Lou Decruss > wrote:

>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:34:53 +0000 (UTC),

>>I care, in the sense that sound energy policy requires that
>>planes be optimally loaded.

>I heard a day or so ago than one airline was trying to get the planes
>to fly with less fuel so they used less. The pilots are bitching and
>I don't blame them. It's not like running out of gas and coasting to
>the side of the road.

This was the US Air pilots. I agree with them, the pilot
not the airline should decide how much fuel load is needed.

But this is separate from the issue of getting to the optimal
weight payload for the airplane.

Steve

On Thu 17 Jul 2008 06:43:32p, Dave Smith told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Too many obese individuals are enabled by family, friends, and even
>> employers (if they're able to work at all), and their co-workers have
>> to take up the considerable slack
>
> That was certainly the case in a program I watched a few months ago
> about really obese people, like 800 pounds plus. They are so fat they
> can't get out of bed. They showed one guy's daily food intake. It was
> enough for a family of four for a week. Family members were not only
> feeding him all that food, they were cooking it and taking it in to him.
>
> When people like that have a medical emergency it takes a a number of
> emergency service workers to get them loaded onto a stretcher and out to
> the ambulance. I recall reading of one case where they actually had to
> remove a wall to get the guy out of the house.
>
>

Exactly. I've seen several of those shows. In one case they had to remove
a picture window and knock out some of the surrounding bricks, then use a
commercial hoist to get the guy out.

There are numerous clinic type centers that specialize in treating the
super morbidly obese. The problem is that many of them do not enforce the
prescribed diet regimen. They also allow food to be brought in from the
outside.

When people in that category are given the opportunity, support, and 24
hour assistance to help solve their problem, yet they continue to eat and
pile on even more weight, I say let them eat themselves to death.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Thursday, 07(VII)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
If the shoe fits, put it in your mouth.
-------------------------------------------

Alright, how about this?



In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert passenger
onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation for
the duration of the trip.


At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
baggage claim.


Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't affect
everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.


Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right, and
those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price, but
since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed luddites
and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...


--Lia

On Thu 17 Jul 2008 07:07:09p, Julia Altshuler told us...

> Alright, how about this?
>
>
>
> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert passenger
> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation for
> the duration of the trip.
>
>
> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
> baggage claim.
>
>
> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't affect
> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>
>
> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right, and
> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price, but
> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed luddites
> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>
>
> --Lia
>
>

Lia, I thought they already did that.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Thursday, 07(VII)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
He's a cat of many mistakes; a man of
faux pas....
-------------------------------------------

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second seat or
> not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into *my* seat. I
> paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>

That is exactly how I feel about it, too.

I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
made me very nervous :-)

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> Alright, how about this?
>
>
>
> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert passenger
> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation for
> the duration of the trip.
>
>
> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
> baggage claim.
>
>
> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't affect
> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>
>
> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right, and
> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price, but
> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed luddites
> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>
>
> --Lia
>
I think I saw that movie <vbg>

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:15:51 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Thu 17 Jul 2008 05:48:09p, Lou Decruss told us...
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 19:07:35 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Their fat
>>>acceptance levels are way way lower than mine. I am thinking like 400 lb
>>>plus. That's just waaaay too big to be expect public sympathy.
>>
>> Around here at 400 lb. the only sympathy you get is welfare and food
>> stamps. <gurrrrr>
>>
>> Lou
>
>That is, unfortunately, so often the case. Two stories... Last year when
>I injured my back and was unable to walk without a walker for an extended
>period, I seriously needed to use an electric cart when shopping in almost
>any large store. Could I find one of the store-provided carts available?
>Only rarely, because the obese people had taken all that were available.
>More often than not, I left the store without shopping because someone who
>needed one because they were too fat to walk had taken all that were
>available. This was easily observed when I was able to get a cart and saw
>the others in use.

As I mentioned in another post the fat acceptance crap seems to
involve imposing on others. I've witnessed the wheelchair thing
myself. I also notice what's in the basket. Never any produce. Just
junk.

