Tom wrote:
by "Tom Conner" Dec 5, 2005 at 05:34 PM




The funny thing about many of the AOPA examples used as an example of the
"benefit" of GA is that the examples are useless in so far as justifying
GA
as a benefit for the average person. Rather, the examples merely point
out
that it might be worthwhile for a government entity to have one or two
aircraft for occasional use. Why we continue to shoot ouselves in the
foot
is beyond me.

I can't understand it either, but I find AOPA "reasoning" to be highly
entertaining! Some of their arguments go beyond the absurd. Any fan of
"Monty Python's Flying Circus" owes Phil Boyer a huge debt of gratitude
for stepping into fill the void left by this famous comedy troupe.

Unfortunately for pilots, he apparently believes his own propaganda (e.g.
"I fly a C-150, fear me!") and seems utterly oblivious to actual reality.
He comes across as a clown to anyone not brainwashed with the nonsense that
comes from the various AOPA organizations, including "GA Serving Amerika."


He will lose his fight against user fees, just like he lost Megis after
"taking on" Daly. He might lose on the ADIZ issue also. I really love it
when he adopts the combative stance, and "takes on" US attorneys, anti
noise groups, governors, etc.

But, what can you expect from a TV executive who made a career out of the
superficial and artificial world of broadcast television.