President Obama Joins With McCain to Eliminate Raptor Fighter Jets
President Obama and his former election rival Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., have found common cause: they are both seeking to eliminate the F-22 fighter jet from the National Defense Authorization Act.
In letters to McCain, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and the committee chair, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the president urged his support for efforts to eliminate funding for the F-22 "Raptor" beyond the existing contract. (Read the letters HERE.)
Pledging to "veto any bill that supports acquisition of F-22s beyond the 187 already funded by Congress," the president said that Defense Secretary Robert Gates "and the military leadership have determined, we do not need these planes."
When the Defense bill was going through committee, both McCain and Levin voted to strip funding for the F-22, but they lost by a vote of 13-11 and $1.75 billion for seven more Lockheed Martin Raptors is currently in the bill.
The pricey aircraft have never flown in combat and have had frequent maintenance problems. The president first threatened to veto the defense bill if it includes F-22 funding at the end of June, his third veto threat. (Before he was inaugurated, president-elect Obama threatened to veto any bill that held up the second $350 billion in economic stabilization TARP funds, and he has threatened to veto the intelligence bill if it included a provision requiring disclosure to Congress of executive branch deliberations and advice regarding covert actions.
There is currently an amendment on the on the Senate floor, one that could be voted on today, to strike the F-22 funding. At last count, McCain said he did not have the votes to kill the funding.
McCain recently told his Senate colleagues that "supporting the continuation of the program serves only parochial interests at the considerable expense of the Department of Defense and ultimately the taxpayer" and that stopping the program's funding is "vital to achieving the correct balance between the needs of our deployed forces and the requirements for meeting the emerging threats of tomorrow."
Defense contractors, the United Steelworkers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers have lobbied for the F-22, arguing that the 22,000 manufacturing jobs in 44 states affiliated with the jet's production need to be preserved. Others have argued that the jets are needed for defense.
The F-22 "is the most sophisticated fighter jet in the world with the latest stealth technology to reduce detection by radar" and is "vital to 21st century American military superiority" said F-22 champions GOP Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson of Georgia, where the F-22 is largely manufactured. The two said that "the decision to limit funding to 187 planes is driven by budgetary decisions, not military requirements" and called it "regrettable that the administration needs to issue a veto threat for funding intended to meet a real national security requirement that has been consistently confirmed by our uniformed military leaders.”
But the Pentagon determination that 183 F-22s are enough "was not made casually," the president wrote, saying the conclusion was based on several analyses based on the length and type of wars the Pentagon thinks it might have to fight in the future and an estimate of the future capabilities of likely enemies.
Spending the $1.75 billion on seven more Raptors, the president wrote, will "waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do need."
-jpt
Email
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
While I applaud Mssrs. McCain and Obama for their fiscal restraint (a trait not often witnessed inside of the DC beltway), production of these planes provide REAL jobs, not the type of jobs The One has touted in his failed “stimulus” package.
BTW, $1.75B is 0.22% of the funds ($787B) appropriated within the failed “stimulus” package.
Posted by: tjp612 | July 14, 2009, 10:10 am 10:10 am
Why won’t the Louisiana governor and other top Republicans denounce the Young Republicans’ new chairman, Audra Shay, who’s accused of spreading racial hate on Facebook? check TDB
Posted by: watching | July 14, 2009, 10:17 am 10:17 am
tjp,
FYI: “Spending the $1.75 billion on seven more Raptors, the president wrote, will ‘waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do need.’”
Does money spent for the military but on other projects somehow kill jobs? Or are the jobs that the 1.75Bn spent elsewhere create not “REAL”? That’s your implication.
Posted by: Reality Talking | July 14, 2009, 10:18 am 10:18 am
Honestly, the defense budget needs to be cut by 75% or more. Very little of what is spent on defense has any real world use.
Future security threats to the U.S. are almost entirely handled by intelligence and special ops like activities.
The nuclear age killed off the need for a massive conventional U.S. military, it’s just mind-blowing that it’s 60-70 years after and the government is -STILL- funding these projects.
