Seeing as how the Democrat Party is so focused on the environment, I have only one question:

Do they have any of those that run on Bio Diesel?  Or Ethanol?

Or better yet, some form of alternative fuel that is none Co2 producing.

I am sure out of principle she will turn it down otherwise….

 MORE

Apparently this is heating up into a he said she said.

The story I humourously lampooned started with a Washington Times report:

The office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pressing the Bush administration for routine access to military aircraft for domestic flights, such as trips back to her San Francisco district, according to sources familiar with the discussions.

The sources, who include those in Congress and in the administration, said the Democrat is seeking regular military flights not only for herself and her staff, but also for relatives and for other members of the California delegation. A knowledgeable source called the request "carte blanche for an aircraft any time."

It fairly notes that the former Speaker had similar access:

Mrs. Pelosi’s request is not new for a speaker, who is second-in-line in presidential succession. A defense source said the speaker’s regular access to a military plane began after the September 11, 2001, attacks. Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, Illinois Republican, who was speaker at the time, started using U.S. Air Force planes for domestic travel to and from his district for security reasons.

But it notes a distinction: 

A former Hastert aide said the congressman did not use military planes for political trips or regularly transport his family.

The defense source said Mr. Hastert requested a plane with good communications so he could conduct legislative business. The military flights increased to the point the speaker used a military plane for many, if not all, flights to his Illinois district, the former aide said.

Sources said Mrs. Pelosi’s request goes beyond what Mr. Hastert received. The speaker’s legal counsel is spearheading the talks.

Leaping to her defense is Think Progress, who claimed:

The House Sergeant at Arms, not Pelosi, initiated inquiries into the use of military aircraft.

and…

A larger plane was requested because Hastert’s plane required refueling to travel cross-country

Dan Riehl tries to make sense out of the dispute:

First, they claim that the request came from the House Sergeant at Arms and not Pelosi. That’s a bit of a laugher. There is nothing unusual about such formality. They then go on to state that the request was only due to a need for an airplane which wouldn’t require refueling to make the coast to coast flight.

…

That’s fine, and may be part of the rationale. However the catch is at the end of the statement TP uses to support their false claim. It actual prevents them from proving anything and actually looks to be more supportive of the WaTimes than TP.

Also fo note, Outside the Beltway has reported her request was granted:

Now, Rachel Van Dongen of Roll Call has learned that the Defense Department has acceded to this request. John Byrne at Raw Story provides excerpts from the subscriber-only story.

A Bush administration official and a senior Hill Republican said that Pelosi’s requests were causing serious friction in the Pentagon, which views them as a strain on a system that is charged with providing military transport for Cabinet officials and top generals and commanders. A permanent large plane for Pelosi, the Hill Republican said, would mean less availability for other high-ranking officials.

“The Department of Defense offered Speaker Pelosi the same aircraft” as the one used by Hastert, said one senior Republican who has spoken extensively with Defense Department officials about Pelosi’s requests. “She found it was not big enough for staff, supporters and other Members.”

It strikes me as quite odd indeed that the Speaker, let alone her “supporters,” would be entitled to transportation in military aircraft. Apparently, this is just another way in which 9/11 “changed everything.” From Scarborough’s piece:

The rules for congressional travel on military aircraft are contained in Defense Department Directive 4515.12. Congressional access to military passenger jets is generally restricted to official trips abroad, or for domestic flights to military bases or events to which the Pentagon invited the lawmaker. Al Qaeda attacks on the U.S. changed the procedure in the case of the speaker.

U.S. Air Force travel for VIPs such as members of Congress is first-rate. The planes are staffed with stewards who serve meals and tend an open bar. Communications suites allow members to conduct business while traveling.

Such flights are one of Congress’ cherished perquisites, providing lawmakers a chance to visit foreign lands at government expense. Official duties are often mixed with sightseeing and fine dining. But trips to war zones are not junkets. Since the September 11 attacks, the Air Force has flown hundreds of congressional delegations, or “co-dels,” to various war theaters. Mrs. Pelosi just completed a fact-finding trip to Afghanistan and Iraq.

David Phinney keeps a good perspective on it:

Stay tuned:.

#1. Will Nancy fly economy or business class on the taxpayer dime?
#2. Will she go military with all the cool technology, catered meals and full bar on an even bigger taxpayer dime?
#3. Does the Speaker really need Air Force Three?
#4. How about just tossing her an iPhone for her communications needs instead of keys to a C-17?….
#5. Ultimately, some thoughtful reflection may be called for among all of us: This situation may lift the notion of "limosine liberal" to a whole new level.

We live in interesting times…. The possibilities for exploiting this are ripe with promise for everyone’s amusement.

I am still waiting to find out if it burns Bio Diesel.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS