Friday, February 09, 2007

The Plane Truth
Nancy Pelosi and her Plane

There are some blogs to which you turn to find breaking news. This is not one of them....like you, dear reader, I learn about the news, sometimes as it happens, but more often after it has been happening for a while.
Therefore, I missed the little story of The Speaker's Jet Plane as it unfolded yesterday.

But oh, what fun it is!

Really, the whole thing is a merry little game of "Hypocrite, Hypocrite, Who Is the Hypocrite".

Here's what happened, at least, here is what happened according to the AP story:

Yesterday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi went before the House Science committee to testify about the need to take action on Global Warming. (I think now that Democrats are back in Congress, it is legal again to refer to it as "Global Warming" rather than "Climate Change" - which is the term Republicans prefer... I personally like the term "Malignant Climate Change" ... but I digress.)

The Irony was just tooooooo delicious to pass up for the embittered losers (whoops, I'm not sure that came out right...I meant the Republicans) on the other side of the aisle.

You see, THEY had just noted that a request had been made that the Speaker of the U.S. House (that's Pelosi) be granted access to a much bigger (or, as Bernie Sanders might put it: "A [h ]'Uuuge ") plane.

The AP actually uses the term "swanky" to describe the aircraft.

The AP quotes Rep. Patrick McHenry, Republican of North Carolina: "The jet that Pelosi has produces 10,000 pounds of carbon dioxide an hour, far more than the previous speaker used," (This puts good old Former Speaker Dennis "Don't-think-about-what-he-is-doing-to-that-boy-or-what-Jack-Abramoff-is-doing-to-the-taxpayer-and-maybe-it-will-all-just-go-away" Hastert in the highly unusual position of FRIEND to the ENVIRONMENT...but I digress...again.)

So there was Nancy, forced to defend herself from the charge of Hypocrisy..."By commandeering a huge government plane for her personal transport to California, this is totally contradictory to the alarm bells we heard her ringing in the Science Committee just a few hours ago," Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. was quoted in the AP story.

" I have never asked for any larger plane," was the substance of the Speaker's argument, "I have said that I am happy to ride commercial if the plane they have doesn't go coast to coast."

....No, I requested the plane...quoth House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood (if you read this line in your best Dudley Dooright voice, this story starts to get EVEN funnier.) It was a matter of SECURITY! The only problem with taking that one at face value is that the Sergeant At Arms is elected by the members of Congress (and with a Democratic majority lead by Speaker Pelosi...well, you do the math. Of course, as a loyal Democrat, I am suggesting NOTHING! Still, it is just possible that Livingood request the plane because...well, you're a grownup, you figure it out.)

And this is where it gets really good-- because once the SECURITY card got played the cavalry rode over the Hill (so to speak) to rescue the "San Francisco Liberal" Speaker from the clutches of the nasty Republicans. And who was this masked hero...it was...now hold your breath....none other than....drum roll, please......


White House Spokesman. Yes, that White House, the George W. Bush White house...because, while fun is fun and all, when those nasty little Republican congressmen criticize the speaker on the question of SECURITY...that's when somebody looses an eye. You see, if you question the Speaker's SECURITY (she is, after all, second in line for the Presidency after Dick Cheney) then you question the validity of the WAR ON TERROR, and, if you assert that there is not that much need for SECURITY for the Speaker, then you begin to see that the people might start to wonder about the WAR ON TERROR and that would be BAD...because of course, if we don't have a WAR....then we can't have a WAR PRESIDENT....

and that's why the White House came to the rescue of Nancy Pelosi.....

Isn't that a good story?



No comments: