The fleecing of America.

I sometimes ponder that from aboard my Learjet but then the flight attendant brings me another drink and I forget about it.

Seriously though the really sad thing is I read this and just shrugged and said, "It happens." You could post an article that said "Feds approve AIG loan to create 30ft. anamatronic dinosaur for execs to ride to work." and I'd be only mildly surprised.

 

Why would they be concerned about how they spend our money when they have such wonderful examples in Washington.........


People,..... Are you out there?

*MADAME PELOSI*

Madame Pelosi wasn't happy with the small private jet that comes with the Speaker's job...no, Madame Pelosi was aggravated that this little jet had to stop to refuel, so she ordered a Big Fat 200 seat jet that could get her back to California without stopping!

Many, many legislators walked by and grinned with glee as Joe informed everyone what Nancy's Big Fat Jet costs us, the hard working American Taxpayers, for the thousands of gallons of fuel every week.

Since she only works 3 days a week, this gas guzzling jet gets fueled and she flies home to California , cost to the taxpayers of about $60,000 one way!

As Joe put it, 'Unfortunately we have to pay to bring her back on Monday Night.' Cost to us is another $60,000. Folks, that is$480,000 per month and that is an annual cost to the taxpayers of $5,760,000. No wonder she complains about the cost of this war...it might cramp her style and she is styling, on my back and yours.


Yep a nice shiney 757 decked out to the max and the above cost is only the fuel and does not include the cost of the plane, upkeep, crew, etc, etc, etc...

 

:yesnod: to minimark

 

Just more urban legend.........
snopes.com: Nancy Pelosi's Jet

 

Urban legend or not.... what's the problem? I fly on chartered jets EVERYWHERE I go... doesn't everyone? Bravo to Madame Speaker for taking the "little plane".

Only the great unwashed fly commercial.

Oh, and auto industry executives, now that we have shamed them into it.

 

Oh... by the way... anyone watch "John Adams"?

See how the founders spent months or years away from their families and homes at a stretch, in the interest of serving their country? Then gladly went back home when their term was over so someone else could take their crappy job?

Hmmmm....

 

Guess this is Urban legend too.....



‘JetGate’ Revelations Dog Speaker Pelosi

Wednesday, March 11, 2009 12:05 PM

By: David A. Patten Article Font Size



House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been treating the United States Air Force as her personal airline, blocking out multiple flights, issuing last minute cancellations after planes and crew are prepped and ready, and expressing outrage when the military aircraft weren’t available.

Those revelations are based on Air Force documents obtained by Judicial Watch, the nonprofit organization that exposes government waste and corruption.

"Not only does Speaker Pelosi issue unreasonable requests for military travel,†said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton, “but her office seems unconcerned about wasting taxpayer money with last minute cancellations and other demands."

In one instance, a House staffer shot off an e-mail to Air Force officials stating: "It is my understanding there are no G5s available for the House during the Memorial Day recess. This is totally unacceptable...The speaker will want to know where the planes are."

On another occasion, when a certain type of aircraft was unavailable, the staffer responded, “This is not good news, and we will have some very disappointed folks, as well as a very upset speaker."

Judicial Watch also reports that a request by Pelosi to have her husband accompany a congressional fact-finding visit to Iraq was denied. “The DOD explained to Pelosi that the agency has a written policy prohibiting spouses from joining [congressional delegations] in combat zones,†Judicial Watch reported.

According to Fox News, Pelosi’s office is disputing the claims. They point to a White House policy enacted after 9/11 that gives the speaker of the house authority to travel by military aircraft for security reasons.

Judicial Watch quotes a Defense Department official complaining about “hidden costs†associated with last minute schedule changes. "We have...folks prepping the jets and crews driving in (not a short drive for some), cooking meals and preflighting the jets, etc.," the official said.




© 2009 Newsmax. All rights

 

Don't you folks read?

The policy of the speaker (third in line for the presidency) was put in place under a REPUBLICAN as a prudent security measure. I don't care who's in the speakers seat, but it's a pretty good idea to keep whomever that is secure.

And this was specifically addressed in the Snopes article that showed that Pelosi's use was less than Hastert, and over the two year period in question total flights on all planes to CA were less than one a month. So ABC news had a very, very different take on this whole issue.

But then why let the truth get in the way when one can re-inforce pre-concieved notions about the evils of government or our current speaker.

Thanks Scott for the Snopes.com link. Objective review is always usefull.

Matt

 

OK, let's get a take on the Omnibus Bill straight off ABC"s news site.....



