Bush Flew Fighter Jets During Vietnam

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.

"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.

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

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.

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.

"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. :-)

"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.

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

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

"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.