McCain Hates Pilots

[puddlejumper101]

I am independently somewhere in the middle...but all I know is all of you mention how big a disaster it would be if the Dems ended up in the White House...how much bigger of a disaster do you all want than the last 8 years? I can't stand Hillary...but honestly...I don't think it can get worse. Rommney Vs. Obama is the ideal situation...either way I think a Democrat will win the general election...compliments of Bubba Bush and his wonderful 8 years of miserable work.

 

[curtis46]

Pretty face Romney is an opportunist.he won't last 2 rounds against the Democratic candidate.
Mc Cain is no angel,but when it's all said and donne,the republican party will rally behind him,specially if Hillary get the nominee.

 

[atafan]

Pretty face Romney is an opportunist.he won't last 2 rounds against the Democratic candidate.

You might be right, we will see if he can take the gloves off with McCain. One thing for sure, if Romney can somehow beat McCain now he will have the stuff to beat Obama later.

Too bad about Ron Paul but he hasn't a chance and a vote for him or Huckabee is a wasted vote.

IMHO

 

[AA767AV8TOR]

....interesting coming from an AA pilot.....how did Clinton "respond to your needs" during the AA PEB......

A very legitimate question and one that was finally put to rest at our National rally on February 1st. There have been many rumors as to what really happened leading up to our PEB in 1997. As it was explained to us from the current APA leadership, our own APA president at the time, Jim Sovich, went to Clinton and asked for the PEB. Not the other way around as so often is assumed. As for the reasons, only Jim Sovich can fully explain his actions. Contract 1997 has gone down as a major failure for APA.

This nugget of information comes directly from our union leadership.

This next round of negotiations will be the most important since deregulation. For a lot of us, it will make or break our careers. Make no mistake about it, our management (and McCain) want to lock-in for the long-term the concessions achieved after 9/11.

A vote cast for McCain is a vote for a very long, drawn out negotiating process helped along by a Republican controlled NMB.

AA767AV8TOR

 

[Ralph Wiggums]

McCain is, in my opinion, a small minded, miserable, sniveling, back stabbing, mean and nasty old man. I no longer consider him honorable because he will do what ever he has to, to be the President.

I believe that Mitt Romney is the best and only other viable option and he has my vote.

Mitt Romney would try to tell you the sky is red if it got him your vote.

If Kerry was a flip-flopper, then Romney is Greg Louganis.

Any Republican who criticized Kerry for changing positions and supports Romney is a hypocrite.

 

[apache]

The REAL John McCain

 

[Toecutter]

A very legitimate question and one that was finally put to rest at our National rally on February 1st. There have been many rumors as to what really happened leading up to our PEB in 1997. As it was explained to us from the current APA leadership, our own APA president at the time, Jim Sovich, went to Clinton and asked for the PEB. Not the other way around as so often is assumed. As for the reasons, only Jim Sovich can fully explain his actions. Contract 1997 has gone down as a major failure for APA.

I thought the APA got what they wanted in the 97 PEB. If I remember correctly. A lot of it had to do with Eagle flying RJs.

 

[skyaddict]

I am independently somewhere in the middle...but all I know is all of you mention how big a disaster it would be if the Dems ended up in the White House...how much bigger of a disaster do you all want than the last 8 years? I can't stand Hillary...but honestly...I don't think it can get worse.

Well, this point may well sell in the end and there is a certain logic to it... It is the reason why this election is the Dems to lose. Still, I think every voter has to decide on who they want in the oval office, rather than on some twisted past comparison of Clinton I vs Bush II for example. For Republicans, it is between those who view Hillary as satan and those who view McCain as satan. But insofar as McCain is viewed - by some conservative republicans- as some sort of closet Democrat or Independent, he becomes the alternative to more of the same without being a tax and spender. I see no evidence that he is a tax and spender. He may have not favored all the Bush tax cuts but he is hard core on fiscal conservatism.

I really don't see how Romney beating McCain would somehow prove he can possibly, remotely beat Obama. If he steals the nomination from McCain it will be because of rallying by the hard right base of the Rep party, but this will guarantee an Obama victory because there are far more left Democrats, independents, and moderates of both parties who would go for "camelot" Obama.

As for Ron Paul, even though his foreign policy would be too recklessly isolationist, some of his quotes are beauts- eg the one the other day about our spending billions blowing up and then rebuilding bridges overseas while our own bridges collapse. I'd gladly accept his domestic policy, but libertarianism will never fly politically because it is so easy for big spenders to buy votes by promising money for nothing.

