Re: Bush Wants To Cut FAA Budget

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
>

Perhaps most of us look at the big picture and understand that a Kerry
presidency would be a disaster.

[H.P.]

Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's would
be only next to worst.

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
>>
>> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
>> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
>> administration.
>>
>> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>>
>> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
>> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
>>
>
> Perhaps most of us look at the big picture and understand that a Kerry
> presidency would be a disaster.
>

[Roger Long]

As near as I can tell, it's about 98% of pilots who are smart enough to
realize that a Kerry administration would be a disaster.

When the Democrats see a problem like the coming crunch in ATC capacity,
they just can't resist the "Tax and Spend" response.

Same thing with a host of other things:

Guess how many people OTHER than Mexicans are walking across our southern
border? Hint? It's more than the margin of the popular vote by which Gore
lead Bush in the last election. These are people from other countries who
went to Mexico first because they knew it was the easiest way in if their
papers wouldn't stand up at an airport of entry.

Sit at any railroad crossing and watch the cars go by. What do you see on
the sides of the Hazmat cars? GRAFFITI! The war in Iraq makes me feel real
safe from terroism.

When Democrats see problems, that old "Tax and Spend" is just like a knee
jerk.

Now, the Republican's aren't really different on the spend part although
they tend to spend on different things. It's the tax part that is important.
Cutting taxes and giving money back to the richest is important because they
already have everything they need and won't spend it on silly things like
necessities that will just increase the demand and inflationary pressures on
consumer goods. Most of those things come from China now anyway. Instead,
they'll pump the money into the imaginary value of companies by buying stock
and increase stock values which everyone knows is the only measure of our
economic health and strength.

The Republican strategy is "Borrow and Spend" and the real genius is to
borrow the money from our children. Children don't vote so their future
upset over their taxes won't increase risk of a Democratic administration
after the next election.

--

Roger Long

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

It is amazing that any Kerry supporter would dare to call Bush a
pathological liar.

[H.P.]

....ah, an intellectual in our midst. A good first effort but you need to
work that Thesaurus a bit more.



"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, H.P.
> > wrote:
>
>> Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's
>> would
>> be only next to worst.
>>
>
> I never knew until reading the responses to this thread that prescience
> was a by-product of being brainwashed by the neoconservative death
> cult.

[H.P.]

Hint: Cambodia, Christmas 1968, Nixon sent him in, seared-seared into his
memory.


"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
>> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
>> rthlink.net...
>> > It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
>> > community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
>> > administration.
>> >
>> > http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>> >
>> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>> >
>> > On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
>> > dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
>>
>> It is amazing that any Kerry supporter would dare to call Bush a
>> pathological liar.
>>
>>
> I imagine that you think that there is a point in there somewhere.

[Jon Kraus]

I like the part about getting a purple heart because they had to pick of
grenade shrapnel out of his ass from his own grenade, after a botched
attempt to blow up a big vat of rice that he came across. Yup he sure
could run the "War on Terrorism" better with his experience. The guy is
a freakn' joke. He and Moma Catsup both...

Don't be a Girlie Nan... Vote for Bush !!! :-)


Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney purchaser


H.P. wrote:
> Hint: Cambodia, Christmas 1968, Nixon sent him in, seared-seared into his
> memory.
>
>
> "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
>
>>In article >, C J Campbell
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>>>
>>>>It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
>>>>community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
>>>>administration.
>>>>
>>>>http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>>>>
>>>>http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>>>>
>>>>On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
>>>>dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
>>>
>>>It is amazing that any Kerry supporter would dare to call Bush a
>>>pathological liar.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I imagine that you think that there is a point in there somewhere.
>
>
>

[C J Campbell]

"H.P." > wrote in message
om...
> Hint: Cambodia, Christmas 1968, Nixon sent him in, seared-seared into his
> memory.
>

Also: Fulbright Commission, medals and White House fence, Vietnam vets are
war criminals, plotting to kill United States Senators, etc.

[Tom S.]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article et>,
> Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>
> > "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
> > rthlink.net...
> > >
> > > It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> > > community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> > > administration.
> > >
> > > http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
> > >
> > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
> > >
> > > On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> > > dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
> > >
> >
> > Perhaps most of us look at the big picture and understand that a Kerry
> > presidency would be a disaster.
> >
> >
>
> Balderdash.

Bull****.

[kontiki]

Name ONE thing Kerry has ever really done in his some 20 odd years
as a senator.

Kerry is living proof of the existance of the "Peter Principle".

Tom Fleischman wrote:
> In article >, H.P.
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's would
>>be only next to worst.
>>
>
>
> I never knew until reading the responses to this thread that prescience
> was a by-product of being brainwashed by the neoconservative death
> cult.

[kontiki]

Tom Fleischman wrote:
>
> Cambell, Kraus, HP...
>
> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...

Ummm... let me guess... you're also a Hillary supporter.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
> > "H.P." > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > Hint: Cambodia, Christmas 1968, Nixon sent him in, seared-seared into
his
> > > memory.
> > >
> >
> > Also: Fulbright Commission, medals and White House fence, Vietnam vets
are
> > war criminals, plotting to kill United States Senators, etc.
> >
> >
>
> Cambell, Kraus, HP...
>
> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...

What a witty retort! Look, if you don't like the truth, don't come around
here with your off topic political crap. Or, just kill file me like some of
the other liberal weenies around here who can't bear the thought that
somebody actually knows more than they do. I will still reply to your posts,
but at least you won't have to read them and risk being exposed to anything
like clear thinking.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
> > "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
> > rthlink.net...
> > >
> > > Cambell, Kraus, HP...
> > >
> > > Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
> >
> > What a witty retort! Look, if you don't like the truth, don't come
around
> > here with your off topic political crap. Or, just kill file me like some
of
> > the other liberal weenies around here who can't bear the thought that
> > somebody actually knows more than they do. I will still reply to your
posts,
> > but at least you won't have to read them and risk being exposed to
anything
> > like clear thinking.
> >
>
> All you guys on the right, you're so pathetic. All you know how to do
> is project.

Well, you haven't refuted a single charge against Kerry, or even tried,
except to call people names. So which is it? Do you simply refuse to admit
that Kerry is a liar, or is it that you don't care?

[John Harlow]

Tom Fleischman wrote:
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

Unfortunately statements like these just tend to make people dig in. Just
present the facts and let people decide for themselves.

Thanks for the info.

[C J Campbell]

"John Harlow" > wrote in message
...
>
> Unfortunately statements like these just tend to make people dig in. Just
> present the facts and let people decide for themselves.
>
> Thanks for the info.

The FAA wastes most of its budget. The Wall Street Journal makes a favorite
target of air traffic control systems that cost ten times what off the shelf
equipment could do better. The FAA spends decades and millions of dollars
developing new technologies and programs which were obsolete before they
even began studying them and then cancels them at the last minute.

They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work right
from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls and
floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security. The
moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
managerial negligence, not age.

The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management should be
brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.

[Bryan Mason]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 11:07:05 -0700, "Tom S." > wrote:

>"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>> In article et>,
>> Steven P. McNicoll > wrote:
>>
>> > "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
>message
>> > rthlink.net...
>> > >
>> > > It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
>> > > community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
>> > > administration.
>> > >
>> > > http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>> > >
>> > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>> > >
>> > > On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
>> > > dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Perhaps most of us look at the big picture and understand that a Kerry
>> > presidency would be a disaster.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Balderdash.
>
>Bull****.

Well, I see that this is turning into an intelligent, insightful,
informative debate.

[C J Campbell]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>
> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...

You realize, of course, that Jim Jones was a liberal, as were most of his
followers. I doubt you will find many conservatives drinking cyanide laced
fruit punch. Lemming behavior is a hallmark of liberalism.

[C J Campbell]

"Bryan Mason bmason com>" <bmason<atdot> wrote in message
...
> >> >
> >>
> >> Balderdash.
> >
> >Bull****.
>
> Well, I see that this is turning into an intelligent, insightful,
> informative debate.
>

It certainly did not start out as one, even with the original post.

[H.P.]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
> > "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
> > rthlink.net...
> > >
> > > Cambell, Kraus, HP...
> > >
> > > Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
> >
> > What a witty retort! Look, if you don't like the truth, don't come
around
> > here with your off topic political crap. Or, just kill file me like some
of
> > the other liberal weenies around here who can't bear the thought that
> > somebody actually knows more than they do. I will still reply to your
posts,
> > but at least you won't have to read them and risk being exposed to
anything
> > like clear thinking.
> >
>
> All you guys on the right, you're so pathetic. All you know how to do
> is project.
>
> I'm not going to killfile you. Why should I deprive myself of the fun
> of reading your inane, barely coherent posts.
>
> It's sad. You are so misled.

Good, now go away!

[Jon Kraus]

If Momma Catsup got in, she try to get us all speaking French.... Thank
God the American people are see right through these elitist *******s...

Hell Kerry can't even get out of Vietnam long enough to talk about what
he would do for America except raise our taxes...

Bush is up by 13 points and climbing. The American people have got to
know what Kerry and Momma Catsup are about and want no part of it.

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney purchaser
Big George Bush fan!!

Tom Fleischman wrote:

> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
>
>>"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>>
>>>Cambell, Kraus, HP...
>>>
>>>Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
>>
>>What a witty retort! Look, if you don't like the truth, don't come around
>>here with your off topic political crap. Or, just kill file me like some of
>>the other liberal weenies around here who can't bear the thought that
>>somebody actually knows more than they do. I will still reply to your posts,
>>but at least you won't have to read them and risk being exposed to anything
>>like clear thinking.
>>
>
>
> All you guys on the right, you're so pathetic. All you know how to do
> is project.
>
> I'm not going to killfile you. Why should I deprive myself of the fun
> of reading your inane, barely coherent posts.
>
> It's sad. You are so misled.

[Dan Luke]

"C J Campbell" wrote:
> They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work
> right
> from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls
> and
> floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security.
> The
> moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
> managerial negligence, not age.
>
> The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management
> should be
> brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.

You could substitute "U. S. Military" for "FAA" in those statements with
perfect accuracy. I have plenty of experience as a contractor for both
and have found the military as bad a steward of public funds as the
FAA - and they have a lot more to spend. My favorite example is a big
pallet-load of new-in-the-box dot matrix printers still gathering dust
in a mechanical room at an Army base: it has overnight shipping labels
on it.

In case you don't find that depressing enough, let me tell you that NASA
is worse than both of them.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Newps]

Tom Fleischman wrote:

> In article >, H.P.
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's would
>>be only next to worst.
>>
>
>
> I never knew until reading the responses to this thread that prescience
> was a by-product of being brainwashed by the neoconservative death
> cult.

Typical liberal. I don't agree with you then I must be brainwashed.
Too little too late. This election is already over. Kerry is in for a
pretty big ass whuppin'.

[Newps]

C J Campbell wrote:


>
> They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work right
> from the day they are opened,

No ****. We are getting a new tower here in Billings, opening August
2006. Took a tour of the 75% complete building for the first time
yesterday. Helluva building. But the TRACON, holy crap Batman. We
only ever have one scope open at a time right now. We have two scopes
in the current TRACON in a room approx 15X15. Our new TRACON is about
100x100. There is talk about running the Bozeman radar from here when
they get it installed but the room is still 40 times bigger than it has
to be.

[C J Campbell]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" wrote:
> > They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work
> > right
> > from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls
> > and
> > floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security.
> > The
> > moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
> > managerial negligence, not age.
> >
> > The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management
> > should be
> > brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.
>
> You could substitute "U. S. Military" for "FAA" in those statements with
> perfect accuracy. I have plenty of experience as a contractor for both
> and have found the military as bad a steward of public funds as the
> FAA - and they have a lot more to spend. My favorite example is a big
> pallet-load of new-in-the-box dot matrix printers still gathering dust
> in a mechanical room at an Army base: it has overnight shipping labels
> on it.
>
> In case you don't find that depressing enough, let me tell you that NASA
> is worse than both of them.

It amazes me what the government spends to furnish a single office. Most
businesses make do with second hand furniture or sale items, or they get
discount furniture from the big box stores. Few businesses can afford to
furnish their offices as if they were sets for big budget Hollywood films
about high powered law firms. Yet the feds manage to spend far more than the
Hollywood standard on stuff that I wouldn't impose on my dog.

If they were private employers, they would have been sued out of business
years ago for the way they treat their employees. The only federal employees
I have ever met that seemed to be happy with their working conditions were,
oddly enough, from the IRS. But then, I haven't dealt with the IRS in
several years, so things may be different now.

[BTIZ]

>
> The FAA wastes most of its budget. The Wall Street Journal makes a
favorite
> target of air traffic control systems that cost ten times what off the
shelf
> equipment could do better. The FAA spends decades and millions of dollars
> developing new technologies and programs which were obsolete before they
> even began studying them and then cancels them at the last minute.
>
> They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work right
> from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls and
> floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security. The
> moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
> managerial negligence, not age.
>
> The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management should
be
> brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.

I did my Master's Thesis on the first 10years of FAA after the 1981 PATCO
affair so I really don't want to get started on it again. But the above
statements are correct about the FAA studies for equipment and cancellations
and the comparison to COS (Commercial Off the Shelf) implementation costs.

Getting the ATC system up and running after 1981 took more than 10yrs and
more than 10 times the original estimated cost than originally promised to
President Regain in 1981.

Let's just go look at what happened last week to LAX ARTCC. A computer that
controls the communication switching has a built in self test (BIT) that
needs to be reset every 30days, a "reset" of the computer so the computer
knows it's still a computer. Some "maintenance" was not accomplished in time
so the 30day bit timer ran out and rather than flag a warning on day 29 the
system just shuts down at the end of day 30.

The poor computer maintainer will be fired.. not the FAA higher ups that
bought the POS and approved it in the beginning.

Think about this, manpower studies have told the FAA leadership that more
than 1000 new controllers need to be hired and trained every year to try and
make it through the future controller retirements. Right now they are
getting less than 1/2 that number.

Most of the current ATC manpower were hired after 1981 and were younger than
30-35 yrs in age. The work force now has at least 20 yrs (Civil Service
Retirement eligible?) and the FAA MANDATES retirement at age 56.

If they were hired in 1982 at age 30, they will turn 56 twenty-six years
later. That is 2008, current information shows that 75% of the controller
workforce is eligible to retire in the NEXT 4 YEARS !!!

Hang on to your hats boys, we are in for a rough ride.

BT

[Jeff Franks]

"misled"? I think not.

