PDA

View Full Version : Pelosi's Family Goes Along for Ride — on Taxpayer Dime



Julie
16 Oct 10,, 01:30
Friday, 15 Oct 2010 12:35 PM

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi may have a lot of speaking to do to talk her way out of this: Even her grandsons are military jet-setters when, Judicial Watch suggests, she could be taking taxpayers for a ride, according to the Beltway Confidential blog in The Examiner of Washington, D.C. The grandsons, as well as Pelosi’s daughter and son-in-law were among family members and staffers who took tax-paid trips on military aircraft between March 2, 2009, and June 7, 2010, according to documents Judicial Watch uncovered after filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the government.

The two grandsons, daughter, and son-in-law were on the June 20, 2009, flight from Andrews Air Force Base in Prince George's County, Md., to San Francisco, where Pelosi lives, the documents show. This past July, one of the grandsons flew with the speaker from Andres to Travis Air Force Base near San Francisco.

Pelosi's jet-trip tally for the period was 85, according to the documents Judicial Watch obtained as the result of a Jan. 25, 2009, Freedom of Information Act request.

Previous documents the nonprofit watchdog group obtained show that Pelosi's travel "cost the United States Air Force $2,100,744.59 over a two-year period — $101,429.14 of which was for in-flight expenses, including food and alcohol," the Examiner quoted Judicial Watch as reporting.

“Pelosi’s abusive use of military aircraft demonstrates a shocking lack of regard for the American taxpayer and the men and women who serve in the U.S. Air Force. Speaker Pelosi may have a frequent flyer record for taxpayer-financed luxury jet travel,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Pelosi's Family Goes Along for Ride (http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Pelosi-military-jet-millions/2010/10/15/id/373847)

Roosveltrepub
16 Oct 10,, 02:44
The irony here is Pelosi tightened Congressional travel rules considerably. On the surface what's stated is wrong unless you are talking about them accompanying her then it becomes nonsense since no actual extra cost was incurred. If that's the case the attack is spurious and the claims of the cost are false. Also, if it has been SOP for the last 20 years and they single her out it's an attempt to decieve you. There is plenty to critisize her on w/o making stuff up as I suspect happend here.

Officer of Engineers
16 Oct 10,, 05:18
The irony here is Pelosi tightened Congressional travel rules considerably. On the surface what's stated is wrong unless you are talking about them accompanying her then it becomes nonsense since no actual extra cost was incurred. If that's the case the attack is spurious and the claims of the cost are false. Also, if it has been SOP for the last 20 years and they single her out it's an attempt to decieve you. There is plenty to critisize her on w/o making stuff up as I suspect happend here.Generals and Admirals take commercial flights and I certainly never qualified for more than a forzen seat in a HERC hawling cargo into the US.

dalem
16 Oct 10,, 05:25
But is it really abuse if she's just dead-heading on a flight that's already going somewhere? I don't see the big deal.

-dale

Officer of Engineers
16 Oct 10,, 05:56
It is if she bumped personel or cargo ... and usually they do.

bigross86
16 Oct 10,, 09:08
Besides, food and booze for 5 people is more expensive than food and booze for one person. I know, I've checked this...

Roosveltrepub
16 Oct 10,, 09:44
:madder::madder:This still looks like an effort to distort rather than present an actual wrong. The opposition paints itself as unreasonable when they hang their hat on BS rather than substance. She's been a crappy Speaker imo and offers enough real failings that make belive crap is a distraction.

It makes me a sad camper when I think of Boehner who stands for nothing as Speaker. it will be a lateral move from dishonest partisan hack to dishonest partisan hack. The one thing pelosi and Boehner share is a willingness to throw principles under the bus for power.

dalem
16 Oct 10,, 11:22
It makes me a sad camper when I think of Boehner who stands for nothing as Speaker.

Except for less spending and smaller government (so he says).

Is that really "nothing"?

-dale

Roosveltrepub
16 Oct 10,, 16:43
Except for less spending and smaller government (so he says).

Is that really "nothing"?

-dale
Except for less spending and smaller government (so he says).

Is that really "nothing"?

-dale

Yeah, I've been watching his feet the last dozen years and the record doesn't match the rhetoric. He is the Rep who was running around pimping for big Tobacco a few years back and we don't really know if he would revert to being a whore for Special Interests if returned to power. I think Pelosi is too beholden to Special interests but Boehner was part of a cynical pay to play leadership that was owned by K street. I've seen no action only rhetoric to suggust he still isn't representing K street. He was part of the problem not the soloution up till 2006. On the plus side i always believe a man with a humble background like his actually understands what it means to work for a living and has some level of understanding of the average working stiffs daily pressures. If He was Speaker I doubt he would of killed the unemployment extension. I believe even though he was part of the leadership that gave us record anonymous earmarks he wouldn't revert to that corrupt style of goverance.