There was a segment on one of the networks about food prices and
people who get food stamps. They interviewed a store manager and he
talked about what he had to stock up on for the first of the month
rush. Most of it was unhealthy stuff. They also interviewed several
shoppers using their food cards and looked at what they were buying.
Who in their right mind on a limited budget would fill a cart with
cases of bottled water and soda, Individual serving sized junk food,
sugar coated cereal etc.etc? They were all way overweight but were
bitching they weren't getting enough handout money for food. One even
stretched the truth and said she had to skip eating at the end of the
month. She pulled the "I gotta take care of my babies" crap. She
weighed at least 250 pounds. I wonder how someone who is starving
could be so fat? Even the reporter saw through the garbage and
commented on the lack of produce in the carts. They all said they
couldn't afford good food. Which to me meant they were too lazy to
prepare it. The show and the lazy pigs really bothered me.

>A "success" story at my place of work involved a lady who probably topped
>out at over 400 pounds. If she hadn't been as knowledgeable and talented
>as she was, there were many occasions when she might have been fired
>because of weight-related illnesses that lasted for weeks at a time, far
>beyond the allocated sick time and accrued vacation. She was finally told
>to "take care of the problem" or start looking for another position. She
>opted for gastric bypass surgery and went on extended leave for 3 months.
>To date she has lost over 250 pounds and works a normal schedule with very
>limited periods of absence.

That's a great story. Proves many things.

>Too many obese individuals are enabled by family, friends, and even
>employers (if they're able to work at all), and their co-workers have to
>take up the considerable slack.

Very true.

Lou

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:53:55 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\"" >
wrote:

(Steve Pope) : in
>rec.food.cooking
>
>> Lou Decruss > wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:34:53 +0000 (UTC),
>>
>>>>I care, in the sense that sound energy policy requires that
>>>>planes be optimally loaded.
>>
>>>I heard a day or so ago than one airline was trying to get the planes
>>>to fly with less fuel so they used less. The pilots are bitching and
>>>I don't blame them. It's not like running out of gas and coasting to
>>>the side of the road.
>>
>> This was the US Air pilots. I agree with them, the pilot
>> not the airline should decide how much fuel load is needed.
>>
>> But this is separate from the issue of getting to the optimal
>> weight payload for the airplane.
>
>Jesus... Lou is right. What if there is a problem at the airport and they
>have to circle several times before landing. Oh mi.

Many things could happen. It's a scary thought.

Lou

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
> wrote:

>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second seat or
>> not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into *my* seat. I
>> paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>
>
>That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>
>I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>made me very nervous :-)

LOL.. We're all here to help you Janet.

Lou

On Thu 17 Jul 2008 08:45:20p, Lou Decruss told us...

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
> > wrote:
>
>>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second
>>> seat or not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into
>>> *my* seat. I paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>>
>>
>>That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>>
>>I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>> made me very nervous :-)
>
> LOL.. We're all here to help you Janet.
>
> Lou
>

Maybe Lou will buy you a parachute, Janet. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Thursday, 07(VII)/17(XVII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
One moment please; we are adjusting
the Reality parameters.
-------------------------------------------

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 07:33:36 -0700 (PDT), maxine in ri
> wrote:
>
>We've lost our respect for each other and authority. A little
>civility on all
>sides would solve many of these problems.
>
>Or we could try the Japanese method: http://preview.tinyurl.com/3vaktn
>
>maxine in ri

jesus. '33 1/2 inches for men and 35.4 inches for women' ain't much.
no wonder they lost the war.

your pal,
blake
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:25:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Thu 17 Jul 2008 07:07:09p, Julia Altshuler told us...
>
>> Alright, how about this?
>>
>>
>>
>> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
>> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
>> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
>> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
>> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
>> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
>> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert passenger
>> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
>> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation for
>> the duration of the trip.
>>
>>
>> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
>> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
>> baggage claim.
>>
>>
>> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
>> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
>> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
>> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't affect
>> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
>> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>>
>>
>> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
>> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
>> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
>> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
>> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right, and
>> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price, but
>> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
>> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
>> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed luddites
>> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
>> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
>> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
>> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>>
>>
>> --Lia
>>
>>
>
>Lia, I thought they already did that.

you mean the c.i.a.? only certain flights to certain undisclosed
locations.

your pal,
blake
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
> wrote:

