More Hope & Change

[Ms Tree]

As far as I am concerned that is worse. I would rather know someone is biased so at least I know where they are coming from. Someone who lies to me by pretending to be something they are not only adds to their lack of credibility.

I have not read anything on it. It would not surprise me if there was. It is DC we are talking about. All I am saying is that NLPC is not a source I would accept with any credibility when discussing anything liberal anymore than I would accept an article from someone media matters when discussing anything conservative.

 

[SparrowHawk]

As far as I am concerned that is worse. I would rather know someone is biased so at least I know where they are coming from. Someone who lies to me by pretending to be something they are not only adds to their lack of credibility.

I have not read anything on it. It would not surprise me if there was. It is DC we are talking about. All I am saying is that NLPC is not a source I would accept with any credibility when discussing anything liberal anymore than I would accept an article from someone media matters when discussing anything conservative.

Try these and see if they meet your approval:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=46227
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2779385/posts
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/09/16/lightsquared-scandal-solyndra-plus-harm-to-the-us-militarys-technological-advantages/

There are 460,000 hits on google, do your own research. I typed in LightSquared scandal

Here we go yet agais Part Deux

Solyndra is—oops, I mean was—a California solar energy company that scored a $535 million taxpayer-funded loan last year from BHO and his boys to save the earth via 1,100 tree humpers in lab coats cranking out solar panels.
Prior to hitting the Obama loan lotto, both the President and Biden actually visited Solyndra and hyped it to us plebes as both sliced bread and Christmas for our flailing economy and our future as a super duper power.
One year later (like, as in twelve months) after Solyndra had deposited the $535,000,000 check, the company mysteriously went tits up and declared Chapter 11. Oops!
Now, the 1,100 workers that Solyndra employed are sitting on their couches eating ramen and watching The Price is Right on their solar paneled TVs while they fill out unemployment docs for more drachmas from China and our great grandchildren’s piggy banks.
The coincidence in all this is that when folks started poking around and wondering how a company goes bust during just one season of American Idol after receiving more than half a billion dollars, they found that, lo and behold, the major shareholders and execs of Solyndra were Obama’s buddies who helped fund his ‘08 bid for the White House.
One cat, George Kaiser, had even visited the White House 16 times in the last two years—which I believe is 14 more times than Biden has actually been there. What a coincidence that his business would get such a massive check for such a crappy company? Wow. What are the chances?
Another interesting ditty is that the loan Kaiser finagled for Solyndra guaranteed George and his pals could recoup their losses in case Solyndra folded, but that the taxpayers would be screwed as far as any retrieval of their cash goes.
And all this went down in the face of Solyndra showing five years of $500 million in losses with everybody and their dog screaming at the President not to support the company.

Here’s my guess as to mo one wants to talk about Solyndra: It busts the fantastic fable they’re foisting on us on several different levels. Here are a couple myths it hammers:

It shatters the Obama All-Wise Money Spender spell they’re trying to dazzle us with as they queue up to blow through another proposed half trillion dollars we don’t have.
It also reeks not of “Hope & Change” but of Chicago-based BS cronyism at its finest.

Welcome, my friends, to the machine. We need some Woodwards and Bernsteins on this thing ASAP.

 

[777 fixer]

In my Libertarian world I want a few very strict rules and regulations and stringent enforcement of those few rules. For aviation I think the FARS can be streamlined significantly without effecting safety. If I was dictator my focus would be on the MTC functions with rigid rules and severe penalties for violations. Given the relatively high level of unionization I think crew rest could be a Labor/Management issue covered by the CBA, even with that I'd still want some type of rule establishing minimum rest periods and let those involved negotiate the particulars beyond that.

So you're for regualtions regarding crew rest then?

 

[SparrowHawk]

So you're for regualtions regarding crew rest then?

I think you have to have at minimum some guidelines. I think that it is really a Labor/Management issue, but given the airline business the airlines will cut every corner until we start getting lawn darts. If airlines blanch at crew rest rules they need only look in the mirror to find the guilty party

 

[777 fixer]

I think you have to have at minimum some guidelines. I think that it is really a Labor/Management issue, but given the airline business the airlines will cut every corner until we start getting lawn darts. If airlines blanch at crew rest rules they need only look in the mirror to find the guilty party

Guidelines are not not enforceable, regulations are.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Guidelines are not not enforceable, regulations are.

I think we agree then.

 

[777 fixer]

I think we agree then.

Guidelines are not worth the paper they are printed on. You say it should be a labor/mamnagement thing. Okay, then what? Now I know in a unionized US airline it is unlikely that a company is going to get away with say having one crew on 14 hour flight to Asia. But what about the third world airlines that fly to the USA that there is no CBA? Flying into the United States they have to abide by FAA regulations. You remove that what do you think some of these airlines are going to do?

