Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Here's your large jet...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
Since a Gulfstream C-37A can make it from IAD to PHNL and list SFO as an atlternate, I suspect it would be adequate to transport Nancy Pelosi nonstop from DC to San Francisco.

This is like watching her inauguration as Speaker of the House. It was more like a coronation. She thinks she deserves the Boeing.



GV
 
She'd probably like them to give it to her, and do it on 50% of the cash as well.

As NewsMax reported earlier, Pelosi’s office has been pressing for routine access to military aircraft not only for herself and her staff, but for relatives and other members of the California delegation as well.
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? If her family needs to travel, let them book it on Orbitz like everyone else. Official business only!
 
These are just a few excerpts from Nacy Pelosi's website:

Reducing our dependence on foreign oil is critical to bolstering our national security and creating good-paying new jobs.

Pelosi: Continuing Resolution Is Giant Step Forward in Cleaning Up Republicans’ Huge Fiscal Mess;

On Earth Day, we recognize that a healthy environment is critical to everyone – especially our children – and rededicate ourselves to working for clean air

I guess the C-32 is a step towards reducing the "Huge Fiscal Mess" and the dependence on foreign oil.

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox and I apologize for visiting Nacy Pelosi's website.
 
Yeah, she says that it is a security issue, not a comfort issue. Stopping for fuel at Scott AFB, Peterson AFB, or even Forbes Field (Topeka) posses a real security threat for the speaker. Those are some of the most dangerous places in the United States. Its not like its Oakland.
Like GVFlyer stated above, why not take the G5? So much for reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
 
What is she asking for: a C-32(B-757-200) or a C-37(G-V?)
 
"not only for herself and her staff, but for relatives and other members of the California delegation as well."

I can understand bringing the staff along if she is going but if they are implying that people in her staff and relatives should have some sort of unrestricted access to these aircraft then that is some b.s. Stick them in first class on United to SFO and make them deal with TSA is my vote.

Maybe she wants a BBJ, I vote they send a couple of young LT's out to pick her up in a C-21 and make her stop for gas.
 
I am glad I am out of that business....I would probably get fired for saying something truthful but not PC. She is as two faced as they come. I would prefer they hire Teddy Kennedy as her driver and he take her back and forth. I am sure there are plenty of bridges between here and SFO.
 
She wants a ride in a big military airplane...?

...we could probably fit her in the back of Fred. We'd have to get another one for her big ideas. There might be enough space that none of us stinky military types would revolt her by getting too close.
 
jetjock6 said:
These are just a few excerpts from Nacy Pelosi's website:

Reducing our dependence on foreign oil is critical to bolstering our national security and creating good-paying new jobs.

Pelosi: Continuing Resolution Is Giant Step Forward in Cleaning Up Republicans’ Huge Fiscal Mess;

On Earth Day, we recognize that a healthy environment is critical to everyone – especially our children – and rededicate ourselves to working for clean air

I guess the C-32 is a step towards reducing the "Huge Fiscal Mess" and the dependence on foreign oil.

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox and I apologize for visiting Nacy Pelosi's website.
Click to expand...

I am just glad she's doing something about global warming/Earth Day. But I guess when she's just as important as Al Gore, Sean Penn, or Bono, she can't be bothered with a little global warming she's creating - gotta save the world you know.
 
Local radio host had a good line this morning.

"Nancy Pelosi maybe 3rd in line for the Presidency but she will always be #2 to me".

I thought it was funny anyways.
 
Not that I figure any of you are remotely interested in the truth, but the Speaker didn't ask for anything. The House Sergeant at Arms asked that the plane be able to make it coast to coast. Karl Rove and the junior repug leauge made up the rest.

Would it kill you guys to do some research other than Faux news????
 
Why are they saying that she specifically requested a C-32 then, when there are multiple VIP transports in the inventory with east coast to west coast non-stop capability?
 
peter185 said:
Why are they saying that she specifically requested a C-32 then, when there are multiple VIP transports in the inventory with east coast to west coast non-stop capability?
Click to expand...

It's called LYING. SHE didn't request ANYTHING. The people who asked for a plane that could go coast to coast non stop didn't ask for a C-32 either. The repugs and Karl Rove just made it up. You see, if we keep talking about crap like this and about Anna Nicole, we aren't talking about the war and the Nation going broke and getting sold to China.


http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/09/pelosi.plane/index.html


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not request a larger plane for personal use to travel cross-country without stopping, Bill Livingood, the House sergeant at arms, said Thursday.

Livingood said the request was his, and he made it for security reasons.

"The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable," Livingood, who has been at his post for 11 years, said in a written statement.

"I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue," the statement said.
 
Now a stupid questin from somebody too lazy to look it up.

Would it be cheaper for a C-40 to go DC to San Francisco than a C-32?
 
Any of the C-20 models or the C-37A will fly from IAD to SFO non-stop at a small fraction of the cost for a C-32.

Hastert used a C-20.


Muddy
 
NorthShore said:
Not that I figure any of you are remotely interested in the truth, but the Speaker didn't ask for anything.
Click to expand...

OK. Guess we should follow our political "leaders" example then when it comes to be interested in the "truth"?
 
Ahahaha

You say people are lying about Pelosi requesting a larger jet then you post an article by the Communist News Network...ironic? Noooooo...
 
DarinFred said:
You say people are lying about Pelosi requesting a larger jet then you post an article by the Communist News Network...ironic? Noooooo...
Click to expand...

OK, how about Tony Snow and the White House? Are they a reliable source?

Look, she makes my blood curdle, too, but we may as well complain about real stuff.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070208-2.html


Q You called the Pelosi plane issue a "silly story" this morning. Shortly thereafter the RNC put out a statement saying -- calling it "Pelosi's power trip" and that she's "non-stop Nancy seeks flight of fancy." Are you calling that --

MR. SNOW: Well, I'll reiterate our position. The question -- the RNC has put out a statement on Speaker Pelosi and travel arrangements, and 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.

Q So, Tony, is it inappropriate for the RNC then to make an issue out of this, and say -- I mean, ridiculing her as "non-stop Nancy, flights of fancy"?

MR. SNOW: Jonathan, you know what my position is. I will let you draw whatever conclusions you may, but our position is pretty clear on this one.
 
Last edited:
Get a Grip

Hey Nancy,

Since you feel you have such a good grip on spending our tax money and certainly feel beyond using any of the very suitable and comfortable aircraft available, maybe you can do some of us tax paying Joe's' a solid. Considering you expect to use the aircraft not only for yourself but family, friends, pets, the mailman etc., we are not asking too much.

How about a ride on the shuttle? Visit to the ISS? Maybe a ride in a F/A-18 or F-15? Certainly there are a few of us taxpayers that would enjoy the privilege. Wow, did I say privilege?

Get a grip lady, ride the airlines like the rest of us.
 
Last edited:

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom