dumbass Air Force 1

2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
catocom said:
ok, prolly won't do much good in the understanding, but I'll re word...



an apology isn't a real apology, unless it meant.
It isn't meant Really, unless the person admitting fault, tries to correct it.
Then not do it again.

I can't make it plainer than that.
Click to expand...

so calling it a mistake and saying that it won't happen again?

how do you know if he meant it or not? are we back to the blood oath?

or is there simply an assumption being made that no politician could possibly be sincere?
 
Gato_Solo

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
2minkey said:
so calling it a mistake and saying that it won't happen again?

how do you know if he meant it or not? are we back to the blood oath?

or is there simply an assumption being made that no politician could possibly be sincere?
Click to expand...

I tend to lean towards that assumption. Doesn't matter the party, either. Comes down to whether you like your butt-rape with petroleum jelly or KY...
 
catocom

catocom

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
so calling it a mistake and saying that it won't happen again?

how do you know if he meant it or not? are we back to the blood oath?

or is there simply an assumption being made that no politician could possibly be sincere?
Click to expand...

nope no blood involve.

People are known by their actions.
Different situations get different time frames.
Just like with judgmental sentencing.

The time frame of the general public depends on the different views of people.
I personally try to have a high tolerance, but all this 'fast eddie' politics requires quick judgments.

Now, that said, in the pres's case I have seen some progress on problems.
Though some I have not.

Overall I have reserved judgement, personally, on his 'job performance'.
I understand you can't be all things to all people, but he seems to be trying.

I'll digress with that.
 
Gato_Solo

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Anyway...now there is a big complaint over the cost. The AF says one thing, and the pundits are now adding in the cost of the panicked sheep who called 911, saying that the cost was higher. :rolleyes:

If the NYC government had actually released the info on the flyby, provided to them by the FAA, the AF cost would be correct because the sheep on the ground would not have panicked. You can assess blame on the Pres if you like, but this whole debacle lies squarely on the shoulders of the folks holding onto the information.

Now...if you want to know why I used the term 'sheep', just watch a flock of grazing lambs when a large shadow passes overhead...
 
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
FAA Memo: Feds Knew NYC Flyover Would Cause Panic
Threatened Federal Sanctions Against NYPD, Secret Service, FBI & Mayor's Office If Secret Ever Got Out


Federal officials knew that sending two fighter jets and a 747 from the presidential fleet to buzz ground zero and Lady Liberty might set off nightmarish fears of a 9/11 replay, but they still ordered the photo-op kept secret from the public.

In a memo obtained by CBS 2 HD, the Federal Aviation Administration's James Johnston said the agency was aware of "the possibility of public concern regarding DOD (Department of Defense) aircraft flying at low altitudes" in an around New York City. But they demanded total secrecy from the NYPD, the Secret Service, the FBI and even the mayor's office and threatened federal sanctions if the secret got out
Click to expand...

So, was the plane empty or did some of Zero's 'rat high $$ contributors cruise on the terrorist route fly-by?
 
2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
thanks for the story. did you happen to notice how it began?

"A furious President Barack Obama ordered an internal review of Monday's low-flying photo op over the Statue of Liberty."
 
jimpeel

jimpeel

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
thanks for the story. did you happen to notice how it began?

"A furious President Barack Obama ordered an internal review of Monday's low-flying photo op over the Statue of Liberty."
Click to expand...

Was he furious because someone took his toy out for a joyride; or is he furious they (he?) got caught?

The problem with this "outrage" of his is that he has to have known that the aircraft was unavailable. That is how it works when you are the president and one of your modes of transportation is out of service.
 
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
521396e.jpg
 
Cerise

Cerise

Well-Known Member
I still would like to know if 0bama flew family and friends the scenic route, or was the plane empty? :shrug:
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
Well this has been a page of nothing. Does anyone have some actual news concerning this? If not, Moderator, time to lock it down.
 
2minkey

2minkey

bootlicker
jimpeel said:
The problem with this "outrage" of his is that he has to have known that the aircraft was unavailable. That is how it works when you are the president and one of your modes of transportation is out of service.
Click to expand...


yeah, i'm sure he tracks the repair history of every vehicle in the motorpool too. that's the stuff he's really paying attention to, not the economy, the war, or the 11 over things that are bubbling over right now.

gee jim you've really never been more than a grunt-level employee have you? see, often times, when you are the boss, people track and take care of the little shit for you.
 
Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
2minkey said:
see, often times, when you are the boss, people track and take care of the little shit for you.
Click to expand...

Or are supposed to. I've always judged bosses by how well their employees do their job, and how little he has to do himself. My first words to any boss is "you hired me to do a job, leave me do it" If I fuck it up, I expect to be fired for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top