 

[SparrowHawk]

Guidelines are not worth the paper they are printed on. You say it should be a labor/mamnagement thing. Okay, then what? Now I know in a unionized US airline it is unlikely that a company is going to get away with say having one crew on 14 hour flight to Asia. But what about the third world airlines that fly to the USA that there is no CBA? Flying into the United States they have to abide by FAA regulations. You remove that what do you think some of these airlines are going to do?

What would be wrong in having different rules for foreign carriers?

 

[tech2101]

What would be wrong in having different rules for foreign carriers?

Nothing, as long as they don't crash into your neighborhood...

 

[SparrowHawk]

Nothing, as long as they don't crash into your neighborhood...

The price of Liberty is often risk.

I have no prob,en with holding foreign carriers to tougher standards if they want to do business here.

 

[777 fixer]

What would be wrong in having different rules for foreign carriers?

If the US government were to propose something like that US carriers would have a fit. They know the coutries in which those airlines are based are going to respond in kind. Which means a giant headache, $$$$$$$, for those airlines affected.

 

[SparrowHawk]

If the US government were to propose something like that US carriers would have a fit. They know the coutries in which those airlines are based are going to respond in kind. Which means a giant headache, $$$$$$$, for those airlines affected.

Probably true. Frankly I'm not terribly concerned with what the airlines do or don't complain about. The roll/goal of Government in the case of commercial aviation to me is straight forward and simple. Maintain safety, enforce the rules aggressively within the parameters established, with the least amount of cost to fund and the lowest level of intrusion on the rights of the individual airline employee.

Put another ways I'm in favor of less rules with VERY stringent enforcement and fines that don't get waived or negotiated down. Our problem as a nation is not that we don't have good rules or laws it's that we have to many of both and not enough enforcement of either. Guns are the classic example of this. We have guns laws out the arse but enforcement is lax to be polite. So what happens is some dim bulb goes "postal" and the next thing we have is 4 new laws and no enforcement of any of them.

What I'd like to see is the people who actually repair and maintain the fleets involved in the rule making process along with Manufacturers, FAA and the airlines. Streamline the rules so our airlines can be more profitable and pay better. It's a national disgrace when an airplane mechanic with a full A &P license makes less than the guy who repairs your Audi and usually by a pretty wide margin.

 

[777 fixer]

The price of Liberty is often risk.

This has nothing to do with liberty. No ones liberty is being infringed by having crew rest requirements.

 

[777 fixer]

Actually it was a joke! I wanted to see if you picked up on it.

I actively support Ron Paul and his numbers lately have been trending in the right direction. Libertarian aren't a single minded group and as I said some are outright anarchists which clearly presents an image problem at minimum. This country got into trouble in 1913. Most of our current ills have their root cause in the policies of Woodrow Wilson. The Federal Reserve, 16th Amendment and the attempt at one world government (League of Nations). There is a significant body of evidence that the feds monetary polices caused the Great Depression along with a growing body of evidence that they are largely responsible for this recession.

Talk radios latest boogey man, Woodrow Wilson. The League of Nations was not some sort of diabolical plot at one world govenrment, if it was it failed miserably. It came about due to the simple fact that after a thousand years of almost constant warfare in Europe and finally WWI which killed millions someone finally thought there had to be a better way. Unfortanetly that better way was the League of Nations which was not originally his idea and of which we never joined in the first place.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Talk radios latest boogey man, Woodrow Wilson. The League of Nations was not some sort of diabolical plot at one world govenrment, if it was it failed miserably. It came about due to the simple fact that after a thousand years of almost constant warfare in Europe and finally WWI which killed millions someone finally thought there had to be a better way. Unfortanetly that better way was the League of Nations which was not originally his idea and of which we never joined in the first place.

I can't speak yo your comment on talk radio as I don't listen to it. Wilson never could get congressional support of his effort for the League of Nations. I've done a fair amount of reading on why we are where we are and 1913 seems like a pivotal year with the creation of a central bank. The Body of evidence that the Fed caused the Great Depression is staggering. The body of evidence is growing to support that very same conclusion for today's mess. The recession during the Carter Administration was largely due to Fed monetary policy.

While I think Barack Obama is the worst President in US history, I also think it unfair to lay every little nuance and speck of bad news at his feet. He alone has changed my view that a sitting Presidents ability to manage the economy is limited. I'm still not certain they can make it better but it's pretty clear they can and do have the ability to make it worse. The fiscal policies of the last ten years have brought the worlds greatest nation to its knees financially. I hold Bush just as responsible for this as Obama, difference being Bush is out of office and we have Mr Obama in charge. Did he inherit a "Mess"? IMO he didn't, he inherited 2/3rds of a mess and promptly turned it into a full blown shite storm of a mess with one failed or liberty robbing plan after another and near as I can determine if we didn't have the Fed we would have never been able to get this far into the dumper and that brings us full circle to Mr Wilson and the creation of the fed. This doesn't even include my Income tax rant.

See it all depends upon whether you believe that the rights of the individual reign over the rights/roll of government or the other way around.