>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second seat or
>> not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into *my* seat. I
>> paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>
>
>That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>
>I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>made me very nervous :-)

drink heavily.

your pal,
blake
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Too many obese individuals are enabled by family, friends, and even
>> employers (if they're able to work at all), and their co-workers have to
>> take up the considerable slack
>
> That was certainly the case in a program I watched a few months ago about
> really obese people, like 800 pounds plus. They are so fat they can't get
> out
> of bed. They showed one guy's daily food intake. It was enough for a
> family
> of four for a week. Family members were not only feeding him all that
> food,
> they were cooking it and taking it in to him.
>
> When people like that have a medical emergency it takes a a number of
> emergency service workers to get them loaded onto a stretcher and out to
> the
> ambulance. I recall reading of one case where they actually had to remove
> a
> wall to get the guy out of the house.
>
>
When I first was married, both hubby and I worked in emergency medicine.
One call required calling in the local fire department with a cherry picker
to get a load out of an upper storied apartment. Seems she was despondent
and ate herself into a massive state. Then when family and friends finally
decided 'gee, she looks bad' at 700 lbs + not only could she not stand or
walk, but wouldn't fit through the door frame. Had to remove the front
windows and bring in the cherry picker. They strapped her to a security
door (a backboard used for vehicle extrication snapped under her) and they
had to slide her out the window three stories up and used automotive tie
down straps to winch her to the cherry picker. When they got her to the
ground, the collapsable legs under the guerney buckled under the weight. I
don't know what happened to her, but I do know that at any time during the
'rescue' anything from the weight throwing the basket off balance to one of
the medics losing his balance climbing in and out of third floor window
could have happened. It took at least 10 guys to lift her into the
ambulance, any of them could have gotten a hernia from the attempt. No
thank you, no gratitude, just 'do you have any snack food in this thing' on
the the way to the hospital.

I have an understanding with my dear husband, now of 25 years. We both have
put on weight, probably too much weight, but if either of us gets to that
point. I opted to being shot at point blank range to put me out of my
misery. I would have been mortified to have to have the fire department get
me out of my own home.
-ginny

"Lou Decruss" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:53:55 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\"" >
> wrote:
>
(Steve Pope) : in
>>rec.food.cooking
>>
>>> Lou Decruss > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 01:34:53 +0000 (UTC),
>>>
>>>>>I care, in the sense that sound energy policy requires that
>>>>>planes be optimally loaded.
>>>
>>>>I heard a day or so ago than one airline was trying to get the planes
>>>>to fly with less fuel so they used less. The pilots are bitching and
>>>>I don't blame them. It's not like running out of gas and coasting to
>>>>the side of the road.
>>>
>>> This was the US Air pilots. I agree with them, the pilot
>>> not the airline should decide how much fuel load is needed.
>>>
>>> But this is separate from the issue of getting to the optimal
>>> weight payload for the airplane.
>>
>>Jesus... Lou is right. What if there is a problem at the airport and they
>>have to circle several times before landing. Oh mi.
>
> Many things could happen. It's a scary thought.
>
> Lou

Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers. After
deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour shifts and
get paid around $18k a year. They are wondering why the pool of controllers
is inexperienced/inept. They get what they pay for. If they treated the
employees well and paid them a living wage they would get responsible
workers. Can you see having the planes stacked waiting to land while Junior
tries to figure out what to do in the tower. With the fuel rationed, they
would just start dropping out of the sky. How many planes have to plop on
the tarmac? And most people are now ****ed because they have to pay for
water on the plane ($2 a pop). This is more important.
-ginny

Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
> When I first was married, both hubby and I worked in emergency medicine.
> One call required calling in the local fire department with a cherry picker
> to get a load out of an upper storied apartment. Seems she was despondent
> and ate herself into a massive state. Then when family and friends finally
> decided 'gee, she looks bad' at 700 lbs + not only could she not stand or
> walk, but wouldn't fit through the door frame. Had to remove the front
> windows and bring in the cherry picker. They strapped her to a security
> door (a backboard used for vehicle extrication snapped under her) and they
> had to slide her out the window three stories up and used automotive tie
> down straps to winch her to the cherry picker. When they got her to the
> ground, the collapsable legs under the guerney buckled under the weight. I
> don't know what happened to her, but I do know that at any time during the
> 'rescue' anything from the weight throwing the basket off balance to one of
> the medics losing his balance climbing in and out of third floor window
> could have happened. It took at least 10 guys to lift her into the
> ambulance, any of them could have gotten a hernia from the attempt. No
> thank you, no gratitude, just 'do you have any snack food in this thing' on
> the the way to the hospital.

