What happened to the environment???

For the past couple of days, Nanci Pelosi has taken heat over a request made on her behalf for a larger plane for her to use to travel from Washington, DC to her home town of San Francisco. Now, since 9/11, the Speaker of the House (being second in line to the presidency) has been granted the use of a military plane for just such a use. This request, however, is absurd. The pretext for the request is supposedly "security concerns" related to the need for a refueling stop required by a smaller plane. The plane Pelosi requested - the military version of the Boeing 757, can fly coast-to-coast without refueling. The request, however, raises a couple of questions:

• Pelosi states that she wants what the previous speaker, Dennis Hastert, had. That being the case, why is she unwilling to travel in the same plane that he traveled in?
• The reason given for the requested plane was security...but this is a military transport. Pelosi would be taking off from Andrews AFB. The refueling stop would be made at an Air Force base in the Mid-West...and there are several such bases in suitable places for just such a refueling stop. Why are they so worried about security when they'll be landing at secure military facilities?
• Before being sworn in, Pelosi promised openness and ethics under her leadership. Just the fuel for a coast-to-coast flight in the requested plane runs in the neighborhood of $300,000...that's around $1.2 million just for the fuel round-trip...and Pelosi has talked about the possibility of needing to fly to San Francisco 1-2 times per week. That's around two and a half million taxpayer dollars just spent on flying Pelosi around, and that's just for fuel - it doesn't include other expenses. How about saving a little money for us taxpayers?
  

But the most burning question is this: I thought the Democrats were the party of the environment...what happened? The emissions produced by the 757 are far worse than the G-V (or the military C-37), the next-smaller aircraft class available to Pelosi. With all of the doom and gloom being preached by the left about the dangers of emissions and global warming, one would think that the Democrats wouldn't be pooh-poohing this issue, or even fighting back, as some are doing. If the Democrats were to show anything even slightly resembling consistency, they would be condemning Pelosi, if not for her wanton wastefulness, then for trying to hasten the day that the world ends due to global warming...but the truth is that Democratic consistency is an oxymoron.


Pelosi says that she just wants what Hastert had. John Murtha even went so far as to imply that denying Pelosi the larger jet would be sexist. The truth is, Hastert's use of a G-V to travel from DC to Illinois and back was itself selfish and wasteful. But for Pelosi to defend the request of a military 757 (aka a C-32) is absurd, at best. What does she have to fear from making a refueling stop? Is she that afraid of red-state America? Or does she just have an intrinsic fear of the military (whom the city of San Francisco is notoriously hostile toward)? Either way, Pelosi's excuses for this request just do not hold water, and there is no reason that the American people should put up with it.