Angry

Peter Duniho wrote:

Save the anger for things that
matter (like politicians who break the law, lie about it until they are
exposed, and then claim that they don't have to obey the law).

Give it a rest. Clinton has been out of office for years, now.

"Peter R." wrote

I see your point, but to me every preventable (no, not the sit on your
couch or fly comparison here - I mean poor decision making) GA airplane
accident that kills especially children is yet another black mark against
"those small planes."

So what if it was a mechanical problem, with an airplane that was well
maintained, well equipped, with a pilot that was well qualified to fly in
weather like the crash weather? What is the response then? Who is there to
get angry at, or to react towards?
--
Jim in NC

"cjcampbell" wrote in message
oups.com...

Peter Duniho wrote:

Save the anger for things that
matter (like politicians who break the law, lie about it until they are
exposed, and then claim that they don't have to obey the law).

Give it a rest. Clinton has been out of office for years, now.

Yea but the other Clinton is still on the prowl. God help us.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
If you think the election was rigged

Why can't you be bothered to read the posts to which you reply? Nowhere did
I say that I "think the election was rigged". This is, in fact, the second
time I've had to try to explain to you otherwise.

[...] If you choose to
believe Republicans vote out of stupidity, you've lost that vote.

Frankly, I did think it was a good sign that a sitting President *barely*
got reelected. Incumbents usually do better. Nevertheless, it's clear from
talking to all sorts of people that most people have decided a long time ago
which party they will vote for, and it really doesn't matter what the people
they are voting for have done or will do.

The vast majority of everyone votes out of stupidity. Republicans aren't
any less guilty of this than other folks.

Republicans, on the other hand, DO know why people vote liberal.
Liberals want the gov't to take responsibility of taking care of
everyone.

Uh huh. Those Republicans are all over the whole Conservative thing. Odd
thing, "Conservative" used to be all about things like maintaining a
balanced budget and keeping the government out of private lives. Somehow,
that got twisted around to mean spending your kid's money and imposing your
confused interpretation of the Christian Bible on everyone else.

Pete

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
The last attempt resulted in Clinton's impeachment, but you must be
referring to Nixon's burglary of Democratic headquarters.

No, I mean the Clinton impeachment attempt. How people can get so worked up
over a blowjob, and yet turn a blind eye to repeatededly lying as part of
one's actual JOB, is beyond me. It is the height of hypocrisy.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Peter R." wrote

I see your point, but to me every preventable (no, not the sit on your
couch or fly comparison here - I mean poor decision making) GA airplane
accident that kills especially children is yet another black mark
against
"those small planes."

So what if it was a mechanical problem, with an airplane that was well
maintained, well equipped, with a pilot that was well qualified to fly in
weather like the crash weather? What is the response then? Who is there
to
get angry at, or to react towards?

The news was quoting relatives as saying he recently got his license, and it
was raining when he departed. The details will start to be clearer and more
accurate over the next few days.

Uh huh. Those Republicans are all over the whole Conservative thing. Odd
thing, "Conservative" used to be all about things like maintaining a
balanced budget and keeping the government out of private lives. Somehow,
that got twisted around to mean spending your kid's money and imposing
your confused interpretation of the Christian Bible on everyone else.

Ohmigod. I find myself in complete agreement with Pete Duniho on a
political point.

Surely the world must be ending!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Peter Duniho" wrote

No, I mean the Clinton impeachment attempt.

You should take a civics class again; the one you must have slept through.

Clinton WAS impeached.
--
Jim in NC

Robert M. Gary wrote:

I've flown with my wife and two kids at night in IMC many,
many times. I certainly don't consider it stupid or dangerous.
I wonder if he had engine problems.

and

...emotional civilians...think SE planes are intrinsicly [sic]
dangerous and can't believe anyone would actually fly one of those
machines at night or in the clouds. Maybe Hilton needs to stick with
riding in the back of 737s.

We "emotional civilians" aren't all civilians, nor are we unaware of the
realities of night and/or IMC conditions, whether S/E or M/E. Maybe
someone who flys his "wife and two kids at night in IMC many, many
times" would do well to "wonder [what] if he had engine problems", and
"stick with riding in the back of 737s," himself.

S/E at night in IMC _is_ dangerous. Whether or not it's also stupid
depends on your reasons for doing so, how well prepared you are, and
your doing all you can to avoid unnecessary risk. Unfortunately, wives
rarely -- and children never -- are able to measure for themselves the
risks they face and the capability of hero-Dad and his airplane, and
then make their own informed decisions. Erring on the safe side rather
than pumping up his own ego is Dad's obligation.


Good luck,

Jack

Morgans wrote:

Q. So what if it was a mechanical problem, with an airplane that was well
maintained, well equipped, with a pilot that was well qualified to
fly in
weather like the crash weather? Who is there to get angry at...?

A. The person who risked everything in his world for an insignificant
payoff, in a game widely understood to be especially designed to
snare the arrogant fool.

If he had lost the house and the car in Vegas, we'd be all for shuffling
him off to a 12-steps program for gamblers. But since attempted the same
thing that some of us do, we just convince ourselves that it was an act
of God, or use some other mechanism for diverting attention from
ourselves and our own foolishness.

The question to ask is not, "what are the odds of something going
wrong?, but, "what are the odds of things turning out well when it does
go wrong?" And it will go wrong. That kind of thinking is the difference
between the "civilians" and those who intend to do the thing, and keep
doing it, for 30 or 40 or 50 years. It's always a matter of "when?",
not, "if?" Things are equally likely to go to hell on your 10th flight
as on your 10,000th.

Just about every year, some fool puts his Piper or Cessna into Lake
Michigan, or even little Lake Erie, because they can't be bothered to
take a longer route or, at the very least, to climb high enough to
ensure a safe emergency landing "feet dry". Some of them even do it at
night in the winter. It's easy to say they deserve what they get, but
their passengers, and the families left behind, do not.


Jack