Is there something new this week involving Pelosi and free Air Force jet rides?

someone mentioned this on another website I visit- yes, he is a kool-aid drinking wingnut. I hadn't heard anything and google didn't come up with anything either. :shrug:

I expect your wingnut friend is simply recycling the first story. This happens again and again, witness the "Hanoi Jane and POWs" story that never dies.

take a large part of the blame for it.

I guess that "drain the swamp" slogan didn't get much approval.

I think we can start to kiss the 2008 election goodbye.

It's called a TIMETABLE, people, and it doesn't matter how many times Stupid vetoes it.

Congress was elected to get us out of the quagmire. If they don't start to put up more of a fight, they'll just stay GOP, having proven to the electorate that Dems are liars and jellyfish.

paying enough attention to really hear what the gripe was. My guess is yet another Pub is whinning because he's being slighted!

By Mike Soraghan
June 14, 2007

Pentagon officials are bracing for a fight with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) over her desire to allow lawmakers’ adult children to tag along on taxpayer-funded travel for free.

Pelosi wants them to be able to fill the role of lawmakers’ spouses when the latter are unable to make a trip because of health issues or work commitments.

“It has been longstanding policy that, in the absence of a congressional spouse, the adult child of a member of Congress may accompany the member on official U.S. government travel abroad for protocol reasons and without reimbursing the U.S.
Treasury,” Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami said. “Speaker Pelosi believes that a modern policy must reflect the professional responsibilities or health realities that might prevent a spouse from participating, and instead permit an adult child to fulfill the protocol needs of the official trip.”

Pentagon officials say the policy is that the Treasury must be reimbursed at commercial rates for children who accompany members on such trips, often called codels.

more: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dod-braces-for-a-fight-with-pelosi-2007-06-14.html

That sounds reasonable to me - what is their problem?

Oh nevermind...

squeaking about this? If you put impeachment on your agenda and had stopped funding the war - this might not have looked so weak. You are so wealthy, please, pay for your children to fly.

If a spouse isn't available - so what? Do you support letting a GF or BF sub for the unspouse of gay or unmarried members? Get on with the people's business!

:thumbsdown:

I do not remember what radio program I heard this mentioned but the host wondered why those people that attacked Pelosi didn't do the same here:


FBI head using jet bought for missions

By John Solomon
The Washington Post
Posted June 12 2007
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-aarmy12jun12,0,7068961.story

WASHINGTON • When the FBI asked Congress this spring to provide $3.6 million in the war spending bill for its Gulfstream V jet, it said the money was needed to ensure that the aircraft, packed with state-of-the-art security and communications gear, could continue to fly counterterrorism agents on "crucial missions" into Iraq.

<snip>

But the jet that the FBI originally sold to lawmakers in the late 1990s as an essential tool for battling terrorism is now routinely used to ferry FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to speeches, public appearances and field office visits.

<snip>

FBI officials acknowledged that Mueller's use of the Gulfstream was a marked departure from the travel practices of his predecessors, such as Louis J. Freeh, who flew commercially or used a smaller Cessna Citation jet.

<snip>

:hi:

I think that was also mentioned on Countdown the other night.