AviationBanter

AviationBanter (http://www.aviationbanter.com/index.php)
-   Military Aviation (http://www.aviationbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=13)
-   -   Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam (http://www.aviationbanter.com/showthread.php?t=9683)

C J Campbell July 12th 04 09:53 PM

Speaking strictly from an aviation standpoint, I don't think that either
Bush or Kerry is especially good for GA.

The Republican tax incentives for new plane purchases have been very good,
but they do have the side effect of depressing the prices of used airplanes.
You can expect these tax incentives to disappear under either
administration, although the Republicans are talking about extending them
one more year.

Estate taxes are another issue. Federal estate taxes have been reduced, at
least temporarily, but many states have adopted estate taxes of their own to
grab this money. Of course, the states will not repeal these taxes when the
federal tax goes back up. Kerry would make matters worse by repealing the
reductions immediately. This means that if you own an aviation business your
heirs will probably be forced to sell the business instead of continuing to
operate it.

Not that it matters all that much. The government is going to take about
half what you earn, no matter how you slice it. Income and estate taxes are
small fish. Most people have no idea how big a bite that Social Security,
payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, utility taxes, and all the other
hidden little taxes that they pay all up and down the distribution system
really adds up to. It doesn't matter what your income is. You end up giving
half of it to the government. The Republicans and Democrats only keep the
income tax around so that they can distract your attention from what you are
really paying. It gives them something to talk about during election years
and gives them the opportunity to pretend that there is really a difference
between the two parties.

Despite claims by some here to the contrary, both Bush and Kerry are wealthy
elitists and they both would have done pretty much the same thing in Iraq.
Bush is not nearly as stupid as painted by the Kerry camp and Kerry is not
nearly as bright. In fact, he may not be any smarter than Bush at all.
Neither is Kerry as well liked in Europe as portrayed. In the end, he would
have gone into Iraq alone, just like Bush, and the Republicans would be
having fits over it, just like the Democrats now. It was the same in
Vietnam. Johnson won the election by portraying Goldwater as a reckless war
hawk, but in the end he did everything Goldwater said he would do, and more.

The real reason that voter turnout is so low in this country is that most
people know that their vote doesn't make much difference one way or the
other.



C J Campbell July 12th 04 09:55 PM


"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...
And you think we are going to have another presidential election in this
country???? I think that bush


Replace "Bush" with "Clinton" and you have a re-run of what many Republicans
were saying during the last election.



Ed Rasimus July 12th 04 09:56 PM

On 12 Jul 2004 12:12:07 -0700, (Sam Byrams)
wrote:

All this brings up several things.

One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT and has not flown as PIC or SIC since.
Neither military or elsewise. (Not counting the ride out to the boat
of late.)


Well, your inclusion of the "if I understand" is the bailout clause
for spouting a lot of crap. Learning to fly in the military at
government expense is quite simply the best way to get the best
aviation training in the world. Qualifying after UPT in an operational
single-seat jet takes, on average another eight to ten months and then
becoming operationally ready takes another six months.

Whether one flies as PIC again after completion of military service is
totally irrelevant. I have not flown as PIC or in any level of control
of an aircraft since my retirement from active duty in 1987. Doesn't
mean crap.

Kerry learned to fly not at government expense and apparently has
done so for a number of years.


I initially learned to fly J-3 Cubs, PA-22 Colts and PA-18 Super Cubs
at my own expense. I can't afford to fly at my own expense today
because I married a nice women who wasn't the recipient of fortune.
Doesn't mean crap.

Now, mind you, I don't like Bush or Kerry as a candidate. Bush was
born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. Kerry is also
apparently something of a rich kid, married Big Ketchup, Ivy League
(yecch), and to top it off is closely associated with a family I
detest and which makes my skin crawl for many reasons (not least of
which the same reason a certain baseball player hated them for every
day of the last 36 years of his life). I can tell you right now I'm
voting third party.


Voting third party is your privilege. But, you should note that the
government will continue despite your effective lack of participation.
Doesn't mean crap.

But-be honest-is there any reason I should prefer Bush over Kerry
from an aviation standpoint? Bush, a nonpilot as far as I'm concerned,
has done nothing for aviation in this country. Kerry isn't likely to
either, but how much worse could he be?


Voting from an "aviation standpoint" doesn't make any sense at all.
Voting from a principles, performance, and ideological standpoint
does. How much worse could he be? Gimme a break.

The other thing in all this discussion of what balls it takes to
strap on a single engine fighter, is the growing evidence that many
people are willing to pay a lot of money for the privilege.


Spending a lot of money for a once-in-a-lifetime thrill ride is a
whole lot different than strapping on a single-seat, single engine
fighter. Flying one operationally is well beyond just flying one.

Once
reserved for places like Mojave, the warjet deal is penetrating down
to the backward Midwest. I saw a Sabre and a Hawker Hunter poking
their tails up among the Aztecs and King Airs at the local spam can
patch this week out here. My guess is it costs roughly five hundred
bucks an hour to fly a Sabre.


Dr. Joe Bagadonutz, the wealthy proctologist buys a Mustang or even a
MiG-17 and successfully takes off and lands. He isn't, by any stretch
of the imagination, a fighter pilot. He isn't really, even that lesser
level, a pilot who flies fighters. He's simply an accident waiting to
happen.


And the civil warjet guys are killing
themselves at a rate that would have embarrassed the Air Force during
the glory days of "Every Man A Tiger".


Excuse me, but you obviously haven't read "Every Man A Tiger." It's
about Chuck Horner as the Air Component Commander of Desert Storm. The
lead-in chapters about Gen. Horner's early days flying F-105s in
Rolling Thunder are anything but glory days.

In and of itself flying fighters is no more heroic than riding a
chopped Harley with the Hells Angels or wreck diving with open circuit
scuba gear. It's what one does, and why, that sometimes might be
heroic.


Any scumbag can ride a Harley. If he's particularly disgusting, he can
become a member of a club. That's a long way from flying fighters
operationally and shouldn't, by any stretch be compared.


But just climbing up there-if I hit the lottery and could get
the FAA to let me I'd buy-after working my way up a little-the wildest
fighter I could. Simply because it would be-this is 2004, Marilyn's
dead, and she'd be 78 anyway- the biggest ego blast in the world to
taxi up to the ramp at the local FBO in front of all those square-ass
Gulfstream and Lear crews.


No, asshole. The biggest ego blast in the world is walking away from
the jet, sweat-soaked and drained, looking back at the bird and
saying, "**** you. You could have killed me, but you didn't." And,
knowing that you do something every day that most other humans don't
even begin to conceive of. "Those square-ass Gulfstream and Lear
crews" aren't even part of the equation.

I know what the statistics are, and I don't
care. I suspect Bush Jr's motives were the same-booze, pussy and
kerosene!


And, who wouldn't be motivated by that?

Works for me.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

kontiki July 12th 04 10:07 PM

Kerry is a PX hero and does a poor immitation of Bill Clinton.

Foster wrote:

Or, think of it this way. Bush is an incompetent moron; Kerry isn't.
Bush's incompetence and ego got us into a war we shouldn't be in; Kerry
didn't.

etc., etc., etc.



kontiki July 12th 04 10:15 PM

Very well stated Sir. I could distill it down to its simplest terms:

The Demos (lead by Kerry) are running towards socialism while the
Repubs (lead by Bush) are jogging towards the same ultimate destination.



C J Campbell July 12th 04 10:32 PM


"Foster" wrote in message
...
Or, think of it this way. Bush is an incompetent moron; Kerry isn't.
Bush's incompetence and ego got us into a war we shouldn't be in; Kerry
didn't.


Actually, Kerry has not made any such claims and for good reason: he has
gone on record too many times saying that Bush fooled him on various issues.
Kerry would probably just as soon his supporters did not make such a big
argument that Bush is stupid; it makes Kerry look even dumber than Bush. It
makes his supporters look even dumber than that, but of course they are too
stupid to realize it. :-)



D. Strang July 12th 04 10:52 PM

"ArtKramr" wrote

Kerry was and is a true decorated war hero.


But he said he murdered innocent women and children.

And it is driving the neocons nut


He doesn't drive me anywhere, he only exists. Plus, there are only true conservatives
on this forum. There are no neo or paleo here, just good conservatives and worthless
radicals (welfare) types.

especially when we look at the war records of president Cheney and vice
president Bush..


They, like the majority of other Americans have never been to war, thus can have
no "war" record.