I'm not "led" into believing any of my political stances. This is going to
come as earth-shattering news, but *MOST* conservatives tend to know WHY
they are conservative. Every I talk to a liberal or lefty leaning person,
its because of all the "bad" things that are happening and how they're gonna
fix it by giving my tax dollars to my 14 yr old daughter for an abortion
without my knowledge.

Here's a thought. re-read the First Amendment. Seriously. Read it. Now
think about this when your reading it a third time....

The right to free speech is for EVERYONE, not just lefties. If I speak for
myself as a conservative, suddenly I'm labeled a fascist, racist heathen
homophobe. The 1st amendment doesn't just apply to people you agree with.
Stop being "led" yourself by the BS put out there by the left. You CAN help
yourself and you CAN make your life better without the government.

jf

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, C J Campbell
> > wrote:
>
> > "Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message
> > rthlink.net...
> > >
> > > Cambell, Kraus, HP...
> > >
> > > Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
> >
> > What a witty retort! Look, if you don't like the truth, don't come
around
> > here with your off topic political crap. Or, just kill file me like some
of
> > the other liberal weenies around here who can't bear the thought that
> > somebody actually knows more than they do. I will still reply to your
posts,
> > but at least you won't have to read them and risk being exposed to
anything
> > like clear thinking.
> >
>
> All you guys on the right, you're so pathetic. All you know how to do
> is project.
>
> I'm not going to killfile you. Why should I deprive myself of the fun
> of reading your inane, barely coherent posts.
>
> It's sad. You are so misled.

[C J Campbell]

"Jeff Franks" > wrote in message
...
> "misled"? I think not.
>
> I'm not "led" into believing any of my political stances. This is going
to
> come as earth-shattering news, but *MOST* conservatives tend to know WHY
> they are conservative. Every I talk to a liberal or lefty leaning person,
> its because of all the "bad" things that are happening and how they're
gonna
> fix it by giving my tax dollars to my 14 yr old daughter for an abortion
> without my knowledge.
>
> Here's a thought. re-read the First Amendment. Seriously. Read it. Now
> think about this when your reading it a third time....
>
> The right to free speech is for EVERYONE, not just lefties. If I speak
for
> myself as a conservative, suddenly I'm labeled a fascist, racist heathen
> homophobe. The 1st amendment doesn't just apply to people you agree with.
> Stop being "led" yourself by the BS put out there by the left. You CAN
help
> yourself and you CAN make your life better without the government.
>

As Sideshow Bob said:
"Your guilty conscience makes you vote Democrat. But deep down you want a
Republican to cut your taxes, brutalize criminals, and rule you like a
king."

[C J Campbell]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:jD83d.99902$yh.97342@fed1read05...
> >
> > The FAA wastes most of its budget. The Wall Street Journal makes a
> favorite
> > target of air traffic control systems that cost ten times what off the
> shelf
> > equipment could do better. The FAA spends decades and millions of
dollars
> > developing new technologies and programs which were obsolete before they
> > even began studying them and then cancels them at the last minute.
> >
> > They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work
right
> > from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls and
> > floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security. The
> > moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
> > managerial negligence, not age.
> >
> > The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management should
> be
> > brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.
>
> I did my Master's Thesis on the first 10years of FAA after the 1981 PATCO
> affair so I really don't want to get started on it again. But the above
> statements are correct about the FAA studies for equipment and
cancellations
> and the comparison to COS (Commercial Off the Shelf) implementation costs.
>
> Getting the ATC system up and running after 1981 took more than 10yrs and
> more than 10 times the original estimated cost than originally promised to
> President Regain in 1981.
>
> Let's just go look at what happened last week to LAX ARTCC. A computer
that
> controls the communication switching has a built in self test (BIT) that
> needs to be reset every 30days, a "reset" of the computer so the computer
> knows it's still a computer. Some "maintenance" was not accomplished in
time
> so the 30day bit timer ran out and rather than flag a warning on day 29
the
> system just shuts down at the end of day 30.
>
> The poor computer maintainer will be fired.. not the FAA higher ups that
> bought the POS and approved it in the beginning.
>
> Think about this, manpower studies have told the FAA leadership that more
> than 1000 new controllers need to be hired and trained every year to try
and
> make it through the future controller retirements. Right now they are
> getting less than 1/2 that number.
>
> Most of the current ATC manpower were hired after 1981 and were younger
than
> 30-35 yrs in age. The work force now has at least 20 yrs (Civil Service
> Retirement eligible?) and the FAA MANDATES retirement at age 56.
>
> If they were hired in 1982 at age 30, they will turn 56 twenty-six years
> later. That is 2008, current information shows that 75% of the controller
> workforce is eligible to retire in the NEXT 4 YEARS !!!
>
> Hang on to your hats boys, we are in for a rough ride.

I don't see them hanging around, either. I do see more and more people
hanging around the flight schools talking to students about a career in ATC.

[dancingstar]

Newps wrote:

> Typical liberal. I don't agree with you then I must be brainwashed. Too
> little too late. This election is already over. Kerry is in for a
> pretty big ass whuppin'.

I see you've been paying good money to your cable company for the Fox
network.

Get used to it: Kerry is gonna landslide into the whitehouse and Bush is
not going to be elected even a first time.

Antonio

>

[C J Campbell]

"dancingstar" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Newps wrote:
>
> > Typical liberal. I don't agree with you then I must be brainwashed. Too
> > little too late. This election is already over. Kerry is in for a
> > pretty big ass whuppin'.
>
> I see you've been paying good money to your cable company for the Fox
> network.
>
> Get used to it: Kerry is gonna landslide into the whitehouse and Bush is
> not going to be elected even a first time.

You know, Bush was elected the first time. Get over it. Nearly every recount
of Florida's ballots showed Bush winning by a wider margin than the original
count. The only way the Dems could claim a 'victory' was by throwing out the
results in all but two Florida counties and by disenfranchising members of
the military.

BTW, the military will vote overwhelmingly for Bush again, too. Apparently
they don't trust a man who thinks they are all war criminals and who has
stated repeatedly that he will not defend the country from attack unless he
has the permission of France, Germany, and Russia.

[C J Campbell]

"dancingstar" > wrote in
message ...
>
>
> Newps wrote:
>
> > Typical liberal. I don't agree with you then I must be brainwashed. Too
> > little too late. This election is already over. Kerry is in for a
> > pretty big ass whuppin'.
>
> I see you've been paying good money to your cable company for the Fox
> network.
>
> Get used to it: Kerry is gonna landslide into the whitehouse and Bush is
> not going to be elected even a first time.

In fact, Bush won the last election (even Gore admits it), despite massive
voting fraud conducted by Democratic political machines in nearly every
major city in the country. To put it bluntly, I am just about fed up with
crooked elections in which millions of aliens (both legal and illegal),
children, dead people, prisoners, dogs, and even automobiles somehow end up
voting for Democrats. It really says something -- that no Democrat could win
an honest election anywhere. So go ahead: let's talk about the last
election. BTW, learn to spell. If there is one thing I can't stand about
so-called liberal intellectuals, they can barely read and write, let alone
think critically. "whitehouse," indeed.

[dancingstar]

Misled? I'd say "delusional" is more accurate. And I would bet Laura's
stash that not a single rightie here could tell you what "projection" is.

