Iowa Aviation Weather...en Espanol

I guess you know more about it than the lawyers and "The Wall Street
Journal."

Now we're supposed to believe the lawyers? What did you *think* they
would say?

We fly to Marshalltown, Iowa (home of the Swift plant) a lot.
Everyone in Iowa knew that they have been hiring -- and, in fact,
recruiting -- illegals for years.

Whatever happens to Swift, they had coming -- times ten. They have
been gaming the system for a long time, and we -- the taxpayers --
have been paying for it, in the form of schools and social services.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

C J Campbell wrote:

But, if enough people complain about this horrible waste of money, then there
will be a Congressional investigation, which only costs about $20 million a
day...

Yeah... sigh I guess you're right... lets just all hand over our
paychecks to Hillary since she's gonna get it all anyway.

I guess government really does know best... sigh

So, I guess the question then becomes, just how far do you think people
should go in trying to micro-manage the Weather Service? I have no doubt that
people still call them up to complain about the weather.


Oh, don't worry... now that 'global warming' has been declared the most
threating thing man has ever encountered on this planet in all history
(Al Gore inveted history) government will be micro-managing things for a
long time to come.

On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 16:09:38 -0800, kontiki wrote
(in article ):

C J Campbell wrote:

But, if enough people complain about this horrible waste of money, then
there
will be a Congressional investigation, which only costs about $20 million a
day...

Yeah... sigh I guess you're right... lets just all hand over our
paychecks to Hillary since she's gonna get it all anyway.

I guess government really does know best... sigh

So, I guess the question then becomes, just how far do you think people
should go in trying to micro-manage the Weather Service? I have no doubt
that
people still call them up to complain about the weather.


Oh, don't worry... now that 'global warming' has been declared the most
threating thing man has ever encountered on this planet in all history
(Al Gore inveted history) government will be micro-managing things for a
long time to come.


That's the spirit!

If you are not depressed it is probably because you don't understand the
situation. :-)

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

In article .com,
"Jay Honeck" wrote:

So what *do* you mean by "foreign language"?

My apologies. You have gone to extreme lengths to explain your
ignorance of the situation, thanks. I didn't realize that the concept
of a "foreign language" needed to be defined, but here goes:

Well, one of use is surely unclear on the definition...

A "foreign language" in the context of the United States of America
(and in the context of this discussion) is a language that is not
spoken by the majority of people since the country's inception.

So after all this you really *do* just mean "non-majority" language when
you say "foreign language". OK...


Since every major founding document, every major newspaper, and (to
bring this discussion into the 21st century) every major American
website was/is published in English, we consider every language other
than English to be "foreign".

This would be the royal "we", right? Or do you presume to speak for all
America, Federal Government included (the US government doesn't, as it
happens, agree with your definition of "foreign language", but never
mind, I'm sure it's the thought that counts, right? Rigour never matters
when language is involved, right?).

(And the idea that "every major American website was / is published in
English" is funnier than you'll ever know, for reasons I'm guessing
you'll never know (let's just say I'm in the biz...). Or are we
encountering a "no true Scotsman" argument from you here?)

For further clarification, please refer to the definition of the word
"foreign", available in any of the free on-line dictionaries.

I have. I even -- twice -- quoted you the definition of "foreign
language" from one of your "free on-line dictionaries". Since you don't
agree with your own sources, this isn't aimed at you, but if anyone's
still playing along out there, a good place to start calling Jay's bluff
is http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/foreign.


Your example of such indigenous languages as Lakota and Spanish are
not relevant to this discussion, as they pre-date the creation of the
United States. They were never considered to be official languages of
the United States, and may therefore be defined as "foreign", both in
fact and in the context of this discussion.

English predates the official creation of the United States, too, oddly
enough. Can you tell me what *the* official language(s) of the United
States is (are) "in fact"? Where is it defined as official? Can you tell
me in which significant part of this country Spanish is the official
language? Is English a foreign language there?

Anyway, I hereby give up. If you want to call the native languages of a
country "foreign" languages in the countries of their origin, that's OK,
just expect to be badly misunderstood in the world beyond the flyover
states (unless, of course, you're using "foreign" as one of those dog
whistle words...). I don't expect you to care one way or another what
the wider population of the United States thinks (in fact something
tells me you'd be proud of the fact that they disagree), but your basic
ignorance of that wider United States rubs someone like me -- a fiscal
conservative who might otherwise bristle at the idea of spending *my*
tax dollars on unnecessary weather products -- very much the wrong way.

Over and out.

Hamish

English predates the official creation of the United States, too, oddly
enough. Can you tell me what *the* official language(s) of the United
States is (are) "in fact"? Where is it defined as official? Can you tell
me in which significant part of this country Spanish is the official
language? Is English a foreign language there?

It is indeed rare to find someone who is both eloquent and ignorantly
obstinate -- but you seem to fill both bills.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone work so hard to try to disprove
the well-accepted (for 225 years!) fact that English is the de facto
"official language" of the United States. The reason it has never
been put in writing is because its predominance was so painfully
obvious to all concerned that codifying it seemed unnecessary.

That situation has recently changed, with the rise of misguided souls
who seem to believe that it is the U.S. taxpayer's sworn duty to
translate every official document and website into every language
(AKA: "foreign" ones), rather than raising the bar the *tiny* amount
it would take to require English language skills of our citizens.
Your moral relativism with regard to this issue provides the perfect
explanation for the growing movement to have English declared the
"official language" in so many U.S. states today.

But believe what you wish. Just don't try living and working in the
vast majority of America without learning English, or you will learn
what economic marginalization is all about.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
That situation has recently changed, with the rise of misguided souls
who seem to believe that it is the U.S. taxpayer's sworn duty to
translate every official document and website into every language
(AKA: "foreign" ones), rather than raising the bar the *tiny* amount
it would take to require English language skills of our citizens.
Your moral relativism with regard to this issue provides the perfect
explanation for the growing movement to have English declared the
"official language" in so many U.S. states today.


Well stated Jay. It is exactly this new 'relativism'... this new
striving to be politically CORRECT to the extreme that that is slowly
but inexorably taking apart the integrity of this country fiber by
fiber. This mis-guided hell bent attempt to get the rest of the world to
like us is really netting less and less respect.

But who cares, its more important to be 'stroked' by the media than
actually stand for anything.

C J Campbell wrote:

If you are not depressed it is probably because you don't understand the
situation. :-)


Why should I try to understand? My government will make the right
decisions for me.

It may be good for business, but in the long term it is not good for societal cohesion. This country struggles harder every year to find things to bind together its many factions... a pretty much impossible task.

It wouldn't be impossible if all of us were the same... followed the
same religion, had the same values, and spoke the same language. But
that's not what freedom is about, is it? It is not =necessary= to be
different in order to be free, but it has to be possible.

That doesn't mean that the government should pick up the tab for every
whim. However, the government is there to serve =us=. =All= of us.
That's what we pay taxes for in the first place.

As pilots, we expect accomodation (by the government) for our pastime.
We make noise about how it is an economic benefit for the rest of the
country that GA is supported and unimpeded, and it may well be true.
Much benefit is under the radar. But that's sort of besides the point.
There are many things I do =not= do, that my taxes go to support. I
do not have children, for example, but my taxes support the education
and entertainment of other people's children. I accept that as the
nature of things, as the government is not here =just= for me.

There are many people for whom a Spanish language version of the
government supported weather operation =is= a service. There are
probably many more such people than there are pilots. It is probably
dirt cheap to provide this service, and I certainly do not begrudge it
to them.

Were we to advocate hacking away at non-mainstream services, we may well
find ourselves without airspace to fly in, so that the leaf blower
brigade doesn't have to listen to the occasional 172 overhead.

Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Jose wrote:

It wouldn't be impossible if all of us were the same... followed the
same religion, had the same values, and spoke the same language. But
that's not what freedom is about, is it? It is not =necessary= to be
different in order to be free, but it has to be possible.