Jim Weir July 12th 04 10:58 PM

A British newscaster on BBC did it much simpler in trying to explain the
differences in our political parties:

The Republicans are very much like our...Conservatives.
The Democrats are very much like our...Conservatives.


Jim




kontiki
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

-Very well stated Sir. I could distill it down to its simplest terms:
-
-The Demos (lead by Kerry) are running towards socialism while the
-Repubs (lead by Bush) are jogging towards the same ultimate destination.
-



Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

B2431 July 12th 04 11:05 PM

From: (Regnirps)
Date: 7/12/2004 3:17 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"Steven P. McNicoll"


Sorry, you can only get one Purple Heart.


Plenty have several.


Have you ever seen more than one? The public thinks of the Purple Heart as
the
medal, which you can get one of (well, you can buy more). After that,
additional awards can be added in the form of embellishments if the recipient
chooses to stick them on.


The "embellishments" are REQUIRED. They are called "devices." If I were still
active duty an was not wearing the V on my bronze star or oakleaves on my
purple heart, good conduct, longevity etc, stars on my national defense and SEA
sevice medal I would have been out of uniform.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Mike Marron July 12th 04 11:09 PM

"Sam Byrams" wrote:

All this brings up several things.


One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT and has not flown as PIC or SIC since.
Neither military or elsewise. (Not counting the ride out to the boat
of late.)


Kerry learned to fly not at government expense and apparently has
done so for a number of years.


Now, mind you, I don't like Bush or Kerry as a candidate. Bush was
born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. Kerry is also
apparently something of a rich kid, married Big Ketchup, Ivy League
(yecch), and to top it off is closely associated with a family I
detest and which makes my skin crawl for many reasons (not least of
which the same reason a certain baseball player hated them for every
day of the last 36 years of his life). I can tell you right now I'm
voting third party.


But-be honest-is there any reason I should prefer Bush over Kerry
from an aviation standpoint? Bush, a nonpilot as far as I'm concerned,
has done nothing for aviation in this country. Kerry isn't likely to
either, but how much worse could he be?


The other thing in all this discussion of what balls it takes to
strap on a single engine fighter, is the growing evidence that many
people are willing to pay a lot of money for the privilege. Once
reserved for places like Mojave, the warjet deal is penetrating down
to the backward Midwest. I saw a Sabre and a Hawker Hunter poking
their tails up among the Aztecs and King Airs at the local spam can
patch this week out here. My guess is it costs roughly five hundred
bucks an hour to fly a Sabre. And the civil warjet guys are killing
themselves at a rate that would have embarrassed the Air Force during
the glory days of "Every Man A Tiger".


In and of itself flying fighters is no more heroic than riding a
chopped Harley with the Hells Angels or wreck diving with open circuit
scuba gear. It's what one does, and why, that sometimes might be
heroic. But just climbing up there-if I hit the lottery and could get
the FAA to let me I'd buy-after working my way up a little-the wildest
fighter I could. Simply because it would be-this is 2004, Marilyn's
dead, and she'd be 78 anyway- the biggest ego blast in the world to
taxi up to the ramp at the local FBO in front of all those square-ass
Gulfstream and Lear crews. I know what the statistics are, and I don't
care. I suspect Bush Jr's motives were the same-booze, pussy and
kerosene!


All good points but remember what Ed Rasimus says; "there are
fighter pilots and there are pilots who fly fighters." Back in the
late 50's and early 60's my Dad flew the F-102 and versus
Dubya 1v1 both flying the -102 undoubtedly my ol' man would
just as soon expose Junior as a foolish ****** as wake up in the
morning.

Regarding your question, "Is there any reason I should prefer
Bush over Kerry from an aviation standpoint?" The answer seems
obvious to me in view of the recovering (post 9/11) airline industry.

As far as GA is concerned, for guys like you, me and the vast
majority of vets on this NG who are interested in flying airplanes
that are affordable and readily available -- I'm not aware of anything
specific that Bush has done for the GA community.

However, I do know that in 2001 Dubya signed into law H.R. 727,
a bill that transfered jurisdiction over low-speed electric bikes from
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to the
Consumer Product Safety Commission, which reduced the cost and
regulatory burdens of electric-powered bicycles.

Conversely, Kerry and his liberal ilk would have wanted to regulate
and tax them into oblivion like Canada does which is absurd since
these are bicycles and should be regulated as bicycles.

