Who does Nancy Pelosi think she is? Do you agree she should get a BIGGER plane and extras than Dennis Hassert did? She thinks so. Power gone to her head or what?
2007-02-07 13:26:08 · 22 answers · asked by killowen05 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"Information" We didn't loss by much, I think one seat. I am not bothered by who loses or wins, the thing is, I don't like her. She is false and definitely not true to her religion which in my OPINION she is false and watch out for her ethics.
2007-02-07 13:46:10 · update #1
To the person who said it was dangerous for her to land and refuel. We all do it every time we fly and I fly a couple of times a year and to get where I am going I have to change planes. She CAN LAND AT ANY AIRBASE BETWEEN CALIFORNIA AND DC. If they are safe for our Air Force to land there then she is extremely safe. The point is the power has gone to her head and she does not want any inconvenience on her part. She is so wrong for the post. It just shows you how lacking in intelligence the liberals are by choosing her.
2007-02-10 15:02:32 · update #2
She has an ego bigger than Hastert's waist line.
2007-02-07 13:28:38 · answer #1 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 21⤊ 1⤋
I don't understand what the big issue is about Nancy Pelosi demanding an Air Force C-32 aircraft (the equivalent of a Boeing 757) to serve as her personal shuttle. Hell, I'd much rather see our tax dollars going to ensure that she flies in a plane large enough to have a formal dining room, workout facility, lap pool, and a Starbuck's, than see the money go to the impoverished constituents who she has vowed so steadfastly to represent and defend. Perhaps we can also arrange for her to have an aircraft carrier for weekend cruises around the San Francisco bay.
2007-02-08 05:48:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is obvious that the so-called "patriotism" of the GOP evaporated as soon as they lost power. They want to risk the lives of people critical to the functioning of our nation, just because they disagree with their politics. It is really sad to see.
Even the White House agrees with me:
WASHINGTON - The White House on Thursday defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) against Republican criticism that her desire to fly in an Air Force transport plane is an extravagance.
"This is a silly story and I think it's been unfair to the speaker," White House spokesman Tony Snow said.
2007-02-08 04:01:47 · answer #3 · answered by barringtonbreathesagain 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm, this is what Bush's spokesman said about this matter:
: I’ll just repeat our position, which is, as Speaker of the House, she is entitled to military transport, and that the arrangements, the proper arrangements are being made between the Sergeant of Arms office in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Department of Defense. We think it’s appropriate, and so, again, I think this is much ado about not a whole lot. It is important for the Speaker to have this kind of protection and travel. It was certainly appropriate for Speaker Hastert. So we trust that all sides will get this worked out.
2007-02-08 16:58:29 · answer #4 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, let me just say that I don't like her. I don't trust her and I'm not likely to change my mind anytime soon.
That said, this woman is now THIRD in line for the US presidency, which means she is a very powerful woman and a potential target for those who seek to harm the U.S.
By being forced to stop and refuel on her trips back and forth from her district, she is that much more vulnerable and that is not acceptable. Period.
Personal feelings aside, this woman should not be "stopping for gas" on her way home. She needs a larger plane.
2007-02-09 02:39:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you so desperate to make her look bad you will grab on to insane stuff. Even the conservative hacks on FOX noise think it's not out of like for her to ask for a bigger plane.
The plane Hastert used did not have the range to fly to California where her district is with out stopping to refuel. He only had to go to Illinois. It cost more to have a plane land to fuel and take off again than it does to fly straight through. not to mention any security concerns. Like it or not she is the speaker of the house.
in the long run it will same the tax payers money.
Try again.
2007-02-07 13:34:08 · answer #6 · answered by arvis3 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
What about the extra greenhouse gasses that the large plane puts out? I guess we will all have to cut back a little more so she can have her new toy.
Oh well, at least she raised the minimum wage - seems like bread and circuses to me.
2007-02-07 13:31:38 · answer #7 · answered by Yo it's Me 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm more pissed off that Bush wanted bigger tax cuts for the richest 1% in the country than he did for the middle class and subsequently is driving up the nations debt and deficits. And you worry about these little things. Sheesh, get a life.
2007-02-07 13:51:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
there is a few kinda Senate regulation that states the Speaker of the abode shouldnt be flying commercial. She HAS to fly defense force or authorities qualified planes. A lotta funds, unhappy, and aggrivating.
2016-11-26 01:19:57 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
She will catch a lot of heat on this. Why not refuel one time instead of a 747 for her. her smug smile will soon change.
2007-02-07 13:42:47 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Whoa! Power going to a politicians head. Jeez never saw that happen before.
2007-02-07 13:33:05 · answer #11 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