In fact, it is projection that defines the right. The right are
followers as opposed to leaders. They copy, mimic, obey the previous
generation's emotional and intellectual outlook. They fear stepping out
of the box. In fact, they fear just about everything. Originality is
thought of as decline and so they cling to the outdated clichés of a
dying religion, philosophy, or political doctrine to establish some sort
of psychological comfort zone where they feel safe. Change is an option
to be avoided at all costs and resisted when it is thrust upon one. And
this above all: They defend their members even when they are dead wrong.
Now that's projection folks!

The left, by contrast, embraces the future and looks with optimism
toward a better one--toward the problems of the present being solved by
the intelligence of the future. They are creative and daring gamblers
because the act of creating is a destructive and, at times, even
frightening act-- bulldozing the traditional in favor of some new
perspective.

The lefties are individuals while the righties are "groupies" who are
quite at ease to have those around them be xerox copies of them inside
and out. The lefties embrace diversity while the righties think, "If
only everyone thought like me!"

All of the above is precisely why I will vote against Bush (note that I
did not say "for Kerry") in this election. He stands for everything I
find base in the human soul.

Antonio




Tom Fleischman wrote:

> All you guys on the right, you're so pathetic. All you know how to do
> is project.
>
> I'm not going to killfile you. Why should I deprive myself of the fun
> of reading your inane, barely coherent posts.
>
> It's sad. You are so misled.

[tscottme]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, H.P.
> > wrote:
>
> > Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's
would
> > be only next to worst.
> >
>
> I never knew until reading the responses to this thread that prescience
> was a by-product of being brainwashed by the neoconservative death
> cult.

You say that like it's a bad thing. Your experience is one reason it's best
to keep political discussions in their own sandbox.

--
Scott

What would you call a 54 year old man that marries a 6 year old girl?
Muslims call him Prophet Muhammad.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm

[tscottme]

"dancingstar" > wrote in
message ...

>
> Get used to it: Kerry is gonna landslide into the whitehouse and Bush is
> not going to be elected even a first time.
>
> Antonio

So when Kerry loses it will be official confirmation that you don't know
what you are talking about.

--
Scott

What would you call a 54 year old man that marries a 6 year old girl?
Muslims call him Prophet Muhammad.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm

[kontiki]

What's really sick (if it weren't utterly sad) is that Kerry is the
the best the Democrat party can come up with..... A 20 year do-nothing
senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can enjoy the
country club lifestyle without actually having to work.

A living beathing example of the Peter Principle.

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Newps
> wrote:

> > They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work
> > right
> > from the day they are opened,
>
> No ****. We are getting a new tower here in Billings, opening August
> 2006. Took a tour of the 75% complete building for the first time
> yesterday. Helluva building. But the TRACON, holy crap Batman. We
> only ever have one scope open at a time right now. We have two scopes
> in the current TRACON in a room approx 15X15. Our new TRACON is about
> 100x100. There is talk about running the Bozeman radar from here when
> they get it installed but the room is still 40 times bigger than it has
> to be.

having some involvement in cutover for 24/7 facilities, let me
just say that you cannot have too much space. About the dumbest
thing someone can do is to build new facilities without gobs of
room.

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

[Bob Noel]

In article <jD83d.99902$yh.97342@fed1read05>, "BTIZ"
> wrote:

> Let's just go look at what happened last week to LAX ARTCC. A computer
> that
> controls the communication switching has a built in self test (BIT) that
> needs to be reset every 30days, a "reset" of the computer so the computer
> knows it's still a computer. Some "maintenance" was not accomplished in
> time
> so the 30day bit timer ran out and rather than flag a warning on day 29
> the
> system just shuts down at the end of day 30.
>
> The poor computer maintainer will be fired.. not the FAA higher ups that
> bought the POS and approved it in the beginning.

Accepting a system with that kind of workaround is valid from
a system engineering perspective.

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

[Bob Noel]

In article >, "tscottme"
> wrote:

> > Get used to it: Kerry is gonna landslide into the whitehouse and Bush is
> > not going to be elected even a first time.
> >
> > Antonio
>
> So when Kerry loses it will be official confirmation that you don't know
> what you are talking about.

No no no no. You don't understand. If Bush is declared the winner
it will be because of some vast right wing consiperacy.

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

[kontiki]

dancingstar wrote:

<portions of whiney liberal drivel snipped>
> The lefties are individuals while the righties are "groupies" who are
> quite at ease to have those around them be xerox copies of them inside
> and out. The lefties embrace diversity while the righties think, "If
> only everyone thought like me!"
>

Wow... talk about delusional. It is the Liberals who are DEFINED by the
various groups they belong to. One of the etseemed leaders of that party,
Ted Kennedy, despises individualism (see quote below) and has opined
odten that it is only the "common good" that makes us great. In FACT,
the Democratic party is nothing BUT an amalgamation of loosly knit groups
each pushing their own agenda. They all seem to find solace (but precious
little leadership) under the tattered tent of the "Democrat" Party.

Kerry is the best the Democrat Party could come up with.... a 20 year
do-nothing senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can
enjoy the country club lifestyle without actually having to do any work.

Kerry has a history of doing a lot of talking and casting blame but
never offers any solutions. He is a living example of the "Peter Principle".

***
*** A quote from Ted Kennedy: even had this quote: (right from ther Karl Marx playbook)
"At a time when our entire country is banding together and facing down individualism,
the Patriots set a wonderful example, showing us all what is possible when we work
together, believe in each other, and sacrifice for the greater good."

[Bob Noel]

In article >, kontiki
> wrote:

> What's really sick (if it weren't utterly sad) is that Kerry is the
> the best the Democrat party can come up with..... A 20 year do-nothing
> senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can enjoy the
> country club lifestyle without actually having to work.

Waffle does to work. Being on every side of every issue is a lot
of work.

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

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:17:08 -0700, "BTIZ" >
wrote in <jD83d.99902$yh.97342@fed1read05>::

>Hang on to your hats boys, we are in for a rough ride.

Naw. There's no need to train new ATC personnel for the future. The
resulting shortage of ATC staffing will be used as justification to
enable Boeing to take over ATC operations (can you say 'user fees').
Then US ATC will be based entirely on satellite communications.
Shortly after the next inevitable solar storm, all the airline flights
in the US will fall out of the sky... :-(

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:19:05 GMT, Bob Noel
> wrote in
>::

>In article <jD83d.99902$yh.97342@fed1read05>, "BTIZ"
> wrote:
>
>> Let's just go look at what happened last week to LAX ARTCC. A computer
>> that
>> controls the communication switching has a built in self test (BIT) that
>> needs to be reset every 30days, a "reset" of the computer so the computer
>> knows it's still a computer. Some "maintenance" was not accomplished in
>> time
>> so the 30day bit timer ran out and rather than flag a warning on day 29
>> the
>> system just shuts down at the end of day 30.
>>
>> The poor computer maintainer will be fired.. not the FAA higher ups that
>> bought the POS and approved it in the beginning.
>
>Accepting a system with that kind of workaround is valid from
>a system engineering perspective.

It's unclear to me why you use the term 'workaround' in this context.
Exactly what is being worked around? The inability of FAA to think of
a warning bell?

From an ergonomic standpoint, a system that intentionally disables a
functioning critical system, resulting in the entirely avoidable
endangerment of hundreds of human lives, is a total failure. The
individual who decided upon such a scheme should be held responsible
for the cost of the 5 Worker's Compensation claims filed as a result
of this outrageous communications outage.

[kontiki]

Tom Fleischman wrote:

> I have no problem with true conservatism. It's not an ideology that I
> embrace, but I think that many of the core values of conservatism have
> merit. The problem is that Bush&Co are *NOT* conservatives. They are
> not even *Republicans* if you define Republican by the traditional
> values that Republicanism has always stood for.

Actually, I partially agree with this. I have not been happy with a
number of Bush initiatives (or or lack-of) in the past 3.5 years (like
NOT veto-ing the feel-goood "campaign reform" bill, or spending a bazillion
more $$$$ on "education" bills [as if the federal government can actually
DO anything about education kids], more medicare spending, and total
LACK of pushing for any big government spending cuts). The fact is that
W IS doing what is needed on the terror front and is certainly much
more of a real person that Kerry is (or will ever hope to be).

The Reblican party today is sort of where the Democrat party was 35 years
ago (John Kennedy would be considered a conservative in todays world).
However... the Democrat Party is, for all practical purposes, Socialist
today. It will continue to move to the left so that one day soon it will
pop out on the right as communist.

[Graham Shevlin]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:10:49 GMT, kontiki >
wrote:

>Tom Fleischman wrote:
>>
>> Cambell, Kraus, HP...
>>
>> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
>
>Ummm... let me guess... you're also a Hillary supporter.
And what sort of a horse**** comment is that?

[Graham Shevlin]

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 16:29:46 -0700, "C J Campbell"
> wrote:

>
>"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>>
>> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
>
>You realize, of course, that Jim Jones was a liberal, as were most of his
>followers. I doubt you will find many conservatives drinking cyanide laced
>fruit punch. Lemming behavior is a hallmark of liberalism.

that is a horse**** set of statements. Prove that Jim Jones was a
liberal, and prove that "lemming behaviour is a hallmark of
liberalism". Otherwise shut up. You are making assertions, not
arguments.

[kontiki]

Tom Fleischman wrote:
>
> Oh please! Your ignorance is really showing here.
>

Please elaborate... please describe my level of ignorance.
>
>>The fact is that W IS doing what is needed on the terror front
>
>
> Bush&Co's misguided nightmare in Iraq has only served to create *more*
> terrorism and make the entire world much *less* safe. That is a *fact*.
>
Just WHAT has Kerry done?? He was, after all, a member of the Senate
intelligence committee and did vote to approve the war in Iraq.
A year later all Kerry talks about is how Bush screwed up and how
HE will di it "better and smarter". Sure... based on his less than
stellar perfomance in the US Senate for the past 20 years I won't
jold my breath.

>
>>and is certainly much
>>more of a real person that Kerry is (or will ever hope to be).
>>
>
>
> I would be very interested in hearing you explain exactly what you mean
> by this statement.
>
I mean that GW's character impresses me much more than that of John Kerry.
Most people seem to agree on that point... you being an exception of course.

>
> I think someone should have spent a few more dollars on *your*
----------^^^^^^^ ? ? ?
> education.

I paid my way through college by working. Not one single taxpayer had to
fork over a dime for my education. Please don't illustrate your arrogance
by insinuating you are somehow better educated than I am. Your posts seem
to indicate otherwise.

[C J Campbell]

"Graham Shevlin" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 16:29:46 -0700, "C J Campbell"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
> rthlink.net...
> >>
> >> Keep drinkin that KoolAid...
> >
> >You realize, of course, that Jim Jones was a liberal, as were most of his
> >followers. I doubt you will find many conservatives drinking cyanide
laced
> >fruit punch. Lemming behavior is a hallmark of liberalism.
>
> that is a horse**** set of statements. Prove that Jim Jones was a
> liberal, and prove that "lemming behaviour is a hallmark of
> liberalism". Otherwise shut up. You are making assertions, not
> arguments.
>

Jones, who thought he was divine, founded Jonestown on the principles of
egalitarianism, communalism, and multiculturalism.

Most of these death cults seem to be especially attractive to liberals who
are seeking something to replace the spiritual emptiness in their lives.
Consequently, from the Baghwan to the tennis shoes and purple cloak crowd to
any of a number of other cults you see liberals flocking to these cult
leaders in droves.

[Richard Hertz]

Um, it seems to me that of all the hare-brained ideas started by congressmen
and senators (TFRs, wiener bill, etc - the majority - or all - are from
Democrats...)

Keep your political views to yourself please.

A "nightmare of an administration" was defined by the tyrant democrat Daly
in Chicago. (Aviation-related nightmares of course)



"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

[aluckyguess]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" wrote:
>> They build architecturally monstrous ATC facilities that don't work right
>> from the day they are opened, have leaky roofs, cracks in the walls and
>> floors, substandard plumbing, inadequate parking, and poor security. The
>> moldy LA facility that they are complaining about is moldy because of
>> managerial negligence, not age.
>>
>> The FAA budget should not only be cut, but much of the management should
>> be
>> brought up on charges for criminal dereliction of duty.
>
> You could substitute "U. S. Military" for "FAA" in those statements with
> perfect accuracy. I have plenty of experience as a contractor for both
> and have found the military as bad a steward of public funds as the FAA -
> and they have a lot more to spend. My favorite example is a big
> pallet-load of new-in-the-box dot matrix printers still gathering dust in
> a mechanical room at an Army base: it has overnight shipping labels on it.
>
> In case you don't find that depressing enough, let me tell you that NASA
> is worse than both of them.
> --
They sell surplus parts at aution then buy them back as long as there in the
origanel packaging.
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM
>

[Bill Denton]

You will learn a lot more by reading than you will by running your mouth!

You stated: "What he *did* vote for was a congressional resolution to give
the Prsident the power to use military force in Iraq *if* it could be shown
that Iraq posed a credible threat to the national security of the United
States."

The word "credible" is not used in the Resolution; the word used was
"continuing". Very different.

Contrary to your statement: "*if* it could be shown that Iraq posed a
credible threat to the national security of the United States" there was no
such requirement. First of all, you didn't state who had to show it, but
that is immaterial, as shown in the following text from the Resolution.

"Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that
Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital
United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq
to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations'
and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the
Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into
compliance with its international obligations';
Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the
United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf
region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international
obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a
significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a
nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist
organizations".

I think that makes it obvious that it had been that the threat had been had
been recognized in the Resolution itself. And interestingly, part of the
threat was recognized by the Democratic Clinton Administration in 1998.

The President did not have to show any threat to anyone prior to using
force, he only had to make the following notifications within 48 hours of
the exercise of said authority.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the
authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior
to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than
48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of
the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his
determination that--

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other
peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national
security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or
(B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations
Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the
United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions
against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those
nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or
aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
So you will have the opportunity to properly research this matter, here's a
link to the Resolution:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:5:./temp/~c107xmN8RC::

And next time, get your facts straight!



