-state (Pennsylvania), I can personally attest to how
over-blown presidential security has gotten and how totally disruptive it
can be to our day-to-day lives. On July 4th, of all days, I couldn't even
walk down a street three blocks from a scheduled campaign event, despite the
fact that I had tickets to and was on my way to attending that very same
event. Heck, the event even was due to start for another two hours! What
on earth was I, with a 3-year-old in tow, going to do three blocks away, two
hours before the speech that would put anyone in any danger whatsoever? So
instead my entire family, including my visibly pregnant wife, had to walk
several blocks out of our way for no good reason at all. I think it's gone
way too far.

But I also suspect that everytime the SS encounters an irate pilot in an
FBO, it just feeds their justification mill for keeping all these "crazy
people in little planes" as far away as possible from the people they are
protecting. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that you went nutso on
the SS in the FBO lobby. I'm just saying that they have a certain
pre-conceived mindset concerning GA, and that anything you did short of meek
and apologetic acceptance is quite likely to be twitsted into a
justification of this misbegotten mindset.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[Jay Honeck]

> Only if it is the Democrat. If it is the Republican, stand by for flowers
and
> poetry.

Hee hee! Ahem, not true.

Actually, the VERY NEXT DAY I was in Green Bay, WI, when Senator Herb Kohl
(D-WI) arrived at the FBO. (True, another Democrat, but that's completely
beside the point.)

He had no security at all, and precisely one lady waiting for him -- who
took SERIOUS umbrage with me railing on about Senator Edwards in particular,
and Congress in general, after my nasty little encounter with the Edward
Campaign the day before in Des Moines.

When I spouted that line about how "Edwards ain't NOTHING worth
protecting -- yet" she puffed up as big as a turkey and haughtily pronounced
"WELL, he IS a sitting U.S. Senator...!"

To which I caustically responded "...Which means he works for THE PEOPLE,
right?"

She thereupon fell completely silent, and turned away.

Honestly, the political class -- on BOTH sides of the aisle -- are getting
waay too big for their britches. In this regard Martin Hotze is absolutely,
100% correct when he says "They are POLITICIANS, for chrissakes, and they're
a dime a dozen."

(Did hell just freeze over? I just agreed with Martin on something! :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Couldn't you or Mary just do three quick patterns (full-stop) and be legal
> to fly at night?

Sure, but that would be terribly impractical.

It was rapidly approaching dusk, with no known end to our delay. To get
night current means waiting until complete darkness, and doing 3 landings.
This would have meant either waiting until legal darkness in Des Moines, or
stopping somewhere along the way home.

With the kids along, neither choice was good. In practice, we probably
would have just stayed the night, rather than screwing around with it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Jay, weren't you the one who said your life had not changed because of
9/11
> paranoia?

No my LIFESTYLE has not changed. (It was Eduardo's statement that the "new
American lifestyle sucks" that I was responding to...)

In the overall scheme of things, my delay in DSM was a minor inconvenience.
But it was a stupid, pointless delay nonetheless, and one that deserves our
attention.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[CB]

"Geoffrey Barnes" > wrote in message
k.net...
> "Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
> ...
>> I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
>> senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.
>
> SS protection can be refused. Nixon, for example, released the SS several
> years after he resigned. I'm not sure if he retained private bodyguards,
> or
> whether he just gave up on having bodyguards altoghether, but it does show
> that a "principal" can tell the SS to get lost if he or she wants to.
>
> But if I were the "principal", I certainly wouldn't want to. Both Kerry
> and
> Edwards are entitled to SS protection, and they are wisely making use of
> it.
> I'm reasonably sure that Edwards is now entitled to make use of any
> security
> arrangement that Cheney has at his disposal. To be sure,
> Vice-Presidential
> TFRs aren't anything close to the pain in the butt that Presidential ones
> are, but even a baby-TFR -- which Edwards certainly could have had if his
> people had asked for it -- would have been enough to ruin Jay's whole
> trip.
> So my own personal take on Jay's (very well-written) story is that we
> should
> be thankful that Kerry-Edwards is at least holding off on releasing the
> TFR
> hounds right now. An hour's wait in the FBO lobby is a pain, but not
> nearly
> as painful as having to cancel the entire trip.
>
> If I had been in your shoes, Jay, my own reaction would have been to treat
> the security people with over-the-top politenes and kid gloves. As a
> resident of a swing-state (Pennsylvania), I can personally attest to how
> over-blown presidential security has gotten and how totally disruptive it
> can be to our day-to-day lives. On July 4th, of all days, I couldn't even
> walk down a street three blocks from a scheduled campaign event, despite
> the
> fact that I had tickets to and was on my way to attending that very same
> event. Heck, the event even was due to start for another two hours! What
> on earth was I, with a 3-year-old in tow, going to do three blocks away,
> two
> hours before the speech that would put anyone in any danger whatsoever?
> So
> instead my entire family, including my visibly pregnant wife, had to walk
> several blocks out of our way for no good reason at all. I think it's
> gone
> way too far.
>
> But I also suspect that everytime the SS encounters an irate pilot in an
> FBO, it just feeds their justification mill for keeping all these "crazy
> people in little planes" as far away as possible from the people they are
> protecting. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting that you went nutso on
> the SS in the FBO lobby. I'm just saying that they have a certain
> pre-conceived mindset concerning GA, and that anything you did short of
> meek
> and apologetic acceptance is quite likely to be twitsted into a
> justification of this misbegotten mindset.
>

well put Martin, I think Jay may be turning into a troll. Big fuss about
nothing. I find the story encouraging in that the management of the
security arrangements seems proportionate to the person being protected.

as for the local i.e. non SS security, I don't blame the local police chief
or sheriff getting all his guys on the street. No one want to have the
assassination of a candidate on their watch, it is a career ender.

[Jay Honeck]

> Of all the idiotic posts you've made, this is certainly one of them.
>
> Couldn't you at least *pretend* to hide your prejudice? Do you have even
a
> shred of evidence that the exact same thing wouldn't have happened to you
> had Dick Cheney showed up at the same airport in 1999? No, of course not.

I thought the Democrats were saying that Kerry and Edwards were "the Answer"
to these problems, Pete?

Funny how they all smell the same...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Iowa always claims this but in reality they are a distant second to the
> Minnesota State Fair. Take a trip to a real fair Jay, it starts this
> Thursday and continues thru Labor Day. Land at STP and you'll be
> minutes away from heaven.

Well, before I fly two hours and walk four, what's Minnesota's fair got that
Iowa's doesn't?

I know Wisconsin's got cream puffs, and Iowa's got pork tenderloins (and
deep-fried Twinkies) -- but what's Minnesota famous for?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
> criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone
who
> served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
babies
> and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone
else
> was doing it

While I share some of your distaste for Mr. Kerry, CJ, I think you've taken
your point "a bit" too far. Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable man,
and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.

I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread. What we,
as pilots, need, is to discuss intelligent, constructive ways to influence
our government officials so that ridiculous crap like this doesn't happen to
more and more pilots.

I'm all for logical, sensible security strategies for our presidential
candidates, but what they did to my family was just stupid. We weren't a
threat, and we couldn't have become a threat. If they THOUGHT we were
potential threats, they could have escorted us to our plane, and searched
it. They could have had the FBO guys tow my plane to the OTHER FBO on the
OTHER side of the field, and we could have departed from there. (Those
planes were coming and going freely throughout this episode.)

They had a myriad of options, all of which they chose to ignore. The only
thing that satisfied them was my complete immobility, which is no different
than treating me like a suspected criminal.

And I resent it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> I know Wisconsin's got cream puffs, and Iowa's got pork tenderloins (and
> deep-fried Twinkies) -- but what's Minnesota famous for?

My personal favorite is the deep fried cheese curds. One of the local
EAA chapters always has a booth and a few partially completed
homebuilts. I believe they also have seminars on various building
techniques, such as painting, fabric, etc. The state DOT also has an
aeronautical booth setup next to the EAA one.

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:56:03 GMT, "Roger Long" >
wrote in >::

>No one with the kind of power they have will ever give a flying
>f__k.

And from what body of law does their power emanate? Do they truly
have jurisdictional authority in the situation Mr. Honeck experienced?

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:


>
>
> Well, before I fly two hours

You lose a cylinder or somethin'? It's only 208 miles

[Jay Honeck]

> well put Martin, I think Jay may be turning into a troll. Big fuss about
> nothing. I find the story encouraging in that the management of the
> security arrangements seems proportionate to the person being protected.

Right.

I just did the math. Assuming that there were "only" 50 law enforcement
officers at the airport, tied up for maybe 5 hours, (not assuming over-time
pay, which it may have been on a Sunday), at an average pay of $50K per year
(including benefits), Mr. Edwards' little party on the ramp in DSM cost
tax-payers about $6000.

This, of course, is only counting the cost of security we saw at the
airport. Let's not forget the en route security guys, the guys at the event
itself, and the guys we COULDN'T see. Factor in the cost of transportation,
and you're into five figures, easy -- all for just ONE crummy little speech,
given by a V.P. candidate!

You're sure willing to **** this kind of money away protecting a
vice-presidential wannabee -- and you're sure cavalier about our freedom of
movement.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> My personal favorite is the deep fried cheese curds.

Ooooooo, deep-fried cheese curds. That's a big Wisconsin thing, too.

Each one takes a day off of your life, but it's worth it!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Chuck]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> > [...] If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> Of all the idiotic posts you've made, this is certainly one of them.
>
> Couldn't you at least *pretend* to hide your prejudice? Do you have even
a
> shred of evidence that the exact same thing wouldn't have happened to you
> had Dick Cheney showed up at the same airport in 1999? No, of course not.
>
>


True, but why does a *candidate* need all of the protection paid for by the
tax payers?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[Jay Honeck]

> You lose a cylinder or somethin'? It's only 208 miles

207.8, but who's counting?

Okay, so it'll only take 1:27 minutes...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Donald M. Ross]

Wonder how much fun I would have had? I generally "carry".

Don

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:os9Wc.212699$eM2.189310@attbi_s51...
> > Jay, weren't you the one who said your life had not changed because of
> 9/11
> > paranoia?
>
> No my LIFESTYLE has not changed. (It was Eduardo's statement that the
"new
> American lifestyle sucks" that I was responding to...)
>
> In the overall scheme of things, my delay in DSM was a minor
inconvenience.
> But it was a stupid, pointless delay nonetheless, and one that deserves
our
> attention.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Jeremy Lew]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%F9Wc.69882$TI1.15818@attbi_s52...
> While I share some of your distaste for Mr. Kerry, CJ, I think you've
taken
> your point "a bit" too far. Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable
man,
> and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.

He "was", until the tragic inconvenience of you having to sit in an FBO for
an hour? What narcisistic bull****.

[Gene Seibel]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>...

> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>

Fear not Jay. In 2 1/2 short months Iowa will once again be nothing
more than "fly-over country" to these guys.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[B. Jensen]

Jay,

Is it safe to say you will be voting Republican?? :-)

BJ

[B. Jensen]

Jay,

Next time show up dressed like a middle east citizen. They would
probably leave you alone... because we all know it's not NICE or PROPER
to profile....

Sharing your disgust,

BJ

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
>>criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone
>>
>>
>who
>
>
>>served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
>>
>>
>babies
>
>
>>and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone
>>
>>
>else
>
>
>>was doing it
>>
>>
>
>While I share some of your distaste for Mr. Kerry, CJ, I think you've taken
>your point "a bit" too far. Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable man,
>and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.
>
>I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread. What we,
>as pilots, need, is to discuss intelligent, constructive ways to influence
>our government officials so that ridiculous crap like this doesn't happen to
>more and more pilots.
>
>I'm all for logical, sensible security strategies for our presidential
>candidates, but what they did to my family was just stupid. We weren't a
>threat, and we couldn't have become a threat. If they THOUGHT we were
>potential threats, they could have escorted us to our plane, and searched
>it. They could have had the FBO guys tow my plane to the OTHER FBO on the
>OTHER side of the field, and we could have departed from there. (Those
>planes were coming and going freely throughout this episode.)
>
>They had a myriad of options, all of which they chose to ignore. The only
>thing that satisfied them was my complete immobility, which is no different
>than treating me like a suspected criminal.
>
>And I resent it.
>
>

[Jay Masino]

Chuck > wrote:
> True, but why does a *candidate* need all of the protection paid for by the
> tax payers?

Because, once they've been given the candicacy by their party, they're
too big of a target for any nutcase (or terrorist group) who wants to
effect our election. That's the reason that they're afforded Secret
Service protection. It makes sense. Kerry and Edwards have very little
say in the situation. One thing they *do* have a say in is whether they
request a moving TFR over them. The Kerry people have NOT requested that,
so we've not been annoyed by additional TFRs related to them.




--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[Icebound]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:0V9Wc.24199$9d6.9615@attbi_s54...
>.....snip..... Factor in the cost of transportation,
> and you're into five figures, easy -- all for just ONE crummy little
speech,
> given by a V.P. candidate!
>
> You're sure willing to **** this kind of money away protecting a
> vice-presidential wannabee -- and you're sure cavalier about our freedom
of
> movement.
> --


Personally, I don't exactly understand why presidential candidates in the
USA campaign in person anyway, given that they all load up the live audience
with their own supporters in advance anyway... (and the Republicans are even
worse than the Democrats).

For all the difference it will make on election day, they could all make
their speeches from an underground studio inside the Colorado Mountains.

[Philip Sondericker]

in article , Brien K. Meehan at
wrote on 8/22/04 2:51 PM:

> C J Campbell wrote:
>
>> I sincerely hope not. They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
>> criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed
> everyone who
>> served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
> babies
>> and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that
> everyone else
>> was doing it, he left his one of his own men for dead while fleeing
> from an
>> imaginary attack and only turned around when shamed into it, two of
> his
>> Purple Hearts are for self inflicted wounds, he disgraced the medals
> that he
>> is now so proud of, and he plotted to kill United States senators. He
> does
>> not deny any of this; instead he resorts to personal attacks against
> those
>> who are exposing the truth about him. If personal attacks do not
> silence his
>> enemies, he resorts to threats of violence and lawsuits, which shows
> what he
>> thinks of freedom of speech.
>
> Now CJ, be fair. There are good indications that one of those
> self-inflicted wounds was NOT intentional.
>

I don't know where you folks are getting your information, but if it's from
those "Swift Boat for Truth" guys, I hope you realize that they have a
really hard time making up their minds. Here are just two examples:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0820041kerry1.html

http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2EA64C19

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%F9Wc.69882$TI1.15818@attbi_s52...
>
> They had a myriad of options, all of which they chose to ignore. The only
> thing that satisfied them was my complete immobility, which is no
> different
> than treating me like a suspected criminal.
>
> And I resent it.

Just be glad you don't live in an area subject to repeated TFRs and other
restrictions. Those of us in such areas have been raising the alarm for
quite some time but until you get a small taste of what it is like you
really can't understand the feeling.

[Bob Noel]

In article <Re9Wc.39273$Fg5.12500@attbi_s53>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> Honestly, the political class -- on BOTH sides of the aisle -- are
> getting
> waay too big for their britches.

They got way too big for their britches years ago.

cripes, we have to treat lousy stinkin' staffers like they
are VIPs. (>-{

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Bob Noel]

In article <Gj9Wc.212654$eM2.14888@attbi_s51>, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

> > Couldn't you or Mary just do three quick patterns (full-stop) and be
> > legal
> > to fly at night?
>
> Sure, but that would be terribly impractical.

would beat the heck out of staying the night.

>
> It was rapidly approaching dusk, with no known end to our delay. To get
> night current means waiting until complete darkness,

no. You have to wait for one hour after sunset.
darkness has nothing to do with it. (or have I misread 61.57?)

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Blanche]

Geoffrey Barnes > wrote:
>the SS in the FBO lobby. I'm just saying that they have a certain
>pre-conceived mindset concerning GA, and that anything you did short of meek
>and apologetic acceptance is quite likely to be twitsted into a
>justification of this misbegotten mindset.

Actually, it's not merely GA. The pre-conceived mindset is towards
anyone and everyone. The philosophy is that *anyone* is a
bad guy.

[john smith]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> I just did the math. Assuming that there were "only" 50 law enforcement
> officers at the airport, tied up for maybe 5 hours, (not assuming over-time
> pay, which it may have been on a Sunday), at an average pay of $50K per year
> (including benefits), Mr. Edwards' little party on the ramp in DSM cost
> tax-payers about $6000.

As I understand it, the national party is supposed to reimburse the
local agencies for security. The trouble is, sometimes they do,
sometimes they don't, or don't pay the whole bill.
My solution is to demand cash upfront at the planning stage.
They don't pay, they don't get local cooperation.
The political machines here in Ohio are spinning the "disruptions" as
good publiciity for the communities that cannot be bought at any price.