Posted by: Atl | July 14, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
Why not use the same money to make weapons our armed services actually need at the same facilities and by the same people who built the Raptors = Win/Win!
Posted by: Jiva Soul | July 14, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
tjp612,
So let me get this right. We should continue to manufacture planes that according to Robert Gates (a Republican BTW) are not being using in combat and that have severe malfunction problems to save jobs. Isn’t that the same as building a bridge to nowhere just to save or create jobs?
Posted by: jddcp | July 14, 2009, 10:21 am 10:21 am
If Obama had his way our troops would be using soda straws and plastic swords to fight with. We can sell the F-22 to Israel/France/The UK/Holland and Germany not to mention others and provide thousands of jobs to Americans. But know let’s just kill the program and print more worthless money. Obama is a joke
Posted by: JJ | July 14, 2009, 10:22 am 10:22 am
Providing real jobs to make a surplus of planes is a waste! Less than half the stimulus money has been distributed, so how can one call it a “failed stimulus” package? It takes more than a few months to correct what took 8 years to make!
Posted by: Try the truth | July 14, 2009, 10:23 am 10:23 am
Also, how is the stimulus plan a failure? None of the measurables were supposed to be evident until early 2010. It is only 5 months since the thing passed! Do you think billion dollar projects are planned, competed for, contracted for and built in 5 months?
Posted by: jddcp | July 14, 2009, 10:24 am 10:24 am
tjp612: Sure they provide jobs, but wouldn’t that same money help more than 22,000 jobs if it wasn’t spent on expensive military purchases?
Posted by: mjt77 | July 14, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
Why is allowing the production of these planes any different from providing stimulus to the American economy? It is the wrong time to make these kinds of cuts.
Posted by: Roddy | July 14, 2009, 10:30 am 10:30 am
Shame on those of you who turn this bipartisan and wise fiscal management of your precious tax dollars into an argument about jobs. Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex – if you’ve staked your economic health on manufacturing death machines you are part of the problem. Here’s an idea: Teaching is a REAL job. Why not fund more and better teachers (something the entire southeast would benefit from). Or maybe we invest that 2 billion in renewal energy development, so less of our troops need to fight wars for energy/oil interests. I applaud this decision, and wish they’d scrap funding for the additional 187 which are contracted to b rebuilt.
Posted by: Jack Gaul | July 14, 2009, 10:34 am 10:34 am
The US should buy at least another 63 raptors,all the banking institutions that recieved bail-out should pay.[goldman-sachs et-al]
Posted by: Valiant-Thor | July 14, 2009, 10:36 am 10:36 am
“Also, how is the stimulus plan a failure? None of the measurables were supposed to be evident until early 2010. It is only 5 months since the thing passed! Do you think billion dollar projects are planned, competed for, contracted for and built in 5 months?”
The effectiveness of any stimulus plan should be measured on three criteria:
1. Is it timely? (no, the vast majority of funding will not be distributed in 2009)
2. Is it targeted? (again, no – this “stimulus” package is a wishlist of liberal hand-outs and goodies0
3. Is it temporary? (again, no – there are elements that are binding.
Obama stated that “this is the worst economy since the Great Depression” and “swift action was needed to get the economy back on track”. They also stated that if no action was taken unemployment would exceed 9% (I’m sure you have noticed we are at 9.5% and climbing – 11% next year is not outside the realm of possibility). Cristina Romer’s (Obama economic adviser) projections show that if no action had been taken we would be better off than we are today. So how can you credibly claim the stimulus has not been a failure? Where are the jobs?
As far as your claim regarding “billion dollar projects”, project that received funding were supposed to be “shovel ready”, remember?
Posted by: tjp612 | July 14, 2009, 10:38 am 10:38 am
John McCain is a responsible leader who is wise to team up with the president to speak out against this wasteful spending. He believes in true bipartisanship– finding common ground where possible, not simply strong arming a political opponent to get in line with what you want. We moderates are glad to see such efforts and wish there were more of them.
Yes, airplane manufacture does provide real, substantial jobs. However, the way the manufacturing of these airplanes is spread over 40 states and 40 congressional districts is inefficient and done to maintain political support for the contract, not to built the planes as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible. McCain has long kept a sharp eye on such maneuvers. When military spending is needed, he says so loud and clear, and when it is wasteful, he says that, too. I am proud to have voted for him.
Posted by: moderate | July 14, 2009, 10:43 am 10:43 am
“Isn’t that the same as building a bridge to nowhere just to save or create jobs?”
Actually, the “stimulus” package isn’t even doing that much. Funds are being routed to citizens in the form of transfer payments via entitlements (e.g., extension of unemployment benefits, etc.) and to shore up state budget shortfalls (e.g., Medicaid). So, it is no surprise that jobs are not being created.
Are these additional planes critical to national defense? Probably not. But, my point is, allocating spending towards these existing jobs is a much better bet to create/”save” jobs than funneling funds through inefficient (and in some cases, corrupt) federal, state, and local bureaucracies.
Posted by: tjp612 | July 14, 2009, 10:48 am 10:48 am
I agree with JJ,if they won’t buy more Raptors for US then they should cancel the export restriction and allow LM to sell 500+ to the allied nations.
Posted by: Valiant-Thor | July 14, 2009, 10:58 am 10:58 am
Yes, extending the contract would be a relatively small amount of money by this administration’s standards, but that’s still taxpayer money being wasted. (If the Secretary of Defense says it’d be wasted, it’d be wasted.)
The less of my money the government wastes, the better. It was bad enough with the stimulus and other crap.
Posted by: Mike | July 14, 2009, 11:02 am 11:02 am
If the Pentagon deems that we have enough already, or will have enough w/ the existing contract, then so be it. Why build more than we need just for the sake of doing so. I’m never in favor of spending government money for the sake of it, especially to build something that the purchaser really doesn’t need, want or desire. It’s a waste. If it were just Obama wanting this cut – rather than w/ McCain – I’d see it as simply a political move, but it seems legit (well, as legit as any government decision can get I guess).
Besides, I would presume we could build them up rather quickly if we ever truly need them in the future. Like in WWII.
And sure, compared to the porkulus package passed by the libs, this is a drop in the bucket, but to me, a tax dollar wasted is a tax dollar wasted. If you are going to spend our money, spend it on things we need (like armor for the Hummers??).
Posted by: Obama, the Second Coming | July 14, 2009, 11:33 am 11:33 am
It’s not just the jobs that need to be supported but also the tech skills base,a brain drain to other nations is not clever,sure investing in new eco-tech is wise but not at the expense of the defence budget,so they say we have all the planes we need for all the projected conflicts,what about the unforeseen conflicts.Typical politicrats that think war and defence can be done on a budget like its a luxury,well i can think of many other luxuries that i would sell before i got to my guns.Where is this one world brotherly love planet that these people live on?
Posted by: Valiant-Thor | July 14, 2009, 11:50 am 11:50 am
moderate,
Your claim aboutt WHY the component parts are spread all over shows an incredible lack of understand about the manufacturing of any complex product, mcuh less one of the the single most sophisticated machines ever built.
Try looking at ANY large machine built anywhere in the world. A company who is tasked with building that big product is not usually capable of producing every single component needed.
This is why niche markets exisit is the first place! Get A clue!
The shame here is not wether ot not a few more of these planes are absoultely “needed”. The real shame is that literally tohusands of jobs will be lost by not funding this plane.
I disagree with McCain here completely. I appreciate his stance, but given the hundreds of billions were are spending with very questionable results, at this time, spending 1.75 Billion to keep thousands employed is damn good deal!
Some one would be making the President eat those words….
Spending the $1.75 billion on seven more Raptors, the president wrote, will “waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do need.”
The statement is wrong, because the 1.75 Billion was REMOVED, not re-allocated!
If this is considered wasteful Mr. President, then what do you think people with common sense think of spending 787 BILLION for virtually no tangible results at all?
So much for being for those middle class workers!
I am sure those 22,000 people and their families appreciate that the President does nto think they are worth 1.75 Billion dollars considering his mad rush to SPEND hundreds upon hundreds of BILLIONS in support of HIS agenda!
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 11:56 am 11:56 am
The President is Jimmy Carter redux-he’s never seen a weapons program he didn’t want to cancel.
The President himself should know that a few billion is a drop in the bucket…this yr’s budget deficit is more than 500 times that amount.
Posted by: J House | July 14, 2009, 11:59 am 11:59 am
‘Try’,
Let me explain it to you…the President himself said, with the ‘stimulus’, unemployment wouldn’t go above 8%…he said it will return $1.50 for every dollar spent.
Did you recall him saying the ‘stimulus’ would not be effective in 2009, therefore, we need to pass it immediately?’
Could you provide the link or the quote in which he stated the ‘stimulus’ wouldn’t do much good this year…that we’d have to wait until next year?
It is pure spin from the White House and you are gullible.
Posted by: J House | July 14, 2009, 12:03 pm 12:03 pm
tjp612: Sure they provide jobs, but wouldn’t that same money help more than 22,000 jobs if it wasn’t spent on expensive military purchases?
mjt77,
actually a good question if not just a bit late in timing. Time now for simple math.
1,750,000,000 / 22,000 = $79,545 per job.
Now we all know that the entire 1.75B does not go to salaries, so on average here we are talking about is less and without question this is about middle class workers.
so, lets see…Obama told us ALL that unless we pass the “Stimulator” we “risked turning a crisis into a catastrophe”….REMEMBER????
so 787 Billion for 3.5 million jobs most of which were supposed to be much less skilled jobs than those required to build F22s. 787,000,000,000 / 3,500,000 = 224,857 per job. now that number is really not a fair assestment, so lets go the other way, how much of the “Stimulator” would be needed to get those 3.5M jobs? based on our 79,545 per job number from the F22…..
79,545 * 3,500,000 = 278,407,500,000
So was 278 Billion set aside in the Stimulator … directly to create jobs…trackable funds that were targeted to created those jobs?…and how much of it has been dispensed to the economy so far?
Think about it just in common sense terms here. Which expenditure gives the taxpayers the better deal?
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Obama, the Second Coming,
Right now, given all we have beeen doing to “save” jobs, create jobs, calling bills jobs bills when they clearly are not…
This is an incredibly STUPID thing to do. Interesting that Chuckie Shummer is not defending this little expenditure with Americans dont care.
I am pretty sure that those 22,000 people an their families care a GREAT deal. I am sure that after watching Obama & Congress deal BILLIONS out to auto companies that failed anyways, that they will just “suck it up” and take it on the chin so everyone can say….”see we saved the taxpayers 1.75 Billion dollars!!!!!!”
Then they get to watch the gov’t spew billions like a an engine with a blown gasket and as the Great “Stimulator” oozes forth all that money they watch as it does nothing for them!
How many of those 22,000 do you think are going to find a job on one those so-called “shovel-ready” infrrastructure projects?
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 12:43 pm 12:43 pm
Mike_C
“tjp612: Sure they provide jobs, but wouldn’t that same money help more than 22,000 jobs if it wasn’t spent on expensive military purchases?”
Yes, if you could trust Obama and the government to re-allocate this funding towards efforts to create/retain jobs. But, as we’ve seen, we cannot trust Obama and his policies. The “stimulus” is a failure (I’ll be saying the same in 2010 and 2011 – Anyone with a basic understanding of this bill and of economics can see it is not a bill intended to create jobs (cost-effectively).