(BTW, I happen to own an Iacocca e-bike and think it's great. I also
fly my own experimental aircraft about every other day.)

In other words, I'm all for any politician who signs a law that
represents a tangible step forward for efficient, affordable
transportation technologies (such as general aviation aircraft,
electric bikes, etc.) while promoting less government, less
taxes, etc.

Thus, Dubya has my vote once again in November.





ArtKramr July 12th 04 11:09 PM

Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: "D. Strang"
Date: 7/12/2004 2:52 PM Pacific Standard Time


Kerry was and is a true decorated war hero.

But he said he murdered innocent women and children.


So did I. I was a bombardier over Europe.So what? Kerry at least had a shred
of honesty to admit it..






Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer


Steven P. McNicoll July 12th 04 11:13 PM


"Regnirps" wrote in message
...

Have you ever seen more than one?


Sure. I've seen the ribbons with oak leaf clusters. Each cluster
represents an additional award.



B2431 July 12th 04 11:14 PM

From: Ed Rasimus

snip


I initially learned to fly J-3 Cubs, PA-22 Colts and PA-18 Super Cubs
at my own expense. I can't afford to fly at my own expense today
because I married a nice women who wasn't the recipient of fortune.


"A nice women?" Ed, I smite thee with a tarver stick :)

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Bob Noel July 12th 04 11:46 PM

In article , kontiki
wrote:

Kerry ... does a poor immitation of Bill Clinton.


which could be considered something in waffle's favor.

--
Bob Noel

Ed Rasimus July 12th 04 11:59 PM

On 12 Jul 2004 22:09:50 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: "D. Strang"

Date: 7/12/2004 2:52 PM Pacific Standard Time


Kerry was and is a true decorated war hero.

But he said he murdered innocent women and children.


So did I. I was a bombardier over Europe.So what? Kerry at least had a shred
of honesty to admit it..


Let me try to construct a parallel between your experiences and mine,
so that we can possibly find a common ground to understand the
animosity I might feel.

You were a bombardier in B-26s over Europe. You went and fought and
stayed the course. You completed fifty missions.

Now, let's take someone in B-26s. Let's make it an aircraft
commander--not simply a crew-member, but a commander of the vehicle.
Let's say he had some minor injuries. Nothing serious. No
hospitalization, no lost limbs, no surgery. Just injuries. He opted
out of completing his tour. Lemme see, four months out of a one year
tour, so let's say he flew 17 missions out of the 50. Then he went
home. The rest of you on his crew slogged on without him.

But, when he got home, he didn't wear his decorations proudly and
support his brothers in arms still fighting the war that their nation
asked them to fight. He abandoned his uniform and spoke out against
the war. He went still further. He went to Congress, stood before the
US Senate and said that you and he had been guilty of war crimes. That
you had all committed atrocities. That you were rapists, baby-killers
and violators of the Geneva convention. Would he be exhibiting
"honesty to admit it"?

The German propaganda machine embraced his statements. Publicized them
and called him courageous. Would you? Would the other members of your
crew? Would you call him a hero?

Do you see a parallel here?

Meanwhile, your father, who fought valiantly for his country in WW I
(or the Spanish-American War) or whatever, began to speak out against
FDR. Accusing him of being a wealthy child of privilege who never wore
the uniform and dragged his country into WW II for his own benefit and
under false pretenses. That while Japan did attack us, the Germans did
no such thing and we were dragged into the conflict for no good
reason. Way too many were dying in Europe for the benefit of the
French who never liked us anyway. Besides, the war had dragged on much
too long and we ought to get rid of him.

Do you see a parallel here?


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

BUFDRVR July 13th 04 12:00 AM

NW_PILOT wrote:

They have already taken away 45% of our
arms


Who's "they"? Surely you're not claiming a Republican administration has
enacted laws to restrict gun ownership? I think you're confused.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Ed Rasimus July 13th 04 12:02 AM

On 12 Jul 2004 22:14:01 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

From: Ed Rasimus


snip


I initially learned to fly J-3 Cubs, PA-22 Colts and PA-18 Super Cubs
at my own expense. I can't afford to fly at my own expense today
because I married a nice women who wasn't the recipient of fortune.


"A nice women?" Ed, I smite thee with a tarver stick :)

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Well, other than the garbled grammar, it's true. The first one was
nice, but the second one is exceptional. Neither came with a fortune.
J.F. Kerry seems to have gone for the gold twice.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

BUFDRVR July 13th 04 12:07 AM

Ed Rasimus wrote:

Let me try to construct a parallel between your experiences and mine,
so that we can possibly find a common ground to understand the
animosity I might feel.

You were a bombardier in B-26s over Europe. You went and fought and
stayed the course. You completed fifty missions.

Now, let's take someone in B-26s. Let's make it an aircraft
commander--not simply a crew-member, but a commander of the vehicle.
Let's say he had some minor injuries. Nothing serious. No
hospitalization, no lost limbs, no surgery. Just injuries. He opted
out of completing his tour. Lemme see, four months out of a one year
tour, so let's say he flew 17 missions out of the 50. Then he went
home. The rest of you on his crew slogged on without him.

But, when he got home, he didn't wear his decorations proudly and
support his brothers in arms still fighting the war that their nation
asked them to fight. He abandoned his uniform and spoke out against
the war. He went still further. He went to Congress, stood before the
US Senate and said that you and he had been guilty of war crimes. That
you had all committed atrocities. That you were rapists, baby-killers
and violators of the Geneva convention. Would he be exhibiting
"honesty to admit it"?

The German propaganda machine embraced his statements. Publicized them
and called him courageous. Would you? Would the other members of your
crew? Would you call him a hero?

Do you see a parallel here?

Meanwhile, your father, who fought valiantly for his country in WW I
(or the Spanish-American War) or whatever, began to speak out against
FDR. Accusing him of being a wealthy child of privilege who never wore
the uniform and dragged his country into WW II for his own benefit and
under false pretenses. That while Japan did attack us, the Germans did
no such thing and we were dragged into the conflict for no good
reason. Way too many were dying in Europe for the benefit of the
French who never liked us anyway. Besides, the war had dragged on much
too long and we ought to get rid of him.

Do you see a parallel here?



Ed, that was awsome, but Kramer will just ignore it, he has to.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

WalterM140 July 13th 04 03:11 AM

What there is no hard evidence of is Bush being AWOL.


This documet shows conclusively that Bush performed no service for 16 months:

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif


Walt

Dave Holford July 13th 04 03:17 AM



Ed Rasimus wrote:

On 12 Jul 2004 22:09:50 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam
From: "D. Strang"

Date: 7/12/2004 2:52 PM Pacific Standard Time


Kerry was and is a true decorated war hero.

But he said he murdered innocent women and children.


So did I. I was a bombardier over Europe.So what? Kerry at least had a shred
of honesty to admit it..


Let me try to construct a parallel between your experiences and mine,
so that we can possibly find a common ground to understand the
animosity I might feel.

You were a bombardier in B-26s over Europe. You went and fought and
stayed the course. You completed fifty missions.

Now, let's take someone in B-26s. Let's make it an aircraft
commander--not simply a crew-member, but a commander of the vehicle.
Let's say he had some minor injuries. Nothing serious. No
hospitalization, no lost limbs, no surgery. Just injuries. He opted
out of completing his tour. Lemme see, four months out of a one year
tour, so let's say he flew 17 missions out of the 50. Then he went
home. The rest of you on his crew slogged on without him.

But, when he got home, he didn't wear his decorations proudly and
support his brothers in arms still fighting the war that their nation
asked them to fight. He abandoned his uniform and spoke out against
the war. He went still further. He went to Congress, stood before the
US Senate and said that you and he had been guilty of war crimes. That
you had all committed atrocities. That you were rapists, baby-killers
and violators of the Geneva convention. Would he be exhibiting
"honesty to admit it"?

The German propaganda machine embraced his statements. Publicized them
and called him courageous. Would you? Would the other members of your
crew? Would you call him a hero?

Do you see a parallel here?

Meanwhile, your father, who fought valiantly for his country in WW I
(or the Spanish-American War) or whatever, began to speak out against
FDR. Accusing him of being a wealthy child of privilege who never wore
the uniform and dragged his country into WW II for his own benefit and
under false pretenses. That while Japan did attack us, the Germans did
no such thing and we were dragged into the conflict for no good
reason. Way too many were dying in Europe for the benefit of the
French who never liked us anyway. Besides, the war had dragged on much
too long and we ought to get rid of him.

Do you see a parallel here?

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8




Thank you Ed.
That puts it in perspective and, who knows, might make a few people
think.

Dave

WalterM140 July 13th 04 03:21 AM

Have you ever seen more than one?

Senator Kerry has three.

http://awolbush.com/images/KerryDD214-box24.gif


Walt

Orval Fairbairn July 13th 04 03:35 AM

In article ,
kontiki wrote:

Very well stated Sir. I could distill it down to its simplest terms:

The Demos (lead by Kerry) are running towards socialism while the
Repubs (lead by Bush) are jogging towards the same ultimate destination.



Neal Boortz (boortz.com) put it succintly on one of his radio show one
day: Today's Democrats are where the Socialists were in 1960, while
today's Republicans are where the Democrats were in 1960. The
Libertatians are where the Republicans were in 1960.

Sam Byrams July 13th 04 04:09 AM


One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT and has not flown as PIC or SIC since.
Neither military or elsewise. (Not counting the ride out to the boat
of late.)


Well, your inclusion of the "if I understand" is the bailout clause
for spouting a lot of crap. Learning to fly in the military at
government expense is quite simply the best way to get the best
aviation training in the world. Qualifying after UPT in an operational
single-seat jet takes, on average another eight to ten months and then
becoming operationally ready takes another six months.

Whether one flies as PIC again after completion of military service is
totally irrelevant. I have not flown as PIC or in any level of control
of an aircraft since my retirement from active duty in 1987. Doesn't
mean crap.


He's certainly under no obligation to fly after his service
agreement, the point is _he didn't do that_. They got less than a year
and a half out of their half-million dollar investment (in 1972). And
tell me someone in his position with his quals would have got the deal
he got if his father hadn't been a war hero congressman. Apparently
his UPT performance should have put him in multi or helos: and
normally someone without specifically in demand attributes should have
had to go active duty to get UPT at that time anyway. Yes, that's as I
understand it and no, I wasn't there. I'm waiting for someone to prove
to me he could have got that commission and training slot with his
academics in the National Guard at that time if his name had been Joe
Bagodonuts. I was thirteen years old when he went to UPT, old enough
to remember public sentiment was rapidly turning against the war-and
bitterly so-even in Dogpatch USA.

As far as not being able to afford to fly-my neighbor drives a UPS
truck and he bought a Decathlon, cash, in February. He's trying to get
me to sign off on a top overhaul he wants to do, since I'm an A&P. I'm
not about to, and since I haven't used my ticket in fifteen years
(since I got it) it wouldn't be legal anyway. But in America the
middle class can fly if they want to.





Now, mind you, I don't like Bush or Kerry as a candidate. Bush was
born on third base and thinks he hit a triple. Kerry is also
apparently something of a rich kid, married Big Ketchup, Ivy League
(yecch), and to top it off is closely associated with a family I
detest and which makes my skin crawl for many reasons (not least of
which the same reason a certain baseball player hated them for every
day of the last 36 years of his life). I can tell you right now I'm
voting third party.


Voting third party is your privilege. But, you should note that the

government will continue despite your effective lack of participation.
Doesn't mean crap.


My Presidential vote isn't going to count anyway since my state is
not remotely up for grabs and it's a winner-take-all state.


But-be honest-is there any reason I should prefer Bush over Kerry
from an aviation standpoint? Bush, a nonpilot as far as I'm

concerned,
has done nothing for aviation in this country. Kerry isn't likely to
either, but how much worse could he be?


Voting from an "aviation standpoint" doesn't make any sense at all.

Voting from a principles, performance, and ideological standpoint
does. How much worse could he be? Gimme a break.

They both suck. If I voted on pure principle I couldn't even vote
Libertarian-although they're closer. Kerry might really screw things
up so bad people would have to pull their heads out and in the long
run, like a dope bust,it might be beneficial for an addict.



Dr. Joe Bagadonutz, the wealthy proctologist buys a Mustang or even

a
MiG-17 and successfully takes off and lands. He isn't, by any stretch
of the imagination, a fighter pilot. He isn't really, even that lesser
level, a pilot who flies fighters. He's simply an accident waiting to
happen.

He's equally likely to kill himself in a Bonanza for that matter.


And the civil warjet guys are killing
themselves at a rate that would have embarrassed the Air Force during
the glory days of "Every Man A Tiger".


