On Tue, 02 Mar 2004 19:19:33 -0600, CriticalMass wrote
in Message-Id: :

Larry,

For pete's sake (and all the rest of our sakes), give "Baby Bush" a rest
- HERE.

I wasn't aware that you had been elected spokesman for ALL of
rec.aviation.piloting. :-)

You've well established your anti-Bush political bias in this ng, and,
I imagine, in as many other places as you can. I'm tired of it.

Perhaps YOU would like to take _responsibility_ for the content of
this newsgroup to which YOU are exposed, and filter out all the
phrases and authors YOU find unpalatable. Or are you really just
looking for an excuse to attack me publicly.

I bet some others are, too. We don't come to this ng to hear about your hate
for "Baby Bush".

The only time the word 'hate' has been used in this thread (until now)
is by you. You can characterize my article as hateful if that is how
you perceive it, but the fact is, it's merely FACTUAL. The hate you
perceive is yours; please don't project it onto me.

Perhaps it is baby Bush's audacious airspace grabs that are TRULY
hateful in their arrogant disregard for those he serves.

The notice I posted is on-topic for this newsgroup. Thank you for not
taking exception to the content of my article, as it contains solely
the words of AOPA. The statement made in the article's Subject is
also valid.

To what is it specifically, that you object? Or are you even capable
of articulating your specific objection? Please provide a quote of
the text you find offending from the article that started this message
thread, or apologize.

Perhaps you can point out the modicum of _information_ you provided in
your followup article to which I am replying. I am completely unable
to find any on-topic information in it at all. It seems just an
immature, groundless, publicly taunting rant.

This isn't a political forum - get it? There ARE political forums. GO
THERE, when you want to bash "Baby Bush".

IF A POLITICIAN AFFECTS THE NAS, THAT'S ON TOPIC -- GET IT?

We come here to talk about aviation, not "Baby Bush, or any other
politician making news..

And you'll notice that the topic of my article is related to the
Presidential TFRs, not political news. Please explain how you feel
TFRs are not aviation related? :-)

It seems that it is you who wishes to raise the issue of the political
nature of this airspace grab. I was content to simply provide the TFR
information for any airmen who might be affected by it, but if you
insist on debating the political aspect, perhaps I can accommodate
you.

To address your specific bitch in this instance, "Baby Bush" is causing
no more inconvenience to GA with his travels and the resulting TFRs than
would any other individual in the same position.

Oh, now you're prescient! How thoughtful of you to share your gift.
:-)

Your complete lack of authority to make such a ridiculous, presumptive
statement about how another individual might act in the future reveals
your obvious lack of critical thinking on this issue. How can you
possibly know what will happen in the future? You don't.

Considering the precedent the President and his gang has now set, the
future is most likely to bring ever more and larger TFRs if the next
president is as uninformed as baby Bush is. Bush's question,
regarding why he wasn't landing at Meigs (shortly after its midnight
destruction) showed how unconcerned he is about GA. Perhaps a GA
pilot in the White House might mitigate such onerous offences against
the NAS.

Get over it.

I find it difficult to get over a Temporary Flight Restriction that
exceeds 3,000 square miles in area. Perhaps you don't have a problem
with it, but AOPA and I do. This huge TFR that surrounds the leader
of the free world is unreasonable, absurd, and an arrogant intrusion
on the rights of the public whom he serves.

Perhaps your prescience will provide an answer to the question, "will
political TFRs increase or decrease in size and number in the future?"
:-)

Cease and desist with your waste of ng bandwidth.

Your imperious attempt at groundless censorship, in this most
egalitarian of public forums, reveals your oppressive totalitarian
proclivity.