« Troop Surge could Reach 48,000 in Theater
And the Number of Contractors? |
Main
| A Convenient Night for Gore »
February 03, 2007
Flying First Class Pelosi (and her entourage)
WHAT'S THIS?:
Speaker Pelosi wants to fly military planes to her congressional district in San Francisco on a regular basis "not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. A knowledgeable source called the request 'carte blanche for an aircraft any time.'"
So says reporter Rowan Scarborough of The Washington Times.
Of course, Republican hacks may be using The Washington Times as a pawn to advance their own political vendetta -- Rowen says the story came from sources in Congress and in the administration.
THEN AGAIN: Pelosi could go back to flying commerical planes like the rest of us.
UNLIKE MOST OF US: Just be careful about wrinkling those Armanis, darling. Steerage can be so -- cramped.
If Pelosi's flying Air Force planes the way Hastert did (Post-9/11 precautions for the third in line to the White House), then she may as well take as many other California lawmakers as possible. It's a long, expensive trip and they already fly commercial airlines every week or two on the taxpayer's dime. So there's an economy of scale to be weighed and if Pelosi really wanted to play it cool, she would invite Republicans along for the ride. Just throw them in the back with the luggage. Let them eat pretzels.
Posted by davidphinney at February 3, 2007 12:32 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.davidphinney.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/124
Comments
i heard that this wasnt actually true?
Posted by: john acorn at February 5, 2007 09:07 PM
Nope not true. Pelosi didn't try to requisition AF planes.
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/05/pelosi-military-aircraft
Posted by: markg8 at February 5, 2007 10:33 PM
STATEMENT BY SERGEANT AT ARMS
In December 2006, I advised Speaker Pelosi that the US Air Force had made an airplane available to Speaker Hastert for security and communications purposes following September 11, 2001.
I told Speaker Pelosi that Speaker Hastert used the Air Force plane for travel to and from his district, however, I was uncertain of the rules and guidelines governing use of the plane. I offered to call the U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense to seek clarification of the guidelines.
Subsequently, several members of the Speaker’s staff and members of the Office of the Sergeant at Arms met with representatives from the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the U.S. Air Force liaison office to discuss the rules and guidelines which governed Speaker Hastert’s use of a plane. Several questions were posed to the Air Force and we are awaiting a response.
Posted by: alison at February 5, 2007 10:58 PM
Thanks for the impartiality David:
Here is a Fact Check from Think Progress:
1) The House Sergeant at Arms, not Pelosi, initiated inquiries into the use of military aircraft. House Sergeant at Arms Wilson Livingood, who has served in his position since 1995, released a statement today clarifying the facts. He writes, “In December 2006, I advised Speaker Pelosi that the US Air Force had made an airplane available to Speaker Hastert for security and communications purposes following September 11, 2001.” Additionally, Livingood writes, “I offered to call the U.S. Air Force and Department of Defense to seek clarification of the guidelines [which governed Speaker Hastert’s use of a plane].”
2) A larger plane was requested because Hastert’s plane required refueling to travel cross-country. The Washington Times says a larger plane was requested to accomodate Pelosi, “her staff, other Members and supporters.” That’s not true. In fact, the plane used by Speaker Hastert was too small for Pelosi since it “needs to refuel every 2,000 miles and could not make the nonstop haul to California. ‘The Air Force determined that [Pelosi’s] safety would be best ensured by using a plane that has the fuel capacity to go coast-to-coast,’” a Pelosi spokesperson said.
Posted by: Broadway Carl at February 8, 2007 10:55 AM
David,
My "impartiality" comment wasn't a dig. I really was actually thanking you. After reading other news articles and blogs, I was relieved to find yours was level-headed compared to others. Sorry if you took it as a sarcastic comment.
As for the Think Progress fact check, it was just more clarification for your readers. Keep up the good work and stop by my blog of you feel inclined.
Posted by: Broadway Carl at February 9, 2007 01:10 AM