[StellaStar]

Newps sez:
>Iowa always claims this but in reality they are a distant second to the
>Minnesota State Fair.

Minnesota's bigger and I'm fond of it, but Iowa's pretty nice too. Remember,
this year USA Today tabbed it second on its list of ten best places in the
country to visit.

Opening night I walked the Iowa State Fair Midway and noticed at the squirtgun
race game a young couple gleefully playing, their kids drowsing in two
strollers behind them, all four clean, quiet, content and smiling. There are
many places in the world worse to be. :-)

[Jay Honeck]

> > Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable man,
> > and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.
>
> He "was", until the tragic inconvenience of you having to sit in an FBO
for
> an hour?

No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress and
his comrades were still being held prisoner.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Is it safe to say you will be voting Republican?? :-)

I usually lean their way -- but this year has been up for grabs.

The more I hear about Kerry, however, the less I like.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Weir]

Are you telling me that as a serious contender for the California gubernatorial
office in October last year I should have had police protection?

We landed in Fresno at the same time the Goobernator was there three weeks
before the election, and he had cops coming out his ears. We were lucky to have
people to fuel the aircraft.

Just some random thoughts, mindya...

Jim



"Jay Honeck" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->> Only if it is the Democrat. If it is the Republican, stand by for flowers
->and
->> poetry.
->
->Hee hee! Ahem, not true.
Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Jay Honeck]

> You have to wait for one hour after sunset.
> darkness has nothing to do with it. (or have I misread 61.57?)

You are correct, although in practical terms, I've found that FAR to be
irrelevant.

Total darkness is, well, total -- and I don't much care if it happens to
occur only 48 minutes (or whatever) past sunset.

(Nor have I ever met a CFI who cares, either...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Are you telling me that as a serious contender for the California
gubernatorial
> office in October last year I should have had police protection?

No.

But a personal security agent who happened to look exactly like Trinity (See
"The Matrix" sometime, Jim) would've been nice, I'm sure...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:lgdWc.214528$eM2.197800@attbi_s51...
>
> But a personal security agent who happened to look exactly like Trinity
> (See
> "The Matrix" sometime, Jim) would've been nice, I'm sure...
>


Your wife's opinion may vary...

[Andrew Gideon]

Icebound wrote:

> For all the difference it will make on election day, they could all make
> their speeches from an underground studio inside the Colorado Mountains.

Then if we'd just quietly shut the door on our way out...

- Andrew

[Jim Weir]

Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass going to
some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope that
your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a rifle
to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.

Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in the
national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk wasn't
so lucky; he came home less his left arm.

You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the Vietnam
draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.

Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This country was
wrong. We had no business being over there.

You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am concerned you
are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T subject to
the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I or Iraq
II are all about.

Jim



"Jay Honeck" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:


->No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
->country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress and
->his comrades were still being held prisoner.

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Jay Beckman]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>

<SNIP>

Jay,

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter who is making the security rules. It would
seem that there is only one all encompasing, over-riding sentiment among all
levels of law enforcement and security personell:

"A repeat of 9/11(using anything that flies...from a Cri-Cri to an A380...)
ain't gonna happen on MY watch..."

The fact that the "unwashed masses" now view any type of aircraft with a
jaundiced eye is by far the saddest and most disgusting after effect of
9/11.

Just my $0.02...

Jay Beckman
Student Pilot - KCHD
39.3 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%F9Wc.69882$TI1.15818@attbi_s52...
> > They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
> > criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone
> who
> > served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
> babies
> > and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone
> else
> > was doing it
>
> While I share some of your distaste for Mr. Kerry, CJ, I think you've
taken
> your point "a bit" too far. Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable
man,
> and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.
>
> I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread. What
we,
> as pilots, need, is to discuss intelligent, constructive ways to influence
> our government officials so that ridiculous crap like this doesn't happen
to
> more and more pilots.
>
> I'm all for logical, sensible security strategies for our presidential
> candidates, but what they did to my family was just stupid. We weren't a
> threat, and we couldn't have become a threat. If they THOUGHT we were
> potential threats, they could have escorted us to our plane, and searched
> it. They could have had the FBO guys tow my plane to the OTHER FBO on the
> OTHER side of the field, and we could have departed from there. (Those
> planes were coming and going freely throughout this episode.)
>
> They had a myriad of options, all of which they chose to ignore. The only
> thing that satisfied them was my complete immobility, which is no
different
> than treating me like a suspected criminal.

They wouldn't dare treat a suspected criminal the way they treated you.
They have laws protecting them. We have the patriot act which puts the law
abiding citizen somewhat lower than pond scum.

> And I resent it.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%F9Wc.69882$TI1.15818@attbi_s52...
> I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread.

What a bizarre thing to write. You *started* the thread as a "bash Kerry"
(well, bash his VP candidate) thread.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:4w9Wc.69806$TI1.46647@attbi_s52...
> I thought the Democrats were saying that Kerry and Edwards were "the
Answer"
> to these problems, Pete?

Why would you think that? I haven't seen a single statement from anyone
qualified to speak about the Democratic platform that would suggest that.
If anything, they are playing up the "Bush hasn't done enough" crap about
security.

What in the world makes you think that the Democrats "were saying that Kerry
and Edwards were 'the Answer' to these problems"?

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Chuck" > wrote in message
om...
> True, but why does a *candidate* need all of the protection paid for by
the
> tax payers?

Frankly, I don't think the in-office President needs all of it.

I'm not saying that what Jay experienced was justified or right. I'm just a
little irked at his blatantly prejudiced post. He could have simply
described the situation accurately, but instead he used inflammatory remarks
at every opportunity.

Pete

[Bob Fry]

Jim Weir > writes:
[A lot of good stuff]

Right on, Mr. Weir.

I was 18 in '73 and they were only drafting the first 20 or 30
numbers, and that's how I missed the draft. A good thing too...I know
I would have been f***ed in the head if I had been forced to go.

The son of a good friend of mine came back messed up in the
head...never did get back to normal.

Another friend who tramped around in the jungle for a year died of
liver cancer at age 52. Agent Orange? Maybe. The brother of another
friend also died of some weird cancer which the military finally
admitted was caused by AO.

I hope Vietnam can once again become the name of a country, not a
stupid war we arrogantly got involved in. Who's the real traitor--try
LBJ.

I respect the military, but sure as hell don't worship them like some
posters in these newsgroups. Hurray for Kerry, who actually uses his
brain to think, instead of his balls. The man joined up and served
honorably, saw with his own eyes what a screwed up situation the war
was, came home and tried to do something about it. What was Shrub
doing, BTW? Coke and booze?

[Bob Fry]

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> > Couldn't you or Mary just do three quick patterns (full-stop) and be legal
> > to fly at night?
>
> Sure, but that would be terribly impractical.

Do you think some FAA cop is going to be waiting for you to make sure
you had 3 night landings in the last 90 days?

Just frigging fly home at night and be done with it. Big deal.

[H.P.]

Presidential candidates have been afforded SS protection since the '68
election when both Robert Kennedy and George Wallace were shot.



"Chuck" > wrote in message
om...
>
> "Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> > news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> > > [...] If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > > Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> >
> > Of all the idiotic posts you've made, this is certainly one of them.
> >
> > Couldn't you at least *pretend* to hide your prejudice? Do you have
even
> a
> > shred of evidence that the exact same thing wouldn't have happened to
you
> > had Dick Cheney showed up at the same airport in 1999? No, of course
not.
> >
> >
>
>
> True, but why does a *candidate* need all of the protection paid for by
the
> tax payers?
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass
going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope
that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a
rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in
the
> national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk
wasn't
> so lucky; he came home less his left arm.
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the
Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.
>
> Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This country
was
> wrong. We had no business being over there.
>
> You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am
concerned you
> are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T
subject to
> the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I
or Iraq
> II are all about.

Well, Mr. Weir. Take a piece of me, then. Blast me if you wish. Although I
was not in the draft mix (my number was 284), I signed onto the Air Force
anyway. I believed we were right and I still believe that. In any event,
Kerry had no business saying that everybody serving in Vietnam was a bunch
of war criminals. He did not have to meet with communist leaders. He did not
have to raise money for an assassination attempt on senators.

[Earl Grieda]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we
> were the only ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa
> State Fair." This year is the 150th anniversary of this grand
> old tradition, so last weekend we decided to check it out.
>
> ......Much tripe deleted.....
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet --
he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>

Jay, when you become a viable candidate for the position of the 2nd most
powerful man on this planet your opinion on this subject might mean
something. Until then, you should be embarrassed you wrote this immature
dribble. Your self-centered and prejudiced attitude places you square in
the category of CJ Campbell, just another grumpy old man.

Earl G

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>

Jay, Jay, you're hopeless! As you said yourself at the beginning of
your post, had any of the Bush people been visiting, there'd have been
a TFR and you'd have stayed home. The Kerry people are voluntarily
waiving their option of having TFRs!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Jeremy,

> He "was", until the tragic inconvenience of you having to sit in an FBO for
> an hour? What narcisistic bull****.
>

Thanks.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jack]

Jim Weir wrote:

> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in the
> national interest" and I got a deferment.

No balls at all, Weir.

No doubt your abilities would have been of some use to the nation in
Viet Nam, too. You let "[t]he engineer on the next desk" essentially
take your place and he came back the worse for it.

Maybe your anger is just cover for a guilty conscience.


Jack

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> I usually lean their way -- but this year has been up for grabs.
>
> The more I hear about Kerry, however, the less I like.

Rather the situation that I'm in as well. I am still 100% undecided, but my
hopes of voting "for" either candidate are quickly evaporating, and the
"lesser of two evils" decision is becoming a reality for me.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

> > I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread.
>
> What a bizarre thing to write. You *started* the thread as a "bash Kerry"
> (well, bash his VP candidate) thread.

I saw it as more of a bash the stupid protection post.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Jay Honeck]

> What in the world makes you think that the Democrats "were saying that
Kerry
> and Edwards were 'the Answer' to these problems"?

Well, hell -- an honest Democrat.

Why change horses if there's no problem The Johns can solve?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> and now, Jay, just imagine the prez coming to IOW for a couple of days,
shutting
> down your airport, denying access to your plane (so you can't even wash
it) and
> everybody (this means: you, Mary, your kids, your employees and your
guests) and
> his dog coming to your hotel is bodysearched ... security, you know. don't
like
> the idea?

Since so many are having trouble distinguishing the salient point of my
post, let me say it again. This time in super-sloooow-mooootion, for the
reading impaired:

John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.

I have no problem with giving the President of the United States the
tightest possible security. If George Bush had been in Des Moines, I would
have completely understood the treatment I received.

Giving a dime-a-dozen politician this kind of protection, however, is
patently absurd.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message et...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> >
> > If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> >
>
> I disagree completely with your logic.

Maybe Jay should consider moving away from Iowa (or the US in general)
if he can't tolerate such things.

[OtisWinslow]

All of these AHs picture themselves as royalty that the rest of us
ought to bow down to. If just fries my butt. Let them go about
their business and us go about ours. If they're going to close the damn
ramps then they should at least issue a notam so people can chose
not to go there.



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>
> After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des
Moines
> Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
> ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport
side
> of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
> enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
> Suburbans.
>
> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had
been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>
> As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing
727
> plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
> we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut,
tight
> as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>
> Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
> take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
> could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
> parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
> uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
> stupidity of it all.
>
> After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport --
and
> were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
> once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
> same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't
be
> far behind.
>
> Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off
the
> ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our
stuff
> and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service
agent
> step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
> depart.
>
> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just
have
> to wait.
>
> So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
> while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers
and
> agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
> for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
> while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.
>
> Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
> and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked.
This
> continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
> the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to
which
> he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
> and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.
>
> By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said
"Well,
> screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
> I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
> stuck here overnight!"
>
> Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
> departs." -- and that was that.
>
> Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and
held
> for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
> for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
> Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had
to
> be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!
>
> Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got
the
> message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
> ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
> ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
> finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.
>
> Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
> incredible security presence that had been there only moments before.
They
> all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
> nothing at all had just happened.
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet --
he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your
tax-dollars
> at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
> happened...
>
> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
> absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
> and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have
one.
> It's as big as a car!)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Donald M. Ross]

Boy has this gotten off of the boards topic.

Jim I love your posts on maintenance and have learned quite a bit from them
and hope to keep seeing them.

I'm of your generation. I went. I came home with a couple of scars
physically and some to the soul. My readings on the subject, both during my
military career (20 years) and since (reflectively) have indicated that what
I feel about the experiences are no different than the ones felt by those
who returned from the Korean War. The difference is that the Korean War
vets didn't turn on themselves in the national media.

To the ones who feel that there was something "special" about Vietnam that
messed up peoples heads, I had guys in my unit that changed drastically
after Grenada and / or Panama. Some people are just affected that way by
conflict. Why so many from Vietnam? Draft more people, create more
veterans, and the number of individuals with problems goes up.

Enough venting by both sides, I'm off to Virginia for a couple of weeks for
business (KORF) and I'm going to rent a 172 and go shoot some landings at
Kitty Hawk (KFFA).

Y'all have fun too.

Don

"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass
going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope
that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a
rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in
the
> national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk
wasn't
> so lucky; he came home less his left arm.
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the
Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.
>
> Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This country
was
> wrong. We had no business being over there.
>
> You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am
concerned you
> are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T
subject to
> the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I
or Iraq
> II are all about.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" >
> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
>
>
> ->No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
> ->country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress
and
> ->his comrades were still being held prisoner.
>
> Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
> VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
> http://www.rst-engr.com

[OtisWinslow]

For someone who didn't serve you're pretty arrogant. Why didn't you just
enlist? Why did you watch your friends get shot up and killed and then
take the coward's way out with a deferment? And you blast Jay? I don't
think merely being "subject" to the draft entitles you to criticize Jay.

Otis W
US Army 1969-72


"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass
going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope
that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a
rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in
the
> national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk
wasn't
> so lucky; he came home less his left arm.
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the
Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.
>
> Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This country
was
> wrong. We had no business being over there.
>
> You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am
concerned you
> are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T
subject to
> the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I
or Iraq
> II are all about.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" >
> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
>
>
> ->No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
> ->country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress
and
> ->his comrades were still being held prisoner.
>
> Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
> VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
> http://www.rst-engr.com

[Travis Marlatte]

I wish it didn't have to happen but I think it does. We have entered an era
where almost any disruption to our political process would be seen as a
small victory by one group or another. Political opinions aside - the acting
president is at the greatest risk but even the major candidates could draw
fire.

Kerry and Edwards have a good likelyhood of stepping up. Taking them out
early - before they were in office would severely disrupt our election
process.

I'm sorry that you were delayed. I know that I would be frustrated too.
Prior to 9/11, I could see securing the perimeter, sweep the airport, and
inspect anything that crosses the boundary. In other words, search your
plane and your family and then send you on your way.

Post 9/11, it is conceivalbe that a happy-looking family that has been
searched and found clean, gets in their small aircraft and dive bombs it
into Edward's plane after he gets on board.

I'm sure that the secret service goes overboard. Battling an unknown enemy,
I don't see how they can do anything different.
--
-------------------------------
Travis
"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:os9Wc.212699$eM2.189310@attbi_s51...
> > Jay, weren't you the one who said your life had not changed because of
> 9/11
> > paranoia?
>
> No my LIFESTYLE has not changed. (It was Eduardo's statement that the
"new
> American lifestyle sucks" that I was responding to...)
>
> In the overall scheme of things, my delay in DSM was a minor
inconvenience.
> But it was a stupid, pointless delay nonetheless, and one that deserves
our
> attention.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>

[Larry Dighera]

On 23 Aug 2004 00:02:36 GMT, (Jay Masino)
wrote in >::

>Because, once they've been given the candicacy by their party, they're
>too big of a target for any nutcase (or terrorist group) who wants to
>effect our election. That's the reason that they're afforded Secret
>Service protection.

The name of Robert "Bobby" Kennedy comes to mind. :-(

>It makes sense. Kerry and Edwards have very little
>say in the situation. One thing they *do* have a say in is whether they
>request a moving TFR over them. The Kerry people have NOT requested that,
>so we've not been annoyed by additional TFRs related to them.

Perhaps there's hope sanity may yet prevail over the nation.

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 01:09:19 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> wrote in
>::

>
>Just be glad you don't live in an area subject to repeated TFRs and other
>restrictions. Those of us in such areas have been raising the alarm for
>quite some time but until you get a small taste of what it is like you
>really can't understand the feeling.

There is a lot of truth about that phenomenon not only regarding ill
conceived aviation security responses, but to local airport closures,
to military airspace grabs, to irresponsible military operations, to
biased NTSB reports, to ...