Egad. And that comment at the end. No wonder...
>
> I have an understanding with my dear husband, now of 25 years. We both have
> put on weight, probably too much weight, but if either of us gets to that
> point. I opted to being shot at point blank range to put me out of my
> misery. I would have been mortified to have to have the fire department get
> me out of my own home.
> -ginny

I told my daughter it is just as well I get uncomfortable with my
weight before I am heavier....

--
Jean B.

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 08:55:07a, Jean B. told us...

> Virginia Tadrzynski wrote:
>> When I first was married, both hubby and I worked in emergency
>> medicine. One call required calling in the local fire department with a
>> cherry picker to get a load out of an upper storied apartment. Seems
>> she was despondent and ate herself into a massive state. Then when
>> family and friends finally decided 'gee, she looks bad' at 700 lbs +
>> not only could she not stand or walk, but wouldn't fit through the door
>> frame. Had to remove the front windows and bring in the cherry picker.
>> They strapped her to a security door (a backboard used for vehicle
>> extrication snapped under her) and they had to slide her out the window
>> three stories up and used automotive tie down straps to winch her to
>> the cherry picker. When they got her to the ground, the collapsable
>> legs under the guerney buckled under the weight. I don't know what
>> happened to her, but I do know that at any time during the 'rescue'
>> anything from the weight throwing the basket off balance to one of the
>> medics losing his balance climbing in and out of third floor window
>> could have happened. It took at least 10 guys to lift her into the
>> ambulance, any of them could have gotten a hernia from the attempt. No
>> thank you, no gratitude, just 'do you have any snack food in this
>> thing' on the the way to the hospital.
>
> Egad. And that comment at the end. No wonder...
>>
>> I have an understanding with my dear husband, now of 25 years. We both
>> have put on weight, probably too much weight, but if either of us gets
>> to that point. I opted to being shot at point blank range to put me
>> out of my misery. I would have been mortified to have to have the fire
>> department get me out of my own home.
>> -ginny
>
> I told my daughter it is just as well I get uncomfortable with my
> weight before I am heavier....
>

Being uncofortable and not feeling as well as I could is what usually
triggers me to return to a weight-loss regime. Only once did my weight
reach a level (near 300 lbs) where I felt out of control. (I was not
working and very depressed). When I got my act together I lost a bit over
100 lbs., within normal range for my build. I now tend to vary 10-15
pounds, whih I keep in check. Know how uncomfortable and ill I fell at myu
top weight, I cannot possible imagine reaching weights of 400-800 pounds.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
'Bribe' is such a . . . crass word.
-------------------------------------------

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 08:41:10a, blake murphy told us...

> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:25:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu 17 Jul 2008 07:07:09p, Julia Altshuler told us...
>>
>>> Alright, how about this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
>>> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
>>> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
>>> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
>>> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
>>> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
>>> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert
passenger
>>> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
>>> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation
for
>>> the duration of the trip.
>>>
>>>
>>> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
>>> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
>>> baggage claim.
>>>
>>>
>>> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
>>> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
>>> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
>>> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't
affect
>>> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
>>> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
>>> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
>>> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
>>> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
>>> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right,
and
>>> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price,
but
>>> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
>>> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
>>> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed
luddites
>>> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
>>> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
>>> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
>>> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>>>
>>>
>>> --Lia
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Lia, I thought they already did that.
>
> you mean the c.i.a.? only certain flights to certain undisclosed
> locations.
>
> your pal,
> blake
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>

Actually, I would welcome that method just traversing from home to work and
back. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Now then, was that funny or WHAT?
-------------------------------------------

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 08:41:59a, blake murphy told us...

> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
> > wrote:
>
>>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second
>>> seat or not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into
>>> *my* seat. I paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>>
>>
>>That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>>
>>I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>> made me very nervous :-)
>
> drink heavily.
>
> your pal,
> blake
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
>

You might throw in a demerol with that scotch and soda.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Now then, was that funny or WHAT?
-------------------------------------------

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:49:16 -0400, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
> wrote:

>Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers. After
>deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour shifts and
>get paid around $18k a year. They are wondering why the pool of controllers
>is inexperienced/inept. They get what they pay for.

Unbelievable. I hoped they were back to a respected, professional
status after all these years. They hold our lives in the palm of
their hands.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Dave Smith wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>
>>
>> Not sure if I agree with you 100% there, Lia. I know a lot of people
>> have 'medical issues' that can and do cause weight problems, but IME,
>> many people are obese simply because they over-eat and/or eat and drink
>> all the 'wrong' foods and beverages (e.g. fries, burgers, soda pop) 7
>> days a week. In some cases, just eating a bit 'healthier' (and maybe
>> doing some form of exercise) can help folks lose a significant amount of
>> weight - but of course that choice is theirs.
>
> The Big Niece fits in there.

<snipped for space>

> She had been eating non stop for close to five
> hours. Everyone else had a bite to eat or snacked, she had been eating non
> stop.
>

Ah. I had almost forgotten you get to witness this 'first hand' on occasion.

> She is not much different from any other really obese people that I know.
> They all eat enough for 5.

Quite so.

> Meanwhile I know lots of people with less
> severe weight problems who just can't seem to lose weight. IMO most really
> obese people are so fat because they just don't stop eating.

I have to agree. When I see what some of my obese friends can 'pack away' it
boggles my mind. I love my food, but I get to a point where I'm full, and
no matter how great the food is, I just cannot eat another bite.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Egg tastes better when it's not on your face...
>

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> Being uncofortable and not feeling as well as I could is what usually
> triggers me to return to a weight-loss regime. Only once did my weight
> reach a level (near 300 lbs) where I felt out of control. (I was not
> working and very depressed). When I got my act together I lost a bit over
> 100 lbs., within normal range for my build. I now tend to vary 10-15
> pounds, whih I keep in check. Know how uncomfortable and ill I fell at myu
> top weight, I cannot possible imagine reaching weights of 400-800 pounds.
>
For better or for worse, I feel pretty bad when I am 25-30 lbs
overweight, and that is quite enough incentive to take off the pounds.

Also, at my age, I figure I'd better get this done and keep it
done. There are too many pontential weight-related medical
issues, and as one gets older, they seem to accrue. Better to
tackle this before that happens.

--
Jean B.

ChattyCathy wrote:

> I have to agree. When I see what some of my obese friends can 'pack away' it
> boggles my mind. I love my food, but I get to a point where I'm full, and
> no matter how great the food is, I just cannot eat another bite.
>

My brother was telling me the other day about having dinner with some fat
friends. They cooked a 10 lb prime rib and served it with gravy and a huge bowl
of mashed potatoes. .... no salad, no vegetables. Dinner was beef, gravy and
mashed potatoes. My brother figured it was at least 5 lb of potatoes. My
brother and his wife each had one nice thick piece of beef and declined offers
of seconds. Then the guy offered his wife seconds and she said if he was having
more she would. They ate the rest of the roast and the rest of the potatoes.

Both these people are huge. They are not very tall but are as wide as they are
tall. He had to have knee replacements before he was 50. He was a meat cutter
by trade and was on his feet all day. The weight was just too much for them. She
went of a diet and lost 250 lb. .and was still fat. ..... and then gained it all
back. He has lost some weight, but only because he now has cancer and has been
on chemo several times.