Excuse me, but you obviously haven't read "Every Man A Tiger." It's

about Chuck Horner as the Air Component Commander of Desert Storm. The
lead-in chapters about Gen. Horner's early days flying F-105s in
Rolling Thunder are anything but glory days.

The phrase far predates that book. It was the grinder call in the 50s
era USAF and I can remember my uncle-who went through the air cadet
program in the 50s-talking about it. Hated the culture of USAF where
Fighter Pilots were gods-he was a C-133/C-130 pilot who dropped dead
six weeks after retiring from TWA at 60 as a four striper.(And a
Navion owner-I took my O&P on it,and he would have let me take my
instrument rating checkride in it too,but the glideslope died and he
left it that way.) Herbert Molloy Mason's book on early 70s era UPT
mentions it in passing, disparagingly, as having been replaced by
"Professionalism". Great T-38 photos. Made me really, really envy
Chuck Thornton (until I met the prick).

Ian MacLure July 13th 04 04:23 AM

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
nk.net:

"WalterM140" wrote in message
...

Of course if its discovered that any of those were self
inflicted as it is alleged that Baby Killer Kerry did...


Seriously now. Have you got even a shred of proof of that?


The following letter appeared in the USA Today "Letters" section on
June 25th last, page 8A:


[snip]

Manna from heaven so to speak.
Wunnerful ain't it.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source


Ian MacLure July 13th 04 04:36 AM

(Regnirps) wrote in
:

[snip]

sails when I joined the Navy, but I never knew Pershing.


But you may have known the grandson who was killed in Vietnam.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source


Steven P. McNicoll July 13th 04 04:41 AM


"WalterM140" wrote in message
...

This documet shows conclusively that Bush performed no service for
16 months:

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif


It does not show that he was AWOL.




Steven P. McNicoll July 13th 04 04:42 AM


"WalterM140" wrote in message
...

Senator Kerry has three.


Two of which he may have earned.



Regnirps July 13th 04 07:28 AM

(B2431) wrote:

The "embellishments" are REQUIRED. They are called "devices." If I were still
active duty an was not wearing the V on my bronze star or oakleaves on my
purple heart, good conduct, longevity etc, stars on my national defense and

SEA
sevice medal I would have been out of uniform.


Yes, the devices embellish the medal.

My grandfather received his in the mail in 1935. I guess he was out of uniform
for a looong time.

-- Charlie Springer


D. Strang July 13th 04 07:41 AM

"Regnirps" wrote

Yes, the devices embellish the medal.


Maybe, but the device (oak leaf, or star) represent an additional medal.

While it is true you only get one full size medal per customer, and the
rest are devices, you are only making a mountain out of a mole hill.



Bill Shatzer July 13th 04 07:47 AM

"Steven P. McNicoll" ) writes:

-snip-

Criticism of Kerry's Purple Heart is just


Retired U.S. army colonel David Hackworth defends presidential
candidate John Kerry's Purple Hearts. He correctly notes that they are
awarded for a wound that necessitates treatment by a medical officer and
that is received in action with an enemy ('The meaning of a Purple Heart,"
The Forum, June 16).


I was the commanding officer to whom Kerry reported his injury on Dec.
3, 1968. I had confirmed that there was no hostile fire that night and that
Kerry had simply wounded himself with an M-79 grenade round he fired too
close.


Basically crap, Steven. Army Regulations re the Purple Heart:

(b) Individuals wounded or killed as a result of
"friendly fire" in the "heat of battle" will be
awarded the Purple Heart as long as the "friendly"
projectile or agent was released with the full
intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy
troops or equipment.

I'd assume the Navy regulations are essentially similar.

In any case, if I recall correctly, it was freakin' -impossible-
to wound oneself by firing an M-79 round "too close".

An M-79 round had to travel a certain distance before arming itself
and that distance was greater than the "kill radius" of the round.

If one fired an M-79 round "too close", it would simply impact with
a thud and no "boom".

Presenting a possible problem for the ordinance disposal folks who
came along later but no particular problem for the firer.

Sheesh.
--


"Cave ab homine unius libri"

D. Strang July 13th 04 08:38 AM

"Bill Shatzer" wrote

In any case, if I recall correctly, it was freakin' -impossible-
to wound oneself by firing an M-79 round "too close".


According to his crew:

They were shooting at rocks along the shore, and he got hit by
a piece of shrapnel (a sliver). Lucky *******.