President Obama to Sign Pork-Laden Omnibus Spending Bill
March 02, 2009 8:29 AM

PrintRSSE-mailShare this blog entry with friendsFacebookTwitterRedditStumbleUponMore
Obama administration officials Sunday announced that despite expressed "concerns" with the billions in earmarks contained in the $410 billion omnibus spending bill -- and campaign pledges to "slash earmarks by more than half" -- the President would sign the bill.

Taxpayers for Common Sense says the bill contains 8,570 earmarks at a cost of $7.7 billion. An estimated 60% of the earmarks are from Democrats, while Republicans requested the remaining 40%.

In his list of the Top Ten Porkiest projects that he tweeted on his Twitter page last week, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. -- who is urging President Obama to veto the bill -- cited both the $300,000 earmark for a Montana World Trade Center from GOP Rep. Dennis Rehberg of Montana, and a $1.8 million pig odor and manure management program from Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa.

"This last year's business," said Office of Management and Budget director Peter Orszag on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos. "We want to just move on. Let's get this bill done, get it into law and move forward."

White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel noted on Face the Nation that when "President Obama came to office, two major bills were passed without earmarks. The major economic recovery act -- earmark-free; the children's health care bill -- earmark-free. He has said clearly his policies about earmarks, which is you've got to be -- more accountability, more transparency, and a reduction."

Host Bob Schieffer asked "why didn't he just tell the Senate, 'Look, take these things out of here; I've told people we were not going to have these earmarks; then send it back to me'?" which prompted Emanuel to repeat the exact same talking points he'd just given, in more bullet-pointy form.

"What he's clear is, again, the economic recovery act, earmark-free, a major bill," Emanuel said. "Second, this is last year's business. And third most importantly, we're going to have to make some other changes, going forward, to reduce and bring more -- reduce the ultimate number and bring the transparency."

On the campaign trail, then-Sen. Obama sounded far less accepting of earmarks.

In Green Bay, Wisconsin, on Sept 22, 2008, he said, "the truth is, our earmark system -- what’s called pork-barrel spending in Washington -- is fraught with abuse. It badly needs reform -- which is why I didn’t request a single earmark last year, why I’ve released all my previous requests for the public to see, why I’ve pledged to slash earmarks by more than half when I am President of the United States."

In February 2008, in Bangor, Maine, Mr. Obama said that McCain "complains about earmarks, but it was his party, the Republican party under George Bush and a Republican Congress that presided on the biggest increase in pork barrel spending that America has ever seen and that is what we're going to change when I'm President of the United States." In July 2008, the President started talking about returning earmarks to their 2001 levels.

After McCain picked Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, Obama criticized her for having been of two minds on earmarks.

"When you been taking all these earmarks when it is convenient and then suddenly you are the champion anti-earmark person," Obama said, "that is not change, come on. I mean, words mean something."

Members of Obama's cabinet who were until recently in Congress -- including Vice President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis -- all have their names attached to various earmarks in the omnibus spending bill. Emanuel's name is attached to an earmark as well.

The President's assertion that he hadn't requested any earmarks in his previous two years in the Senate seemed under question last week when his name turned up attached to an earmark along with three dozen other senators who wrote a letter advocating a vocational training program for native Americans in North Dakota and New Mexico. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said that there was "no funding level" mentioned in the letter, so the president's name should not have been cited as an earmark sponsor.

"The President, as a senator, did not request earmarks for the final two years he was in the Senate," Gibbs said.

A spokesman for the Senate Appropriations Committee Thursday said the president's name would be excised from the congressional report identifying earmarks and their sponsors, Congressional Quarterly reported.

- Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller

March 2, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (300)



PS: All of Washington is out of control..... VOTE TERM LIMITS

 

Matt - Hastert was a crook. Pelosi is a crook. The primary difference between the parties in Washington now is which of your pockets they stick their hands into. I'm an equal-opportunity federal government critic.

As for keeping the speaker "secure".... "insulated" is what they're going for, not secure. I see LOTS of famous and important people on commercial flights all over the country, all the time. Post a SS agent beside her on Southwest, and she'll be secure. If somebody wants to take a bullet while trying to attack her with a plastic butter knife, well, maybe she can take that as something less than universal adoration for the job she's doing.

 

.....and thankfully this was shot down after being exposed by several news agencies. Taken fron the Wall Street Journel site.....





WASHINGTON -- Congress plans to spend $550 million to buy eight jets, a substantial upgrade to the fleet used by federal officials at a time when lawmakers have criticized the use of corporate jets by companies receiving taxpayer funds.

