APA Pilot Running for Congress

[waveflyer]

Draginass-
Obama is the clear choice -- otherwise you've been in a cave this last year as an airline pilot- and as a middle class american.
Mccain will be better than Bush- and that's the reason you all don't like him--- amazing!
Take your hard line stances elsewhere- this world has had enough of it--

 

[Flyer1015]

You mean the stance that all AMR flying should be done by pilots on the APA seniority list? Sounds like a good stance to me.

No. The stance they've taken of treating Eagle like the bastard step child. They blame Eagle for their problems, yet, ignore the fact that THEY (APA) farmed out scope to protect their ol' grey haired guys on the big jets.

Many APA members talk sh*t about Eagle, and yet, these are the same 500+ people who gladly took a flowback seat at Eagle when they were laid off from AA.

APA blames Eagle for too much, where in 90% of the cases, APA needs to look at themselves in the mirror to see where the blame lies....

 

[PCL_128]

That's the same with every mainline group and their related "express" groups. The APA pilots are nothing unusual in that regard. I agree that it's ridiculous to blame the regional guys for problems that the mainline guys created for themselves.

 

[Captzaahlie]

Draginass-
Obama is the clear choice -- otherwise you've been in a cave this last year as an airline pilot- and as a middle class american.
Mccain will be better than Bush- and that's the reason you all don't like him--- amazing!
Take your hard line stances elsewhere- this world has had enough of it--

I'm not a devote McCain supporter but I gotta agree with Cindy's logic:

"From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's how many days the Senate was actually in session and working. After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World, and fill the shoes of Abraham Lincoln, FDR, JFK and Ronald Reagan. 143 days.

I keep leftovers in my refrigerator longer than that."

Cindy McCain

OBAMA IS JUST BARELY OFF HIGH MINS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD........

 

[SuperFLUF]

Originally Posted by STL717
He thinks global warming is a concern.

..Yep. Must be that pesky "science" stuff.

I believe the proper term is "junk science".

Even the founder of the Weather Channel doesn't believe it. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...-founder-global-warming-greatest-scam-history


Nor do thousands of other scientists. One of which is a nuclear physicist who sent this to me: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org:80/press/proved_no_climate_crisis.html

 

[PCL_128]

Yes, 99% of the scientific community is adhering to "junk science." Riiiiiiiiiight.

 

[SuperFLUF]

Yes, 99% of the scientific community is adhering to "junk science." Riiiiiiiiiight.

That's another of the many ways in which you've (we've) been mislead. There is no consensus.

An excerpt from an article titled "Consensus"? , What "Consensus"?........." http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/m...limate_scientists_the_debate_is_not_over.html

There is indeed a consensus that humankind is putting large quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere; that some warming has resulted; and that some further warming can be expected. However, there is less of a consensus about whether most of the past half-century’s warming is anthropogenic, which is why, rightly, Oreskes is cautious enough to circumscribe her definition of the “consensus” about the anthropogenic contribution to warming over the past half-century with the qualifying adjective “likely”.
There is no scientific consensus on how much the world has warmed or will warm; how much of the warming is natural; how much impact greenhouse gases have had or will have on temperature; how sea level, storms, droughts, floods, flora, and fauna will respond to warmer temperature; what mitigative steps – if any – we should take; whether (if at all) such steps would have sufficient (or any) climatic effect; or even whether we should take any steps at all.
Campaigners for climate alarm state or imply that there is a scientific consensus on all of these things, when in fact there is none. They imply that Oreskes’ essay proves the consensus on all of these things. Al Gore, for instance, devoted a long segment of his film An Inconvenient Truth to predicting the imminent meltdown of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice-sheets, with a consequent global increase of 20 feet (6 m) in sea level that would flood Manhattan, Shanghai, Bangladesh, and other coastal settlements. He quoted Oreskes’ essay as proving that all credible climate scientists were agreed on the supposed threat from climate change. He did not point out, however, that Oreskes’ definition of the “consensus” on climate change did not encompass, still less justify, his alarmist notions.
Let us take just one example. The UN’s latest report on climate change, which is claimed as representing and summarizing the state of the scientific “consensus” insofar as there is one, says that the total contribution of ice-melt from Greenland and Antarctica to the rise in sea level over the whole of the coming century will not be the 20 feet luridly illustrated by Al Gore in his movie, but just 2 inches.

Read on if you dare, or you can just choose to believe Algore.
LOOK! Manbearpig............

 

[PCL_128]

If you want some credibility, you'll have to find a source a little more unbiased than the Science & Public Policy Institute, an anti-environment activist think-tank.

 

[Nindiri]

Rancatore seems like a nice guy, but no way I could vote for him; way to liberal for me. Not that it matters anyway since I'm not in his district. The Air Tran guy looks like a good candidate, though.

 

[NSDQ]

I'm may be going out on a limb here, but I don't think this guy is going to get $50 from everybody.....