Pretty typical stuff, that killed a lot of troops who weren't so lucky.
I know four guys in two tours, who have their name on the wall, who
killed themselves doing stuff this stupid.



Cub Driver July 13th 04 10:12 AM


I've seen a lot of Westerns, and John Wayne war movies, and Platoon
is near the top, mainly for the script, and for the acting. It probably
has as much to do with Vietnam, as John Wayne's had to do about
D-Day or the Pacific.


But at least John Wayne never thought of himself as the Messiah. The
only image I carried away from Platoon is the guy with his arms
outstretched: oooh, look, daddy! Jesus on the Cross! What clever
symbolism! This much be a very deep movie!

My own Viet picks: We Were Soldiers, Go Tell the Spartans, and Full
Metal Jacket. The first is one of the great war movies, the second was
based on a book I wrote, and the third is a classic bang! bang! film.
I enjoyed each of them as much the second time around.

Hamburger Hill had its moments, but I sometimes forgot what war it was
supposed to be. I probably won't see it the second time.


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Cub Driver July 13th 04 10:29 AM


One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,
fourteen months after UPT


I'm glad you put in the qualification, because clearly you don't
understand. Bush learned to fly in a bit more than a year of full-time
service, 1968-69, was an active duty pilot until his unit transitioned
to a different aircraft in 1972, and fulfilled his military obligation
in every respect, serving six and one-half years in total, or somewhat
more than two years of active duty for training, as it is termed.
www.warbirdforum.com/bushf102.htm



all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Cub Driver July 13th 04 10:30 AM

On 12 Jul 2004 12:12:07 -0700, (Sam Byrams)
wrote:

One, Bush learned to fly in the military at government expense, did
not complete his assigned commitment, and flew, if I understand ,


No, you don't understand.

You don't even understand well enough not to repeat your posts. See my
answer to the earlier one. And now you get the old Control K.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:
(put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Cub Driver July 13th 04 10:32 AM

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:45:07 -0700, "NW_PILOT"
wrote:

If there is an election
this year I will be very surprised.


Oh yes, I forgot. The black helicopters will swoop in and take over
Washington. Is that before or after the draft is reinstated?

Control K!

(I find, interestingly enough, that kill-filing these people almost
always results in 1 message being deleted. Evidently they are fakes.
Take a look at steven's email address, for example.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

Cub Driver July 13th 04 10:40 AM

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 14:56:53 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

Qualifying after UPT in an operational
single-seat jet takes, on average another eight to ten months and then
becoming operationally ready takes another six months.


That seems to be about right in prexy's case. Bush was on full-time
duty ("active duty for training") from November 1968 to November 1969.
Back at Ellington, he remained on full-time duty until June 1970, when
he graduated from Combat Crew Training School. Altogether, about 21
months full-time service, after which he became a weekend warrior.

It's a bit sad that the left has to smear his service, which of course
few of them would admit was worth doing in any event! (Most of my
friends wouldn't go within spitting distance of a military man until
in desperation they signed on with the Wesley Clark campaign.
Suddenly, getting a hero was the most important qualifcation for a
Democratic primary.) Even the redoubtable Michael Moore hasn't
bothered to retread this tired old lie.

More at www.warbirdforum.com/bushf102.htm


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum
www.warbirdforum.com
The Piper Cub Forum www.pipercubforum.com
Viva Bush! weblog www.vivabush.org

WalterM140 July 13th 04 11:05 AM

Senator Kerry has three.


Two of which he may have earned.



Prove he didn't earn all three.

Walt

WalterM140 July 13th 04 11:07 AM

This documet shows conclusively that Bush performed no service for
16 months:

http://users.cis.net/coldfeet/doc10.gif


It does not show that he was AWOL.


No, you have to draw that inference yourself.

Walt

WalterM140 July 13th 04 11:08 AM

Kerry was and is a true decorated war hero.

Who by his own admission in sworn Senate testimony was personally
guilty of committing war crimes and atrocities as well as personally
observing them in his role as a commissioned officer yet not doing
anything to stop them.


Can you source some back up of that statement?

Walt

WalterM140 July 13th 04 11:10 AM

Vice [sic] President Bush is the issue, and the only issue.


Why isn't Kerry the issue?


Kerry's military records are complete. Bush's are not.

Walt




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AviationBanter.com