"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, kontiki
> > wrote:
>
> > Tom Fleischman wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh please! Your ignorance is really showing here.
> >
> > Please elaborate... please describe my level of ignorance.
> > >
>
> Your <snip> says it all...
>
> > >>The fact is that W IS doing what is needed on the terror front
> > >
> > > Bush&Co's misguided nightmare in Iraq has only served to create *more*
> > > terrorism and make the entire world much *less* safe. That is a
*fact*.
> > >
> > Just WHAT has Kerry done?? He was, after all, a member of the Senate
> > intelligence committee and did vote to approve the war in Iraq.
>
> You've obviously been basing your opinions on fallacious information.
> Kerry did *not* vote to approve "the war in Iraq". What he *did* vote
> for was a congressional resolution to give the Prsident the power to
> use military force in Iraq *if* it could be shown that Iraq posed a
> credible threat to the national security of the United States. Bush&Co
> then used cooked intelligence and *lied* about Iraq's possesion of WMD
> to trigger the resolution and go in militarily.
>
> The only thing that Kerry is guilty of is of trusting his President.
>
> > A year later
>
> It's been *two* years since the vote was taken, numbnuts.
>
> > all Kerry talks about is how Bush screwed up and how
> > HE will di it "better and smarter". Sure... based on his less than
> > stellar perfomance in the US Senate for the past 20 years I won't
> > jold my breath.
> >
>
> Yeah, don't let facts get in the way of the disinformation you are
> getting from the three-hour hate monger.
>
> > >
> > >>and is certainly much
> > >>more of a real person that Kerry is (or will ever hope to be).
> > >
> > > I would be very interested in hearing you explain exactly what you
mean
> > > by this statement.
> > >
> > I mean that GW's character impresses me much more than that of John
Kerry.
> > Most people seem to agree on that point... you being an exception of
course.
> >
>
> You mean the character of a guy who will willfully *lie* to the
> American people so he could start a war against a country that had
> *never* done anything to the U.S? You mean the character of a guy whose
> sole agenda in office appears to be to steal the nations treasury and
> hand it over to corporations such as Halliburton and Bechtel? Yeah, it
> takes real character to kill 30,000 innocent Iraqis and over 1000 of
> our own young men and women based on a lie so that your Saudi
> benfactors and oil baron friends can get richer while you cut benfits
> for the wounded veterans and their families who believed that they were
> making a real scrifice for our country based on a pack of lies. It
> speaks volumes about the quality of your education that you are
> impressed by such a character.
>
> > >
> > > I think someone should have spent a few more dollars on *your*
> > ----------^^^^^^^ ? ? ?
> > > education.
> >
> > I paid my way through college by working. Not one single taxpayer had to
> > fork over a dime for my education. Please don't illustrate your
arrogance
> > by insinuating you are somehow better educated than I am. Your posts
seem
> > to indicate otherwise.
> >
>
> I guess that means that you went to only private schools and colleges.
>
> Listen, kid. I'm done with you now. I'll just finish by saying that you
> may want to think about voting for your own best interests in the
> upcoming election rather than continuing to parrot all of the crap that
> comes out of the mouth of the three-hour hate monger.

[kontiki]

Don't bother confusing Mr. Tom Fleischman with the facts.

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Larry Dighera
> wrote:

> >> Let's just go look at what happened last week to LAX ARTCC. A computer
> >> that
> >> controls the communication switching has a built in self test (BIT)
> >> that
> >> needs to be reset every 30days, a "reset" of the computer so the
> >> computer
> >> knows it's still a computer. Some "maintenance" was not accomplished
> >> in
> >> time
> >> so the 30day bit timer ran out and rather than flag a warning on day
> >> 29
> >> the
> >> system just shuts down at the end of day 30.
> >>
> >> The poor computer maintainer will be fired.. not the FAA higher ups
> >> that
> >> bought the POS and approved it in the beginning.
> >
> >Accepting a system with that kind of workaround is valid from
> >a system engineering perspective.
>
> It's unclear to me why you use the term 'workaround' in this context.

because it is a workaround.

> Exactly what is being worked around? The inability of FAA to think of
> a warning bell?

no. The workaround is the use of a reset to prevent a failure.

>
> From an ergonomic standpoint, a system that intentionally disables a
> functioning critical system, resulting in the entirely avoidable
> endangerment of hundreds of human lives, is a total failure.

Yeah, sure, the FAA deliberately designed such a system.

Larry, how many systems have you tested?

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

[Earl Grieda]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:17:08 -0700, "BTIZ" >
> wrote in <jD83d.99902$yh.97342@fed1read05>::
>
> >Hang on to your hats boys, we are in for a rough ride.
>
> Naw. There's no need to train new ATC personnel for the future.
> The resulting shortage of ATC staffing will be used as justification
> to enable Boeing to take over ATC operations (can you say 'user fees').
> Then US ATC will be based entirely on satellite communications.
> Shortly after the next inevitable solar storm, all the airline flights
> in the US will fall out of the sky... :-(
>

ATC could also be done by low-wage H1-B employees. If it is okay for the
high-tech industry then why not for other jobs.

[Jon Kraus]

You Libs are so humorous... God love ya.. Name one lie that George Bush
told? Name one thing on the last 20 years that John Kerry has done in
the US Senate? He sponsored a bill to gut the US intellegence by some 6
billion dollars. Not even Ted Kennedy could go along with that one!!
Even after a half dozen scotch and murky waters (Ted's favorite drink)
he couldn't go along with him. Now that's bad!!

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney purchaser

Tom Fleischman wrote:
> In article >, Bill Denton
> > wrote:
>
>
>>You will learn a lot more by reading than you will by running your mouth!
>>
>
>
> I have never exchanged word one with you before today, so why do you
> feel it necessary to begin your discussion with me by being insulting.
> It is so typical of right-wingers to think that it is appropriate to
> behave this way.
>
>
>>You stated: "What he *did* vote for was a congressional resolution to give
>>the Prsident the power to use military force in Iraq *if* it could be shown
>>that Iraq posed a credible threat to the national security of the United
>>States."
>>
>>The word "credible" is not used in the Resolution; the word used was
>>"continuing". Very different.
>>
>>Contrary to your statement: "*if* it could be shown that Iraq posed a
>>credible threat to the national security of the United States" there was no
>>such requirement. First of all, you didn't state who had to show it, but
>>that is immaterial, as shown in the following text from the Resolution.
>>
>>"Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that
>>Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital
>>United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq
>>to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations'
>>and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the
>>Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into
>>compliance with its international obligations';
>>Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the
>>United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf
>>region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international
>>obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a
>>significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a
>>nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist
>>organizations".
>>
>>I think that makes it obvious that it had been that the threat had been had
>>been recognized in the Resolution itself. And interestingly, part of the
>>threat was recognized by the Democratic Clinton Administration in 1998.
>>
>
>
> They stated that Iraq "poses a continuing threat to the national
> security of the United States" because they were lied to by the
> administration. That was the entire basis of the resolution.
>
>
>
>>The President did not have to show any threat to anyone prior to using
>>force, he only had to make the following notifications within 48 hours of
>>the exercise of said authority.
>>
>> (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the
>>authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior
>>to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than
>>48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of
>>the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his
>>determination that--
>>
>
> Which HE FAILED TO DO.

[C Kingsbury]

kontiki > wrote in message >...
> Tom Fleischman wrote:
>
> > I have no problem with true conservatism. ...SNIP
>
> LACK of pushing for any big government spending cuts). The fact is that
> W IS doing what is needed on the terror front and is certainly much
> more of a real person that Kerry is (or will ever hope to be).

Mind you, I think we've botched a lot of stuff in Iraq lately and I'm
not at all happy with GWB not speaking more directly to this. Honestly
I do wonder sometimes whther there's a pitcher of kool-aid being
passed around up there.

But, speaking as a Bostonian, I just don't believe a thing that comes
out of Kerry's mouth. Up until right after the first Gulf War he was a
lockstep liberal, which at least has the virtue of being consistent.
But from there out, the plot's been harder to follow than a David
Lynch movie.

