Can’t we all agree that the stupidest poster on the SDMB is Clothahump?
Of course. I never meant to imply that Darth actually has a chance of taking the title; just that he seems to be making a play.
No thanks, I’m good.
Cite?
That’s a Bozo no-no, even in the Pit.
Please avoid it in the future.
Gfactor
Pit Moderator
I think Starving Artist at least gave him a run for the money with his “I’m going to illustrate the dangers of sex education by telling you about the time I discovered my dad’s porn stash and then tried to molest a fellow eight-year-old” post. Throw in the rest of the “Sarah Palin Proven Right About Death Panels” thread that that gem came from and he might come out on top.
And was gonzomax’s “Faggy is not insulting to gays and I’ll prove it by citing Ann Coulter using the word to describe John Edwards” thread from this year or last? If it’s this year, I don’t think you can rule him out of the running either.
Hell, Darth’s going to have to put a whole lot more effort into things to even claim the bronze this year.
I think Starving snatched the crown from all those with his “I will post a Google vomit and I will defend it for several pages as valid cite” when he could not find evidence that liberals were at fault for creationists/conservatives/republicans confusing evolution with the origin of life.
Hey, trying to find an actual cite, however ineptly, is a step up for the guy. If you mock him for it, he’ll never continue along that path and, who knows, maybe one day achieve borderline competence.
I will concede there is a war on Christmas (and Christianity) when choirs are no longer allowed to sign Sacred pieces.
I know! Let’s do it The Mouse That Roared way! Declare war on Christmas and surrender, and then Jesus and Santa have to rebuild our country! 
What with Black Friday and all, I thought that was the system we had already…
Update: Inhofe believes he was unfairly treated by the FAA and plans to introduce a bill limiting the agency’s ability to punish pilots who pulls stunts like this.
To further expand:
Of course, when decided to leave the airport he showed a little more common sense: he notified the airport that he would take off from a taxi-way. Didn’t know that rule was in the FAR. But he proceeded anyway. Of course, there were four other runways available.
Now, he’s going to play the martyr card: “Pilot’s Bill of Rights”. Now it could be argued that it’s a good thing–maybe the FAA needs some housecleaning, but for Inhofe it’s a three-for-one deal–1) impress your dumb-ass constitutes that “big government” is persecuting the little guy, which in turn 2) deflects criticism concerning the gross negligence of Inhofe actions as a pilot-in-command, and 3) encourages further cynicism towards government in general.
Inhofe is a pilot with 10,000 hours+ and a certified flight instructor.
You can’t make this stuff up. 
I liked the part where he got his required remedial training from one of his former students.
The guy needs to take more opportunities to shut up. He should have been arrested for reckless endangerment. Most of us would have been. Different spanks for different ranks …
Here’s a good summary of the latest on Inhofe and the FAA from James Fallows at The Atlantic, who’s a pilot himself.
Goddam it, I’m going to take Inhofe’s side a little.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with taking instruction from a former student if that person is certified as an instructor. I give recurrent training to two of my former instructors. The three of us all have over 2000 hours, so why not?
As for the bill, I can kinda sorta agree with some of it. I do think the FAA has a tendency to remove anthills with A-bombs. But I also agree with user_hostile that Inhofe’s motives are more self serving.
I see it as ironic–I would hazard to guess Inhofe would have been a pretty good instructor. But he blew his reputation as a CFI–your called to set an example. His students would have been very disappointed, if not outright disgusted with his actions.
Let’s forget for a moment that he is a Senator and only got a slap from the FAA–is there anyone on this Board who would be willing to fly as a passenger with Inhofe at the controls?
Normally, no, but this was not a normal situation. I’m referring to the strong pressure the CFI must have felt to be, shall we say, excessively deferential rather than to give effective correction.
Curious: Does recurrent training differ significantly from remedial training?
Yes. Remedial implies “remedying” a problem. So when a pilot does something wrong - or irretrievably stupid, like Mr. Inhofe - the FAA will often require them to take training that addresses the issue relevant to the incident.
Recurrent training is the normal experience necessary for maintaining pilot privileges. All pilots have to take a flight review with an instructor every two years. At a minimum, this is one hour of ground instruction and one hour of flight instruction. Actual times and tasks are at the discretion of the instructor. The flight review can also be bypassed by passing a checkride during the two years.
To maintain instrument flight privileges a pilot can either accrue a certain amount and type of instrument flight (over 6-12 months), or take an instrument proficiency check with an instrument instructor. That would also be recurrent training. I and my former instructors regularly give each other flight reviews and instrument checks.
It seems Inhofe was required to take remedial training, presumably to remind him what NOTAMS are, what big X’s on runways mean, and to help pull his head out of his ass.
To address ElvisLive’s comment: I take your point, but the CFI giving remedial instruction is also under pressure from the FSDO. I knew an instructor who gave remedial training to a guy who had busted airspace. When the guy went for the 709 checkride they decided the CFI didn’t do a good enough job with him and then 709’d HIM. I’m always careful with FAA required remedial training for this reason.