Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

UAL does a Lorenzo tactic

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Good call, enigma.

An example of this is the recent statement by mccain (jerk) agreeing to pull baseball style arbitration from consideration.
FDJ, that's great news! Am I missing something? When did this happen?
 
It has not been widely reported, but it seems to be true. I saw it in a memo from (I believe) the UPS union, and members of our mec have confirmed it. I also spoke to another pilot who called his senator's office, and they agreed that the bill pulled from the floor. They did not, however, say that this was a permanent developement. Perhaps that is why ALPA has not publicized it more.

I hope that the above information is true, I will admit it sounds a little "he said, she said." I will post again when I find out more.

In the meantime, we ALL need to continue to contribute to the PAC. I am the most conservative guy around, and I vote that way. However, I have no problem supporting specific issues which benefit my career. That's what the PAC is for.

BACK the PAC!!!


P.S.
Read "The Savage Nation" by Michael Savage. All this political talk reminded me. It was great.
 
I'm glad we finally have a president that is willing to fight for what is right, rather than running off with his tail between his legs. What would clinton be doing if he was president right now??? Same thing he did after the embassy bombings, same thing he did after the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole.......NOTHING! If you don't like it then tough....it's the truth.
It's just my honest opinion.
 
From Trainerjet:
George W. Bush Richard Cheney Republican 50,459,624 47.87% 271 50.4%
Albert Gore Jr. Joseph Lieberman Democrat 51,003,238 48.38% 266 49.4%
Ralph Nader Winona LaDuke Green 2,882,985 2.74% 0 0.0%
Patrick Buchanan Ezola Foster Reform 449,120 0.43% 0 0.0%
Harry Browne Art Olivier Libertarian 384,440 0.36% 0 0.0%
Other - - 232,922 0.22% 1* 0.2%


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by 20sx
And don't forget, the majority of the population DIDN'T vote for George Jr.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Which means exactly what? Maybe you could tell us who the majority of the population DID vote for




By your OWN numbers you show who had the majority (use whatever definition of majority you want)! This is not a slam....are you a moron? Truly, do you have a thinking problem. Bush--47.8% Gore--48.3%. Not huge, but a majority. That is all I ever said, nothing more, nothing less. And yes, I understand the electoral process, even if I don't agree with it.






The FACT is, we don't know who won the popular vote. Here's another fact for you. We don't need to know who won the popular vote because we don't elect our leader with the popular vote. Bush won the electoral college, therefore he is the properly elected President of these United States!

More about the final popular vote. Do you realize that millions of votes go uncounted every presidential election? It varies state by state, but most states never even count the absentee ballots unless they are needed to decide the election FOR THAT STATE. Simply put, they stop counting once one candidate has a victory margin larger than the remaining number of ballots. So the truth is: we really don't know who won the popular election. If I had to guess, I'd say that Bush recieved the majority, because of the historical trend where the military absentees vote republican. Plus, he won more states. I would suggest that some of you start to think for yourselves instead of repeating what Dan Rather has to say.

8N


Once again, I understand the electoral process. How is it you can start off saying that they don't count all the votes from all the states and then assume that the ones that aren't counted lean towards Bush? For me, I look at published numbers, not just assumptions. I can assume I have the winning numbers to the lotto but it doesn't make it so.

Honestly people, there is nothing wrong with different opinions in America, its what makes this a great country. Some like Bush, others don't. When I face a furlough because Bush is more interested in revenge instead of our economy, then I get mad. If he could really link Iraq to terrorism then it would justify this war. I would think North Korea is more deserving of this than Iraq.

And now, let the dissing begin......
 
Without getting into a political discussion, 20sx asked for a link from saddam to terrorism.

He gives $40,000 to the family of each palastinian homicide bomber. That is a link to terrorism, and we should be committed to rooting out terrorists wherever they hide. I only hope that Iraq is not our last stop.

I don't want my children to grow up in a color-coded threat world. The time to end this crap is now. First Afghanistan, then Iraq, then a few more stops before coming home.

There is a group of people out there who have declared war on us. They will stop at nothing to kill us, because they have been taught their whole lives to do so. We know who they are, we know where they are, and we must end their threat, or risk spending the rest of our lives in fear of the next attack. I don't want to live like they do in Israel.

We didn't start the war, but we will finish it.


Sorry. This wasn't supposed to be this long.
 
I thin what he is stating is that while Al Gore led in the popular vote, since nobody received more than 50% of the vote, nobody received a majority of the votes.
 
I'll buy that 46Driver. Thinks for not slamming me in the process.

And yes DeltaJets, that's a good point. Question, where does it stop? Saudia Arabia has a much greater link to 9/11 than Iraq. When do we take them out? How about North Korea, they've made many threats to us in the last couple of months.

I agree, stop terrorism. No problem with that. But the original point of going into Iraq was to get rid of mass destruction warfare. Then it changed a couple of times to regime change. In the end someone new will takeover who is just the same as the old. And the weapons will still be there.
 
46Driver,

Yep..that's what I was saying. That's the definition of majority I was using. I guess 20sx is using a different definitiion to suit his argument, which is his prerogative.

I guess if anyone (you, I ...whomever) chooses not to use his definition, we are a moron with a thinking problem.

Whatever:rolleyes:

I'm out.
 
To answer your question 20sx, I hope we do some housecleaning in Saudi Arabia as well. On the other hand, I do not view North Korea as being as much of a threat. Perhaps I am wrong, but like the USSR, I think that the MAD theory can maintain peace where they are concerned. Peace through strength works with some people, and it doesn't work with others.

To get a better idea of the people against whom diplomacy does not work, I suggest reading the book "The Sword of the Prophet" by Serge Trifkivoc. It is illuminating. As is "Islam Unveiled" by Robert Spencer.

War has long ago been declared on us. Unfortunately, most people in this country are too politically correct to say it. One would think that 9/11 would have awakened them, but apparently, it did not.

(the above was not an indictment of you personally, but of many of our political leaders and media elite)
 
It's easy...if you're a republican at heart but a democrat at your job...vote Libertarian.

If you don't vote Libertarian, you're practically a commie anyways. Gotta love Joseph.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top