The purchases will help accommodate growing travel demand by congressional officials. The planes augment a fleet of about two dozen passenger jets maintained by the Air Force for lawmakers, administration officials and military chiefs to fly on government trips in the U.S. and abroad.

The congressional shopping list goes beyond what the Air Force had initially requested as part of its annual appropriations. The Pentagon sought to buy one Gulfstream V and one business-class equivalent of a Boeing 737 to replace aging planes. The Defense Department also asked to buy two additional 737s that were being leased.

Lawmakers in the House last week added funds to buy those planes, and plus funds to buy an additional two 737s and two Gulfstream V planes. The purchases must still be approved by the Senate. The Air Force version of the Gulfstream V each costs $66 million, according to the Department of Defense, and the 737s cost about $70 million.

Geoff Morrell, the Pentagon press secretary, said the Department of Defense didn't request the additional planes and doesn't need them. "We ask for what we need and only what we need," he told reporters Wednesday. "We've always frowned upon earmarks and additives that are above and beyond what we ask for."

Congress turned harshly critical of companies that fly executives on private jets in the weeks following the government bailout of banks and auto makers last year. General Motors, Chrysler LLC and Citigroup Inc. were among those caught in the cross hairs of angry lawmakers.

Hypocrosy??

 

....and what the heck is this straight from the Library of Congress....




C-130 TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT
In fact, this Congress seems to have a much bigger desire to add to low priority military spending than to get rid of it. Last year, excesses in this bill sponsored in the Senate earned the Senate majority leader an `Oinker' award entitled `Piracy on the Potomac' from the Citizens Against Government Waste. The prime candidate for this year's award should be the sponsor of the $431 million added in this bill for seven C-130 aircraft that were not requested by the Pentagon. This is a continuation of a past practice of adding substantial sums for these planes that are built in Georgia.

The C-130 situation is best summed up by Senator John McCain, in his Additional Views printed as part of the Senate Armed Services Committee Report (105-189) accompanying the FY 1999 Defense Authorization Bill. Senator McCain commented on the Senate authorization of four C-130J aircraft as follows:

The problem of continued procurement of C-130 aircraft despite an enormous surplus of such platforms in the Air Force inventory solely to provide federal tax dollars for specific congressional districts is worse than

ever. During the very time when it is incumbent upon Congress to deal responsibly with the budget for national defense, the addition of four C-130J aircraft (2 C-130Js, 1 EC-130J, 1 WC-130J) is irresponsible. To add these aircraft in the same bill the accompanying report for which is highly critical of the C-130J program for cost overruns and development delays is a disgrace. These aircraft represent real money, over $200 million, at a time when the majority party is supposed to be concerned about inadequate force structure, readiness, missile defense, counterproliferation, and the federal deficit, this addition completely defies logic and portrays Congress in the worst light. (P.445) ..........


PS: Maybe they should alocate a couple million in the budget for a study on what this smells like...

 

To bad my Garage is to small to house a C-130 I'd like one.

 

I'm not sure what scares me more here. The fact that Deviant, and I know I do it too, shrug our shoulders when we find out about another govenrnment debacle or the fact that several members of the media have constructed a very detailed, citing sources mind you, account that the speaker of the house is abusing her privleges which proves out to be fabricated.

Tell the lie often enough and people believe it.

I personally think the Republican party is soooo pissed they lost the election they have a full time hatchet team looking for any and all democratic transgressions. If there isn't a real one? make it up. I'm sure the Dem's did it when Georgie was abusing power in his own right I just was so disillusioned with Bush that I was willing to believe anything that jackasss did was wrong

 

The real problem as I see it is that both parties act like spoiled brats and spend all their time working against each other in the name of spite instead of working for us, those that sent them there.

 

What do we all expect?

Used to be a time when local citizens loved the local elected officials to "bring home the pork". This turned into local jobs and money into the local economy. It's still one of the main duties of elected politicians. Local pork is "stimulous", other's pork is waste.....

And guess what, vote trading is the lubricant of getting legislation passed. Sad but true.

And most voters are happy with thier incombants, it's just the incombants of other districts, regions or states that are the real problems.

The US gets the government it deserves, for lots of reasons.

Matt

 

You could store two MINIs in a C-130 though so the garage thing is moot. I'll take mine with a set of JATOs.

The solution seems obvious, fly congress around in C130s. Those who've never ridden on the cargo nets they call seats wouldn't understand but then I guess that's the reason soldiers jump out of the things, to avoid the return flight.

C-17s are pure luxury in comparison and with a C-5, you may as well set up a flag-football game during the flight.