Dude, Barak, buddy, you've got to start being more careful!
I'm not talking about the whole VP search (good luck trying to make everyone happy with that, by the way) or the odd "indecisive" accusation. I'm talking about the whole air transport thing.
When I first saw a news story about your airplane having to make an emergency landing, I thought it was typical mass-media-sensationalism and inevitable mis-reporting of aviation news. But then Aviation Week (which, granted, used to have a reputation for some sensationalistic "super-amazing-mega-airplane" scoops) picked it up with the cooly complex headline of In-Flight Malfunction on MD-81 Diverts Obama as opposed to "Barak Obama Plane Problem Scare," I knew it was legit.
Now Barak, we need to talk about this.
Flying an MD-81? I thought you'd moved up to a chartered Jet Blue Embraer or 737 now that the bickering with Hilary died down? So if you're thinking to save money by going with a DC-9 derivitive, while I understand the idea of saving some funds for the big three months after the conventions, let me remind you of a few facts:
One pilot nickname for the MD-80 is "death tube."
One of them cracked in half during a test flight (though I must say that is why you have test programs and this was a high-rate emergency landing test).
Airlines are retiring them left and right (primariliy due to operating cost, I'll admit).
There has been a pretty big rash of DC-9/MD-80 derivitive crashes this year.
Why take the chances? So when you get a chance to take a break from the vice president thing, spend a few moments double checking the air travel fleet if you can, OK? Did I mention the death tube thing?