The thing a lot of folks are missing in the elation over an impending victory is the generic polls show Republicans as popular as democrats. They run a real risk of setting themselves up to be crushed in 2012. Now, they will have to govern which means some level of give and take with POTUS rather than kne jerk opposition. Maybe with a Democrat in the WH and a Republican Congress our Servants will be willing to do some service and share the hit any SS/Medicare fix will require.

They have talked great about deficits but haven't proposed anything that actually addresses the root causes of the sea of red we face. Entitlements > revenue. The tax cuts Boehner is pushing cost more than the savings they have committed to. I can understand a lack of detail since no one votes for the guy who states we living beyond our means and need to do w/o things we want or pony up. Any plan that achieves sustainability for entitlements and reduces taxes would alienate a key part of their base as deeply as Johnsin did with southern democrats in 65.

Democrats seem to want to pass it forward and Republicans proposed privatization schemes that sound great to the base but require huge defict increases. No one has actually been willing to "man up". I really hope Boehner and Obama can put us ahead of power politics. Split goverment allowed the SS fix in 83 and the return to fiscal sanity in the 90s.....maybe it can happen again. With our new constant partisan hackery on cable I think it's more likely they continue to play chicken and lay false blame as they toss feces at each other till 2012 or 2016 or till we wake up in Greece.

dundonrl
18 Oct 10,, 14:05
But is it really abuse if she's just dead-heading on a flight that's already going somewhere? I don't see the big deal.

-dale

I really REALLY doubt that she was dead heading on 85 flights, that the miltiary flew, and for some reason I'd guess that 85 of those flights were not on cargo air craft, but passenger jets that the military owns..

dalem
18 Oct 10,, 18:15
They have talked great about deficits but haven't proposed anything that actually addresses the root causes of the sea of red we face.

You know that they've proposed several things but the Dems refuse to debate them, right?

-dale

gunnut
18 Oct 10,, 18:38
This is well known for years now. I read a similar article last year about Pelosi. The thing is she requested a big jet, I think a Boeing 757 class to travel from DC to Cali. Former speaker (forgot his name) rode in a twin prop plane because he was from the midwest.

Actually, I don't mind her traveling and abuse the freebies that come with her office. It's the spending I care about. If we can pay her $2 million a year to do nothing, we could potentially save billions of dollars.

Roosveltrepub
18 Oct 10,, 23:00
You know that they've proposed several things but the Dems refuse to debate them, right?

-dale Dale, as I have understood it the cuts in spending proposed fall short of even paying for the taxcuts proposed. If I missed something I'd be interested in proposed cuts that went beyond the 700 billion in taxcuts. It was only a few years ago they gave us the largest unfunded entitlement which added trillions in future debt. At the same time they were open in touting a "starve the beast" mythology to enact unaffordable policy and presided over a period of record earmarks not even requiring the Author's name. I want fiscal responsibility over the long haul. I don't think Republicans are honest actors on the budget as the party stands now. I'd prefer a party that maintains taxes and ignored the crisis we will be in 10 years from now than one that cut taxes and ignored it. For me it's a frying pan or fire choice. I don't think the Democrats have shown a willingness to "man up" either but, the fact is it wasn't they who pushed to return to a fiscal policy that actually projected endless deficits
From my perspective a dream outcome this election will be a Republican Congress and a Democrat POTUS both willing to take some heat for instituting real long term budgetary fixes. I just don't think I've heard a desire to do that from Republicans. i bolded that because all the past actions aside if that were to happen imo they'd deserve to stay in power in 2012.

All those letters Republicans wrote to Federal Agencies requesting Stimulus funds claiming projects would create or maintain jobs just made public under the FOIA raise more doubts in whether they are committed to any course that ends in power or one of good goverment.

dalem
19 Oct 10,, 09:27
Dale, as I have understood it the cuts in spending proposed fall short of even paying for the taxcuts proposed.

But that's not what you said. You claimed that they haven't proposed anything that addresses root causes. So, is it that you think what they've proposed is inadequate, or that they've not proposed anything at all? Which is it?

-dale

Dreadnought
19 Oct 10,, 20:16
Thats 2 million dollars more of the taxpayers money then shes worth. Pathetic! This is why they need to go and tighter spending/travel restrictions put on Washington politics. No reason why she cannot fly commercial like everyone else.