So, as a taxpayer, I’d rather see money spent on efforts that will yield tangible results (such as construction of planes that while not necessarily needed will save jobs and produce a product we can either use or sell later). What is a better investment: $1.75B for 7 high-tech, state-of-the-art fighter jets or $50B shoveled to automotive companies? Billions shoveled to state governments with demonstrated lack of fiscal restraint (e.g., CA, NY) to shore up budget gaps and to, in effect, subsidize lack of fiscal discipline?
Posted by: tjp612 | July 14, 2009, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm
So conservatives think we’re supposed to use tax money to prop up an industry making equipment that is expensive to buy and maintain; equipment for the Defense Department that the Defense Department does not want, let alone need; equipment that according to Gates is already beginning to be made obsolete by the F35. But why would the DoD (remember that Gates is a Republican appointed by Bush, not really what you’d call an “Obamaniac” or a “Socialist”), and both sides of the Senate AFC, know better than Lockheed Martin what the DoD should purchase from Lockheed Martin? A conservative wrote on this board “But, my point is, allocating spending towards these existing jobs is a much better bet to create/”save” jobs than funneling funds through inefficient (and in some cases, corrupt) federal, state, and local bureaucracies.” Right, Lockheed, Boeing, et al, they’re never corrupt! They’re never ‘inefficient’. Why not throw our money away on an incredibly wealthy industry already completely subsidized by government in return for soon to be out of date technology we don’t want and can’t afford? I don’t get it, conservatives sound like anarchists when Democrats are in power, they sound like communists when Republicans are in power. Industries that are propped up with subsidies while at the same time being deregulated by Republicans for 20 out of 28 years are a major part of our economic woes today. Let’s not be conservatives and learn from our mistakes.
Posted by: garcho | July 14, 2009, 1:06 pm 1:06 pm
F-35 and the F-22 are worlds apart..Two entirely different aircraft with entirely different objectives…………
Posted by: Parallex View | July 14, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
JJ and Valiant…Can’t sell classified programs to foreign countries in the name of saving jobs…
Posted by: Parallex View | July 14, 2009, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm
The people who are crying about jobs are powerful, connected defense contractors who will get much larger chunks of the money than any working class folks. President Obama has made a noble effort to change the sleazy weapons contracting situation. Senator McCain is authentically patriotic and wants what’s best for our nation’s defense.
Don’t be deceived by the bogus rhetoric from the thieves that have been robbing us for a long time.
Posted by: randyg | July 14, 2009, 1:19 pm 1:19 pm
randyg…Ummm I believe you have defense contractors confused with our “the drinks are on me” present administration…you ain’t seen nothing yet, wait until Obama’s health/welfare program kicks in, but then again some who feed off of government sponsored social programs, because they are too lazy to work or retrain, won’t be complaining except at the defense budget…
Posted by: Parallex View | July 14, 2009, 1:33 pm 1:33 pm
We spend more than all other countries combined. I doubt cutting a few planes to leave 187 on the table is that big of an issue.
Build another interstate defense network willya? Too busy worrying about terrorism, we’re getting murdered on the commute!
Posted by: Cru | July 14, 2009, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
“Do you think billion dollar projects are planned, competed for, contracted for and built in 5 months?”
————————————-
Do you understand what “shovel-ready” MEANS?????????? Just to bring you up to speed….Those projects have ALREADY been thru the planning & competing stages, they are READY to be awarded!
Some actually have, but here is the kicker….since we have such deep oversight, no one is actually keeping track of how many new hires if any these companies were making. If they were, I guarantee you we would all be hearing about it!
By the way, since we were told it HAD to passed NOW, before they even had a chance to understand the real state of the economy (Damn that Biden guy when he lets the truth slip out!)
So, now the “revised” exstimates are how many jobs THIS year?….How many next year?
By the way “genius”, how many of those F22 workers do you think are going to get jobs in the construction companies that will be building the “shovel-ready” projects?
So, lets spend hundreds of billions more dollars now to try to re-employ those we cold have kept employed with a “paltry” 1.75 Billion!