 

[SkiFishFly]

The REAL John McCain

I'm no real fan of McCain, but quite a bit of the stuff on this website you reference is pure BS.
ie - they take him to task for several aircraft losses and include the following:

"McCain's fourth aircraft loss occurred July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk pilot. While seated in the cockpit of his aircraft waiting his turn for takeoff, an accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain's plane. He escaped from the burning aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft, and threatened to sink the ship"

He was sitting in his aircraft waiting for the launch cycle to get underway and it was struck by a rocket from another aircraft. Explain to me how that was his fault??? They include the number of brave sailors killed and also aircraft lost, all in a feeble, chickensh*t attempt to further smear him.
I think there are plenty of reasons to dislike John McCain as a potential President - but are you really ignorant enough to fall for the crap on the website you reference?

OBTW - Have you ever seen the figures as to how many aircraft the Navy and AF were losing in the 50s and 60s? Some of the early jets were real pigs, poorly (and cheaply) built and very unforgiving of the slightest errors.

 

[labatt]

I am independently somewhere in the middle...but all I know is all of you mention how big a disaster it would be if the Dems ended up in the White House...how much bigger of a disaster do you all want than the last 8 years? I can't stand Hillary...but honestly...I don't think it can get worse. Rommney Vs. Obama is the ideal situation...either way I think a Democrat will win the general election...compliments of Bubba Bush and his wonderful 8 years of miserable work.

I agree with your analysis, except the very end.

Say what you want about Bush, but I'll tell you this. The worst thing in the world that could happen to our careers is another major terrorist attack. In my opinion I think he's done one hell of a job preventing that from happening. I think history is going to reflect well on old George W. and my hat's off to him.

If the Dems. get into office, in this day and age, God help us.

 

[apache]

I'm no real fan of McCain, but quite a bit of the stuff on this website you reference is pure BS.
ie - they take him to task for several aircraft losses and include the following:

"McCain's fourth aircraft loss occurred July 29, 1967, soon after he was assigned to the USS Forrestal as an A-4 Skyhawk pilot. While seated in the cockpit of his aircraft waiting his turn for takeoff, an accidently fired rocket slammed into McCain's plane. He escaped from the burning aircraft, but the explosions that followed killed 134 sailors, destroyed at least 20 aircraft, and threatened to sink the ship"

He was sitting in his aircraft waiting for the launch cycle to get underway and it was struck by a rocket from another aircraft. Explain to me how that was his fault??? They include the number of brave sailors killed and also aircraft lost, all in a feeble, chickensh*t attempt to further smear him.
I think there are plenty of reasons to dislike John McCain as a potential President - but are you really ignorant enough to fall for the crap on the website you reference?

OBTW - Have you ever seen the figures as to how many aircraft the Navy and AF were losing in the 50s and 60s? Some of the early jets were real pigs, poorly (and cheaply) built and very unforgiving of the slightest errors.

Was this the article that I linked? No it was not. But the article you mentioned did not "take him to task" for the Forrestal incident. Using McLame's own standard in his Pilot Records Act, it is more than fair game to bring into question how many airframes were lost under his command. By any account, this incident was not his fault, but you could have cited his other losses which are far more suspect.

It is disapointing that you do not mention any features of the article that I linked which chronicle McLame's "breaking into the business" in politics, his dumping of his first wife after she became crippled, his association with a known false naval aviator war hero, his involvement with the Keating 5 and Lincoln Savings and Loan which ultimately dumped $2 bil of bad debt on the taxpayers, his predatory and abusive actions concerning MIA/POW families, and the circumstances behind his drug addicted wife and her criminal activity which was given a pass. When does matter of fact and public record become smear?

We all have political agendas. You decry the tactic of the smear, but just trade it for dishonesty.

The truth will set you free, SkiFishFly.

Oh, I suppose this has to be explained to you. The website I linked is by definition anti-McLame, however, they link articles from several sources. Are these credible? That is a matter of opinion. That is why I linked the ones that reflect what is available in the public record. The article I linked had this at the bottom:

Sydney H. Schanberg is the editor of APBnews.com’s investigative unit. He was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his 1975 coverage of political and social chaos in Cambodia. His news reports and a best-selling book about his experiences in Southeast Asia became the basis for the Academy Award-winning film The Killing Fields.