> The Reblican party today is sort of where the Democrat party was 35 years
> ago (John Kennedy would be considered a conservative in todays world).
> However... the Democrat Party is, for all practical purposes, Socialist
> today. It will continue to move to the left so that one day soon it will
> pop out on the right as communist.

The Dems today are basically comprised of blue lesbian sociology
professors and yuppie-hating union pipefitters. Their real problem is
that when one half of their members meet the other half, they're
shocked by what they see. As a blue-state agnostic city-dwelling
professional I may be a long way culturally from the Good 'ol Boys in
TX and WV, but I could drink Bud from the can and talk guns, hunting
dogs, and bass boats with them all afternoon long.

Still, I agree that if Iraq was under its own control and Osama was
slowly decaying in a 6' deep hole, I'd be tempted to vote for Kerry
and the ultimate form of true conservative government: complete
gridlock.

-cwk.

[kontiki]

C Kingsbury wrote:
>
> The Dems today are basically comprised of blue lesbian sociology
> professors and yuppie-hating union pipefitters. Their real problem is
> that when one half of their members meet the other half, they're
> shocked by what they see.
>
An excellent observation on the true state of the Democrat party today.

> As a blue-state agnostic city-dwelling
> professional I may be a long way culturally from the Good 'ol Boys in
> TX and WV, but I could drink Bud from the can and talk guns, hunting
> dogs, and bass boats with them all afternoon long.

WHat are you doing up there? Come on down and join the rest of us in
the land where we still consider the US Constitution worthy of being
upheld.

>
> Still, I agree that if Iraq was under its own control and Osama was
> slowly decaying in a 6' deep hole, I'd be tempted to vote for Kerry
> and the ultimate form of true conservative government: complete
> gridlock.
>
Agreed! We had a few good years during the Clinton presidency because
the congress was too busy investigation his administration to actually
pass any more legislation. Especially the last few when Clinton was
playing hide the zorketa with Monica in the oval "orafice". Gotta love
it... :o)

Seriously though... the BEST thing we can do is turn Iraq into a
decent stable government (no matter how "democratic") in the middle
east. In the long run it will serve to stabilize the region and we
will benfit. Yes, it will be costly, but the alternative will be
costly also. Eeny Meeny Miney Moe.....

[Bill Denton]

My comments are in the text...


"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> In article >, Bill Denton
> > wrote:
>
> > You will learn a lot more by reading than you will by running your
mouth!
> >
>
> I have never exchanged word one with you before today, so why do you
> feel it necessary to begin your discussion with me by being insulting.
> It is so typical of right-wingers to think that it is appropriate to
> behave this way.

That's not an insult. It's simply a statement of fact. And what makes you
think I'm a right-winger? All I did was correct some totally erroneous
information you posted. I could be a right-winger, which I'm not, or I could
be a left-winger, which I'm not. I'm a centerist, who's only interested in
insuring that the debate is framed by the facts.


>
> > You stated: "What he *did* vote for was a congressional resolution to
give
> > the Prsident the power to use military force in Iraq *if* it could be
shown
> > that Iraq posed a credible threat to the national security of the United
> > States."
> >
> > The word "credible" is not used in the Resolution; the word used was
> > "continuing". Very different.
> >
> > Contrary to your statement: "*if* it could be shown that Iraq posed a
> > credible threat to the national security of the United States" there was
no
> > such requirement. First of all, you didn't state who had to show it, but
> > that is immaterial, as shown in the following text from the Resolution.
> >
> > "Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded
that
> > Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital
> > United States interests and international peace and security, declared
Iraq
> > to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international
obligations'
> > and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with
the
> > Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into
> > compliance with its international obligations';
> > Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of
the
> > United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf
> > region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its
international
> > obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a
> > significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking
a
> > nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist
> > organizations".
> >
> > I think that makes it obvious that it had been that the threat had been
had
> > been recognized in the Resolution itself. And interestingly, part of the
> > threat was recognized by the Democratic Clinton Administration in 1998.
> >
>
> They stated that Iraq "poses a continuing threat to the national
> security of the United States" because they were lied to by the
> administration. That was the entire basis of the resolution.

Obviously, you don't read very carefully! The information came from both the
Bush AND the Clinton Administrations. Are you saying that both the Bush
Administration and the Clinton Administration lied? Sounds like to me you're
pretty well up **** creek without a party.

>
>
> > The President did not have to show any threat to anyone prior to using
> > force, he only had to make the following notifications within 48 hours
of
> > the exercise of said authority.
> >
> > (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the
> > authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall,
prior
> > to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later
than
> > 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker
of
> > the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate
his
> > determination that--
> >
> Which HE FAILED TO DO.

And that is an absolute lie! Both the Speaker of the House of
Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate were notified
well within the statutory time limits. If you actually read things, you
would note that the resolution does not specify any particular method of
notification; it doesn't have to be by registered letter or anything.
President Bush could have invited them to his office for a formal
notification, or he could have simply sent them a note telling them to watch
CNN at some particular time when he would be making a speech that would
include the notification.

John Kerry has already put more than enough information out in the public's
face to cost him the election. Putting out these easily refutable lies, such
as you have done, do nothing to help his cause...

[C J Campbell]

"H.P." > wrote in message
. com...
> Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's would
> be only next to worst.

If Kerry was President, then Jack Nicholson in "Mars Attacks" would look
good by comparison.

[Mike Rapoport]

Why is cutting the budget of this can't-get-anything-done-on-time-or-budget
agency a bad idea? (Personally, I'm more in favor of cutting
totally-out-of-control Medicare though)

Mike
MU-2


"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

[C J Campbell]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
k.net...
> Why is cutting the budget of this
can't-get-anything-done-on-time-or-budget
> agency a bad idea? (Personally, I'm more in favor of cutting
> totally-out-of-control Medicare though)

The articles referenced mention only a proposed budget "cut" for facilities
and maintenance. I am not sure how 12.6% becomes "almost 14%" but I somehow
doubt that the requested budget represents a cut at all. They probably are
only getting a smaller increase than what they asked for.

[Dave Stadt]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> It amazes me that anyone, particularly anyone in the the aviation
> community, would continue to support this nightmare of an
> administration.
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040916_1903.html
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4500288,00.html
>
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

Budget cuts equal smaller federal government. Sounds like an outstanding
plan. Now if he would cut all federal departments, agencies and welfare
programs 50 percent he could be king for the next 50 years.

[dancingstar]

kontiki wrote:

<portions of derogatory elitism snipped>

>> The lefties are individuals while the righties are "groupies" who are
>> quite at ease to have those around them be xerox copies of them inside
>> and out. The lefties embrace diversity while the righties think, "If
>> only everyone thought like me!"
>>
>
In FACT,
> the Democratic party is nothing BUT an amalgamation of loosly knit groups
> each pushing their own agenda.

You bet! Thank you for agreeing with me that the lefties (and not
necessarily just the democrats) are able to embrace diversity and that
which does not follow the "party line".

>They all seem to find solace (but precious
> little leadership) under the tattered tent of the "Democrat" Party.

I would much rather gather under a 'tattered tent' with those with open
minds than in an ivory tower with closed-minded Christian elitists.

Have you seen the movie "Fahrenheit 911" ? It's coming out on video next
week. If *your* mind is open enough, why not take a peek? In fact, I
dare all you Bushies to take a peek at this movie--you lovers of truth
and justice! Go take a look at the opposition and hear the evidence
RIGHT OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS !! Then come and tell me how great Bush is
for this country.


