Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:58:16 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-4512090@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.46.173.3; envelope-from=mnewman@dragonnorth.com
Reply-to: <mnewman@dragonnorth.com>
From: "Michael Newman" <mnewman@dragonnorth.com>
References: <redirect-4511302@logan.com>
In-reply-to: <redirect-4511302@logan.com>
Subject: RE: [LML] Preserving Freedom -  Flying and otherwise
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Thread-index: ActvM3NhI/FazxeeRSestGVXsvGr+QAW9+dg
Content-language: en-us


>Just to creep the thread a little bit.  One other item to add to the list
is Obama >personally closing down airspace via TFR.  For example, today, you
could not land at any >Boston area airport without a flight plan and a
sqawk.  Nor could you do any of 12 forbidden >activities including practice
approaches.   Earlier this summer he effectively blocked >Martha's vineyard
for 2 weeks because of his vacation.    How did previous presidents get
>along without this kind of attention?   I would be okay with 1 hour to get
in and out but to >close down the airspace because somebody might take a pot
shot out of a spam can seems like >an unreasonably big hammer.    What's
next?   Nobody can go anywhere anytime without a >flight plan and a sqawk?
>
>Colyn

This is not new. The presidential TFR as we see it today has been in place
for several administrations. It was certainly in place during Mr. Bush's
administration.