[Travis Marlatte]

Jim, that's a lot of attitude for someone who was almost drafted.

I have no problem with your belief that the war was bad and that Karry was
justitifed in his open criticisms after returning. If you think it was an
unjustified war, then argue that point. If you think it needed to be openly
criticized, then argue that point.

Your statement that, "You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless
you were in the Vietnam
draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up." makes it a laughable rant.

Jim, you would have absolutely no chops to criticize Jay even if you had
actually been drafted into a nightmare of a war. Far less so since you were
almost drafted.
--
-------------------------------
Travis
"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass
going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope
that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a
rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in
the
> national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk
wasn't
> so lucky; he came home less his left arm.
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the
Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.
>
> Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This country
was
> wrong. We had no business being over there.
>
> You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am
concerned you
> are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T
subject to
> the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I
or Iraq
> II are all about.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
> "Jay Honeck" >
> shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
>
>
> ->No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
> ->country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress
and
> ->his comrades were still being held prisoner.
>
> Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
> VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
> http://www.rst-engr.com

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
> nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.
>

He is a candidate. The purpose of this kind of protection is to make
sure a democratic process can take place with a candidate being voted
for or against, not killed out of the election before it takes place.

As you well know, your country has a (for an established democracy
unusual, one might add) history of attacks on elected presidents or
candidates put up for election. Thus, this kind of protection might make
sense.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:50:56 -0700, "Jay Beckman" >
wrote in <mQdWc.93789$Lj.58952@fed1read03>::

>
>The fact that the "unwashed masses" now view any type of aircraft with a
>jaundiced eye is by far the saddest and most disgusting after effect of
>9/11.
>
>Just my $0.02...
>
>Jay Beckman
>Student Pilot - KCHD
>39.3 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!
>

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
> nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.
> I have no problem with giving the President of the United States the
> tightest possible security. If George Bush had been in Des Moines, I would
> have completely understood the treatment I received.
> Giving a dime-a-dozen politician this kind of protection, however, is
> patently absurd.

Once they're the candidate of their party, there's way too much of a
chance that an assasination attempt could alter our elections. It makes
sense to protect them as if they were already President/Vice President.

--- Jay



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> Maybe Jay should consider moving away from Iowa (or the US in general)
> if he can't tolerate such things.

Keep in mind that this is the same guy who was saying that nothing's changed since
9/11 a couple weeks ago.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jim Weir wrote:
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.

Absolutely. I was in the same demonstrations Kerry was.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Dave Stadt wrote:
>
> They wouldn't dare treat a suspected criminal the way they treated you.

They wouldn't dare say "Excuse me sir, you can't go through that door"? Of course
they would.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jim Weir wrote:
>
> Are you telling me that as a serious contender for the California gubernatorial
> office in October last year I should have had police protection?

Maybe. Has anybody tried to shoot a California gubernatorial candidate?

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Jay Honeck]

> You wanna blast me? Come on. Take a piece of me. So far as I am
concerned you
> are a stupid jackass that DIDN'T serve in the military, that WEREN'T
subject to
> the draft, and have absolutely no CONCEPT of what either Vietnam, Iraq I
or Iraq
> II are all about.

You know, Jim, most people are nice in-writing, but go off half-cocked
in-person. You're the only person I've ever met that is just the opposite.

Many people will be ripping you to shreds for your argument that "almost
being drafted" makes you more qualified to comment on the Vietnam war.
Some may even point out that there is some guy up on that black wall in
Washington, D.C. because you chose not to go.

Not me. Although I think you're wrong, it was you guys in the Apollo
program that were the true heroes of the '60s. If only we had followed the
path laid out by NASA, rather than the path laid out by the "Great Society,"
we'd all be living in a much better world by now. (Actually, it might have
been a world other than Earth...)

Current arguments aside, we needed Apollo a helluva lot more than we needed
Vietnam.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> If they're going to close the damn
> ramps then they should at least issue a notam so people can chose
> not to go there.

Gosh, someone who "gets" it -- thank you!

Had I known Edwards was going to shut down operations at Signature, I would
have chosen the "other" FBO.

A simple NOTAM would have done the job, my family wouldn't have been treated
like suspected criminals, and he could have basked in royal security without
criticism. Hopefully someone from the FAA or Kerry campaign is taking
notes?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Tony Cox]

"H.P." > wrote in message
m...
> Presidential candidates have been afforded SS protection since the '68
> election when both Robert Kennedy and George Wallace were shot.

Only "Major candidates" are offered protection, and this protection
can be declined. See http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/ref/blssprotect.htm
In practice, the two "official" political parties get to decide who
is entitled to protection.

From Title 18, Sec. 3056

"Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and,
within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses
of such candidates. As used in this paragraph, the term ''major
Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates'' means those
individuals identified as such by the Secretary of the Treasury
after consultation with an advisory committee consisting of the
Speaker of the House of Representatives, the minority leader of
the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders
of the Senate, and one additional member selected by the other
members of the committee. The protection authorized in paragraphs
(2) through (7) may be declined."

[Andrew Gideon]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Why change horses if there's no problem The Johns can solve?

Even if we accept your premise - that there's no problem they can solve,
which is not what Peter wrote - the answer is still fairly blatent: to
avoid production (or exacerbation) of more.

I'm no fan of Kerry, but I'm a conservative voter and Bush is less
conservative than Kerry. From the Patriot Act to tariffs to education to
marriage (and so on), Bush has been getting the Federal Government into
places it doesn't belong. How much more liberal in the reading of our
Constitution can one get?

Strange as it is to write, I think that Kerry would do this less. Rather:
while Kerry would probably be as economically irresponsible as Bush, he's
less likely to be as liberal in areas involving Civil Rights.

These are definitely weird times!

- Andrew

[gatt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:oV3Wc.68220$

> The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this?

Uh...you tried to get into any Bush or Cheney events lately? Or operate an
aircraft in a city where they're appearing? It goes both ways.

Fortunately those law-abiding Terrorist Flight Restrictions keep terrorists
from flying over them.

-c

[Peter Gottlieb]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Ron Natalie wrote:
>>
>> Maybe Jay should consider moving away from Iowa (or the US in general)
>> if he can't tolerate such things.
>
> Keep in mind that this is the same guy who was saying that nothing's
> changed since
> 9/11 a couple weeks ago.
>

Maybe this was karma catching up with him for saying that when so many of us
have had so much grief from the GA disruptions.

[Peter Gottlieb]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
> Maybe. Has anybody tried to shoot a California gubernatorial candidate?
>

Yes, with poor results (at least in the movies).

[Bill Denton]

You might consider spending some time with the dictionary, specifically with
"liberal" and "conservative". Our political scale is generally considered to
consist of a center, with liberalism to the left of center and conservatism
to the right.

If you want to consider Bush to be not a conservative, the farthest to the
left you could place him would be the center, as he is certainly not a
liberal. Kerry, however, is about as liberal as you can get.

All of this is relative: you can't compare the liberalism/conservatism of
1776 with that of today. Views on government have changed far too much to
permit that.

One response: Bush on education. Bush is trying to repair and put some
rationality into federal education spending. But Bush did not put the
original programs into place, that was done primarily by liberals. And Bush
cannot get rid of the programs. Most of what Bush has done, for all
practical purposes, is rename some programs and try to improve them. But he
has not put any totally new educational programs into place.

I really don't care who you vote for; that's a choice our wonderful nation
gives you. But I do hope you try to get a little better understanding of
both candidates and what they are all about...



"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> > Why change horses if there's no problem The Johns can solve?
>
> Even if we accept your premise - that there's no problem they can solve,
> which is not what Peter wrote - the answer is still fairly blatent: to
> avoid production (or exacerbation) of more.
>
> I'm no fan of Kerry, but I'm a conservative voter and Bush is less
> conservative than Kerry. From the Patriot Act to tariffs to education to
> marriage (and so on), Bush has been getting the Federal Government into
> places it doesn't belong. How much more liberal in the reading of our
> Constitution can one get?
>
> Strange as it is to write, I think that Kerry would do this less. Rather:
> while Kerry would probably be as economically irresponsible as Bush, he's
> less likely to be as liberal in areas involving Civil Rights.
>
> These are definitely weird times!
>
> - Andrew
>

[Jay Honeck]

> So you are saying that you will gladly surrender your rights and your
ability to
> make business while the prez (again, no matter if Bush or somebody else)
is in
> town?

Surrender my rights and ability to make business? No.

Delay my departure from an airport? Sure.

The most powerful man on earth -- POTUS -- is a target for virtually every
nut-group. His survival is intrinsically linked with the potential
survival of the U.S. itself, and therefore his life must be protected in a
fail-safe manner.

If this means TFRs and closing ramps while Air Force One is here, I'm fine
with that.

But not for a wannabee V.P. candidate.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Andrew Gideon]

Bill Denton wrote:

> You might consider spending some time with the dictionary, specifically
> with "liberal" and "conservative". Our political scale is generally
> considered to consist of a center, with liberalism to the left of center
> and conservatism to the right.

"Left" and "Right" are terribly poor guides, in that to my left is a table
and my right a wall. "Liberal" vs. "Conservative" involves the willingless
one has to make claims about interpreting the intent of our Constitution.
A "complete" conservative takes none, and sees but the words. A "complete"
liberal pretends to know the minds of the authors better than the authors,
and therefore takes complete freedom with the words.

Conservative also means "traditional", which is getting less and less
helpful over the years as history grows to include so many different
"traditions". I'd not expect, for example, that following an economically
irresponsible administation Conservatism would suddenly mean economically
irresponsible.

[Although perhaps that's precisely what's occurring today <laugh>.]

Of course, all these are pretty silly anyway, in that they're one
dimensional. One can be liberal in economic topics while conservative in
social topics, for one very obvious and simplistic example.

Kerry is almost certainly economically liberal (although he's doing a
semi-decent job of claiming otherwise; I've no faith in that) and almost
certainly socially conservative. Bush is liberal in all areas. No
conservative would get the Federal Government anywhere near a "definition"
of marriage. No conservative would put tarrifs on steel (absent something
like someone dumping on us, or some such excuse). No conservative would
pass the so-called Patriot Act.

And so on...

[...]

> All of this is relative: you can't compare the liberalism/conservatism of
> 1776 with that of today. Views on government have changed far too much to
> permit that.

In detail, this is true. In a general sense, however, the same issues
remain valid: partitioning of responsibility between various branches and
levels of government, and with final responsibility resting on us.
Remembering both the "by" and the "for" is as valid today as it was a
couple of centuries ago.

- Andrew

[Andrew Gideon]

Andrew Gideon wrote:

> "Liberal" vs. "Conservative" involves the
> willingless one has to make claims about interpreting the intent of our
> Constitution.
> A "complete" conservative takes none, and sees but the words. A
> "complete" liberal pretends to know the minds of the authors better than
> the authors, and therefore takes complete freedom with the words.

Hmm...this is too limited. It ignores that these words can be applied
outside of our country (either geographically or chronologically). For
example, there's this:

http://www.majorcox.com/columns/liberal.htm

which refers to "The liberal idea of religious freedom" in the context of
1620 Europe and America. No U.S. Constitution to be interpreted in that
chronological context.

This explains a lot about the current "conservative" administration,
perhaps.

For an example of greater confusion, see:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1067375/posts

- Andrew

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> The most powerful man on earth -- POTUS -- is a target for virtually every
> nut-group. His survival is intrinsically linked with the potential
> survival of the U.S. itself, and therefore his life must be protected in a
> fail-safe manner.

It's important to protect the President within reason, but he is NOT
"intrinsically linked with the potential survival of the U.S. itself".
The country has well defined procedures for the transfer of power, and our
country would continue, just fine, without the President. The Secret
Service has been, basically, out of control since JFK was assasinated, and
sees no limit to how far they should go to protect the President. The
continued ADIZ around DC is a glaring example. Some of us think that
protecting our civil liberties is also important.

> If this means TFRs and closing ramps while Air Force One is here, I'm fine
> with that.
> But not for a wannabee V.P. candidate.

He has very little to do with it. The protection is automatic. It seems
fairly obvious that you're being effected by your political preferences
(ie, refering to Edwards by funny names... ie, Senator NiceHair, etc or
whatever you said). I suspect that, during a Democratic administration, if
you were inconvenienced by a Republican candidate, you wouldn't be nearly
as upset.

--- Jay



--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[James Robinson]

Bob Noel wrote:
>
> Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> > > I don't want this to become a "bash Kerry" or "trash Bush" thread.
> >
> > What a bizarre thing to write. You *started* the thread as a "bash Kerry"
> > (well, bash his VP candidate) thread.
>
> I saw it as more of a bash the stupid protection post.

Jay made it political with the way he directly blamed the candidate for
preventing him from access to his aircraft, using disparaging names and
other remarks that clearly were aimed at the Democratic slate. Had he
simply described the security as over the top, then it wouldn't have
become a flame war.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:_LkWc.217443$eM2.183110@attbi_s51...
> Why change horses if there's no problem The Johns can solve?

Sorry, by "these problems" I assumed you were staying on topic and referring
only to the security issues.

There are plenty of things the Democrats claim to be able to do better.
Reducing the impact to your lifestyle due to security measures just doesn't
happen to be one of them.

Pete

[Jay Honeck]

> He has very little to do with it. The protection is automatic. It seems
> fairly obvious that you're being effected by your political preferences
> (ie, refering to Edwards by funny names... ie, Senator NiceHair, etc or
> whatever you said). I suspect that, during a Democratic administration, if
> you were inconvenienced by a Republican candidate, you wouldn't be nearly
> as upset.

Well, I'm hoping to see Richard Campagna
(http://www.badnarik.org/campagna_bio.php) in Iowa one of these days. He
and his running mate, Michael Badnarik, are starting to look like the only
viable alternatives for my vote.

We'll see if the security apparatus goes ape-sh*t over him the way they did
over Edwards.

If they do, you can look forward to another long thread...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[James Robinson]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Since so many are having trouble distinguishing the salient point of my
> post, let me say it again. This time in super-sloooow-mooootion, for the
> reading impaired:
>
> John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
> nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.
>
> I have no problem with giving the President of the United States the
> tightest possible security. If George Bush had been in Des Moines, I would
> have completely understood the treatment I received.
>
> Giving a dime-a-dozen politician this kind of protection, however, is
> patently absurd.

Regarding why your point might have been obscured, let me remind you
what you wrote in your original posts:

"Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727"
"Mr. Ketchup's side-kick"
"If this is what we have to look forward to under a Kerry/Edwards
presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come."
"The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
potential constituents like this?"

Had you not provided the political slant and directly blamed the
Democratic candidates for the inconvenience, you would not have obscured
your own message.

To provide my own political slant, I might note that "this kind of
protection" is being offered under the Bush/Cheney presidency, so you
don't have to look forward, it is here now under the present
administration.

Regarding the fact that the candidate has protection, even though he is
not in fact the VP, that's just the sort of soft target a terrorist
might look for, because of the news coverage it would get, and some form
of protection is probably justified.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:a%pWc.76075$TI1.45999@attbi_s52...
> Well, I'm hoping to see Richard Campagna
> (http://www.badnarik.org/campagna_bio.php) in Iowa one of these days. He
> and his running mate, Michael Badnarik, are starting to look like the only
> viable alternatives for my vote.

Until we fix the voting system in the US, a vote for anyone other than the
two major candidates is really just a vote against the person you'd have
otherwise voted for. And of course, that's exactly the opposite of what you
really want.

If you genuinely couldn't care less which of the two major candidates gets
elected, then I suppose you might as well vote for some other random person.
No different than staying home, or leaving that race unvoted on your ballot.
Certainly no better though.

I've always been a bit puzzled that the independent parties don't stop
wasting time putting up candidates for races they'll never win, drawing
votes from the major candidate most closely aligned with their thinking.
It's counterproductive. They'd do much better working on the voting process
first, so that third-party races were actually viable rather than
disruptive.

I, for one, would love to be able to vote for someone other than a Rep or
Dem in a way that was actually meaningful.

Pete

[DanH]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>
> After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des Moines
> Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
> ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport side
> of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
> enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
> Suburbans.
>
> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>
> As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing 727
> plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
> we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut, tight
> as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>
> Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
> take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
> could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
> parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
> uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
> stupidity of it all.
>
> After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport -- and
> were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
> once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
> same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't be
> far behind.
>
> Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off the
> ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our stuff
> and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service agent
> step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
> depart.
>
> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just have
> to wait.
>
> So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
> while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers and
> agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
> for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
> while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.
>
> Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
> and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked. This
> continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
> the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to which
> he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
> and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.
>
> By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said "Well,
> screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
> I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
> stuck here overnight!"
>
> Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
> departs." -- and that was that.
>
> Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and held
> for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
> for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
> Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had to
> be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!
>
> Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got the
> message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
> ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
> ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
> finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.
>
> Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
> incredible security presence that had been there only moments before. They
> all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
> nothing at all had just happened.
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet -- he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your tax-dollars
> at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
> happened...
>
> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
> absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
> and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have one.
> It's as big as a car!)
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

Wow! That's the highest whining-per-sentence ratio I've heard since the
last time I accidentally channel-surfed to Air America or Rush.

[Jay Honeck]

> Keep in mind that this is the same guy who was saying that nothing's
changed since
> 9/11 a couple weeks ago.

Nothing of any importance HAS changed, for 99.99% of the people.

And I was responding to Eduardo's broadside about how the "new American
lifestyle sucks" -- which it clearly does not.

Edwards' over-the-top security was inconvenient, stupid, and unnecessary,
but it hardly amounts to a hill of beans in the overall scheme of things in
America.

Which, incidentally, is why they feel they can get away with it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Had you not provided the political slant and directly blamed the
> Democratic candidates for the inconvenience, you would not have obscured
> your own message.

I blamed the Democratic V.P. candidate directly because that is where the
blame lies. In my world, the boss takes the blame for his subordinates.

I find it incredibly hypocritical that Kerry supporters continue to rant
about the "restrictive" and "fascist/racist" security measures the Bush
Administration has put in place nationally, yet in the same breath will
defend their candidate when he does EXACTLY the same thing.

Only it's worse, because their candidate is precisely that: Just a
candidate.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Masino]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
> I blamed the Democratic V.P. candidate directly because that is where the
> blame lies. In my world, the boss takes the blame for his subordinates.

Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.


> I find it incredibly hypocritical that Kerry supporters continue to rant
> about the "restrictive" and "fascist/racist" security measures the Bush
> Administration has put in place nationally, yet in the same breath will
> defend their candidate when he does EXACTLY the same thing.

Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.

> Only it's worse, because their candidate is precisely that: Just a
> candidate.

Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.




--
__!__
Jay and Teresa Masino ___(_)___
http://www2.ari.net/jmasino ! ! !
http://www.oceancityairport.com
http://www.oc-adolfos.com

[TaxSrv]

"Jay Masino wrote:
> Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.

Is declining Secret Service protection "no control"? The DHS web site
says that Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates, and their
spouses/children, may individually decline protection. If the
question is whether they may tell them how to do their jobs once they
consent to protection, well, that I imagine is like any other
situation where professionals tend not to listen to suggestions from
amateurs.

F--

[Chuck]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...


<snip>

> and finally, to compare your calculated $ 6,000 for security at this
event:
> check out http://www.costofwar.com/ to have an estimate what your
government
> spends on other things.
>


Big deal. I can write a program to make numbers change at a regular
interval...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[Chuck]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
...

<snip>

> Maybe Jay should consider moving away from Iowa (or the US in general)
> if he can't tolerate such things.
>


Jay, you can get the crap stirred up more than I can! Your good.

What happened to your right to free speech? You voice your opinion and now
you are being told to leave the country because of you voicing your
opinion...

What a country...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Chuck" > wrote in message
m...
>
> Big deal. I can write a program to make numbers change at a regular
> interval...
>

Yes, we call them "constants."

[H.P.]

How in heavens name would a GA pilot vote for Edwards, a personal injury
lawyer who's inclined to sue General Aviation out of existence? He's
already attempted to sue Obstetricians into oblivion so that pregnant moms
sometimes have to fly to the nearest available OB\GYN willing to deliver
their babies! And can you tell me that John F'n Ketchup won't regulate or
tax GA to death?

"James Robinson" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck wrote:
> >
> > Since so many are having trouble distinguishing the salient point of my
> > post, let me say it again. This time in super-sloooow-mooootion, for
the
> > reading impaired:
> >
> > John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
> > nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.
> >
> > I have no problem with giving the President of the United States the
> > tightest possible security. If George Bush had been in Des Moines, I
would
> > have completely understood the treatment I received.
> >
> > Giving a dime-a-dozen politician this kind of protection, however, is
> > patently absurd.
>
> Regarding why your point might have been obscured, let me remind you
> what you wrote in your original posts:
>
> "Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727"
> "Mr. Ketchup's side-kick"
> "If this is what we have to look forward to under a Kerry/Edwards
> presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come."
> "The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this?"
>
> Had you not provided the political slant and directly blamed the
> Democratic candidates for the inconvenience, you would not have obscured
> your own message.
>
> To provide my own political slant, I might note that "this kind of
> protection" is being offered under the Bush/Cheney presidency, so you
> don't have to look forward, it is here now under the present
> administration.
>
> Regarding the fact that the candidate has protection, even though he is
> not in fact the VP, that's just the sort of soft target a terrorist
> might look for, because of the news coverage it would get, and some form
> of protection is probably justified.

[Bill Denton]

You might re-read this...constants don't change at all; that's why we call
them constants.


"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "Chuck" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > Big deal. I can write a program to make numbers change at a regular
> > interval...
> >
>
> Yes, we call them "constants."
>
>

[Brian Burger]

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Jay Honeck wrote:

> > and now, Jay, just imagine the prez coming to IOW for a couple of days,
> shutting
> > down your airport, denying access to your plane (so you can't even wash
> it) and
> > everybody (this means: you, Mary, your kids, your employees and your
> guests) and
> > his dog coming to your hotel is bodysearched ... security, you know. don't
> like
> > the idea?
>
> Since so many are having trouble distinguishing the salient point of my
> post, let me say it again. This time in super-sloooow-mooootion, for the
> reading impaired:
>
> John Edwards isn't the President. He isn't the Vice-President. He is
> nobody but a run-of-the-mill Senator.

Um, no. He's the Democratic Party's canidate for VP, as of earlier this
month. He also happens to be a Senator, but seriously: if he got offed, it
would at least disrupt the Dem's political campaign. The whole point of
protection for canidates is to prevent disruption of the democratic
process, more or less.

I'm not even an American, for Dog's sake, and the above is obvious to
me...

Tell us: If your entire trip had been scuttled by a Shrub/Cheney TFR,
would you even have posted anything about it?

Brian.


>
> I have no problem with giving the President of the United States the
> tightest possible security. If George Bush had been in Des Moines, I would
> have completely understood the treatment I received.
>
> Giving a dime-a-dozen politician this kind of protection, however, is
> patently absurd.
>

[mike regish]

But "this" the result of the Bush/Cheney "team."

mike regish

>> If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> >
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
> >
>
>

[Jay Beckman]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 20:50:56 -0700, "Jay Beckman" >
> wrote in <mQdWc.93789$Lj.58952@fed1read03>::
>
>>
>>The fact that the "unwashed masses" now view any type of aircraft with a
>>jaundiced eye is by far the saddest and most disgusting after effect of
>>9/11.
>>
>>Just my $0.02...
>>
>>Jay Beckman
>>Student Pilot - KCHD
>>39.3 Hrs ... Nowhere to go but up!
>>
>

Larry,

Thanks...Um, I think...

Jay

[Icebound]

"Travis Marlatte" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> I wish it didn't have to happen but I think it does. We have entered an
era
> where almost any disruption to our political process would be seen as a
> small victory by one group or another.

Ah, but we forget that in politics perception is everything.

They only get their victory when we allow an event (whether 9/11, political
distruption, or worse...) to be seen as a "really big deal". Then the
groups know that they have something, and become encouraged and bold.

If we snarl quietly behind gritted teeth and a bland exterior... ferret out
the perps, their financiers, and supporters, like in any other crime... make
some quiet adjustments and go on with business as usual... these groups
cannot be sure that they have hurt a powerful democracy in any significant
way.

Treat your own citizens like potential terrorists and the real terrorists
get to think... "hey, they believe everyone is a terrorist...we can blend
right in!!

*** A great civilization is not conquered from without until it
has destroyed itself from within. ***
- Ariel Durant 1898-1981

[Peter Clark]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 22:21:37 GMT, "Geoffrey Barnes"
> wrote:

>"Bob Gardner" > wrote in message
...
>> I'm pretty sure that the decision to provide security to candidates (not
>> senators per se) lies with the Secret Service and could not be refused.
>
>SS protection can be refused. Nixon, for example, released the SS several
>years after he resigned. I'm not sure if he retained private bodyguards, or
>whether he just gave up on having bodyguards altoghether, but it does show
>that a "principal" can tell the SS to get lost if he or she wants to.

Has nobody watched "Guarding Tess" lately? ;)

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Masino" > wrote in message
...
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
> > I blamed the Democratic V.P. candidate directly because that is where
the
> > blame lies. In my world, the boss takes the blame for his subordinates.
>
> Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.

100 percent not true.

[Dave Stadt]

"Chuck" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> <snip>
>
> > Maybe Jay should consider moving away from Iowa (or the US in general)
> > if he can't tolerate such things.
> >
>
>
> Jay, you can get the crap stirred up more than I can! Your good.
>
> What happened to your right to free speech? You voice your opinion and now
> you are being told to leave the country because of you voicing your
> opinion...
>
> What a country...

Kerry did what Jay did and now he is in contention for the top job.

What a country....

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message
...
> You might re-read this...constants don't change at all; that's why we call
> them constants.
>

Depends on how good a programmer you are!!

[mike regish]

CJ. **** You, you sanctimonious, psycotic piece of ****, faggot, scum
sucking, lying whore of the bushies.

I've wanted to say that for a long ****ing time but didn't out of
poloiteness to the rest of the group. . **** that and **** you. I hope you
rot in your own excrement.

And your faggot, coward loverboy Bush is the biggest, phoniest asshole I've
ever seen. It's people like you who **** up the bell curve and make it
possible for such lying sack of ****, self serving liars to get in office to
begin with.

There. Now I feel better.

mike regish

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
> > more in the settings of his novels.
> >
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > > wrote in
> > <p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::
> >
> > >If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > >Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> >
> > I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.
> >
> > But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.
>
> I sincerely hope not. They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
> criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone
who
> served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
babies
> and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone
else
> was doing it, he left his one of his own men for dead while fleeing from
an
> imaginary attack and only turned around when shamed into it, two of his
> Purple Hearts are for self inflicted wounds, he disgraced the medals that
he
> is now so proud of, and he plotted to kill United States senators. He does
> not deny any of this; instead he resorts to personal attacks against those
> who are exposing the truth about him. If personal attacks do not silence
his
> enemies, he resorts to threats of violence and lawsuits, which shows what
he
> thinks of freedom of speech.
>
> It speaks volumes about the Democrats that they have sunk so low as to put
> such a slimeball up for the Presidency. The Democratic Party no longer
> respects America or Americans, but is solely focused on using fraud and
> deceit to achieve power in any way that it can. If this behavior continues
> the only outcome can be civil war.
>
>

[Grasshopper]

mike regish wrote:
> CJ. **** You, you sanctimonious, psycotic piece of ****, faggot, scum
> sucking, lying whore of the bushies.
>
> I've wanted to say that for a long ****ing time but didn't out of
> poloiteness to the rest of the group. . **** that and **** you. I
> hope you rot in your own excrement.
>
> And your faggot, coward loverboy Bush is the biggest, phoniest
> asshole I've ever seen. It's people like you who **** up the bell
> curve and make it possible for such lying sack of ****, self serving
> liars to get in office to begin with.
>
> There. Now I feel better.
>
> mike regish



You have major issues.



--
____________________________
Ah, Young Grasshopper.
Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.

[mike regish]

Yup.

And I've been reading that psychos bull**** for way too long.

mike regish

"Grasshopper" > wrote in message
m...
>
>
>
> You have major issues.
>
>
>
> --
> ____________________________
> Ah, Young Grasshopper.
> Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.
>
>

[Jay Somerset]

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 16:33:24 GMT, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

> > Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with these
> low
> > level security details. All this stuff has long ago been delegated well
> > away from them. If anything, Kerry's campaign has requested that security
> > of this sort be less rather than more.
>
> I'd say my experience serves as evidence to the contrary.
>
> The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this? Heck, my family couldn't even approach
> THE FENCE with a camera, let alone get close to Edwards himself.

And just how close do you think you would have got to Cheney or Bush? Let's
keep your inconvenience in perspective -- you are wrong to blame either
Edwards or the Democrats (I am actually a Republican, so this is an unbiased
comment).
>
> Now, mind you, if Edwards was a "somebody" (I.E.: The Vice-President. The
> President . The King. The Pope) I might understand this kind of
> fascist-brand of security -- but he is NOBODY.
>
> He is a vice-presidential CANDIDATE, which ranks him just ahead of Orca the
> Whale in national importance.
>
> The whole situation is absurd.

[Jay Somerset]

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 13:42:28 GMT, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

> > If they're going to close the damn
> > ramps then they should at least issue a notam so people can chose
> > not to go there.
>
> Gosh, someone who "gets" it -- thank you!
>
> Had I known Edwards was going to shut down operations at Signature, I would
> have chosen the "other" FBO.

Are you sure the "other FBO" was not equally inconvenienced?

>
> A simple NOTAM would have done the job, my family wouldn't have been treated
> like suspected criminals, and he could have basked in royal security without
> criticism. Hopefully someone from the FAA or Kerry campaign is taking
> notes?

[Laura]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> > Edwards, Kerry, Bush and Cheney have relatively little to do with these
> low
> > level security details. All this stuff has long ago been delegated well
> > away from them. If anything, Kerry's campaign has requested that security
> > of this sort be less rather than more.
>
> I'd say my experience serves as evidence to the contrary.
>
> The Democrats claim to be the "party of the people" -- yet they treat
> potential constituents like this? Heck, my family couldn't even approach
> THE FENCE with a camera, let alone get close to Edwards himself.

The same VP candidate of the "party of the people" was decrying the working
people living paycheck to paycheck at the People's Party convention in Boston
last month. This of course was after the DNC and its leaders loudly instructed
everyone who lives or works in or near Boston to stay home while the party
bosses were in town to play. Just stay home. Take the week off.

[Laura]

Larry Dighera wrote:

> Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
> more in the settings of his novels.
>
> On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote in
> <p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::
>
> >If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> >Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.
>
> But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.

Kerry himself has so much confidence in his campaign that he is still a
US Senator. Since he doesn't bother to show up to work or even vote to
represent his constituents, why not resign now since the election is
coming up quick and surely he must think he will win?
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/05/11/kerry.vote/ Of course if he
can't do his job as just a Senator, I'm sure he'll be a great President
who can boldly lead. What's his stand on voting for Iraq again?

Contrast with Senator Bob Dole who had the integrity to resign from the
Senate and then be a presidential candidate.

[Roger Halstead]

I propose that as part of the "Campaign Finance Reform" that the
following rules be applied to *all* campaign visits at all levels. If
the visit is going to inconvenience more than 5... OK ... 10
individuals, or businesses it must be canceled. The same is true for
campaign speeches whether in person, on radio, or TV.
I'd add that third parties should be given half of each candidates
slush fund for their own advertising be it pro or con.

Just think how peaceful election years would become.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

[Laura]

Jim Weir wrote:

> Only if it is the Democrat. If it is the Republican, stand by for flowers and
> poetry.

Is Golan Cipel the poet on duty?

[Laura]

Bob Fry wrote:

> Jim Weir > writes:
> [A lot of good stuff]
>
> Right on, Mr. Weir.
>
> I was 18 in '73 and they were only drafting the first 20 or 30
> numbers, and that's how I missed the draft. A good thing too...I know
> I would have been f***ed in the head if I had been forced to go.
>
> The son of a good friend of mine came back messed up in the
> head...never did get back to normal.
>
> Another friend who tramped around in the jungle for a year died of
> liver cancer at age 52. Agent Orange? Maybe. The brother of another
> friend also died of some weird cancer which the military finally
> admitted was caused by AO.
>
> I hope Vietnam can once again become the name of a country, not a
> stupid war we arrogantly got involved in. Who's the real traitor--try
> LBJ.
>
> I respect the military, but sure as hell don't worship them like some
> posters in these newsgroups. Hurray for Kerry, who actually uses his
> brain to think, instead of his balls. The man joined up and served
> honorably, saw with his own eyes what a screwed up situation the war
> was, came home and tried to do something about it. What was Shrub
> doing, BTW? Coke and booze?

I'm sure you voted for George HW Bush with his war record and Bob Dole
with his war record over draft dodging Mr. Clinton, since military service
is very, very important to you, right? Lots of people served honorably in
many places. But that doesn't give them a free ride to be President or a
free pass to strike from the record 20 years of a US Senate record and
Dukakis's lt governor before that. What is Mr Kerry's position on voting
for Iraq again?

