Travel News - Schumer refers to a flight attendant as a “.....”

Schumer has a flight to forget

Sen. Chuck Schumer loves the sound of his own voice, but it carried a bit farther than he might have liked on the US Airways shuttle from New York to Washington on Sunday.

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “.....” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

Both senators kept talking.

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0912/schumer_has_a_flight_to_forget_.html

Stay classy Senator Self-Important. :rolleyes: And a cheer to the FA for risking his wrath. ^ I could only wish he'd been kicked off the flight for his disgusting remark.

When I was a kid (last century) I saw a great cartoon of a couple of legislators walking away from the Capitol. One says to the other, "I'd hate to have to go out and live under some of those laws we just passed."

A lot of truth in that IMHO.

I could only wish he'd been kicked off the flight for his disgusting remark.



+1

Jack-*ss
Hey, DYNWIA?? :rolleyes:

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “.....” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

Both senators kept talking.

http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0912/schumer_has_a_flight_to_forget_.html

The announcement was made, but the front door was still OPEN? So, which proceeds the other? Crewmember instructions or the front door closed? (inviting debate)
Some F/A's make the announcement when the agent comes down to close out the flight, giving people advance warning to end calls. And, "deal" with those who keep talking or texting during push back. This is the perfect case of passengers IGNORING the announcement, and then having to "deal" with a verbal response from F/A's.

bother way, Senator Schumer is a wonderful passenger. Minus the B word, I can see how he questioned the policy. He flies alot. Lives in NY, commutes to DCA.

only wish he'd been kicked off the flight

+1

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “.....” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Yep, there's a reliable and objective source.

According to a House Republican aide[/U] who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “.....” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Yep, there's a reliable and objective source.

Oh yeah, the guy must be lying since he's a Republican. :rolleyes:
And it would so out of character for Up-Chuck since he is such a humble guy.

bother way, Senator Schumer is a wonderful passenger.

¿Qué?


According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “.....” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Yep, there's a reliable and objective source.


So why did Schumer's spokesman apologize?

"The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn't have made, and he regrets it," Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Anne Schroeder Mullins. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/16/2009-12-16_just_plane_rude_sen_charles_schumer_caught_call ing_flight_attendant_the_bword.html)

So why did Schumer's spokesman apologize?

"The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn't have made, and he regrets it," Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Anne Schroeder Mullins. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/16/2009-12-16_just_plane_rude_sen_charles_schumer_caught_call ing_flight_attendant_the_bword.html)

Most likely a closet Republican who lied to get his position and then lied again when he issued a fake apology. :p

Oh yeah, the guy must be lying since he's a Republican. :rolleyes:
And it would so out of character for Up-Chuck since he is such a humble guy.I didn't say he way lying. I said he was neither a reliable nor objective source. As for it being out of character for Schumer, how would you know? I'll believe if its confirmed. Otherwise, it's just more character assassination from a "Republican aide."

Stay classy Senator Self-Important. :rolleyes: And a cheer to the FA for risking his wrath. ^ I could only wish he'd been kicked off the flight for his disgusting remark......agrred and if it was me, i'd be saying hello to mr/ms leo in the gate area faster than you can say, "glove save and a beauty". feh on mr. schumer. :td::mad:

The announcement was made, but the front door was still OPEN? So, which proceeds the other? Crewmember instructions or the front door closed? (inviting debate).....afiac, it is crew member instructions whether door open or closed as there is a reason for them making the announcement, "plane" and simple

¿Qué?





So why did Schumer's spokesman apologize?

"The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn't have made, and he regrets it," Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Anne Schroeder Mullins. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/16/2009-12-16_just_plane_rude_sen_charles_schumer_caught_call ing_flight_attendant_the_bword.html)From the article:

He then muttered his complaint about the flight attendant to Gillibrand.

A Republican aide on the plane, who overheard the powerful Democrat, tattled to Politico.com.

"The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn't have made, and he regrets it," Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Anne Schroeder Mullins.

The GOP moved quickly to slam Schumer.

Does anyone really care what anyone mutters under their breath? The FA clearly didn't hear it, nor was it directed to her -- if she had, I would have expected Schumer, justifiably, to have been removed from the plane. Instead, an eavesdropping "Republican aide" saw an opportunity to make political hay. Contrast the GOP's condemnation of a private remark with Cheney's use of the F-bomb directed at a Democratic senator on the Senate floor:

"Cheney's office did not deny that the phrase was uttered. His spokesman, Kevin S. Kellems, would say only that this language is not typical of the vice presidential vocabulary. "Reserving the right to revise and extend my remarks, that doesn't sound like language the vice president would use," Kellems said, "but there was a frank exchange of views.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3699-2004Jun24.html

So please take your hyper-partisan faux-indignation somewhere else.

Does anyone really care what anyone mutters under their breath? The FA clearly didn't hear it, nor was it directed to her...

Then why did his aide apologize?? :D:rolleyes:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/16/2009-12-16_just_plane_rude_sen_charles_schumer_caught_call ing_flight_attendant_the_bword.html

Then why did his aide apologize?? :D:rolleyes:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/12/16/2009-12-16_just_plane_rude_sen_charles_schumer_caught_call ing_flight_attendant_the_bword.htmlBecause a response to the Republican character assassination was required.

Like bdstone, I'd have probably muttered the same thing to my traveling companion and, if overheard by some snooping busy-body, I would have apologized, too. Interesting that, whereas I quoted the section of the article that described what had happened, you and the others who seem to think this "issue" is, in any way, relevant to anything, persist in quoting out-of-context in an attempt to make some point.

What is your point? What do you think is the significance of this incident? I'd really like to know.

Stay classy Senator Self-Important. :rolleyes: And a cheer to the FA for risking his wrath. ^ I could only wish he'd been kicked off the flight for his disgusting remark.

When I was a kid (last century) I saw a great cartoon of a couple of legislators walking away from the Capitol. One says to the other, "I'd hate to have to go out and live under some of those laws we just passed."

A lot of truth in that IMHO.

+1 If you don't want to say it in public or with a live microphone then don't say it at all.

So please take your hyper-partisan faux-indignation somewhere else.

Hey, you’re the one that injected partisanship into this thread.:rolleyes:

People that think the rules don’t apply to them rub me the wrong way, I don’t care what the party affiliation is.;)

From the article:



Does anyone really care what anyone mutters under their breath? The FA clearly didn't hear it, nor was it directed to her -- if she had, I would have expected Schumer, justifiably, to have been removed from the plane. Instead, an eavesdropping "Republican aide" saw an opportunity to make political hay. Contrast the GOP's condemnation of a private remark with Cheney's use of the F-bomb directed at a Democratic senator on the Senate floor:

"Cheney's office did not deny that the phrase was uttered. His spokesman, Kevin S. Kellems, would say only that this language is not typical of the vice presidential vocabulary. "Reserving the right to revise and extend my remarks, that doesn't sound like language the vice president would use," Kellems said, "but there was a frank exchange of views.""

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3699-2004Jun24.html

So please take your hyper-partisan faux-indignation somewhere else.

Remember the media firestorm about Cheney/Leahy? Months of coverage, coarsening the dialogue, etc. But insulting a working woman is OK? And a woman Senator laughs about it?

Pathetic.

Because a response to the Republican character assassination was required...

So let me see if I have this now...
1. The Republican aide lied.
2. Then Up-Chuck's aide apologized for his boss. But in reality, he really meant to apologize for the Republican aide's lies about his boss.

I am so confused by "hope and change". :D:D

Hey, you’re the one that injected partisanship into this thread.:rolleyes: Really? How did I do that? By pointing out that a Republican aide reported what a Democratic Senator said? How is that partisan?

People that think the rules don’t apply to them rub me the wrong way, I don’t care what the party affiliation is.;)And who is that supposed to apply to? Schumer turned off his phone when asked to. He followed the rule which, in this case, was, "observe all instructions from the flight crew." He didn't like it because this FA was arbitrary and her instruction was contrary to policy.

So what makes you think Schumer believes the rules don't apply to him?

For that matter, please cite to anything that suggests Schumer said, "Do you know who I am?"

Remember the media firestorm about Cheney/Leahy? Months of coverage, coarsening the dialogue, etc. But insulting a working woman is OK? And a woman Senator laughs about it?

Pathetic.Very nice. Except that he didn't insult a "working woman." He made a private comment to his colleague that was overheard by a Republican eavesdropper. Not quite the same thing a Cheney, who told a senator, on the senate floor, to "f" off.

So let me see if I have this now...
1. The Republican aide lied.

I never said that. I said he was partisan and, therefore, an unreliable source.

2. Then Up-Chuck's aide apologized for his boss. But in reality, he really meant to apologize for the Republican aide's lies about his boss.I said nothing remotely like that. Now who's lying?

I am so confused by "hope and change". :D:DI agree -- you are very confused.

So what makes you think Schumer believes the rules don't apply to him?

If arguing with a FA and then calling her a crude name loud enough for others to hear isn’t a classic case of DYKWIA, I don’t know what is.

If arguing with a FA and then calling her a crude name loud enough for others to hear isn’t a classic case of DYKWIA, I don’t know what is.

Yes, but you forgot that the REPUBICAN aide with an obvious malicious agenda, who is no doubt a conservative, white male, a racist and an anti-semite to boot, made up the entire story. :rolleyes:

If arguing with a FA and then calling her a crude name loud enough for others to hear isn’t a classic case of DYKWIA, I don’t know what is.Once again, that's not what happened. Nor does it support your allegation of DYKWIA. Obviously, your partisanship completely any possibility of objectivity.

Yes, but you forgot that the REPUBICAN aide with an obvious malicious agenda, who is no doubt a conservative, white male, a racist and an anti-semite to boot, made up the entire story. :rolleyes:Now let me see if I've got this straight -- you're rolling your eyes about statements that only you, and not one other person, has made? You're right: :rolleyes:

Please let me know if you're ever interested in actually discussing facts. Right now, you're just arguing with yourself and, frankly, that's more than a little disturbing.

Once again, that's not what happened. Nor does it support your allegation of DYKWIA. Obviously, your partisanship completely any possibility of objectivity.

Mr. Schumer was sitting on the plane talking on his cell phone when the flight attendant told him to turn the phone off. He initially argued with the attendant, but eventually complied.

Mr. Schumer then turned to his fellow New York senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, who was sitting next to him on the flight, and used a profanity to describe the attendant.

Linkage (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/schumers-shuttle-swearing/)

Classic DYKWIA. Or is the Times not a credible source for you? :p

Linkage (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/schumers-shuttle-swearing/)

Classic DYKWIA. Or is the Times not a credible source for you? :pYour post:

If arguing with a FA and then calling her a crude name loud enough for others to hear isn’t a classic case of DYKWIA, I don’t know what is.

My response (once again):

Once again, that's not what happened. Nor does it support your allegation of DYKWIA. Obviously, your partisanship completely any possibility of objectivity.

Linkage (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/16/schumers-shuttle-swearing/)

Classic DYKWIA. Or is the Times not a credible source for you? :p

He won't listen. No amount of proof will change his mind, since he knows so much more than the rest of us.

He won't listen. No amount of proof will change his mind, since he knows so much more than the rest of us.Really? What proof has been provided?

I have nothing to say other than it is strangely refreshing to, once again, have one's posts add to one's post count in a political thread. Which is, really, the only reason I'm posting anything.

But, but, but, the FA herself is most likely a constituent.