AOPA propaganda

In bitching about recent news coverage about saftey at a local airport (the
media don't get it right, they aren't experts, they create hysteria....),
AOPA posted this gem on accident statistics:

"Now put this into perspective with car crashes, household accidents,
medical mishaps, and the innumerable other risks of everyday life. We're
talking losses on a monthly basis that likely exceed aviation losses for a
decade. The risk in aviation is negligible compared to some other common
activities when exposure is considered. On a per-mile or per-trip count we
might not fare as well as we'd like, but most of us aren't aloft with
anywhere near the same frequency compared to traveling in automobiles."


AOPA's standards of journalism and objectivity are the model for all
media!!!

Not to be outdone by his underling, the President of the AOPA embarks on
his own bit of "objective" journalism:

"The airline association actually stated that it believes that $3 billion
annually should shift to other system users; in other words, general
aviation. Their way to shift the financial burden is to implement user
fees for operations in the ATC system. Easy for the airlines to accept
this method since, as I recently pointed out to Congress, it is the
airline passengers who would pay the fees. However, GA pilots and owners
pay an efficiently collected fuel tax that comes from our own pockets."

OK, sure Phil, the airlines don't actually pay a cent in user fees, only
the passengers do. Right, got it. But then, later in the article he says,


"This is not some benign project because the accompanying spreadsheets of
numbers suggest GA is a major user of the IFR system. Excuse me, but
wasn't and isn't this system designed for the airlines, and GA is a very
incremental user?"

Excuse me indeed. Then wouldn't the user fees be nominal?

I hope he got this part right:
" In a newly introduced topic, the FAA has a question about actually
releasing airports from the important guarantees that accompany federal
funding so federally funded airports will remain open and be available to
all users."

Cool. A private forum.

OK guys, you can sneak a peak. Here is the questionaire that the
honorable president of the AOPA is commenting on (wondering how many times
that clown will use the word "actually" to imply that something is simply
outrageous to AOPA).

Note that the questionaire also mentions increased AVGAS taxes as an
alternative. Boyer doesn't mention this in his most recent diatribe. He
had better "take on" the FAA about this too!

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/...akeholders.pdf

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
In bitching about recent news coverage about saftey at a local airport
(the
media don't get it right, they aren't experts, they create hysteria....),
AOPA posted this gem on accident statistics:

"Now put this into perspective with car crashes, household accidents,
medical mishaps, and the innumerable other risks of everyday life. We're
talking losses on a monthly basis that likely exceed aviation losses for a
decade. The risk in aviation is negligible compared to some other common
activities when exposure is considered. On a per-mile or per-trip count we
might not fare as well as we'd like, but most of us aren't aloft with
anywhere near the same frequency compared to traveling in automobiles."

AOPA's standards of journalism and objectivity are the model for all
media!!!

Huh? AOPA lobbyists don't purport to be journalists. Regardless, though, the
argument put forth in that quote is indeed unfortunate; it's like saying
that Russian Roulette is an activity with negligible risk, since there are
very few participants and consequently very few fatalities.

But you fail to mention where this quote appears. Can you provide a link,
please?

--Gary

Gary: Here's the link. Pretty much anything that that clown Boyer says is
totally irrational, sometimes even (like this example) what a professor
used to call "internally contradictory." Yup, he said it, in AOPA
President's message.


http://www.aopa.org/prez/prespos.html

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
Gary: Here's the link. Pretty much anything that that clown Boyer says
is
totally irrational, sometimes even (like this example) what a professor
used to call "internally contradictory." Yup, he said it, in AOPA
President's message.

http://www.aopa.org/prez/prespos.html

No, that's not a link to the quote I was asking about.

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
AOPA posted this gem on accident statistics:

"Now put this into perspective with car crashes, household accidents,
medical mishaps, and the innumerable other risks of everyday life. We're
talking losses on a monthly basis that likely exceed aviation losses for
a
decade. The risk in aviation is negligible compared to some other common
activities when exposure is considered. On a per-mile or per-trip count
we
might not fare as well as we'd like, but most of us aren't aloft with
anywhere near the same frequency compared to traveling in automobiles."

AOPA's standards of journalism and objectivity are the model for all
media!!!

Huh? AOPA lobbyists don't purport to be journalists. Regardless, though,
the
argument put forth in that quote is indeed unfortunate; it's like saying
that Russian Roulette is an activity with negligible risk, since there are
very few participants and consequently very few fatalities.

But you fail to mention where this quote appears. Can you provide a link,
please?

--Gary

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
Gary: Here's the link. Pretty much anything that that clown Boyer says
is
totally irrational, sometimes even (like this example) what a professor
used to call "internally contradictory." Yup, he said it, in AOPA
President's message.


http://www.aopa.org/prez/prespos.html



Will you learn how to post. Quote the text to which you are replying.

Damn. I can't find it. It came up on a Google News alert this AM. So it
was just published. But it is in AOPA somewhere. The guy named Cerula
(spelling??) wrote (inanely) about the accident stats; Boyer wrote his
stupidity about the user fee issue.

"Skylune" longislandsurfer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote in message
news:13b989e940e7437e586f9ca1b7e75d86@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gary: Here's the link. Pretty much anything that that clown Boyer
says
is
totally irrational, sometimes even (like this example) what a
professor
used to call "internally contradictory." Yup, he said it, in AOPA
President's message.


http://www.aopa.org/prez/prespos.html



Will you learn how to post. Quote the text to which you are replying.


Trolls have difficulty with authority figures and taking orders.

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
Damn. I can't find it. It came up on a Google News alert this AM. So it
was just published. But it is in AOPA somewhere. The guy named Cerula
(spelling??) wrote (inanely) about the accident stats;

I was suspicious of the quote to begin with because it is so poorly written;
AOPA's copy is usually competently edited. If you can't find a link to the
statement, I'll assume it was not in fact issued by AOPA.

--Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
AOPA posted this gem on accident statistics:

"Now put this into perspective with car crashes, household accidents,
medical mishaps, and the innumerable other risks of everyday life. We're
talking losses on a monthly basis that likely exceed aviation losses for
a
decade. The risk in aviation is negligible compared to some other common
activities when exposure is considered. On a per-mile or per-trip count
we
might not fare as well as we'd like, but most of us aren't aloft with
anywhere near the same frequency compared to traveling in automobiles."
...
But you fail to mention where this quote appears. Can you provide a link,
please?

--Gary