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 2:19 pm 2:19 pm
“The people who are crying about jobs are powerful, connected defense contractors who will get much larger chunks of the money than any working class folks. President Obama has made a noble effort to change the sleazy weapons contracting situation. Senator McCain is authentically patriotic and wants what’s best for our nation’s defense.
“Don’t be deceived by the bogus rhetoric from the thieves that have been robbing us for a long time.” Posted by: randyg | Jul 14, 2009 1:19:52 PM
____________________________________
Agreed. Spend the money on expensive military crap (and it does sound like a poor product) to create jobs? If both President Obama and John McCain are against it . . . something seems fishy with the plane and the project.
Posted by: danita | July 14, 2009, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm
Danita,
So your ok with tossing all those jobs to the side in our current economic conditions? Your cool spending hundreds of Billions in hopes it may help the economy, but you dont want to spend 1.75B to keep 22,000 people working!
I am sure those people & thier families appreciate your liberal concerns!
So typical – Do as I say, Not As I Do!!!!!
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm
Mike_C . ..
I don’t not support the use of Government’s money on expensive pieces of military crap. If John McCain is against this plane, and he being a strong military supporter and a former pilot, something seems definitely to be wrong.
Posted by: danita | July 14, 2009, 3:12 pm 3:12 pm
What I don’t understand about this arguement is how 7 planes equals 22,000 jobs. They are still building 187 planes. It cannot require 22,000 people to build those 7 planes. Those 22,000 people would all be working on all of the planes. Cutting a little bit of excess from the bill goes to help pay for those huge stimulus plans already passed by the former and current administration.
If Lockhead Martin cuts 22,000 people just because it did not get a contract for 7 additional planes, that is Lockhead Martin’s cross to bear. This is a responsible thing to do, especially when the spending is going so high. If you spend more in some area’s you have to spend less in other area’s.
All you fiscal watch dogs must understand that concept at least. Crying like the sky is falling over 7 planes and people saying that will directly result in 22,000 jobs lost is disingenious at worst and nieve at best.
These 7 planes are probably a couple months worth of work and they would ideally be the last 7 planes of the project so by the time the previous 187 planes are built there could conceiveably be more money or different projects for those workers. It doesn’t have to be all doom and gloom. But I guess then you don’t get to lambast Obama if you don’t see it all that way.
Posted by: ZS California | July 14, 2009, 4:36 pm 4:36 pm
ZS,
Wake up and get informed. These are jobs scatered all over the country in rioles that support the constrcution of the plane and its thousnads of sub-components.!
Do you honestly believe any one company can build something as sophisitaced as that plane without drawing on the expertise of hundreds of companies across the nation?
Posted by: Mike_C | July 14, 2009, 4:45 pm 4:45 pm
“What I don’t understand about this arguement is how 7 planes equals 22,000 jobs. They are still building 187 planes. It cannot require 22,000 people to build those 7 planes.” Posted by: ZS California | Jul 14, 2009 4:36:14 PM
____________________________________
Doesn’t make sense to me either ZS, and Mike’s post doesn’t explain how 7 planes equals 22,000 jobs being lost.
Posted by: danita | July 14, 2009, 5:23 pm 5:23 pm
Plenty of apologists for the Military Industrial Complex in this thread.
Posted by: Trudy | July 14, 2009, 5:26 pm 5:26 pm
Think Hover Crafts and Cars!
Posted by: Yeil | July 14, 2009, 5:27 pm 5:27 pm
Mike_C, I am generally extremely supportive of military spending and do worry a great deal that President Obama will reduce necessary programs. That’s why I am trusting John McCain on this one. He is a strong supporter of the military and if he agrees that the planes would be redundant, then I defer to his superior knowledge in this area.