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
news
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:25:27 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Thu 17 Jul 2008 07:07:09p, Julia Altshuler told us...
>>
>>> Alright, how about this?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In order to pack the maximum number of people on a plane while still
>>> insuring everyone gets a safe comfortable flight, the seats are taken
>>> out. They're replaced with long thin palates arranged like bunks. At
>>> security, as well as all carry-on luggage being inspected, all
>>> passengers are frisked and shoes are removed. Then they're given an
>>> injection which knocks them out. Airline personnel then wrap each
>>> passenger in a sheet with a barcode on it, piles the now inert passenger
>>> onto a luggage ramp, and loads the passengers into the plane, face up,
>>> on the bunks. They all then snooze in a drugged suspended animation for
>>> the duration of the trip.
>>>
>>>
>>> At the other end, each cocoon is unloaded, unwrapped, and given a
>>> reversal. Passengers come to, put on their shoes, and proceed to
>>> baggage claim.
>>>
>>>
>>> Instead of comparing meals, leg room, or service, passengers complain
>>> about the effectiveness of the drugs, how dry their mouths are on
>>> arrival, and their headaches. Instead of jetlag, people have to adjust
>>> to the muzzy headed feeling the drugs give them. The drugs don't affect
>>> everyone the same way. Some people get high. Drug addicts fly on
>>> purpose for that reason. Getting high takes on a whole new meaning.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jehovah Witnesses and other religious groups that don't drink object,
>>> and the system is taken to the Supreme Court. Must one be given drugs
>>> in order to fly? The immorality of unrelated male and female wrapped
>>> passengers being lain side by side is also brought into question. In a
>>> 5-4 decision, it is decided that flying is a privilege, not a right, and
>>> those who wish to fly the old fashioned way may pay a premium price, but
>>> since fewer and fewer airlines allow conscious passengers, a policy put
>>> into the place, by the way, for the safety of ALL passengers in these
>>> times of increased terrorist risk, religious zealots are dubbed luddites
>>> and told to stay home. Further, it is pointed out, if they're not
>>> willing to support American values by taking injections and flying, why
>>> should they be allowed to benefit from our flying culture by eating
>>> imported foods and living in houses made from flying technology ...
>>>
>>>
>>> --Lia
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Lia, I thought they already did that.
>
> you mean the c.i.a.? only certain flights to certain undisclosed
> locations.
>
> your pal,
> blake
> ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


Blake, if they book you on NorthAmerican Airlines, be afraid, be very
afraid....
-ginny

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 09:42:13a, Jean B. told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> Being uncofortable and not feeling as well as I could is what usually
>> triggers me to return to a weight-loss regime. Only once did my weight
>> reach a level (near 300 lbs) where I felt out of control. (I was not
>> working and very depressed). When I got my act together I lost a bit
>> over 100 lbs., within normal range for my build. I now tend to vary
>> 10-15 pounds, whih I keep in check. Know how uncomfortable and ill I
>> fell at myu top weight, I cannot possible imagine reaching weights of
>> 400-800 pounds.
>>
> For better or for worse, I feel pretty bad when I am 25-30 lbs
> overweight, and that is quite enough incentive to take off the pounds.
>
> Also, at my age, I figure I'd better get this done and keep it
> done. There are too many pontential weight-related medical
> issues, and as one gets older, they seem to accrue. Better to
> tackle this before that happens.
>

Exactly.

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
''E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on!'
-------------------------------------------

"Lou Decruss" wrote

> I'm sure my shoulders are bigger than 17", but I've never had a
> problem with normal sized people. That's why I said I NEED my whole
> seat. Even someone my size next to me would be no problem. The
> problem is leg room. Uggg

I'm a short little shit <grin>. The only time I had a problem with a tall
person on a plane, it was because they 'assumed' they could use my storage
spot under the seat infront of me for their gear. Sorry dude. At 5ft1in, I
can not comfortably reach the overhead containers. I also have medical
issues making reaching above my head with anything in my hands over 20 lbs,
difficult.

He wanted me to put my stuff several seats away (ours was full) so he could
keep *his* stuff nearby. His arguement was 'he got there first'.

It was a most uncomfortable flight. The attendant made him move *his* stuff
to that farther away overhead area and out of my spot. He spent most of the
rest of the trip deliberately and childishly bumping me with his knees until
the attendant (I'd said nothing and probably should have) noticed this and
offered me another seat.

The fun part of that is the attendant had a major sense of humor. A couple
with a major ADHD sort of kid, swapped with me so he got the kid who was
also into bumping everything in reach and talking or singing non-stop

Me? I sat with the parents and their other 3 kids and we had a little
party. The parents whispered to me that the ADHD kids was told he could for
once just have fun as long as he didnt bump the seat in front of him. Major
come uppance!

