Pelosi flies disputed military jet home [nonstop!]

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | Feb 10, 2007

[John Jorsett]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the subject of Republican criticism for her mode of air travel, flew home nonstop Thursday night aboard a 12-seat military aircraft set aside for use by lawmakers.

Republican House members, aided by friendly radio and television talk show hosts, created a political tempest this week, claiming Pelosi was pressuring the Pentagon for the use of an "Air Force Three" and a "flying Lincoln Bedroom." Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, however, the administration has required the speaker -- then Republican Dennis Hastert of Illinois -- to travel home and on official business using military planes for security reasons.

House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood said he had asked the Pentagon to provide a plane large enough to fly Pelosi nonstop to San Francisco, citing the security concerns.

Even the White House defended the Democratic speaker. The president's spokesman, Tony Snow, on Thursday called the criticism "unfair" and the flap "a silly story."

Pelosi flew nonstop from the nation's capital to San Francisco to attend the funeral services of the late Lt. Gov. Leo McCarthy aboard a C-37A, the military's version of a Gulfstream V that can travel 6,300 miles. It is one of the planes used regularly by Hastert, Pelosi's office and the Pentagon said.

[ArmyTeach]

Did't I hear that one of her reasons for needing the larger plane was to fly lobbyists to California? Now, that has the appearance of corruption ...

[Defender2]

I hope you all realize these stories of pelosi wanting a military jet for domestic flights is bogus. She really wants the longest leggy ranged aircraft so she can confer with our enemies under the guise of diplomatic missions.

:-(

[68skylark]

I think the whole thing has been ridiculous from the beginning.... Congress should repeal this stupid idea.

I don't have a problem with this. Lots of VIP's fly on military aircraft -- from the first lady to high-ranking military leaders. The speaker of the house needs to have good communications with Washington at all times, so it makes sense to travel on military planes. It was only when she requested a 757 that I thought she went too far.

[DuncanWaring]

Great Circle distance from Washington to San Francisco is a little over 2100 nautical miles.

Less than half the range of a G-V.

And she had the gall to complain about "having to refuel"?

[originalbuckeye]

She flew home for the funeral of another Dem politico! So, would that be $600,000 round-trip?

Queen Nancy indeed.

[ArmyTeach]

To San Francisco, no less. Now, haven't the SF city fathers declared San Francisco to be a military-free zone? And Nancy wants the military to fly her to SF? The only explanation is blind hypocrisy.

[GBA]

Okay, sure, a Gulfstream V is not a B-757, but it is one of the sweetest aircraft flying. I think Rush has one, which is probably why it isn't good enough for Her Highness. Only the ultra rich would think a G5 is beneath them.

[seanmerc]

Believe me, I'm no Nancy Pelosi fan, but we should stick to the facts. As was pointed out earlier, the smaller aircraft can fly the route non-step IF the weather conditions/atmospherics are right. Sometimes they will be, sometimes they won't. The larger aircraft would always be able to fly the route non-stop.

[eleni121]

queen? She's more like the ultimate salon addict: hair nails nails hair makeup hair makeup all the time. She strikes me as the neighborhood mob princess who made it all the way to the speakership. Only a Dem could do that.

[DuncanWaring]

As was pointed out earlier, the smaller aircraft can fly the route non-step IF the weather conditions/atmospherics are right and the smaller aircraft starts with the fuel tanks half full.

Starting with FULL tanks, a Gulfstream V can fly from Washington to SF AND BACK without refueling.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Believe me, I'm no Nancy Pelosi fan, but we should stick to the facts. As was pointed out earlier, the smaller aircraft can fly the route non-step IF the weather conditions/atmospherics are right. Sometimes they will be, sometimes they won't. The larger aircraft would always be able to fly the route non-stop

Bad weather can reduce the plane's range from 6300 miles to 2100?

[elhombrelibre]

Actually, I do remember it and was thinking the other day what an excellent example that is when we consider how fawning the MSM is to Democrats and how obstreperous they are toward the Republicans.

[The Great RJ]

Should, God forbid, Hillary become President she will probably demand a golden litter carried by slaves just like the Queen of Sheba.

[Red6]

Liberals sure like the military when it serves to coach them around.

[jrooney]

No it can't. It can reduce to it but not to that level.

[Popman]

I really see no problem with her request to fly non stop from DC to San Francisco.

The job does have it's perks

Park her ass in a seat like every other normal person, skip the rest of the liberal limousine requests.

[Non-Sequitur]

The speaker of the house needs to have good communications with Washington at all times, so it makes sense to travel on military planes.

The Speaker wasn't issued a military plane until after 9/11. It's a waste of resources, always has been and always will be.

[LibKill]

Should, God forbid, Hillary become President she will probably demand a golden litter carried by slaves just like the Queen of Sheba.

I can see that in my mind's eye.

The horror. The horror.

[kcar]

High-flying adored.

[John Jorsett]

Bad weather can reduce the plane's range from 6300 miles to 2100?

No, but I can see a scenario where you might have to fly a long distance out of your way to avoid a bad weather front. Of course, a weather front like that would be bleedin' obvious before you even file your flight plan. In which case you would simply not take off in the first place if you were unwilling to make a refueling stop.