> Kerry is the best the Democrat Party could come up with.... a 20 year
> do-nothing senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can
> enjoy the country club lifestyle without actually having to do any work.
> Kerry has a history of doing a lot of talking and casting blame but
> never offers any solutions. He is a living example of the "Peter
> Principle".

I agree. Which is one reason why I am not voting for him. As I said, I
am voting *against* Bush.


take care,

Antonio

[kontiki]

dancingstar wrote:
>
> You bet! Thank you for agreeing with me that the lefties (and not
> necessarily just the democrats) are able to embrace diversity and that
> which does not follow the "party line".

All this wonderful liberal "diversity" that you are so fond of is
slowly tearing this country apart, in case you haven't noticed.
The biggest difference between liberals and conservatives is their
level of respect for the US Constitution. Liberals think it's an
outdated document, open to interpretation, written by a bunch of
old farts. Their favorite phrase is "freedom of choice" but only
when it applies to giving birth. They are NOT for choice when it
comes to choice in education, choice in whether I want to invest
in the Social [in]Security system, or choice in whether I want to
own a firearm or not. Too much diversity I guess....

Without the quality of leadership required to insure that the
principles of that document are consistantly applied to all the
people this country can claim no greater status than that of a
third world banana republic.

[Morgans]

"dancingstar"

> Have you seen the movie "Fahrenheit 911" ? It's coming out on video next
> week. If *your* mind is open enough, why not take a peek? In fact, I
> dare all you Bushies to take a peek at this movie--you lovers of truth
> and justice! Go take a look at the opposition and hear the evidence
> RIGHT OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS !! Then come and tell me how great Bush is
> for this country.

That is nothing but propaganda. Even your own kind with a mind say that.

See ya. NOT!
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 9/17/2004

[John T]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in
message rthlink.net
>
> I have never exchanged word one with you before today, so why do you
> feel it necessary to begin your discussion with me by being insulting.
> It is so typical of right-wingers to think that it is appropriate to
> behave this way.

Oh, *that* is rich. You've been flinging names and personal insults
throughout this thread and we're suddenly supposed to see you as holding the
moral high ground? Puh-lease.

BTW, I think you need to stop regurgitating the liberal attack weenies'
one-liners and actually look up the definition of "neoconservative". You
keep bandying that term around like it's some sort of insult, but it only
shows your lack of understanding. I'm curious why you'd apply it to people
who've demonstrated long-standing convervative viewpoints.

Typical of most liberal "attack dogs" I've come across. Only the
"right-wing nutjobs" are the brainwashed repeating political talking points.
Tom, you'd have a lot more credibility if you'd demonstrate some of your own
critical thinking you claim is not shown by those who don't agree with you.

--
Bob

[Chris Schmelzer]

In article >,
"C J Campbell" > wrote:

> "H.P." > wrote in message
> . com...
> > Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's would
> > be only next to worst.
>
> If Kerry was President, then Jack Nicholson in "Mars Attacks" would look
> good by comparison.


Wow, you've convinced me with your meaningless analogy..

--
Chris Schmelzer, MD
Capt, 110th Fighter Michigan ANG
University of Michigan Hospitals
Ann Arbor, MI

[Dan Luke]

"C J Campbell" wrote:
> If they were private employers, they would have been sued out of business
> years ago for the way they treat their employees.

My father was a career U. S. Post Office employee, from letter carrier to
management, and I believe the failure of his health was largely due to what
a horrible place the P. O. was to work. It was characterized by a
malignantly hateful relationship between management and labor that polluted
the entire organization. Judging by events since it became the
semi-autonomous "U. S. Postal Service," it's no better now.

> The only federal employees
> I have ever met that seemed to be happy with their working conditions
were,
> oddly enough, from the IRS.

I've never been around any except air traffic controllers; the ones I've met
seem to love their jobs.
--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

[C J Campbell]

"Chris Schmelzer" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "C J Campbell" > wrote:
>
> > "H.P." > wrote in message
> > . com...
> > > Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's
would
> > > be only next to worst.
> >
> > If Kerry was President, then Jack Nicholson in "Mars Attacks" would look
> > good by comparison.
>
>
> Wow, you've convinced me with your meaningless analogy..

You've convinced me you have no sense of humor.

[C J Campbell]

"dancingstar" > wrote in
message ...
>
> I would much rather gather under a 'tattered tent' with those with open
> minds than in an ivory tower with closed-minded Christian elitists.

That's pretty funny -- calling Christians elitists.

>
> Have you seen the movie "Fahrenheit 911" ? It's coming out on video next
> week. If *your* mind is open enough, why not take a peek? In fact, I
> dare all you Bushies to take a peek at this movie--you lovers of truth
> and justice! Go take a look at the opposition and hear the evidence
> RIGHT OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS !! Then come and tell me how great Bush is
> for this country.
>

What does "Fahrenheit 9/11" have to do with truth? Do you actually believe
Moore's assertion that Bush, bin Laden, and the Saudi royal family conspired
to blow up the WTC as a pretext to seize control of a non-existent Afghan
pipeline? Moore never seems able to connect the dots, and for good reason.
They don't connect.

[C J Campbell]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> > The only federal employees
> > I have ever met that seemed to be happy with their working conditions
> were,
> > oddly enough, from the IRS.
>
> I've never been around any except air traffic controllers; the ones I've
met
> seem to love their jobs.

I have a couple relatives in the IRS. Family reunions are odd -- the CPAs
and the IRS guys will stand there on the riverbank, fishing, and arguing
about taxes. Working for the IRS appeals to a certain analytical type of
person.

[Andrew Gideon]

kontiki wrote:

> What's really sick (if it weren't utterly sad) is that Kerry is the
> the best the Democrat party can come up with..... A 20 year do-nothing
> senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can enjoy the
> country club lifestyle without actually having to work.

You write this as if it were a Bad Thing. If I'd planned so well, I'd have
my own plane by now.

- Andrew

[Henador Titzoff]

No, Kerry is more closer to living proof of the Dick Principle.


"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
> Name ONE thing Kerry has ever really done in his some 20 odd years
> as a senator.
>
> Kerry is living proof of the existance of the "Peter Principle".
>
> Tom Fleischman wrote:
> > In article >, H.P.
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Jimmy Carter is looking forward to a Kerry presidency; then Carter's
would
> >>be only next to worst.
> >>
> >
> >
> > I never knew until reading the responses to this thread that prescience
> > was a by-product of being brainwashed by the neoconservative death
> > cult.
>

[Henador Titzoff]

"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
> What's really sick (if it weren't utterly sad) is that Kerry is the
> the best the Democrat party can come up with..... A 20 year do-nothing
> senator who marries rich widows for their money so he can enjoy the
> country club lifestyle without actually having to work.
>
> A living beathing example of the Peter Principle.

Why don't you add an ambulance chasing lawyer to Kerry's team. Everybody
hates frivolous lawsuits, except the people who don't want to work for a
living. Edwards was all to happy to make money siding with these people,
and now he wants to be their champion in the White House.

I'd say Kerry and Edwards are both examples of the Dick Principle.

-Henador

[Clyde Torres]

"Tom Fleischman" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
> On Nov. 2 let's dump this blackhearted, greedy, pathological liar,
> dry-drunk blowmonkey and put a *real* pilot in the White House.

I am not running for the Presidency for this year. Quit campaigning for me.

Clyde Torres