[Laura]

Jim Weir wrote:

> Then, Jay, you are a generation behind me. You didn't SWEAT your ass going to
> some rice paddy in Vietnam. You didn't LIVE your life hoping against hope that
> your draft board wouldn't haul your ass out of college and send you with a rifle
> to some country that you couldn't have given a rat's ass less about.
>
> Me? I got lucky. My draft board thought that my work on Apollo was "in the
> national interest" and I got a deferment. The engineer on the next desk wasn't
> so lucky; he came home less his left arm.
>
> You have absolutely no chops to criticize Kerry unless you were in the Vietnam
> draft mix. You were not. Shut the hell up.

Huh? Nobody is permitted to criticize Kerry if they weren't draft eligible 30+
years ago? Oh yes, a real constitution advocate you are. Why stop there?? Why
not just say that nobody is permitted to criticize Kerry unless they were fighting
in Vietnam? Which rice paddy were you earning your first amendment rights in
again? Shut the hell up indeed. By your logic an entire sex shouldn't be
permitted to criticize Kerry. We should just appoint him king kerry right now
because anything said that isn't a complement is out of line.

Using your supreme logic, Bob Dole can't even criticize John Kerry because he
doesn't have the proper military service credentials to do so.

[Laura]

mike regish wrote:

> CJ. **** You, you sanctimonious, psycotic piece of ****, faggot, scum
> sucking, lying whore of the bushies.
>
> I've wanted to say that for a long ****ing time but didn't out of
> poloiteness to the rest of the group. . **** that and **** you. I hope you
> rot in your own excrement.
>
> And your faggot, coward loverboy Bush is the biggest, phoniest asshole I've
> ever seen. It's people like you who **** up the bell curve and make it
> possible for such lying sack of ****, self serving liars to get in office to
> begin with.

Oh, I see. You don't have a logical argument nor position, so you are forced to
use sexuality slurs and reduce yourself to homophobic language as you call
somebody names. Would you shout those same words in the streets of your
hometown, Northhampton? Or do you reserve your toughness for behind your very
tough keyboard?

And actually, I don't believe CJ made it possible for Clinton to get in office
at all.

[Eduardo Kaftanski]

In article <svqWc.45638$Fg5.43388@attbi_s53>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> Keep in mind that this is the same guy who was saying that nothing's
>changed since
>> 9/11 a couple weeks ago.
>
>Nothing of any importance HAS changed, for 99.99% of the people.
>
>And I was responding to Eduardo's broadside about how the "new American
>lifestyle sucks" -- which it clearly does not.
>

I've since been convinced American Lifestyle does not suck for everybody. My
apologies for the hurt feelings.

Anyway, just to fuel the fire and duck, your president is coming
to this little small country in few weeks. His security, a local
reporter said last week, includes a 300 meter radius around him were
you cannot walk without a clearance..

Its going to be fun to watch. The day was going to be declared a national
holiday to ease the procedures, but is no longer going to be.



--
Eduardo Kaftanski | To put a pipe in byte mode,
| type PIPE_TYPE_BYTE.
http://e.nn.cl | (from the Visual C++ help file.)

[mike regish]

I don't live in Northampton. And I've read CJ's paranoid bull**** here way
too long.

Impeach Bush.

mike regish

"Laura" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> mike regish wrote:
>
> > CJ. **** You, you sanctimonious, psycotic piece of ****, faggot, scum
> > sucking, lying whore of the bushies.
> >
> > I've wanted to say that for a long ****ing time but didn't out of
> > poloiteness to the rest of the group. . **** that and **** you. I hope
you
> > rot in your own excrement.
> >
> > And your faggot, coward loverboy Bush is the biggest, phoniest asshole
I've
> > ever seen. It's people like you who **** up the bell curve and make it
> > possible for such lying sack of ****, self serving liars to get in
office to
> > begin with.
>
> Oh, I see. You don't have a logical argument nor position, so you are
forced to
> use sexuality slurs and reduce yourself to homophobic language as you call
> somebody names. Would you shout those same words in the streets of your
> hometown, Northhampton? Or do you reserve your toughness for behind your
very
> tough keyboard?
>
> And actually, I don't believe CJ made it possible for Clinton to get in
office
> at all.
>

[Jay Honeck]

> Tell us: If your entire trip had been scuttled by a Shrub/Cheney TFR,
> would you even have posted anything about it?

If my trip was scuttled before it happened, I'd have gone somewhere else.
The State Fair would have survived without us.

As was evidenced by my deferred plans to visit Superior, WI last month, I
treat Presidential TFRs no differently than the weather. If it sucks to the
east, I'll fly west -- or vice versa.

Back then I delayed my trip to the Bong Museum by one day, because President
Bush was in Duluth. It made for a funny post, but no real hardship.

And, once again for the reading impaired -- if the President comes to town,
it's a whole different world than if a V.P. candidate rolls in.

Or, at least, it should be.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Michael 182]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
news:kiyWc.32759$9d6.23888@attbi_s54...
>
> Impeach Bush.

I'd settle for voting him out in November. But I admire your sentiment.

Michael

[Jim Weir]

Quod scripsi, scripsi.

Jim




Laura >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:


->Huh? Nobody is permitted to criticize Kerry if they weren't draft eligible
30+
->years ago?


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[SeeAndAvoid]

Jay, are you a glutton for punishment or what? I personally found your
story humurous with the occasional funny jab at the "Johns" (you forgot
"life support for a hair-do"), but like anywhere else in this country,
it's so polarized you're bound to **** off half of the people, and no
one is going to convince anyone to change their minds.

As far as you and your family not fitting a profile, there is no profile,
everyone is suspect. In "Bush At War" by Bob Woodward, there's
a passage...
....."Disruption is our goal," (CIA Director George) Tenet said. "We
want to change the profile of what we do to provide security at
critical points. To throw them off, to frustrate their planning, show
a different security profile. Something they haven't seen before, haven't
planned against, can't count on. Because the goal is disruption."
Searching everyone from clergymen to elderly ladies at airport
security could send a message to terrorists-no matter how you dress
or how unlikely a suspect you may appear, no one is immune from
scrutiny.........(Simon and Shuster - on loan from library)

Now imagine every TSA/SS worker is driven by that idea and you
can see why they do what they do, right or wrong. Do the Pres/VP
candidates on each side deserve SS protection, of course they do.
Does anyone in this group really want any of these four, regardless
how much you hate them, be attacked? I'd hope no American here
would say yes, and the non-americans who have a problem with
our way of government can mind their own business. We may
not be perfect, but this and the past presidents are ours, for better
or worse, no one asked you.

Even though I saw your attempt at humor, politics, especially right
now, is a good way to make enemies and lose friends. For what?
There's whackjobs in here on both sides of the issue, far left
and far right, neither is better. Luckily most Americans are
somewhere in the middle, regardless of how we're represented
here and abroad by the media.

....but I await your next adventure, hehe.

Chris

--
Steve Bosell for President 2004
"Vote for me or I'll sue you"
www.philhendrieshow.com
http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/philhendrie/lawsuits.html

[C Kingsbury]

"H.P." > wrote in message >...

> How in heavens name would a GA pilot vote for Edwards, a personal injury
> lawyer who's inclined to sue General Aviation out of existence? He's
> already attempted to sue Obstetricians into oblivion so that pregnant moms
> sometimes have to fly to the nearest available OB\GYN willing to deliver
> their babies! And can you tell me that John F'n Ketchup won't regulate or
> tax GA to death?

Kerry comes across as a semi-active GA pilot so I suspect he'd have at
least some sympathies in our direction.

No question about Johnny Trial Lawyer though. At the end of the day,
400,000 members of AOPA do not have 1% of the clout with the Democrats
that the trial lawyers do. If Hollywood lends them their sizzle it's
the ATLA that pays for the steak.

It's interesting that Bush has not made more of an issue out of
liability limitation as he did in Texas. Cessna's plant in
Independence would be a perfect backdrop for a "success story" on the
subject.

I doubt either guy gives a whit about day-to-day regulation, that's in
the hands of the permanent bureaucracy which nobody really gets to
vote on anymore. As for taxes, again I doubt we'd see big differences.
Barring a change in the House (v. unlikely w/ Texas redistricting)
even Kerry couldn't do anything too radical right now. Meanwhile the
notion of a luxury tax, tried under Bush I, was so thoroughly
discredited by experience that it likely won't be heard from for
another generation. It devastated the boatbuilding industry so badly
even the big lefties had to admit it was a dumb idea.

Best,
-cwk.

[Blanche]

I guess it's going to take a Constitutional amendment (sure, right)
to have the option "None of the above".

[Peter Duniho]

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> I guess it's going to take a Constitutional amendment (sure, right)
> to have the option "None of the above".

It might. I'm not really sure, since to be honest, I've never bothered to
look up what actually defines exactly how we vote.

I mean, yes...the electoral college is from the Constitution, but that's not
the real problem, not as it's used today. If states, for example, allowed
voters to vote for more than one candidate, then a vote for Nader would not
mean (on average) a vote against Kerry, as it does today.

There is ample precedent for alternative voting mechanisms. The main
problem is that the folks who control how we vote are the same folks who
have a vested interest in locking out all of the "third parties". Though,
given how the Democrats claim that Nader screwed up the last election for
them, it may be that they may find that third parties that get popular
enough (and it doesn't take much popularity) are enough of a thorn in their
side that they would be willing to give up their virtual monopoly (shared
with the Republicans, who so far haven't had a similarly disruptive similar
party running with them) on holding office.

One thing's for sure, when you've got one party (the Republicans in this
case) helping fund activities intended to support another party (the
Greens), simply because the more that other party succeeds, the less the
real competition (the Democrats) can succeed, something is really screwed
up.

Pete

[Earl Grieda]

"mike regish" > wrote in message
news:2nwWc.47620$Fg5.23823@attbi_s53...
> CJ. **** You, you sanctimonious, psycotic piece of ****,
> faggot, scum sucking, lying whore of the bushies.
>
> I've wanted to say that for a long ****ing time but didn't out
> of poloiteness to the rest of the group. . **** that and **** you.
> I hope you rot in your own excrement.
>
> And your faggot, coward loverboy Bush is the biggest, phoniest
> asshole I've ever seen. It's people like you who **** up the bell
> curve and make it possible for such lying sack of ****, self serving
> liars to get in office to begin with.
>
> There. Now I feel better.
>
> mike regish

Good post. Very accurately describes CJ. However, you forgot "grumpy old
man".

For another example of CJ's thinking here is one of the better CJ Campbell
quotes:

"There is considerable evidence to the contrary. It appears that Islam not
only sponsors terrorism, it is a way of life. More than 90% of the world's
wars are being fought in Islamic countries. That says a lot about Islam. All
the so-called 'moderate' Islamic sects and countries provide enormous
amounts of money as well as shelter and support to terrorists.

Quite honestly, I think that nuclear sterilization is an option that should
be explored."

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=cn8ve05hv7lrok7lreupupsodtk6qdu8ca%404ax.c om&rnum=8&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dcj%2Bcampbell%2Bmiddle%2Beast%26hl%3D en%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26scoring%3Dd%26selm%3Dcn8ve05hv7lrok7lreupupsod tk6qdu8ca%25404ax.com%26rnum%3D8


CJ is such a loving, tolerant Mormon.

Earl G




>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
> > > more in the settings of his novels.
> > >
> > > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > > > wrote in
> > > <p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::
> > >
> > > >If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > > >Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> > >
> > > I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.
> > >
> > > But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.
> >
> > I sincerely hope not. They should have shot the lying, treasonous war
> > criminal a long time ago. He betrayed his country, he betrayed everyone
> who
> > served in Vietnam, he met with enemy leaders, he deliberately killed
> babies
> > and then justified by claiming in Congressional testimony that everyone
> else
> > was doing it, he left his one of his own men for dead while fleeing from
> an
> > imaginary attack and only turned around when shamed into it, two of his
> > Purple Hearts are for self inflicted wounds, he disgraced the medals
that
> he
> > is now so proud of, and he plotted to kill United States senators. He
does
> > not deny any of this; instead he resorts to personal attacks against
those
> > who are exposing the truth about him. If personal attacks do not silence
> his
> > enemies, he resorts to threats of violence and lawsuits, which shows
what
> he
> > thinks of freedom of speech.
> >
> > It speaks volumes about the Democrats that they have sunk so low as to
put
> > such a slimeball up for the Presidency. The Democratic Party no longer
> > respects America or Americans, but is solely focused on using fraud and
> > deceit to achieve power in any way that it can. If this behavior
continues
> > the only outcome can be civil war.
> >
> >
>
>

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
(C Kingsbury) wrote:

> Meanwhile the
> notion of a luxury tax, tried under Bush I, was so thoroughly
> discredited by experience that it likely won't be heard from for
> another generation. It devastated the boatbuilding industry so badly
> even the big lefties had to admit it was a dumb idea.

really? Somehow I missed the big lefties admitting that. Do you
have a source for that? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like
to see it.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Thomas Borchert]

Mike,

> There. Now I feel better.
>

Me too <g>.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Michael,

> I'd settle for voting him out in November.
>

Didn't work last time.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Honeck]

> > Well, I'm hoping to see Richard Campagna
> > (http://www.badnarik.org/campagna_bio.php) in Iowa one of these days.
He
> > and his running mate, Michael Badnarik, are starting to look like the
only
> > viable alternatives for my vote.
>
> I think you should vote for him Jay. Be true to your principles.

Heh, good one.

Actually, I may.

It's kinda refreshing to see the Libertarians running a legitimate candidate
for office. Not the usual unelectable nut-case type they've run in the
past...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> With the exception of the homophobic aspects of your post, I'd like to
> thank you for saying what I am sure that many of us here on this board
> have been thinking about Mr. Campbell for a long time.

I've followed both of their posts here for years, and they're both a bit off
the beaten trail, as far as I'm concerned.

But C J never stoops to profanity, nor will he fall to the level of 4th
grade name-calling.

What a silly, pointless post. Shame on you, Mike.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Chuck]

"Jay Somerset" > wrote in message
...

<snip>
> And just how close do you think you would have got to Cheney or Bush?
Let's
> keep your inconvenience in perspective -- you are wrong to blame either
> Edwards or the Democrats (I am actually a Republican, so this is an
unbiased
> comment).
> >

<snip>

But... Bush and Cheney are actually *somebody*...


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[Aviv Hod]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Blanche" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I guess it's going to take a Constitutional amendment (sure, right)
>>to have the option "None of the above".
>
>
> It might. I'm not really sure, since to be honest, I've never bothered to
> look up what actually defines exactly how we vote.
>
> I mean, yes...the electoral college is from the Constitution, but that's not
> the real problem, not as it's used today. If states, for example, allowed
> voters to vote for more than one candidate, then a vote for Nader would not
> mean (on average) a vote against Kerry, as it does today.
>
> There is ample precedent for alternative voting mechanisms. The main
> problem is that the folks who control how we vote are the same folks who
> have a vested interest in locking out all of the "third parties". Though,
> given how the Democrats claim that Nader screwed up the last election for
> them, it may be that they may find that third parties that get popular
> enough (and it doesn't take much popularity) are enough of a thorn in their
> side that they would be willing to give up their virtual monopoly (shared
> with the Republicans, who so far haven't had a similarly disruptive similar
> party running with them) on holding office.
>
> One thing's for sure, when you've got one party (the Republicans in this
> case) helping fund activities intended to support another party (the
> Greens), simply because the more that other party succeeds, the less the
> real competition (the Democrats) can succeed, something is really screwed
> up.
>
> Pete
>
>

Pete, you're assuming that having a third, fourth, or more parties would
be good for politics. Having been born in a country that has a
notoriously fractured political structure, with 50+ parties running for
parliment and a good dozen or so well represented, I can attest to the
fact that multi-party politics serves only to benefit the fringe
fanatics by making them more important than they really are because they
are necessary for coalition building. What you end up with is an
incredibly unstable government that is always under the threat of
breaking apart. The smaller, fringe (and sometimes fanatic) parties
twist the arms of the coalition to get their way, to the detriment of
the country. Of course, I am talking about Israel, a country mired in an
asinine political system that has the moderate majority held hostage by
the radicals on every side (and we're talking about a completely
multi-dimensional political spectrum). The results have been disastrous
for Israel in both domestic and foreign policy.

Yes sir, I have come to appreciate the blandness and uniformity of the
Republicrat system. It's the worst system, except for all the others
:-) Seriously, though, the two party system necessitates a measure of
moderation, since the only way a radical government can stay in power is
if a majority of American voters are radical, at which point it's
difficult to call that segment of the population radical. That's not
too bad of a system, IMHO.

Having said that, the beauty of the current system is that it has NO
basis in law. There ARE other parties, they DO get on ballots, and
there have been plenty of precedents for third party or no party
candidates being elected into office. If one of the major parties takes
a swing too far in one direction as to turn off a lot of voters, and
some other party or candidate takes a position that does resonate with
people widely, then that party will run and win, period.