We will have to agree to disagree a tad about the spreading around of the project, which provides the sort of protection from budget cuts that defense contractors appreciate. I apologize for making it sound as if that were the ONLY reason for spreading the work around. I am well aware that something as complex as this jet requires specialized labor and cannot simply be built on one site. (The small business I co-own is involved in a very specialized niche in a very different industry, so believe me, I understand.) However, it is ALSO true that Lockheed and other defense contractors do not want to concentrate the labor in one district for political reasons as well. Yes, the complex work means there are multiple specialists involved, but I think there could be some GEOGRAPHIC consolidation. It is my experience that companies in related areas in an industry often locate near one another. Seems like some of the subcontractors on these projects could similarly be located in the same Congressional district more often than they are.
Posted by: moderate | July 14, 2009, 5:51 pm 5:51 pm
danita…Without going too far out on a limb, the F-22 is anything BUT a piece of military crap. You are only displaying your ignorance on a subject you know absolutely nothing about….
Posted by: Parallex View | July 14, 2009, 6:02 pm 6:02 pm
“Wake up and get informed. These are jobs scatered all over the country in rioles that support the constrcution of the plane and its thousnads of sub-components.!”
Also don’t forget the businesses that provides goods and services in these communities: restaurants, gas stations, etc., etc. that are part of the “multiplier effect” inherent within economies (remember the “multiplier effect”? Obama claimed that for each dollar of “stimulus investment” $1.50 would be created…not seeing it).
Posted by: tjp612 | July 14, 2009, 6:34 pm 6:34 pm
“the F-22 is anything BUT a piece of military crap….” Posted by: Parallex View | Jul 14, 2009 6:02:08 PM
________________________________________
“The pricey aircraft have never flown in combat and have had frequent maintenance problems.”
The F-22 has not received universally favorable reviews. And I stand by my original statement . ..
“I don’t not support the use of Government’s money on expensive pieces of military crap. If John McCain is against this plane, and he being a strong military supporter and a former pilot, something seems definitely to be wrong.”
Posted by: danita | July 14, 2009, 7:39 pm 7:39 pm
“What I don’t understand about this arguement is how 7 planes equals 22,000 jobs. They are still building 187 planes. It cannot require 22,000 people to build those 7 planes.” Posted by: ZS California | Jul 14, 2009 4:36:14 PM
____________________________________
Doesn’t make sense to me either ZS, and Mike’s post doesn’t explain how 7 planes equals 22,000 jobs being lost.
Posted by: danita | July 14, 2009, 7:40 pm 7:40 pm
“Also don’t forget the businesses that provides goods and services in these communities: restaurants, gas stations, etc., etc. that are part of the “multiplier effect” inherent within economies”
Funny, you didn’t give a crap about the millions of jobs attached to the auto industry in your zeal to stick it to the unions.
So are you a complete fraud in real life or just when posting for the GOP?
Posted by: Ryan C | July 14, 2009, 7:48 pm 7:48 pm
danita..and I stand by my original statement..the F-22 is anything but a piece of military crap..This aircraft dominates the airspace in which it patrols and is worth every penny..BTW McCain has not flown for 40 plus years. To suggest McCain is an expert on current military aircraft is like saying my 90 year old grandfather is an expert on current computer applications..McCain is past his prime and needs to retire..BTW If he is so great why did the liberals trash him at every opportunity this past election??? Mcold, Mclame……
Posted by: Parallex View | July 15, 2009, 1:20 am 1:20 am
Maybe if MC Cain Had been flying a stealthy, super fast airplane like Raptor he wouldn’t have had the misfortune of being shot down; now, he wants other young American pilots to suffer his fate. I hope Obama doesn’t think like this old dummy.
Posted by: Rick M. | July 20, 2009, 5:13 pm 5:13 pm
WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!We need those planes….Every country is already tryn to duplicate this aircraft China, Russia, korea ,must i go on?….We should be designen a brand new raptor to stay ahead of the world…HOW CAN THE PENTAGON PROJECT WHAT WE WILL NEED IN WAR….Are Our goverment officials now smarter than ever and can predict wars now?….WWHAT A JOKE!!!!!!WAKE UP PEOPLE AND NOT WHEN ITS NOT TO LATE.
Posted by: Col John Ross | July 30, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm