Will the new government have any effect on GA?

"Jim Macklin" writes:

Only winning the war on terror will return aviation to
pre-9/11 status.

Then aviation will never return to pre-9/11 status, as the war on
terror is an illusory one that can be sustained indefinitely, like the
war on Eastasia or Eurasia. Of course, that was the idea all along.

Furthermore, the Democrats rarely return
power since seeking more power is their goal in life.

Politicians in general never return power unless forced to do so, no
matter what their party affiliation.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Matt Whiting writes:

The connection is liberty, pure and simple.

The most important liberty is freedom of speech, and since people are
giving that up willingly, other liberties tend to follow.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 20:13:45 -0600, Jim Macklin wrote:
Only winning the war on terror will return aviation to pre-9/11 status.

But the only way to win that is to wipe every camel ****in' Bedoin off the
face of the planet... It is highly unlikely that we are willing to go to
that effort...

I look at a candidates position on the Second Amendment first and
aviation secondly. Support for private arms is a great way to determine
how that person will approach all issues. IMHO.

Yeah, I figure at as long as I have my guns, any other law I don't agree
with is 'negotiable'...

On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 19:49:25 -0800, Andrew Sarangan wrote:
I never understood the connection between aviation and guns. A good way
to assess this is to find out how many AOPA members are also NRA
members, or vice versa. I would guess that there is very little overlap.

I'm an AOPA member -- mainly because I like to read the magazine, I
suspect...

I'm not an NRA member... They're a bit too liberal for my tastes...

Grumman-581 writes:

But the only way to win that is to wipe every camel ****in' Bedoin off the
face of the planet... It is highly unlikely that we are willing to go to
that effort...

There will always be terrorists. That's why the "war on terror" is
ideal for demagogues and potential dictators: it's a war that isn't a
war, a war that has no identifiable enemy, and best of all, it's a war
that cannot be won, so it lasts forever and justifies the eventual
elimination of all civil liberties. Goering knew this, and apparently
the current U.S. administration knows it, too.

Yeah, I figure at as long as I have my guns, any other law I don't agree
with is 'negotiable'...

Your little gun won't help you against a well-armed military. Your
best bet is to control who commands the military, not to try to fight
against it.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

The news media is talking about the Iraq Study Group and
saying that part of the "new plan for Iraq" is to get Iran
and Syria to "help." What nonsense. Iran has won, why
would they change now?

Terrorism has won, the world will become very dangerous and
soon we will have a real world war being fought with nuclear
weapons and chemicals.

For those who do not know the history, the USA won the Viet
Nam war and had a peace treaty signed in Paris. But the
Congress was supposed to support the South. But the first
time a vote came up for money to supply food, medicines and
ammunition to the South, Congressional Democrats refused to
support the treaty obligation.
A few weeks later the North rolled their tanks into Saigon
[ Ho Chi Min City].

The American people have elected a Congress that promised to
do the same thing again. Adolph Hitler is laughing, Osama
is smiling and the western world is asleep.



"LWG" wrote in message
...
|I think the connection is demonstrated in the liberal
belief that any
| problem can be cured with 1) more federal (they really
mean my and your)
| dollars, and 2) with more legislation. So we have 20,000
plus gun laws.
| Still have a problem? Just pass some more. Lather, rinse
repeat. Have
| problems with terrorists hijacking airliners? Have every
GA pilot file a
| flight plan in the ADIZ. Still worried? Ban GA flights
over Chicago.
|
| Most of this is feel good nonsense for soccer moms who
don't have the
| inclination or ability to use reason. Washington DC's gun
laws forbid
| anyone not named Carl Rowan from personal possession of a
handgun, but you'd
| better watch where you walk after dark. "Shall issue"
jurisdictions have
| shown a decrease in gun violence because while criminals
aren't particularly
| moral creatures, they aren't stupid. If I am going to prey
upon others, do I
| want to choose one who I know will be unarmed, or one who
might be able to
| fight back?
|
| The ADIZ stuff has been beaten to death here and
elsewhere. It's now mostly
| just a trap for the unwary and unlucky. I believe it adds
nothing to the
| safety of GA pilots or our earthbound bretheren. But it
sure makes you pay
| attention to the health and well-being of your
transponder.
|
| As for the election, I think this is the beginning of the
end of America's
| leadership role in world affairs. In the next two years,
Syria and
| Hizballah will invade Israel and overthrow the government
in Lebanon, Iran
| will move to control Iraq, Turkey will also move into
northern Iraq. The
| current Iraqi leadership will move its assets to
Switzerland and abdicate.
| China will invade and take over Taiwan. The United States
and Britain will
| suffer more terrorist attacks domestically and against our
interests abroad.
| North Korea and Pakistan will provide the means. "We"
will stand by
| watching and complaining, but our rhetoric will be
unmatched in the history
| of the world.
|
|
| I never understood the connection between aviation and
guns. A good way
| to assess this is to find out how many AOPA members are
also NRA
| members, or vice versa. I would guess that there is very
little overlap.
|
|
|

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

Jim Macklin wrote:
Only winning the war on terror will return aviation to
pre-9/11 status. Furthermore, the Democrats rarely return
power since seeking more power is their goal in life.
I look at a candidates position on the Second Amendment
first and aviation secondly. Support for private arms is a
great way to determine how that person will approach all
issues. IMHO.

I think we are screwed for at least 2 years.




I never understood the connection between aviation and guns. A good
way to assess this is to find out how many AOPA members are also NRA
members, or vice versa. I would guess that there is very little
overlap.

I don't personally know any pilots that don't also own a gun. Limited
sample size, and hardly random, but it leads me to the opposite guess
regarding overlap.

Neil

Recently, Andrew Sarangan posted:

My voting decision was influenced in large part on which candidates
supported GA. I called each candidate's office and asked for their
views on GA and ATC privatization.

I was wondering what people think about how GA will be affected by the
new government, on things like ATC privatization, user fees,
presidential TFRs, Washington ADIZ etc.. Were these issues the
creation of the previous government, or do they transcend politics
and are here to stay regardless of whoever is in power? Is there any
hope that things will return to what they were before 2000 (except
fuel price, of course)?

There doesn't seem to be many differences in GA post 2000. The only things
that come to mind are a few "permanent TFRs" and taller fences around
airports. ATC privatization and user fees are driven by economic matters,
basically the intersection of opinions about where the government should
be spending its money and a loss of the notion of a "common good". In some
ways, this is more similar to states selling their roads to private
companies and other idiot-driven modes of thinking. Unfortunately, as we
"dumb down" our society, those kinds of things are likely to expand.

Neil

On 12 Nov 2006 19:49:25 -0800, "Andrew Sarangan"
wrote:

Jim Macklin wrote:
Only winning the war on terror will return aviation to
pre-9/11 status. Furthermore, the Democrats rarely return
power since seeking more power is their goal in life.
I look at a candidates position on the Second Amendment
first and aviation secondly. Support for private arms is a
great way to determine how that person will approach all
issues. IMHO.

I think we are screwed for at least 2 years.




I never understood the connection between aviation and guns. A good way
to assess this is to find out how many AOPA members are also NRA
members, or vice versa. I would guess that there is very little overlap.

Its like the canaries miners carried into coal mines. If the canary
croaked, it warned the miners of toxic gas. They weren't that
concerned that bird died, but they were concerned about the gases.

If the government ignores the clear intent of the Bill of Rights and
infringes on the right to bear arms, it is a warning that those in
power do not believe you have rights unless the majority agrees with
those rights.

Those who believe it is OK to deny law abiding citizens their 2nd
amendment rights because others have an irrational fear of armed
citizens (hoplophobia) will also deny you your right to fly because of
others irrational fear of airplanes used as weapons or simply out of
class envy.

The bottom line is either politicians believe in a republic with
unalienable rights or they believe in mob rule, otherwise known as
democracy.

Don


Virginia - the only State with a flag rated
"R" for partial nudity and graphic violence.

Look at GA in any socialist country.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.



Andrew Sarangan wrote:
My voting decision was influenced in large part on which candidates
supported GA. I called each candidate's office and asked for their
views on GA and ATC privatization.

I was wondering what people think about how GA will be affected by the
new government, on things like ATC privatization, user fees,
presidential TFRs, Washington ADIZ etc.. Were these issues the creation
of the previous government, or do they transcend politics and are here
to stay regardless of whoever is in power? Is there any hope that
things will return to what they were before 2000 (except fuel price, of
course)?