I find it unhelpful to complain about the "system" when what we're
really talking about is current voting patterns. Those can be changed
if the message has wide merit and appeal. And yes, that also includes
having enough merit and appeal to enable the third party to raise funds
to become viable. I think it's only fair.

-Aviv Hod

[Corky Scott]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 03:11:45 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>And, once again for the reading impaired -- if the President comes to town,
>it's a whole different world than if a V.P. candidate rolls in.

But Jay, Bush too was once only a candidate, and so was his running
mate Cheney. To use your words, Cheney was a VP wannabe. At that
time they both were accorded the same protection that Edwards and
Kerry now rate. If Bush/Cheney deserved the protection then, don't
Kerry/Edwards deserve it now?

Corky Scott

[Trent Moorehead]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message

> With the exception of the homophobic aspects of your post, I'd like to
> thank you for saying what I am sure that many of us here on this board
> have been thinking about Mr. Campbell for a long time.

Well, whatever. I'm thinking a whole lot less of Mr. Regish right now.

-Trent

[Malcolm Teas]

"H.P." > wrote in message >...
> How in heavens name would a GA pilot vote for Edwards, a personal injury
> lawyer who's inclined to sue General Aviation out of existence? He's
> already attempted to sue Obstetricians into oblivion so that pregnant moms
> sometimes have to fly to the nearest available OB\GYN willing to deliver
> their babies! And can you tell me that John F'n Ketchup won't regulate or
> tax GA to death?

Do you have grounds for this? Or is a just a rant? It's fine with me
if you want to rant, I just want to distinguish it, that's all.

I've been following multiple news sources and here's what I've seen on
the candidates and GA: Nothing on Edwards feelings for GA one way or
the other. But, might have missed something.

Kerry's an active GA pilot and would be expected to have some
understanding of the issues facing GA. Neither Kerry or Edwards has
asked for TFRs when campaigning, that might mean they're GA-friendly.

Bush is an inactive pilot and in TX showed no interest one way or the
other in GA. He let Mueller airport in Austin close without comment.
Since then there's a lack of a good GA airport in central TX.

Cheney's not a pilot and doesn't seem to have a concern about GA
either way from what I see. Both he and Bush have those fun TFRs
following them around the country. And both apparently support the
Wash. DC ADIZ.

From the scant evidence I see KE may be a little more in favor of GA
than BC are. But, frankly GA isn't showing up on either party's
radar.

-Malcolm Teas

[Newps]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> (C Kingsbury) wrote:
>
>
>>Meanwhile the
>>notion of a luxury tax, tried under Bush I, was so thoroughly
>>discredited by experience that it likely won't be heard from for
>>another generation. It devastated the boatbuilding industry so badly
>>even the big lefties had to admit it was a dumb idea.
>
>
> really? Somehow I missed the big lefties admitting that. Do you
> have a source for that? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like
> to see it.

There was a 10% surcharge on cars over $30K, airplanes over $100K and
boats over some number I don't recall right now. The boating industry
was hit the hardest because there are lots of small boat builders who
build high end boats. These people were effectively shut down as orders
dried up. What the lefties failed to realize was that these purchases
were nearly 100% discretionary. As such sales dried up completely for
the boats and thousands were left out of work and hundrreds of small
companies went bankrupt. Virtually no tax money was collected. You'll
never see a stick it top the rich surcharge like that again.

[Newps]

Malcolm Teas wrote:

He let Mueller airport in Austin close without comment.
> Since then there's a lack of a good GA airport in central TX.

That was the last one, there's no place to land in central Texas anymore?

[Michael 182]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Malcolm Teas wrote:
>
> He let Mueller airport in Austin close without comment.
> > Since then there's a lack of a good GA airport in central TX.
>
> That was the last one, there's no place to land in central Texas anymore?

No convenient place if you live in Austin. For a city the size of Austin to
not have a GA airport is ridiculous. I've landed at Bergstrom a number of
times as a transient, but hanger space is virtually impossible there. I
used to hanger at San Marcos - but there was no good reason to close
Mueller, especially after Dell bought and closed Austin Executive.

Michael



>
>

[C J Campbell]

"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> Quod scripsi, scripsi.
>
> Jim

Sophocles was acquitted of insanity with this argument because of the beauty
of his tragedies. Are you sure you want to use what YOU wrote as a defense?

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> Well, I'm hoping to see Richard Campagna
> (http://www.badnarik.org/campagna_bio.php) in Iowa one of these days. He
> and his running mate, Michael Badnarik, are starting to look like the only
> viable alternatives for my vote.

Well, if you've found a candidate that you can actually vote *for*, instead of simply
casting a vote *against* someone else, I think you should vote for him. For one
thing, if everyone continues to follow a policy of "voting for <your favorite 3rd
party here> is just wasting your vote", the status of the smaller parties will never
improve.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Paul Sengupta]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> As you well know, your country has a (for an established democracy
> unusual, one might add) history of attacks on elected presidents or
> candidates put up for election. Thus, this kind of protection might make
> sense.

2nd amendment. That's the justification that's given for people to
bear arms. If they don't like the political machine then they can do
something about it.

:-P

Paul

[G.R. Patterson III]

Newps wrote:
>
> What the lefties failed to realize was that these purchases
> were nearly 100% discretionary. As such sales dried up completely for
> the boats and thousands were left out of work and hundrreds of small
> companies went bankrupt. Virtually no tax money was collected.

Beechcraft took their cancelled aircraft orders and pointed out that the income taxes
from the workers that would have built those planes totalled more than Beech paid in
luxury taxes. That helped.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Paul Sengupta]

"Paul Sengupta" > wrote in message
...
> "Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
> ...
> > As you well know, your country has a (for an established democracy
> > unusual, one might add) history of attacks on elected presidents or
> > candidates put up for election. Thus, this kind of protection might make
> > sense.
>
> 2nd amendment. That's the justification that's given for people to
> bear arms. If they don't like the political machine then they can do
> something about it.

From http://www.saf.org/default.asp?p=gunrights_faq#2
3. What was the intent of the Second Amendment?

The intent of these amendments was to protect individuals from government
powers. They were meant as a guarantee to the individual state governments
as well as the American citizens that the Federal government would not try
to take away the freedoms which many of them had so recently fought for.
Senator William Grayson wrote to Patrick Henry; "Last Monday, a string of
amendments were presented to the lower House; these altogether respected
personal liberty." (p. 76).

"To preserve Liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people
always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use
them." (Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress,
and member of the first Continental Congress, which passed the Bill of
Rights)

Paul

[Paul Sengupta]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "Bill Denton" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You might re-read this...constants don't change at all; that's why we
call
> > them constants.
> >
>
> Depends on how good a programmer you are!!

....where the constants aren't and the variables don't.

Paul

[H.P.]

Your points are well taken but if AOPA and other lobbying groups hope to
limit product liability any further for GA, a democrat, in general, and a
"trial" lawyer, in particular, are not likely to be proponents of product
liability reform. As for Mueller Airport, I'm not sure that Bush could have
or should have had a role in preventing its closure, for whatever reason it
closed. I'm not so sure that restraint on TFRs is practiced with GA in mind,
as
opposed to heavy/commercial.





"Malcolm Teas" > wrote in message
om...
> "H.P." > wrote in message
>...
> > How in heavens name would a GA pilot vote for Edwards, a personal injury
> > lawyer who's inclined to sue General Aviation out of existence? He's
> > already attempted to sue Obstetricians into oblivion so that pregnant
moms
> > sometimes have to fly to the nearest available OB\GYN willing to
deliver
> > their babies! And can you tell me that John F'n Ketchup won't regulate
or
> > tax GA to death?
>
> Do you have grounds for this? Or is a just a rant? It's fine with me
> if you want to rant, I just want to distinguish it, that's all.
>
> I've been following multiple news sources and here's what I've seen on
> the candidates and GA: Nothing on Edwards feelings for GA one way or
> the other. But, might have missed something.
>
> Kerry's an active GA pilot and would be expected to have some
> understanding of the issues facing GA. Neither Kerry or Edwards has
> asked for TFRs when campaigning, that might mean they're GA-friendly.
>
> Bush is an inactive pilot and in TX showed no interest one way or the
> other in GA. He let Mueller airport in Austin close without comment.
> Since then there's a lack of a good GA airport in central TX.
>
> Cheney's not a pilot and doesn't seem to have a concern about GA
> either way from what I see. Both he and Bush have those fun TFRs
> following them around the country. And both apparently support the
> Wash. DC ADIZ.
>
> From the scant evidence I see KE may be a little more in favor of GA
> than BC are. But, frankly GA isn't showing up on either party's
> radar.
>
> -Malcolm Teas

[Trent Moorehead]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> There was a 10% surcharge on cars over $30K, airplanes over $100K and
> boats over some number I don't recall right now. The boating industry
> was hit the hardest because there are lots of small boat builders who
> build high end boats. These people were effectively shut down as orders
> dried up. What the lefties failed to realize was that these purchases
> were nearly 100% discretionary. As such sales dried up completely for
> the boats and thousands were left out of work and hundrreds of small
> companies went bankrupt. Virtually no tax money was collected. You'll
> never see a stick it top the rich surcharge like that again.

I was working at Hatteras Yachts designing megayachts (92ft and up) at the
time. I was fairly liberal back then and right out of college. I wasn't
making much money, so soaking the rich felt like a good thing to do. Heck,
they can afford it, right? Greedy fat *******s.

Boy was I ignorant. Layoffs began within a couple of months of the passage
of that stupid tax. We also had a recession at the time. Rich folks are the
ones who can weather a recession and will still spend money, but that tax
deterred them from spending money on things like yachts. It essentially
destroyed the place. I never got laid off, but things got really bad for the
ones left behind. Hatteras survived, but many of its competitors did not.
The local economy was also adversely affected as well.

What a stupid tax! Any policy based on class envy should be examined
extremely closely. I am also very suspicious of very wealthy polititians who
want to penalize wealthy people by increasing their taxes. Will they really
put their John Hancock on a tax that could cost them huge bucks personally?

-Trent
PP-ASEL

[Tom S.]

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Welcome to the 21st century! Robert Heinline predicted this and much
> > more in the settings of his novels.
> >
> > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 13:25:41 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > > wrote in
> > <p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>::
> >
> > >If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> > >Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
> >
> > I believe it is what occurred during Dubuah's reign.
> >
> > But I share your confidence that the Kerry presidency is assured.
>
> I sincerely hope not.
I guess he hasn't seen that Econometrics dude up in Pennsylvania that has
projected the last eight elections from six months out within a very few
points. In 2000 he predicted Bush at 52-48 and by 30 or so electoral votes
which is about right when you factor in the five states with significant
vote frauds; Wisc., Minn, Penn, NW, Oregon and possibly Iowa. Outside of
Penn (where in just two or three counties there were more votes for Gore
than people over 18--in the rest Gore won by 4000-5000 votes.

The guy in Pennsylvania is predicting Bush to take 58% of the popular vote
and around 40 states.

[Tom S.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:%F9Wc.69882$TI1.15818@attbi_s52...
> While I share some of your distaste for Mr. Kerry, CJ, I think you've
taken
> your point "a bit" too far. Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable
man,
> and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.

He NEVER was an honorable man and now he's just a psychotic and pathological
liar that's been shoved in front of the camera for "one last fling" much
the way Bob Dole was in 1996.

[Kyler Laird]

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

>But C J never stoops to profanity,

That's appreciated.

>nor will he fall to the level of 4th
>grade name-calling.

Is it 5th grade when children learn to call entire populations of people
"cockroaches" and advocate their destruction?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=aevn7.831%24QK.700647%40news1.sttln1.w a.home.com

--kyler

[Tom S.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:f5dWc.214469$eM2.93226@attbi_s51...
> > > Kerry is (or, at least, was) an honorable man,
> > > and I wish him the best in the upcoming election.
> >
> > He "was", until the tragic inconvenience of you having to sit in an FBO
> for
> > an hour?
>
> No, Kerry was honorable until he went on TV blasting the behavior of his
> country and his fellow soldiers, while the Viet Nam war was in progress
and
> his comrades were still being held prisoner.

His entire military career was a fake and a setup (posed pictures and
recreated video footage), not to mention the fact he was a backshooting
murderer.

[Tom S.]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Masino" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Jay Honeck > wrote:
> > > I blamed the Democratic V.P. candidate directly because that is where
> the
> > > blame lies. In my world, the boss takes the blame for his
subordinates.
> >
> > Edwards has absolutely no control over what the Secret Service does.
>
> 100 percent not true.

He had bodyguards when he was a civilian and demanded police escorts when a
Senator, I've heard.

[C Kingsbury]

Bob Noel > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (C Kingsbury) wrote:
>
> > Meanwhile the
> > notion of a luxury tax, tried under Bush I, was so thoroughly
> > discredited by experience that it likely won't be heard from for
> > another generation. It devastated the boatbuilding industry so badly
> > even the big lefties had to admit it was a dumb idea.
>
> really? Somehow I missed the big lefties admitting that. Do you
> have a source for that? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like
> to see it.

I'm probably extrapolating a bit too much from wishful thinking but I
strongly doubt we'll see anything like it again for a while.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/ThisWeek/Politics/george_will_030112.html

The fact that the tax battered companies in Maine, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island had a lot to do with the fact that Congress set a
land-speed record rescinding it. New taxes usually take generations to
get rid of; this one took less than a decade.

Likewise, it's easy to demonize the owners of G-Vs, but every senator
would kill to have Gulfstream build a new factory in their state.

Best,
-cwk.

[Tom S.]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
> > really? Somehow I missed the big lefties admitting that. Do you
> > have a source for that? I'm not challenging you, I'd just like
> > to see it.
>
> There was a 10% surcharge on cars over $30K, airplanes over $100K and
> boats over some number I don't recall right now. The boating industry
> was hit the hardest because there are lots of small boat builders who
> build high end boats. These people were effectively shut down as orders
> dried up. What the lefties failed to realize was that these purchases
> were nearly 100% discretionary. As such sales dried up completely for
> the boats and thousands were left out of work and hundrreds of small
> companies went bankrupt. Virtually no tax money was collected. You'll
> never see a stick it top the rich surcharge like that again.

Not only was virtually no revenue collected, but the costs were significant
(companies that go under don't pay ANY taxes, unemployment, etc.)

[Michael 182]

"Tom S." > wrote in message
...
> His entire military career was a fake and a setup (posed pictures and
> recreated video footage)


lol - and Neil Armstong never landed on the moon and the Holocaust was all a
fake...

Michael

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> His entire military career was a fake and a setup (posed pictures and
> recreated video footage), not to mention the fact he was a backshooting
> murderer.

Wow! The conspiracy theorists are getting faster and faster these days.
With Clinton, they at least waited until he was in office before they
accused him of murder. Kerry's not even getting a honeymoon on groundless
murder accusations! That poor man!

Next, you'll be telling me that Kerry was directly behind the "accident"
that killed Senator Heinz and left Theresa free to marry again.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[Newps]

Tom S. wrote:

the five states with significant
> vote frauds; Wisc., Minn, Penn, NW, Oregon and possibly Iowa.

Never heard of this but I did see a story on the news last night that
apparently there are tens of thousands of people registered to vote in
both Florida and New York, presumably snowbirds. There is a feeding
frenzy on now to see if they voted twice in 2000. If so this is very
bad news for the democrats.

[Peter Duniho]

"Aviv Hod" > wrote in
message ...
> Pete, you're assuming that having a third, fourth, or more parties would
> be good for politics.

Yes, that's true.

> Having been born in a country that has a
> notoriously fractured political structure, with 50+ parties running for
> parliment and a good dozen or so well represented, I can attest to the
> fact that multi-party politics serves only to benefit the fringe
> fanatics by making them more important than they really are because they
> are necessary for coalition building. What you end up with is an
> incredibly unstable government that is always under the threat of
> breaking apart.

Well, I never thought of it that way. That said, under a change like what I
proposed, a third party would still not get into office unless they had the
majority vote. It just makes it easier for the people to express their true
desire, rather than always having to choose between things like "the lesser
of two evils" and "voting one's heart".

Also, while I readily admit that the US government is not nearly in as great
a state of distraction as the Israeli government, I'll also suggest that
there are other very significant factors at work in Israel that are unlikely
to ever be an issue here. Maybe we can "handle it" even as another country
could not.

> [...]
> Having said that, the beauty of the current system is that it has NO
> basis in law. There ARE other parties, they DO get on ballots, and
> there have been plenty of precedents for third party or no party
> candidates being elected into office.

Not in any election that really matters. A primary party candidate would
have to really go off the deep end to open up things for an independent, or
the office would have to be uncontested.

> [...]
> I find it unhelpful to complain about the "system" when what we're
> really talking about is current voting patterns. Those can be changed
> if the message has wide merit and appeal.

I disagree. An independent or secondary party candidate would have to spend
several orders of magnitude more money than the primary candidates just to
even have a hope of competing. Equal spending isn't going to do it, and
there's not even the finances available for equal spending. The current
system completely locks out third parties, even when they have a serious,
viable platform.

I will repeat my previous observation: when one party is funding another
party just to screw a third party, there's something wrong.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> Aren't you forgetting Mr. Perot, in two of the last three elections?

I don't recall Perot having nearly enough votes to have been able to be
blamed for making a difference in the election.

In the most recent Presidential election, the actual number of votes cast
were actually *greater* for the loser, with the electoral college system
causing the difference in outcome. It's unusual for elections to be that
close, allowing a third party to shift the results.

Pete

[BllFs6]

>In the most recent Presidential election, the actual number of votes cast
>were actually *greater* for the loser, with the electoral college system
>causing the difference in outcome. It's unusual for election

Actually not ALL the votes in ALL the states were EVEN counted......so who even
knows who got the popular vote....not that it really matters....given the
electorial system...and if you think the electorial system is a crock, then you
should think the house vs senate is as well, because they have the same basic
premise....

There are IIRC several states that only count until its "obvious" who wins the
state....then they stop counting...so those uncounted numbers never show up in
the popular count vote...

take care

BLLLL

[Andrew Gideon]

H.P. wrote:

> Your points are well taken but if AOPA and other lobbying groups hope to
> limit product liability any further for GA, a democrat, in general, and a
> "trial" lawyer, in particular, are not likely to be proponents of product
> liability reform.

Take a look at Ashcroft's statements before joining the Bush administration.
He was rabidly biased towards state's rights. Since joining the Bush
administration, he's taken a very federalist view.

I've no idea what prompted this change. Is he burying his own opinions in
favor of those of his boss (not unreasonable)? Did something actually
change his mind?

Bush himself was against nation-building and strongly in favor of free
trade.

I mention these because it's not always clear what will happen when someone
is put in charge.

- Andrew

[Peter Duniho]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> does this only happen at national level or also on state or county (or
even
> community) level? are there no independent/liberal/green/... mayors or
other > important people in the US?

Generally speaking, the more important a race is, the less likely someone
not from the two primary parties will win. At the lowest level (municipal
elections), races are (almost?) always non-partisan, so all sorts of folks
could get office. But they have little more influence than deciding things
like how many sidewalks to build, and who in the city pays for them.

As far as I know, there's no "Liberal" party. Perhaps you meant
"Libertarian"?

Pete

[G.R. Patterson III]

"Tom S." wrote:
>
> His entire military career was a fake and a setup (posed pictures and
> recreated video footage), not to mention the fact he was a backshooting
> murderer.

That doesn't matter. The key question is: did he inhale?

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Peter Duniho wrote:
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
> > Aren't you forgetting Mr. Perot, in two of the last three elections?
>
> I don't recall Perot having nearly enough votes to have been able to be
> blamed for making a difference in the election.

I recall the media (paper and radio) in this area claiming that Bush, Sr. would
almost certainly have won if Perot had not been running. NPR in particular assumed
that most of the people who voted for Perot would have voted Republican had Perot
dropped out.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Malcolm Teas]

Newps > wrote in message >...
> Malcolm Teas wrote:
>
> He let Mueller airport in Austin close without comment.
> > Since then there's a lack of a good GA airport in central TX.
>
> That was the last one, there's no place to land in central Texas anymore?

You'd have to check w/ someone who actually still lives there. I move
away because of work. But, there's Lakeway, Bergstrom, and San Marcos
as well as Georgetown. The latter two can be far from most of the
people there and perhaps a little small. The first is rather small
and private, the second is large and can be expensive - it's more
geared for corp fliers, not GA.

Last I heard they were trying to figure out a good replacement for
Mueller. I also heard the abandoned runway was used for an emergency
landing this summer. So, it's still there.

-Malcolm Teas

[G.R. Patterson III]

Martin Hotze wrote:
>
> does this only happen at national level or also on state or county (or even
> community) level? are there no independent/liberal/green/... mayors or other
> important people in the US?

I've seen a few 3rd-party candidates for local offices here in New Jersey. I've not
seen one win election in my area, but sometimes they do run for office.

With the possibilities for income from graft, the local offices here are frequently
hotly contested. In the last election, the hottest contest by far was for a
Middletown council seat. The son of one of the NJ legislators wants to get a variance
to allow him to build a massive set of commercial businesses (he calls it a "Town
Center") sort of like a spread-out mall and the council opposes it. So he had his
daddy working hard to get one of the councilwomen deposed. As it turns out, it almost
cost his daddy his office.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[mike regish]

Actually, I regret those remarks. But only those. One of the other things
that disgusts me is people's reactions to the gay marraige issue.

I'm still married. The world hasn't ended. And I've only had slight urges to
marry my cat. ;-)

mike regish

"Tom Fleischman" > >
>
> With the exception of the homophobic aspects of your post, I'd like to
> thank you for saying what I am sure that many of us here on this board
> have been thinking about Mr. Campbell for a long time.

[mike regish]

Believe it or not, it's a skill I learned in the Naval Academy. Under
orders, actually.

mike regish

"Trent Moorehead" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
>
> > With the exception of the homophobic aspects of your post, I'd like to
> > thank you for saying what I am sure that many of us here on this board
> > have been thinking about Mr. Campbell for a long time.
>
> Well, whatever. I'm thinking a whole lot less of Mr. Regish right now.
>
> -Trent
>
>

[Bob Moore]

Jim Weir wrote

> Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This
> country was wrong. We had no business being over there.

I did my 'Nam time in 1967, only about 150 combat flying hours.
No medals to throw away when I got home, but I sure-as-hell
resigned my Naval Commision as soon as I returned state-side.
We had absolutely NO business being there.
I feel the same as Jim...if you weren't there, you have no right
to critisize anyone.

Bob Moore

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> I'm still married. The world hasn't ended. And I've only had slight urges
to
> marry my cat. ;-)

Just how attractive is your cat, anyway. Oh, and what year did you graduate
from Canoe U.? I had a bunch of ring-knocker friends on the Dale, ranging
from about '87-'92 or so.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[mike regish]

Never graduated. Would have been '76. I still have my pin.

mike regish

P.S. The cat's not bad.
"Geoffrey Barnes" > wrote in message
link.net...
> > I'm still married. The world hasn't ended. And I've only had slight
urges
> to
> > marry my cat. ;-)
>
> Just how attractive is your cat, anyway. Oh, and what year did you
graduate
> from Canoe U.? I had a bunch of ring-knocker friends on the Dale, ranging
> from about '87-'92 or so.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004
>
>

[Jim Weir]

The quotation is generally ascribed to Pontius Pilate when he was asked to
change the inscription on the paper nailed to Christ's cross. And it *is*
Latin, not Greek.

Jim



"C J Campbell" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->
->"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
->> Quod scripsi, scripsi.
->>
->> Jim
->
->Sophocles was acquitted of insanity with this argument because of the beauty
->of his tragedies. Are you sure you want to use what YOU wrote as a defense?
->

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Chuck]

"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
. 8...
> Jim Weir wrote
>
> > Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This
> > country was wrong. We had no business being over there.
>
> I did my 'Nam time in 1967, only about 150 combat flying hours.
> No medals to throw away when I got home, but I sure-as-hell
> resigned my Naval Commision as soon as I returned state-side.
> We had absolutely NO business being there.
> I feel the same as Jim...if you weren't there, you have no right
> to critisize anyone.
>

But do you, or any Vietnam vet, have the right to criticize the ones who
weren't there?


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[C J Campbell]

"Jim Weir" > wrote in message
...
> The quotation is generally ascribed to Pontius Pilate when he was asked to
> change the inscription on the paper nailed to Christ's cross. And it *is*
> Latin, not Greek.
>

That is true. I was thinking of a Latin commentary on Sophocles, but now I
have to look it up.

Actually, the phrase is not very good Latin or, rather, it takes
considerable poetic license. Translated somewhat loosely, it is "But what I
wrote, I wrote." IIRC the phrase attributed to Sophocles in the Latin
history was meant to say "But see what I have written" meaning that what he
had written was beautiful and could not be the product of an incompetent. It
is a play on words, using the made-up "scripsi" to mean both "see" and
"write." The "si" suffix is required to make "Quod" mean "but" or
(sometimes) "therefore."

Now I have to wonder if Pilate was quoting an earlier commentary. It would
have been a typically Roman thing to do, but the reference might have either
been lost on the Gospel writers or else (more likely) they would have
assumed that anyone reading the narrative would have recognized it. After
all, "It is written" is a strongly Semitic sentiment. Related would be the
declaration of the name of God: "I Am that I Am," first proclaimed from the
burning bush to Moses and then referred to by Jesus: "Before Abraham was I
Am" and "Who do men say that I Am?" We could then go into Christian
symbolism in modern pop literature, as in Popeye: "I am what I am," but then
I digress considerably, so we will leave it at that.

[C J Campbell]

I should also mention that I really don't remember that much of my high
school Latin, so if you go quoting any more Latin phrases don't assume that
I will understand them. :-)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Laura wrote:
>
> Huh? Nobody is permitted to criticize Kerry if they weren't draft eligible 30+
> years ago?

That's not what he said. Basically, if you aren't old enough to have been affected by
Vietnam, you have no business criticizing either those who served in it or those who
protested the war for doing so. Want to talk about Kerry's record in the Senate, go
ahead, but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "G.R. Patterson III"
> wrote:

> That's not what he said. Basically, if you aren't old enough to have been
> affected by
> Vietnam, you have no business criticizing either those who served in it
> or those who
> protested the war for doing so. Want to talk about Kerry's record in the
> Senate, go
> ahead, but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.

So, if you are under, say 100, shut up about slavery?

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

[Peter Duniho]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
> [...] if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.

I'm under 50. Does that mean I also ought to refrain from finding fault in
our country's history with respect to racial civil rights, suffrage, robber
barons, sweat shops, and a host of other not-so-proud moments all of which
happened before I was born?

Sorry, but that's just BS. You can argue that it's important for someone
commenting today to maintain an appropriate perspective, taking into account
the social environment of the time, but you cannot hope to seriously claim
that just because a person wasn't there, they have no business discussing
the situation, or even offering an opinion.

Pete

[Newps]

Peter Duniho wrote:


> Generally speaking, the more important a race is, the less likely someone
> not from the two primary parties will win. At the lowest level (municipal
> elections), races are (almost?) always non-partisan, so all sorts of folks
> could get office. But they have little more influence than deciding things
> like how many sidewalks to build, and who in the city pays for them.

Jesse "the body" Ventura.

[Newps]

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.

Bull****.

[Tom S.]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, "G.R. Patterson III"
> > wrote:
>
> > That's not what he said. Basically, if you aren't old enough to have
been
> > affected by
> > Vietnam, you have no business criticizing either those who served in it
> > or those who
> > protested the war for doing so. Want to talk about Kerry's record in the
> > Senate, go
> > ahead, but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.
>
> So, if you are under, say 100, shut up about slavery?
>
And if you're under 200, shut up about the American Revolution.

[Jay Honeck]

> Take a look at Ashcroft's statements before joining the Bush
administration.
> He was rabidly biased towards state's rights. Since joining the Bush
> administration, he's taken a very federalist view.
>
> I've no idea what prompted this change. Is he burying his own opinions in
> favor of those of his boss (not unreasonable)? Did something actually
> change his mind?
>
> Bush himself was against nation-building and strongly in favor of free
> trade.

You make your statement as if Ashcroft's and Bush's philosophical changes
occurred in a vacuum.

Both men have been influenced by 9/11, and the resulting war. It's hard to
worry too much about state's rights and to be against nation building when
you're leading a country at war.

State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and always
have been. Don't worry -- they'll be back again, after this one is over.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Bob Noel wrote:
>
> So, if you are under, say 100, shut up about slavery?

I don't know any slave owners, and I'd bet you don't either.

George Patterson
If you want to know God's opinion of money, just look at the people
he gives it to.

[Tom S.]

"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
. 8...
> Jim Weir wrote
>
> > Lots of us blasted the behavior of our country at that time. This
> > country was wrong. We had no business being over there.

Yes, we did. We did not have a DIRECT interest, and we fought a half-assed
effort, but consider this:

http://www.techcentralstation.com/081204I.html

/excerpt
Fight When We Have To, Even If We Can't Win.



The Battle of Pearl Harbor was a lost cause. Korea was nearly one. And
Vietnam, given the constraints, was almost certainly a losing proposition.



Yet we fought in those places.



We fought at Bull Run, too. And we fought at Kasserine Pass, and Manila, and
Bastogne, and Hue, and on Flight 93. We even won at a couple of those
places, even though the cause seemed lost.


/end excerpt

> I did my 'Nam time in 1967, only about 150 combat flying hours.
> No medals to throw away when I got home, but I sure-as-hell
> resigned my Naval Commision as soon as I returned state-side.
> We had absolutely NO business being there.
> I feel the same as Jim...if you weren't there, you have no right
> to critisize anyone.

[SeeAndAvoid]

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote
>Want to talk about Kerry's record in the Senate, go
> ahead, but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam

What a load of crap. Okay, then lets throw out all the history
books in schools then. First off, this is the US, nobody's
going to tell me what I can and can't talk about. Secondly,
if we dont learn from history, we're surely to make the
same mistakes. Thirdly, someone's going to have to clean
up the mess most of the baby boomer generation is making
for everyone behind them.
Nobody walks in anyones boots as everyone has different
experiences, and things to offer.
I dont know about you, but I'm seeing a hell of a lot of
Gen Y'rs out there in Afghanistan and Iraq trying to take
care of the decades of mistakes that has lead to terrorism
and these rogue states. I bet you over 50'rs want to talk
for them, too. Would you like them to tell you to shut
up when they and the rest of us keep up your daily
supply of Depends in the future?

File this garbage along with the pack of "almost" 'Nam
vet nonsense.

Chris

--
Steve Bosell for President 2004
"Vote for me or I'll sue you"
www.philhendrieshow.com

[Peter Duniho]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
> Jesse "the body" Ventura.

A) He ran for a state office (Governor), not a municipal office.
B) Huh? Is that supposed to mean something?

Take your pick. Did you have a point?

[Jay Honeck]

> If Bush/Cheney deserved the protection then, don't
> Kerry/Edwards deserve it now?

Bush and Kerry, perhaps. (I'm not convinced.)

Cheney and Edwards, no.

It's a matter of degree.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> but you were ****ed at what happened to you...

Of course. That's the American way!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> I should also mention that I really don't remember that much of my high
> school Latin, so if you go quoting any more Latin phrases don't assume
that
> I will understand them. :-)

Hey, I was a post-Vatican II Catholic boy. No latin for me...

However, I CAN recite the entire Catholic Mass (circa 1964) verbatim, if
you'd like...

(Nowadays, this would be called "child abuse." Back then, it was called
"going to church every day.")

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.
>
> Bull****.

Ah, succinct as always, Newps -- God love ya.

I gotta say, George, that your statement (and Jim's) is the biggest crock of
**** I've seen on Usenet -- and that's saying a lot! :-)

Heck, I was 15 when the draft for Viet Nam ended. Was that close enough?

My first memories are of watching Walter Cronkite recite the nightly body
count -- was THAT close enough?

Heck, I even remember watching footage of blacks (then called "Negroes")
torching Watts, and dozens of other American inner cities. But since I
wasn't old enough to participate in the riots, I suppose I shall refrain
from making any commentary on these actions.

And I guess that anyone who wasn't of age in the '60s, really shouldn't say
ANYTHING about that whole screwed up decade, right?

And while we're at it, let's forget about civil rights in the '50s

....and World War II in the '40s.
....and the Great Depression in the '30s.
....and boot-legging in the '20s.
....and World War I in the '10s...

Hell, let's just chuck the whole early 20th century, while we're on a roll.
After all, NONE of us were "there."

Honestly, George.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Morgans]

"Geoffrey Barnes" > wrote

Kerry's not even getting a honeymoon on groundless
> murder accusations! That poor man!

Poor, he's not.
--
Jim in NC

[smackey]

Well, Jay,
I suspected this day would come. You are the "hail fellow, well met"
guy I always figured you for. Friendly and chummy with everyone, but
really a narrow minded little twit. For anyone with a bit of ability
to read between the lines, it has simply been a waiting game.
Keep your political crap off this newsgroup, please. Your attack on
John Edwards was not so much without portent given the tone of your
numerous, "humerous", selfserving and commercially motivated constant
plugs for the Alexis Inn, as it was surprising that you finally had
the guts to finally come clean. Why don't you just admit that you are
against anything that Kerry/Edwards stand for, and are just another
Bush/Cheney toady?!
My wife and I annually fly to the midwest, and I had planned on
stopping by to stay at your 3rd rate motel, just from a sense of
pilot-comraderie. Forget it.
I'll stay elsewhere, thank-you. The incident you report had nothing
to do with John Edwards; it is a result of the necessary security that
surrounds every major pres/VP candidate.


