PILOT SPIN

Well, what do you know?  Libertarians and Republicans unite on some thing. Maybe there’s hope.


https://conventionofstates.com/news/republicans-libertarians-unite-in-supporting-convention-of-states-south-carolina?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=link&utm_content=text1&utm_campaign=

I don't see it that way.  It is logical to choose the most viable solution. Choosing a desperate act over certain death certainly sounds logical to me.

KIRK: Mister Spock.
SPOCK: Captain.
KIRK: There's really something I don't understand about all of this. Maybe you can explain it to me. Logically, of course. When you jettisoned the fuel and ignited it, you knew there was virtually no chance of it being seen, yet you did it anyhow. That would seem to me to be an act of desperation.
SPOCK: Quite correct, Captain.
KIRK: Now we all know, and I'm sure the doctor will agree with me, that desperation is a highly emotional state of mind. How does your well-known logic explain that?
SPOCK: Quite simply, Captain. I examined the problem from all angles, and it was plainly hopeless. Logic informed me that under the circumstances, the only possible action would have to be one of desperation. Logical decision, logically arrived at.
KIRK: I see. You mean you reasoned that it was time for an emotional outburst.
SPOCK: Well, I wouldn't put it in exactly those terms, Captain, but those are essentially the facts.
KIRK: You're not going to admit that for the first time in your life, you committed a purely human emotional act?
SPOCK: No, sir.
KIRK: Mister Spock, you're a stubborn man.
SPOCK: Yes, sir.

Relax, you're among friends.  I agree with a lot of what you say, but also think Stan made some good points.  I totally agree the Republicans are just big spending, big government Democrat LITE.  Even Trump who I support signed the last two record breaking budgets.  But what is he going to do?  If he doesn't the Media and Dems scream he shut down the government and welfare mom's can't feed their children which is a lie, but......

Hope I wasn't coming off as "worked up", lol.  I get that this site can sometimes turn into a Republican echo-chamber just due to the demographics.  I'm just trying to espouse an opinion that it's useful to be a bit more objective about how we view other political parties.  Blaming Libertarians for a Republican loss essentially says that the R-party wasn't strong enough to win on its own.  When your party sees fit to have a crappy candidate in the race, you reap what you sow.  Can't blame Libertarians for siphoning votes away because the other candidates were seen as the "lesser evil".  As far as Trump and the budgets, he could at least start pretending like he gives a crap about the spending problem.  Obviously we all (should) know that the President doesn't make the budget decisions anyway, but at least coming forward with a plan would be prudent.  Like you said, showing any cuts to military or social services will just send the media into a frenzy about how he's abandoning our allies or our at-risk families.  Every President before him has dealt with the same thing when faced with budget cuts, but Trump will likely deal with a bit more vitriol than past Presidents no doubt (not that he didn't bring most of it on himself).

Please remember that. (That goes to everyone; not just Sooner ...).

It may be true that Rs are a lot like D lite, but when it comes to socialization, I prefer "lite" to "heavy".  And Yes, I will vote for almost any pol with an R beside their name over almost any pol with a D beside their name because voting for Ds to take over the country is voting for the ruination of our country.  Not that some of them don't have good ideas, but they vote as a block for things I despise.

I can understand the idea that you'd want to vote for potentially smaller changes than sweeping ones.  The problem that we find ourselves in (which was warned against by the Founding Fathers) is the descent into a 2-party system.  If Republicans adopted more Libertarian/Constitutionalist values, we probably would be having this discussion.  I mean, it's not like Republicans are always on the right side of social issues (criminal justice reform, marriage equality, etc.) so sometimes it's okay to vote D (or other party) if that's the biggest concern for that particular voter.

Lol, horseshit.  I know a whole host of people who vote (R) no matter how terrible the candidate/incumbent is.  Religious zealot who spends more time worrying about how to enact laws about whether gays can marry than trying improving something meaningful . . . sure seems like a shoe-in for political office.  Hell, we've had (R) politicians fighting for a decade over putting a monument of the 10 Commandments on the State Capitol grounds.  The problem is, moron (R) voters will lap that shit up like it's "fighting the good fight" and vote party line. 

Most R/D voters and politicians are just two sides of the same coin.  They espouse different platform ideals, but in reality, operate in lockstep when it comes to legislation . . . and Libertarians are the bad guys, lol.

Bullshit. I’m no great defender of Republicans, but I despise mischaracterizations of Republican voters.

You are emblematic of the pathetic populace that characterizes republicans as evangelicals.  Frankly, that group has lost any power it may have once had.

Republicans support the bill of rights - all of them, not just a few. So when Republicans make an impassioned argument for freedom OF religion, freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, or due process, it is doing so from a constitution-centric argument. Likewise regarding abortion. Being pro-life is not necessarily a religious position. It is a pro-science position.

Yes, in many cases Republicans have to hold their nose and pull the R lever.  But that’s only because the D or L option is often bat-shit crazy and in the case of D’s likely damaging to our freedoms.

Actually, isn’t the complete removal of a thread a first on POA, and an unusually strong level of control for them?

Reminds me of Twitter taking down the entire hashtag #EpsteinCoverup yesterday after news broke that implicated Bill Clinton and Prince Andrew. It had over 100,000 posts. Vanished.

First of all, you;re trying to intertwine car accidents and politics into a discussion on GA pilots and the instrument rating.  Then you're trying to claim there is no need, everything is hunky dory even though we still have pilots ending up in smoking holes.

 The FAA sets a minimum standard. When it comes to GA, much of it is on the honor system, and we see the results.  If you're fine with that, then proceed.

 Finally, I find it amusing when mentioning training to a GA pilot they get defensive.

Flying in the Air Traffic Control system, which is what you do every time you fly on an IFR flight plan, you most certainly not just on the honor system. Your entire flight, short of a visual approach to landing, is under the watchful eye of ATC. Have a significant departure in altitude, heading, or instrument approach and you just may be asked to copy a phone number after you land.

Because of that, most instrument pilots take their 6 in 6 responsibilities seriously. Further, flying in IMC involves more risk than other aviation activities, and I have yet to know of a pilot who is anxious to be the first person on the scene of their own death.

Regarding your last comment, that’s BS. Many of us got our IR in order to make us better pilots, even if we don’t plan to fly a lot of IMC. We incurred significant time and significant cost in order to improve ourselves. Yet in a different thread you said getting the instrument rating is less than worthless if you don’t fly on instruments. Make up your mind.

What GA pilots DO reject is incurring unreasonable costs with little demonstrable benefit. Annual written testing is just that.

When I was a student pilot Scott Crossfield ripped the wings off his Cessna 210 (I believe) in a thunderstorm over the Appalachians.  I sincerely doubt a written test would have changed his decision making process. Somethings, shit happens.

But like most conservatives, pilots don’t want a “feel good” fix that is otherwise meaningless.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/you-must-win-the-electoral-college-pelosi-warns-2020-democrats-against-leftward-lurch

Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates not to lurch too far to the left because whoever the nominee is will still need to win a general election.


Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!

Pretty sad that the candidates can’t be who they are from the outset - they they have to be far left in the primary, and then lie about who they are in the general.

Republicans aren’t immune from that either - except for one:  Donald Trump. Not being a career politician, we got what we saw in the primary. That is driving the democrats, never Trumpers, and swamp dwelling Republicans totally bat shit crazy.

I was afraid this was going to turn out to be a case of mistaken identity, but since it's been confirmed, credit where credit is due: Trump took the responsibility for something big, gave the green light, restrained himself from tweeting about it prematurely, and the mission was successful. Kudos to him and to the people in uniform who put their lives on the line.