If you didn't have a fear of flying before, you'd better think twice now.

Jody, it would almost be worth a default to pay the GOP reps what they are worth, they are getting good pay and benefits to rebel against the will of the majority.

Amen Jody!

You just said a 'mouthful' ;o)

The Tea Party won't care.

Rich corporate barons don't fly commercial and rednecks travel by tractor.

rednecks travel by tractor

Or in the case of those who live off the Gubment teat - riding lawn mowers...

Interesting - a democrat controlled congress was incapable to come up with a plan since 2007. Looks like we were right to get rid of many of the bums in 2010. Even lost some from the right, I am sure.

Feisty,

I wonder if/how this affects Sasha? Crazy times, eh?

Cautiously, that's actually funny. The corporate barons who don't fly commercial are more likely to use the small local airports because they're usually closer to wherever they are starting from. Why do you think Reid, Rockafeller & Baucus are so interested in protecting them? Either they or their campaign contributors are using the heck out of private hangars at local airports or they wouldn't care.

They got a deal that is better than any union contract. Pay them minimum wage, or just outsource Congress why should we pay more than we have to, let the free market decide their worth, I don't know any private sector job that gives you a lifetime full pension for 5 years service and lets you decide and vote on you own pay increases. I am sick of people that steal $176,000 a year for doing nothing but then tells a teacher they make to much.

Republicans kowtowing to their corporate masters.

If you are opposed to unionizing but don't care enough about it to show up then you should not automatically be counted as a "NO" vote. Decisions are made by those who show up.

So workers have to go in person, participate in a forum run by union thugs and vocalize opposition to organizing. Nope --- no chance of intimidation possible there.

If those in opposition are not willing to attend and free voice their opinions that's their problem.

I want to join Congresses union they got a deal no union contract can come close to.

sfcret:

Uh....wait a minute here. I thought you guys were all strict Constitutionalists. There's no FAA in the Constitution....

So, wouldn't your preferable solution be to give the FAA authority to the states instead of the military? You know, create 50 different state run air traffic control units...50 different entities responsible for civil air safety?

Isn't that what the Founding Fathers wanted, after all?

biwheeler,

I don't think aircraft existed in 1776...maybe a few balloons.

Edward:

Of course there weren't aircraft in 1776.

Thus, the folly of the fools who argue that only a "strict" and literal application of the Constitution is correct. Those who want to return to the original document are really closet anarchists who want to destroy, not shrink, the federal government.

Such an interpretation of the Constitution is only advocated by those who wish to return us to the 18th century. Whether sfcret is among those is not clear, but he certainly seems eager to trash the FAA without offering any real solutions to how we should safely engage in air travel in some other manner. The role of the military is to defend the US, not to provide a role in commercial transportation. In fact, use of the military in any way short of a temporary emergency (such as the one Reagan created by firing air traffic controllers) is arguably against the law.

Sorry the point was lost on you.

sfcret- The military did not fill the towers in 81" to replace the wrongly fired controllers. A few were used, but not many. Fired controllers were nearly all military veterans. The FAA beefed up the supervisory ranks and filled the positions. They pulled it off and even made the American people believe Reagan was telling the truth. The ATC system is so very inferior now to what is was then; even with new technology and four times the pay.

Mark, You are probably right, after I re-read the article I agree it is not FAA employees. The majority of Air Controllers positions at major air ports were taken over by military controllers and some retired controllers who volunteered to come back and other non-union controllers. You might be right now that the military is much smaller than in the 80s if they could fill the positions, actually I was just reminiscing about better days. Hope you were able to avoid the so called 405 closure.

sfcret, don't get me started about better days! Aviation has been getting punched in the face from so many different directions, especially post 911. Often times have to fend off the blows, take a deep breath, and remember I got into this business 'cause I love airplanes.

Mark in SoCal,

The Military has absolutely no problem with training new air-traffic controllers. They could train thousands if needed. All they need is a go-ahead from the Commander-in-Chief.

I am tired of taking my shoes off at the airport, damn stupid terrorists, they should have had a bra bomber, I wouldn't mind an extra hour in line for that.

Now you're talkin', Forrest!!!!!

Tommy,

On the contrary, this is what happens when you do vote, but don't do your homework. This is how the empty suit, teleprompter-trooper got into our White House.

Candice,

No need to adress this issue year after year. Once we get rid of the main problem...Obama, and a lot of Senators and Represenatives who carry the dreaded "D" after their names, we can fix the debt problem in a month, and fix it permanently.

How do we stop the insanity of our congressional representatives being more concerned with reelection than actually running the country? Because that's what this is about. They haven't passed a long term funding bill since 2007 because doing so will cost someone votes. Same reason we don't have a budget now. Same reason we have had such issues with the debt ceiling debate. None of this has to do with what's best for the US, it's all about what's best to get me reelected. It needs to stop.

Interested:

I think you're being sarcastic, but I doubt the "shrink the government crowd" will get it. They may just take you up on this, and get behind killing the FAA.

They're not really "smaller government" advocates. In truth, they hate government. They're really closet anarchists who want NO government whatsoever.

All of which makes your post richly sarcastic....but lost on the target audience.

The sad part is that there are people out there dumb enough to buy into IO's sarcasm...I GUARANTEE IT!!!

And here I was thinking the sad part is you think the "shrink the government" crowd wants to do away with all government. I don't think you'll find many of us who don't understand that there are some services that must be provided by a centralized federal government. Infrastructure is one of them and the FAA certainly has a big role in our infrastructure. If ya'll spend a little less time spouting off about your superior intellect and a little more time actually listening, I think you'll find that we all want the same thing in the end, we just see different routes to get us to the end zone.

Suzy:

Thanks for your thoughtful response. For the record, I DO listen, and I don't consider myself a "superior intellect." I suppose I spout off sometimes, but my rantings are as sincere as yours.

I wish you were correct, but frankly, shrinking government to size where you can drown it in a bathtub is not an approach to supporting ANY services provided by a centralized federal government. Throw in Reagan's famous quote that "government is not the solution...it's the problem," and you can see why there's some confusion over what the "shrink the government" crowd thinks.

Free market advocates help add to the confusion regarding the role of government. Because they see no such role.

Perhaps you are not an advocate of anarchy. Even so, the Tea Party principles currently being advanced border on anarchy. And the Tea Party is not particularly discreet about it.

So while your limited government view is perhaps commendable, it is certainly not shared by everyone on the "right" side of the equation. And frankly, it's not you, but these fringe extremists that I fear are driving the message on the role of government.

As a result, I disagree with your conclusion. I don't believe we all want the same thing. I believe that some on the far right are waging a revolutionary war that will forever change, and possibly destroy, our country.

Please take a careful look at the fringe on your side. They are dangerous, destructive, and they are discrediting people like you who are trying to bring a moderate view to the discussion.

Bill

Bill, I think the same can be said about the fringe on your side. There are people who do want to see us take a hard left to socialism which also destroys everything that is great about our country. I think, though, what happens is its those loudest voices who get the most attention from the press so we falsely assume they speak for the majority. I think it's sort of a 10/80/10 split- 10% on either end are so extreme they actually bump into each other at some point but the middle 80% is where things get done. Sometimes the middle 80 swings a little more left, sometimes a little more right, but that's where most of us want the same end, just through divergent paths.

The Tea Party is, indeed, an interesting phenomenon. At the core, I think the idea is good- Taxed Enough Already- I think I pay enough in taxes, especially for the quality of services I receive for my contribution. I want to see some responsibility from our government. Show me that you don't look at me solely as a piggy bank you can smash open with a hammer and grab the cash every time you find some new sparkly chicken you want to "invest" in. On the other hand, the movement seemed to have created a monster. Some of this is warranted, congressional leaders beholden ONLY to a small percentage of their constituents isn't a good thing, but some is entirely blown out of proportion. A TEA party endorsement of a candidate doesn't mean the candidate is suddenly a slave to this master, just that they are more closely aligned than the opposition. I think much more of this is made on a national level than the local level where the elections actually take place. I didn't vote for Ron Johnson last November because the TEA party backed him, I voted for him because he is a business owner with conservative principles who better represents my values than did Russ Feingold. To me, the 2 are totally separate. I think you'll find this from most people. But we all get so caught up in our own perceptions that we forget there might be logic or reason to the reality.

Suzy:

Perhaps you are right, but I do think the left/right comparison is a false equivalency. Link me to left leaning sites showing that are advocating a radical overthrowing of the government. I'm not aware of any.

You are correct that the loudest voices drive the discussion. That's not a good thing.

I don't think it's at all debatable that the radical right wing has co-opted the moderate GOP, and is now in charge of the agenda. So even though they are the minority, their influence is WAY out of proportion to their numbers.

I don't see myself (or you for that matter), as a "piggy bank." We all work hard for the $, and no one I know pays more taxes than they must. That said, though, I see taxes as the cost of living in the greatest country in the world. Is there waste? Of course. There is waste in every entity (and that includes business as well as government) at every level. I fully support eliminating as much as waste as possible. But I do not support eliminating the programs that have made this country great. And that includes those created in the New Deal. They should be tweaked for improvements, but the promise we have made to our citizens cannot be broken.

I would have voted for Feingold. I grew up in Wisconsin, and have fond memories of the history of progressive politics there (Fighting Bob Lafollette, Gaylord Nelson, Bill Proxmire...). Voters in Wisconsin used to value the same things I value.

Wisconsin voters elected Walker, but I'm hopeful that they will soon swing back to their traditional left-center pattern. The Walker experiment has blown up on them.

Bill, I think there is too much still to be determined before we can call the "Walker experiment" a bust. The next few weeks are going to be interesting. I wasn't surprised that Hansen's seat didn't turn over, I don't think most of the seats in this recall effort will. From where I sit, I have to believe that if Walker's agenda was so horrible, the RINOs in our state legislature & senate would have broken ranks and voted against more of his policies but that just isn't happening. People are starting to realize the left-center ideals come with a price tag we simply cannot afford. Feel free to cook up a crow sandwich and hold it in reserve in case I need to eat it, but I think sentiment in Wisconsin has died down far more than what you'd think from outside our borders.

Suzy:

I think your confidence in RINOs injecting common sense into the debate is misplaced. The GOP is the victim of a hostile takeover by the Tea Party. They don't tolerate RINOs, they don't tolerate compromise, and they have no use for a "big tent." Walker gave them all their marching orders, and no deviations were permitted.

You may be right about the decreased enthusiasm for the political fight. But I wouldn't get too confident. Walker overplayed his hand. People may have gone back to work, but they haven't forgotten what made them so angry.

Can we afford to have a great country? I think we can. Historically, we have showed the world what a country founded on liberty, justice, and equality looks like. We still can. But only if we want to. It will require some changes, and some of them will be difficult. But I still think America can be exceptional.

Since I have commitments for the rest of the day, I'll close with a related but somewhat personal statement. We can disagree without shouting, name calling, insults, and vulgarities. That's how it used to be, and that's (in my view at least) how this discussion between us turned out today. For that, you have earned my respect.

Thanks for the focused, useful exchange. We need more of it around here.

Bill