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<p91Wc.21556$9d6.17529@attbi_s54>...
> After living in Iowa for the last 7 years, it seemed that we were the only
> ones left who had NOT been to the "Great Iowa State Fair." This year is
> the 150th anniversary of this grand old tradition, so last weekend we
> decided to check it out.
>
> After the brief, 0.7 hour flight to Des Moines, Mary taxied up to Des Moines
> Flying Service (A.K.A.: "Signature") to park. As we trundled toward the
> ramp we noticed an inordinate number of vehicles parked on the airport side
> of the fence. As the prop stopped, I noticed that they were all law
> enforcement vehicles, of every type and kind, from marked squads to black
> Suburbans.
>
> Jokingly I commented on the criminal nature of that last landing (which
> netted me a swat to the head :-), but wondered aloud just what the heck
> could justify the expense of 30 - 40 vehicles and crew...
>
> ...and then we remembered the season, and where we were. It HAD to be a
> presidential election-related visit of some sort -- but who?
>
> Mary had quite specifically grilled Flight Service about TFRs, and had been
> told there were none. DSM approach mentioned nothing, either, so we were
> fairly certain that it couldn't be the President. The fact that the cops
> were eying us warily, but otherwise ignoring us, seemed to reinforce this
> notion.
>
> This left the Kerry/Edwards campaign as the primary suspects, and we were
> not to be disappointed.
>
> As soon as we were inside the FBO, the Kerry/Edwards "Real Deal" Boeing 727
> plane rolled in. John Edwards was making an appearance in Des Moines, and
> we were lucky to get in when we did -- cuz the ramp was slammed shut, tight
> as a drum, as soon as he arrived.
>
> Walking to our rental car with my kids, I pushed up closer to the fence to
> take a picture. Immediately a uniformed DSM police officer asked if he
> could "help me" -- and ordered me to stay behind a painted line in the
> parking lot (that he had chosen entirely at random, at that instant) in no
> uncertain terms. So, I took my pictures and left, marveling at the
> stupidity of it all.
>
> After spending a marvelous day at the fair we returned to the airport -- and
> were dumb-founded to see all those police officers rolling up to the ramp
> once again! With incredibly bad timing, we had arrived precisely at the
> same moment as the advance security detail, meaning that Edwards couldn't be
> far behind.
>
> Now hurriedly paying for gas and the car, hoping against hope to get off the
> ground before the V.P.-wannabee returned to his plane, we grabbed our stuff
> and made a bee-line toward the plane -- only to have a secret service agent
> step between me and the door, asking that I please wait for Mr. Edwards to
> depart.
>
> Now you must realize that my plane was MAYBE 40 feet from the door he was
> blocking, while Mr. Liability-Attorney's 727 was several hundred yards
> farther out. I pointed this fact out to him, and also pointed to my
> children, stating that all we wanted to do was get off the ground before
> dark, since neither of us were legal to fly at night.
>
> This carried no weight with him, and he quietly told me that we'd just have
> to wait.
>
> So, I resignedly told my family to find comfy chairs, and that it would be
> while. For the next ten minutes or so, we observed at least 50 officers and
> agents, all on the tax-dole, making sure that the ramp area was "sterile"
> for Mr. Perfect-Hair. Some were just standing around staring into space,
> while others were actively scanning the fence line and building tops.
>
> Aggravatingly, two characters -- obviously pilots -- kept freely going in
> and out of the same door that the jar-head secret agent had blocked. This
> continued for 15 minutes, until I could no longer stand it. I approached
> the door guard and asked him what THEY had that we did NOT have -- to which
> he replied succinctly: "Clearance." Apparently they worked for Signature,
> and had been pre-screened to be on the ramp.
>
> By now thoroughly aggravated, I raised my hands over my head and said "Well,
> screen me. Escort me. Tow me. Do whatever you've got to do to make sure
> I'm not a threat -- but we've got to get off the ground soon, or we'll be
> stuck here overnight!"
>
> Unsmilingly, he simply said "You're not going anywhere until that plane
> departs." -- and that was that.
>
> Finally Mr. Ketchup's side-kick taxied out to the active runway -- and held
> for departure. We all immediately grabbed our stuff and started heading
> for the door -- which our favorite S.S. officer was STILL blocking!
> Dumbfounded, I asked what the problem was -- and he said that Edwards had to
> be OFF THE GROUND before he could clear us onto the ramp!
>
> Now thoroughly ****ed, I just stared at the guy incredulously. He got the
> message, and promised that he would try to "get us clearance onto the
> ramp" -- and started talking into his lapel. He then walked out onto the
> ramp, where he was animatedly talking with someone when Edwards' plane
> finally got clearance to depart, and blasted into the evening sky.
>
> Within minutes, the Signature ramp was empty, with no vestige of the
> incredible security presence that had been there only moments before. They
> all headed to the donut shoppe, and we were able to depart normally, as if
> nothing at all had just happened.
>
> Harry Truman once famously said that the "position of vice-president ain't
> worth a bucket of warm spit." Worse, Edwards isn't even THERE yet -- he's
> just a wannabee! He is nothing, absolutely NOTHING -- yet we are treating
> him like royalty, and my family was treated like criminals when we were
> anywhere near him. If this is what we have to look forward to under a
> Kerry/Edwards presidency, I fear the worst is yet to come.
>
> As we climbed out I laughingly told my kids that this was "your tax-dollars
> at work." I then closed my eyes and wished fervently that 9/11 had never
> happened...
>
> (BTW: If you've never seen the Iowa State Fair, it's worth the trip. It's
> the biggest fair in America, apparently, and it is so chock-full of
> traditional Americana that I felt like a kid again. And my kids were
> absolutely in awe of the place, with the rides, live entertainment, food,
> and animals. Ever seen a 3000 pound bull? Me neither -- but they have one.
> It's as big as a car!)

[Bob Fry]

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and always
> have been. Don't worry -- they'll be back again, after this one is over.

Ever the optimist.

How will we know when this "war" is over? When some future president
playing boy soldier tells us it is?

[Chuck]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...

<snip>
>
> So, if you are under, say 100, shut up about slavery?
>

I'll drink to that!!!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/20/2004

[Michael 182]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:nVTWc.54974$Fg5.20899@attbi_s53...
>
> And I guess that anyone who wasn't of age in the '60s, really shouldn't
say
> ANYTHING about that whole screwed up decade, right?

Hey, I liked the 60's! At least what I remember of them...

Michael

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:8yTWc.85344$TI1.35696@attbi_s52...
>
> State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and always
> have been. Don't worry -- they'll be back again, after this one is over.
> --

I got the feeling "this one" won't be over for quite some time.

I hope I am wrong.

[Morgans]

"smackey" > wrote

> Keep your political crap off this newsgroup, please.

You must be kinda new to this. Your comments will have no=effect on the
subject of off topic political posts. If you don't like them, mark the
thread read, or ignore, and move on.

Or even better, just move on.
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Weir]

I don't think either you or I have the chops to criticize Pilate's Latin, which
he learned at his mother's knee and for the next forty years or so.

It is excellent Latin, and it is NOT translated loosely, it is "What I have
written, I have written." No poetic license is necessary.

Or, you can reflect on the New York cabbie that picked up a native NY'er who had
been away for a while and wanted a dinner of scrod more than anything in the
world. He asked the cabbie, "Where can I get scrod in this town?"

The cabbie answered back, "Buddy, I've hoid that question ten t'ousand times,
but that's the FOIST time I've ever hoid it in the plupoifect subjunctive."

End of discussion.

Jim


"C J Campbell" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Actually, the phrase is not very good Latin or, rather, it takes
->considerable poetic license. Translated somewhat loosely, it is "But what I
->wrote, I wrote."


Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[C Kingsbury]

"Trent Moorehead" > wrote in message >...

> I am also very suspicious of very wealthy polititians who
> want to penalize wealthy people by increasing their taxes. Will they really
> put their John Hancock on a tax that could cost them huge bucks personally?
>

Something tells me no matter what happens, Laurie David and Teresa
Heinz will always manage to dig enough $100s from out between the sofa
cushions to gas up their Gulfstreams, but there's a very real chance I
will not be able to muster the dimes to fly my Cessna.

It's been said that the people who get hit the hardest are those who
fall into the low-mid range of the upper income band, say
$175k-$300k/year. Enough, in other words, to pay most of their income
at the top marginal rate, but still not enough to start playing the
income-shifting games that the big-big money guys can to shelter their
earnings.

A hard group of people to muster much sympathy for, perhaps, but that
should not be a primary determinant of the merits of policy.

-cwk.

[Jim Weir]

(smackey)
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->Well, Jay,
->I suspected this day would come. You are the "hail fellow, well met"
->guy I always figured you for. Friendly and chummy with everyone, but
->really a narrow minded little twit.

Agreed.


For anyone with a bit of ability
->to read between the lines, it has simply been a waiting game.
->Keep your political crap off this newsgroup, please. Your attack on
->John Edwards was not so much without portent given the tone of your
->numerous, "humerous", selfserving and commercially motivated constant
->plugs for the Alexis Inn, as it was surprising that you finally had
->the guts to finally come clean. Why don't you just admit that you are
->against anything that Kerry/Edwards stand for, and are just another
->Bush/Cheney toady?

I can't buy that. He can't stand either one, but is not as abusive of the
Republicans as he is of the Democrats.

!
->My wife and I annually fly to the midwest, and I had planned on
->stopping by to stay at your 3rd rate motel, just from a sense of
->pilot-comraderie. Forget it.

Now I really take umbrage with you, sir. Believe of Jay as you will as a narrow
minded Republican-leaning twit, his hotel is first rate. He may take up an
unusual amount of bandwidth in this ng subtly promoting his hotel (as I do
promoting my avionics business) but mostly his stuff regarding his establishment
is on target. It takes an enormous amount of time and talent to assemble what
he has assembled in the last couple of years, and there is nothing else like it
in the world. You owe it to yourself to spend just ONE night at the hotel,
whether or not you can stomach Jay's politics. Most of us cast that aside in
person, and one on one, he is a genuinely likeable person. In this newsgroup,
as you noted, he is a twit from time to time.


->I'll stay elsewhere, thank-you. The incident you report had nothing
->to do with John Edwards; it is a result of the necessary security that
->surrounds every major pres/VP candidate.

Your call, sir. I'd suggest otherwise. I'd also suggest taking a course on
learning how to snip.

Jim



Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Javier Henderson]

"Jay Honeck" > writes:

> State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and always
> have been. Don't worry -- they'll be back again, after this one is over.

Just one question.

How will we know when it's over?

Thanks.

-jav

[Peter Duniho]

"Martin Hotze" > wrote in message
...
> but every citizen is directly affected by their decisions. so they
> are rather important, IMVHO

I suppose it depends on your definition of "important". Municipal
governments generally are in the business of providing services (parks,
police, fire, utilities, etc.), with some zoning oversight thrown in (e.g.
don't construct a building that might kill someone). They are NOT generally
in the business of restricting basic rights or setting social policy.

The federal government, on the other hand...

In this context, I'm using "important" to describe politicians who can
significantly and negatively affect what I feel are basic concepts of
freedom. Municipal governments theoretically could attempt similar
interference in individual rights, but they are much easier to overthrow,
and so they do a better job taking care of the people they're supposed to be
taking care of.

Of course, the larger the municipality, the less this is true. Major cities
(1 million residents or more) often feel more like the individual is
impotent, while relatively small cities (10,000 residents or fewer) depend
on each and every citizen to set policy and to run the city.

I find it ironic, actually...the portions of our government that have the
most power, and are the hardest to avoid, are also the ones that are the
most difficult to change.

Pete

[Earl Grieda]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Laura wrote:
> >
> > Huh? Nobody is permitted to criticize Kerry if they weren't draft
eligible 30+
> > years ago?
>
> That's not what he said. Basically, if you aren't old enough to have been
affected by
> Vietnam, you have no business criticizing either those who served in it or
those who
> protested the war for doing so. Want to talk about Kerry's record in the
Senate, go
> ahead, but if you're under 50, shut up about Vietnam.
>

Sounds like the corollary to "The airport was there first." arguement.

[Thomas Borchert]

Paul,

> 2nd amendment. That's the justification that's given for people to
> bear arms. If they don't like the political machine then they can do
> something about it.
>

And THAT is freedom...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Thomas Borchert]

Tom,

> He NEVER was an honorable man and now he's just a psychotic and pathological
> liar that's been shoved in front of the camera for "one last fling" much
> the way Bob Dole was in 1996.
>

The CJ types are really coming out of their holes in this thread... Sad!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Honeck]

> > State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and
always
> > have been. Don't worry -- they'll be back again, after this one is
over.
>
> Ever the optimist.
>
> How will we know when this "war" is over? When some future president
> playing boy soldier tells us it is?

Perhaps the ketchup king has a "secret plan" to win the hearts and minds of
the people who are trying to kill us...? (I keep waiting to hear what that
plan is, but, alas, all Mr. Kerry seems to do is mention "bringing the
international community" into the conflict -- and then he changes the
subject back to his war record...)

If I were him, I'd let Edwards unleash the product liability lawyers onto
the newly freed (and unsuspecting) public in Iraq. That would bring the
terrorists to their knees in a matter of months!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Just one question.
>
> How will we know when it's over?

We'll know the same way we knew when Viet Nam was over -- we'll coldly turn
our backs on our Iraqi allies, and cut and run.

Hey, it worked in '72 - '73. We'll probably call it "Iraqi-ization"
(doesn't quite ring right, does it?), give 'em a bunch of weapons, and bail
out.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

"Michael 182" > wrote in message
news:2FUWc.55248$Fg5.42074@attbi_s53...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:nVTWc.54974$Fg5.20899@attbi_s53...
> >
> > And I guess that anyone who wasn't of age in the '60s, really shouldn't
> say
> > ANYTHING about that whole screwed up decade, right?
>
> Hey, I liked the 60's! At least what I remember of them...
>
> Michael

If you weren't at the Chicago riots in '68 you are a nobody.

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> Hey, I was a post-Vatican II Catholic boy. No latin for me...
>
> However, I CAN recite the entire Catholic Mass (circa 1964) verbatim, if
> you'd like...

Hey, there are still a bunch of us attending Mass every Sunday using the
1963 Tridentine Missal. Everything in latin but the homily, lots of
incense, the priest with his back to the congregation, having to kneel to
receive communion, the whole nine yards. And the music is at least 100
times better, since the latin mass had nearly 2,000 years to filter out all
the bad compositions and stuck only with the stuff that was really, really
good.

Actually, for full disclosure, I haven't done the 1963 mass since I got to
Pittsburgh in 1999. We moved into the same neighborhood as the Cathedral,
and I just couldn't resist singing there, even if they do use the weak
(IMHO) Vatican II format to perform the liturgy.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/19/2004

[Don Tuite]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 18:00:13 -0700, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>I should also mention that I really don't remember that much of my high
>school Latin, so if you go quoting any more Latin phrases don't assume that
>I will understand them. :-)
>
Ohnay etsway.

Don

[Thomas Borchert]

Jay,

> newly freed public in Iraq
>

If your world has a freed public in Iraq, it is certainly very
different from mine.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Jay Honeck]

> http://www.techcentralstation.com/081204I.html

Interesting stuff.

Thanks for sharing it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> If your world has a freed public in Iraq, it is certainly very
> different from mine.

Don't read the papers much, eh?

There's this thing called "democracy" growing over there. Give it time --
it might catch.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> the guts to finally come clean. Why don't you just admit that you are
> against anything that Kerry/Edwards stand for, and are just another
> Bush/Cheney toady?!

Because it's not true -- I think they're all assholes.

I guess that makes me an "equal opportunity twit", eh?

;-)

> My wife and I annually fly to the midwest, and I had planned on
> stopping by to stay at your 3rd rate motel, just from a sense of
> pilot-comraderie. Forget it.

Gosh, if you get this worked up about a Usenet discussion -- about politics,
of all things! -- I'd appreciate it if you'd stay the hell away from my
airport.

You're a bit too unstable to be piloting a plane.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Your call, sir. I'd suggest otherwise. I'd also suggest taking a course
on
> learning how to snip.

Uh, thanks for the support, Jim.

That *was* support, right?

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Tom S.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:8yTWc.85344
>
> State's Rights and free trade are subjugated during wartime -- and always
> have been.

During peace time, too.