Boeing supporters target McCain

[Indi Guy]

Source: boston.com



By Matthew Daly
Associated Press Writer / March 8, 2008

WASHINGTON—Angry Boeing supporters are vowing revenge against Republican presidential candidate John McCain over Chicago-based Boeing's loss of a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract to the parent company of European plane maker Airbus.

There are other targets for their ire -- the Air Force, the defense secretary and even the entire Bush administration.

But Boeing supporters in Congress are directing their wrath at McCain, the Arizona senator and nominee in waiting, for scuttling an earlier deal that would have let Boeing build the next generation of Air Force refueling tankers. Boeing now will miss out on a deal that it says would have supported 44,000 new and existing jobs at the company and suppliers in 40 states.

"I hope the voters of this state remember what John McCain has done to them and their jobs," said Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Wash., whose state would have been home to the tanker program and gained about 9,000 jobs...

Read more: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/08/boeing_supporters_target_mccain

[physioex]

1. I dunno the all the details behind the Boeing deal...

There was mention that the Air Force was not honest in their speicifications or Boeing would have initially selected a larger airplane. Anyways WA will never go to McSame.

[Indi Guy]

3. I actually supported McCain in his primary bid against Bush in 2000...

He's so completely sold out to the traitorous neocon agenda since then that he's patently unelectable.

This Boeing thing is a perfect example.

[ingac70]

7. The Repukes...

voted in 2003 to allow Boeing to compete with foreign companies for military contracts. It was along party lines with one Dem voting yea... Zell Miller. McCain authored the legislation.

Folks in Kansas are pissed too!

[bunkerbuster1]

2. Good. Mo' money and mo' power against this evil neocon creep.

Nice to see a positive story for a change.

[Indi Guy]

4. To quote Pat Buchanan..

"He’s very bellicose. He’s got that very in-your-face attitude Bush does. I think we could very well be at war with Iran. That’s one of the reasons I’ve always been skeptical of McCain. I think he’s Bush on steroids." -- http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/22/buchanan-mccain-is-bush-on-steroids/

[Diclotican]

5. Indi Guy

Indi Guy

Americans. Relax. Boeing would get so many "sub-construction" jobs, that in fact the Northrop Grumman/EADS so in fact it can be questioned if the A330 tanker would be american made or european made.. :sarcasm: This is just Boeing crying over the fact that they don't get the tanker deal... Who was to make the Boeing 767-400 to exist a lot longer... The Boeing Company was SO sure they should get the deal, and the bomb was that they don't get the deal as they always belived... It was a sure bet, that USAF would go to Boeing after maybe 50 year with the KC135? Tanker.

And if Northrop Grumman/EADS get the deal, it would be building in USA, not in Europe. MANY european would lose their job, so the factory in Mobile Alabama would be made, and for the most part american would get the jobs that Airbus hax here in Europe..

So why cry?.. If Airbus was getting the deal, with a better aircraft than the Boeing was to give.. Why cry so much over the fact?.. Is this the new american century, cry to you get what you want?... Specially when it come to US military?.. Specially when a foreigner are building a aircraft that would stay in the military stable for maybe 40 year...?

By two cents, is that this deal with Northrop Grumman/EADS would be overturned over "technical stuff" and then the deal given to Boeing, who would be so happy to get the deal... This was rigged from the beginning, and the fact that Boeing for the moment are on the loosing end, would not stop it from happening anyway. Boeing would get either a deal with NG/EADS who the Boeing would be stamped over the whole Aircraft. Or Boeing would cry to the deal is of with NG/EADS and the Boeing rewarded the Tanker deal in the end...

Even if Airbus are a better aircraft then B767-400...

Diclotican

Sorry my bad English, not my native language

[dixiegrrrrl]

14. Actually, the Airbus will be built in europe

and assembled here in Mobile, according to a lengthy article in the Mobile
newspaper this weekend.
Parts of the plane will be made in several European countries, even Spain, I think, flown here to build the planes.
Seems strange to me, but after watching all the sub-contracting games going on, led by Halliburton and KBR, parting out pieces of construction seems to be the new business model.
Then when the wings fall off, fingers can point every whichaway.
Actually, after the Navy punished Northrop Grumman Corp.
for the enormous screw ups of the Littoral Combat Ship built in Ingalls shipyard in Mississippi, I am surprised that Gruman got the Airbus contract.
Well, maybe not "surprised"....this IS Bushland.

[Diclotican]

15. dixiegrrrrl

dixiegrrrrl

Yes I know about the Mobile Case.. But I would bet the last word in this saga are _not_ been said yet.. If just enough Boeing lobbyist are talking to the elected interest in Congress and in the Senate, the deal with Northrop Grumman and Airbus it would be Boeing, and 767-400 who would win the deal in the end.. Or if Airbus are to REALLY get the deal. The deal would be that Boeing would be given so many sub-contract that the poor Airbus, could easily been made in US, as a Boeing product alone... You can get alloust all the electronic would be american made.. Even if they are worse than the european electronic for the Airbus are.. Boeing Will just CRY to the point that both Airbus, and the Congress and Senate would cave in and give them what they want all along.. Command over a product who are not "the product of Boeing":..

Well, first of all Airbus must build a plant in USA.. Then they have to send all the Pisces both to the plant, and to the aircraft itself, before they can start build the dam thing.. I doubt that a Airbus made in Europe, or a Airbus made in US would be worse, or better than the counterpart.. I would guess the same product would be a good one.. After all. Airbus HAVE build aircraft before...

I am not familiar with the Littoral Combat Ship case in Ingalls Shipyard in Mississippi, but if I am not totally wrong it have with some modernize ring of a type of ships, who was been screwed royalty up when everything was wrong from the get go?:. And the US NAVY was getting ships, they was not cable of using even in fair water...

It IS bushland... So I would not be surprised if Boeing get the final deal anyway... And Airbus get the boot...

Diclotican

Sorry my bad English, not my native language

[ingac70]

6. They should go after the whole Repuke party...

every last one of the fuckers voted for this shit in 2003... only one Dem voted to allow this to happen.... Zell Miller.

[lanlady]

8. Boeing and AF were own worst enemies

There was mass corruption involved in the first deal, and at least 2 AF civilian officials went to jail for accepting bribes. McCain version 1.0 "The Maverick" made an issue of it. Now it comes back to bite McCain version 2.0 "Craven Republican Hypocrite" in the ass.

[liberalhistorian]

11. Excellent way of putting it, and that's

exactly what happened.

[ingac70]

9. kick.

[DetlefK]

10. McCain did the right thing: He scrapped the Boeing deal because of bribery charges.

Boeing bribed in 2006 (or 2002, I don't remember clearly) a member of the DoD, to get technical information of the plane Airbus was trying to sell.

She sold the info, quit her job and got a well-paid one at Boeing.
Boeing almost got that contract in a sweetheart-deal, but it came out, and she and the boss of Boeing went to jail.

The contract was renegotiated.

[YankmeCrankme]

12. Exactly

Not in any way supporting McCain, but what he did was right. He exposed some of the corruption between military contractors and procurement officials in the military. Boeing deserved to get exposed and penalized. Some of the people even spent time in jail.

Sorry they couldn't compete without insider, sweetheart deals. Though, like someone stated, it will probably be negated and awarded back to Boeing. So much for that Republican global economy, free trade ideal. lol

[OKthatsIT]

13. BOEING MOVED TO CHINA....they're shutting Ops down in the USA

Please...don't just read headlines.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

16. Boeing should have been banned from this competition to begin with

on the basis of the corruption scandal alone.

Giving this business to Boeing after throwing a bunch of assholes in jail would send the message to corporate america that defrauding the taxpayer has no consequences except to those you select to throw under the bus.

Getting another widebody airliner assembly plant built in the United States hardly seems a cause for outrage.

[Igel]

17. No-bid contracts are bad.

Unless, of course, we like them. Then they're good.

That *is* the take-away message of this, isn't it?

Bribes are bad, and contracts that come from bribes show corruption. Unless we like them, then bribes are good and resulting contracts show integrity. As does defending them.

Yet another take-away message, right?