Well there ya go... the word 'freedom'. If in fact we actually had real
freedom in the countyr and LESS government regulation, micromanaging
and forcing rules of so called 'fairness' and political correctness
down our throats then the natural course of freedom WOULD bind us closer.

But that is not what happens... politicians play one socio-conomic
group against another, one income strata against another (remeber the
"two Americas" John Edwards is always talking about?). If you don't
recognize this as a problem you are part of it.

That doesn't mean that the government should pick up the tab for every
whim. However, the government is there to serve =us=. =All= of us.
That's what we pay taxes for in the first place.


The word sir is freedom... freedom from government trying to "serve" us.
The job of government is not to "serve" us.. its job is to provide
national security so that our citizens can thrive using their own hard
work and get to keep as much of their OWN money as possible. Thats it.

As pilots, we expect accomodation (by the government) for our pastime.

Why should I have to have a government "accomodate" my pastime?

We make noise about how it is an economic benefit for the rest of the
country that GA is supported and unimpeded, and it may well be true.
Much benefit is under the radar. But that's sort of besides the point.
There are many things I do =not= do, that my taxes go to support. I do
not have children, for example, but my taxes support the education and
entertainment of other people's children. I accept that as the nature
of things, as the government is not here =just= for me.

Maybe you accept the fact that your taxes should support the education
and 'entertainment' of other people's children but I don't. It is the
responsibility of the parents... a concept that requires self reliance
and belief in the concept of personal responsibility. Publically
requiring people to accept personal responsibility is politically
IN-correct today and you know it.

There are many people for whom a Spanish language version of the
government supported weather operation =is= a service. There are
probably many more such people than there are pilots. It is probably
dirt cheap to provide this service, and I certainly do not begrudge it
to them.

Sure and I'm sure you can find all kinds of people that would LOVE
to have to government (AKA other taxpayers) provide for and support
additional services that benefit them. But that is not real freedom.

Benjamin Franklin stated that "those willing to trade some freedom
for the promise of security deserve neither freedom nor security".

Were we to advocate hacking away at non-mainstream services, we may well
find ourselves without airspace to fly in, so that the leaf blower
brigade doesn't have to listen to the occasional 172 overhead.


You are just wrong Jose... the more responsibilities for so called
"mainstream services" you want to hand over to the government
simply translates into less freedoms you as an individual will have
to chart your own destiny.

"Those willing to trade freedom for the promise of security deserve
neither freedom nor security".

Benjamin Franklin stated that "those willing to trade some freedom
for the promise of security deserve neither freedom nor security".

1: I wasn't talking about security.

2: The quote does not really refer to government excess, which is what
we are discussing. It refers to the impossibility of providing security
without sacrificing so much freedom it's too much.

3: You said, in the same post:

The job of government is not to "serve" us.. its job is to provide
national security so that our citizens can thrive...

So, maybe =you= should read Franklin's quote.

Maybe you accept the fact that your taxes should support the education
and 'entertainment' of other people's children but I don't. It is the
responsibility of the parents...

Well, yes. But it is important to me that future voters, who =will=
decide the future of this country, be educated. You may not like the
state of public schools here, but there are quite a few parents who
would choose not to educate their children were it to cost them. Some
can't afford it, some don't see the value of education, and some want or
need helping hands at home. All of those children will vote one day.

There are some things that are tailor-made for government - among them
law enforcement and national defense. There are other things for which
government is a reasonable venue. Pure scientific research is such a
thing. It helps make our nation strong, even if there are no economic
benefits (which would attract the profit sector), because it makes this
country attractive to brainpower. Then, there are the ancillary things.
It makes little sense =not= to spend a little extra tax money to take
services that the government needs for its own uses and make them
available to the public who paid for them. Weather forecasting is such
a thing. And making that forecast available in the language of a
significant segment of the populace is (IMHO) included in this.

Yes, one must be alert for bloat and corruption. But this is not where
it is.

Jose
--
Humans are pack animals. Above all things, they have a deep need to
follow something, be it a leader, a creed, or a mob. Whosoever fully
understands this holds the world in his hands.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.