And no, we didnt isolate the ADHD kid from the fun. We were just over the
isle in the center section. The kid had been reasonably well behaved when
next to me across the isle and we just swapped seats.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Thu 17 Jul 2008 08:45:20p, Lou Decruss told us...
>
>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>
>>>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second
>>>> seat or not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into
>>>> *my* seat. I paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>>>
>>> That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>>>
>>> I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>>> made me very nervous :-)
>> LOL.. We're all here to help you Janet.
>>
>> Lou
>>
>
> Maybe Lou will buy you a parachute, Janet. :-)
>

Great! I've always wanted to try skydiving.

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

blake murphy wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
> > wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second seat or
>>> not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into *my* seat. I
>>> paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>>
>> That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>>
>> I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>> made me very nervous :-)
>
> drink heavily.

I will on the International flight. The wine is free (or it used to be).
A little Valium---a little wine makes for a nice flight. I'm not a very
good flier, but I am a great sleeper :-)
--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

>>> I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all have
>>> made me very nervous :-)
>> drink heavily.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake

> You might throw in a demerol with that scotch and soda.
>
Demerol has seriously fallen out of favor and is rarely given these
days. You better pick a good scotch instead.

sf wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:49:16 -0400, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
> > wrote:
>
>> Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers. After
>> deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour shifts and
>> get paid around $18k a year. They are wondering why the pool of controllers
>> is inexperienced/inept. They get what they pay for.
>
> Unbelievable. I hoped they were back to a respected, professional
> status after all these years. They hold our lives in the palm of
> their hands.
>
I think Ginny's facts are inaccurate. That figure is about $8.50/hour.
Burger King pays that much. I suspect something is amiss here?

On Fri 18 Jul 2008 06:35:01p, Janet Wilder told us...

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Thu 17 Jul 2008 08:45:20p, Lou Decruss told us...
>>
>>> On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 21:35:04 -0500, Janet Wilder
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I honestly don't care whether the airline charges them for a second
>>>>> seat or not. I just don't want the obese person flowing over into
>>>>> *my* seat. I paid for it and I'm entitled to it.
>>>>>
>>>> That is exactly how I feel about it, too.
>>>>
>>>> I'm gonna be doing a lot of flying in the next few months and y'all
have
>>>> made me very nervous :-)
>>> LOL.. We're all here to help you Janet.
>>>
>>> Lou
>>>
>>
>> Maybe Lou will buy you a parachute, Janet. :-)
>>
>
> Great! I've always wanted to try skydiving.
>

I hope you enjoy impromtu activities!

--
Wayne Boatwright
-------------------------------------------
Friday, 07(VII)/18(XVIII)/08(MMVIII)
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Cats must make snowflakes out of a
whole roll of paper towels.
-------------------------------------------

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:36:26 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:49:16 -0400, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers. After
>>> deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour shifts and
>>> get paid around $18k a year. They are wondering why the pool of controllers
>>> is inexperienced/inept. They get what they pay for.
>>
>> Unbelievable. I hoped they were back to a respected, professional
>> status after all these years. They hold our lives in the palm of
>> their hands.
>>
>I think Ginny's facts are inaccurate. That figure is about $8.50/hour.
>Burger King pays that much. I suspect something is amiss here?

I dunno. $8.50 is a "living wage". Are you saying BK pays a living
wage outside of California?



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

I googled on "how much do air traffic controllers get paid." I don't
know how reliable any of the following sites are. They give the idea
that entry level pay isn't wonderful, but those with seniority can do well.


http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_a...ntrollers_paid

http://current.newsweek.com/budgettr...d_air_tra.html

http://www.airlinejobfinder.com/airline_jobs_faq.php


The pay and training are different in different countries.

--Lia

On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 18:27:17 -0400, "cshenk" > wrote:

>And no, we didnt isolate the ADHD kid from the fun. We were just over the
>isle in the center section. The kid had been reasonably well behaved when
>next to me across the isle and we just swapped seats.

LOL! Good for that attendant and good for the parents who must have
noticed your situation and figured Mr. Man needed a little of his own
medicine.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Jul 17, 5:24*pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> Goomba wrote:
> > Dave Smith wrote:
>
> > > BTW... there was a news video on CNN a week or two ago about a woman and her
> > > kids who got booted off a plane in the US. The mother and most of her family
> > > were two seaters.
>
> > LOL, not to be confused with "two baggers"
> > Yet they can be both, I guess?
>
> Truth be told, they were two seaters and two baggers.
>
> You be the judge:http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=126253&comments=1

Is my geography off? Why does one fly from Detroit to Phenix (sp?) to
get to Seattle?

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

On Jul 19, 2:26*am, sf wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:36:26 -0400, Goomba >
> wrote:
>
> >sf wrote:
> >> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:49:16 -0400, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
> >> > wrote:
>
> >>> Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers. *After
> >>> deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour shifts and
> >>> get paid around $18k a year. *They are wondering why the pool of controllers
> >>> is inexperienced/inept. *They get what they pay for. *
>
> >> Unbelievable. *I hoped they were back to a respected, professional
> >> status after all these years. *They hold our lives in the palm of
> >> their hands.
>
> >I think Ginny's facts are inaccurate. That figure is about $8.50/hour.
> >Burger King pays that much. I suspect something is amiss here?
>
> I dunno. *$8.50 is a "living wage". *Are you saying BK pays a living
> wage outside of California?

Air Traffic Controllers and Airfield Operations Specialists Median
Income for Full -Time Employed $64,739

From US Bureau of Census http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/incom...ll2usboth.html

<sf> wrote in message
> "cshenk" > wrote:
>
>>And no, we didnt isolate the ADHD kid from the fun. We were just over the
>>isle in the center section. The kid had been reasonably well behaved when
>>next to me across the isle and we just swapped seats.
>
> LOL! Good for that attendant and good for the parents who must have
> noticed your situation and figured Mr. Man needed a little of his own
> medicine.

Hehe it was funny! Especially when I told a fun story to all the kids about
a bunny who was very sad as his hopper was broken and how many things he
tried to fix it.

Quite evil of me that one!

It was not a long flight, about 4-5 hours in the middle of the day and all
the kids on the plane were just a bit wired. I did *not* start the story
telling. Another did when the TV system went wonkers. One told a fairly
standard fairytale of a princess in distress. I told one on 'Charlotte the
Eagle' who was really my daughter set in King Authur's court (ADHD kid
flapping arms to fly with us all). Another told one based on Harry Potter
and her kid (Jeffers?) helping Harry find some critical clue, then I dove
off to the 'Bunny who lost his hop and how he found it again'. (He needed to
eat his veggies. Hey, it was a young crowd!). 'Oh My! I found my Hop! It
was stuck in carrot! Hop Hop Hop'.

One fellow really sticks out in my mind. His tale was so sweet! He had
horrible facial scars. He started low, and to a tune which he half sung.
It was very 'kermit the froggish' and 'It's not fun to be ugly'. Had to do
with rescuing his priceless daughter who was a princess. Adults tagged that
his face was the result of getting his 4YO daughter out of a burning car.
Kids just tagged him as a hero who wore that face by day but at night turned
into a shining Knight and who had to accept his daytime looks to help
people. (There wasnt a dry adult eye in hearing).

Parents all around were resettling the kids near us and big grins as we
found a simple way to keep them all tolerably entertained. I dare say we
entertained a few adults too with our antics ;-) Full plane and I think
every kid age 4-12 ended up within a few rows of us. I recall a major
resettling 'back to your parents now' called by the attendant about 10 mins
before you have to be seated for landing.

Funny things happen on plane trips. Most are pretty quiet but some stand
out if you fly often enough.

Perhaps 'Mr Man' was a good thing in the overall schema of life!

Goomba wrote:
> sf wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 11:49:16 -0400, "Virginia Tadrzynski"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Especially after the report regarding the air traffic controllers.
>>> After deregulation by Reagan, they now work on average of 10-12 hour
>>> shifts and get paid around $18k a year. They are wondering why the
>>> pool of controllers is inexperienced/inept. They get what they pay
>>> for.
>>
>> Unbelievable. I hoped they were back to a respected, professional
>> status after all these years. They hold our lives in the palm of
>> their hands.
>>
> I think Ginny's facts are inaccurate. That figure is about $8.50/hour.
> Burger King pays that much. I suspect something is amiss here?

One of my nephews is an air traffic controller in Houston. He earns
about 88K.

Becca