McCain Amendment Allowed U.S. Military Equipment Outsourcing
By Logan Murphy Tuesday Mar 04, 2008 12:40pm
When Senator John McCain spoke of less jobs and more war, no one could have predicted it would lead to this:
From the Kansas Democratic Party:
Yesterday, John McCain defended the Air Force decision to overlook Wichita-based Boeing Co. for a $35 billion contract to build airborne refueling planes, saying he would not work to overturn the decision and saying that military decisions should not be about creating jobs. [McCain Town Hall Meeting, Waco TX, 3/3/08; AP, 3/3/08] Unfortunately for American workers, McCain has the record to back his statement up.
In 2003, Sen. McCain authored an amendment undermining “Buy American” rules requiring U.S. military equipment, defense systems and components to be manufactured in the United States. By allowing the Department of Defense to purchase American military equipment from foreign companies, the McCain amendment laid the groundwork for the Air Force’s decision to outsource the production of refueling tankers for the American military. The amendment passed along party lines with Kansas Senators Roberts and Brownback voting in its favor. [Vote 191, 5/21/03]
“McCain’s refusal to question the Air Force’s decision gives us a glimpse into the kind of economic policy we can expect from a McCain presidency.” asked Kansas Democratic Party Executive Director Mike Gaughan. “His track record clearly demonstrates a lack of commitment to investing in the American economy. In fact, the only economic plan we’ve heard from John McCain so far is making George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy permanent in 2010.” Read on...
McCain's amendment bolstered by GOP support cost some 44,000 jobs nationwide and took hundreds of millions of dollars out of the U.S. economy -- which has made a LOT of people VERY angry and Congress may be looking into the deal. If you look at the roll call on McCain's amendment you'll see that only one Democratic Senator voted for the amendment. Less jobs, more war, indeed...
Login or Register to post comments.
.
IMPEACH
CHENEY
FIRST!!!
.
I was truly shocked wnem I learned that a consortium built around Airbus received the tanker contract from the USAF. Not only the fact that they went with an overseas company, but I thought Boeing was pretty much a monopoly on these things as far as the US military was concerned. Sheesh, at least as long as we're feeding the MI complex, we should at least allow for a little trickle down to american aerospace workers!
A country that doesn't build it own weapons is a country that can be sold outdated weapons.
.
LOL
Outsourcing the American Military Industrial Complex...
.
I'm wondering just exactly how many of those people who may very well be losing their jobs have been loyal GOP voters, because...hell...they work in the defense industry and that industry is GOP property. The GOP always looks after it's own , right?
On the other side of the coin, anything that sends defense jobs oversees weakens the hold of the military-industrial complex on our nation's throat.
C'mon folks, the MIC is international in scope - always has been!
McCain looks like an arse in those sunglasses.
[Deleted]
Paul @ 5:
THE IRONY! Oh well, karma can be such a bitch....snicker, snicker.
John McSame. His platform? More of the same old bush policies. Feed the rich, starve the middle class and poor.
this creates one of the most perfect opportunities for foreigners to cause harm to us. this creates an opportunity for Al Qaeda to not just plant an operative to "work on a plane" at Boeing, it creates an opportunity for an entire team of operatives to manage and entire R&D project.
then again, I'm one of those wacky types who thought it a little too "coincidental" when we bought cat food, toothpaste and children's cough syrup from China tainted with rat poison.
Does Boeing have an inferior product? I mean, if it is cheaper and better to have someone else build it, why not? Jobs? What if it is cheaper,even when you consider the jobs? Perhaps this could be the start of ending all the military spending that isn't necessary any more. That money could be better spent somewhere else.
Bangkok Bob @ 9:
NEW YORK - Oil surged Wednesday, rising a remarkable $5 a barrel to a new record over $104 a barrel.
L.A. Confidential @ 12:
Worry not. Wait until water goes the same route. THEN worry.
Strawberrybitch @ 8:
Indeed!. As for the MIC, it is as bluelensman point out an international form of cancer. But hope does spring eternal...
Perhaps they should start recruiting soldiers for their endless wars where they buy their goods, that is in China and France. Just what the hell is our "defense department" defending? It's clear that the interests of the multi-national corporations always trump those of the American taxpayer and worker.
Bangkok Bob @ 9:
these are the sort of positions
yup and seeing how unpopular bush and his policies are with the ppl, if he gets elected we will know for sure that democracy is rigged in america...
we cannot continue to create civilian jobs and expect our young people to join the military...
only in a weak economy can we expect the ranks of our military to fill up...
we need to be reasonable...
Hey look, it's Darth Vaguer modeling his desert wear.
ConcernedCanuck @ 11:
Well Americans have gotten addicted to buying lot's of cheap junk. It's to expensive to make our own cheap junk to consume and toss away when it falls apart or we have to have another buying fix, so China's producing the junk for us and the consequence of that is U.S. Wages have to go down to be competitive.
What happened to quality?
When they outsourced the night vision goggles ITT got a whopping fine. But the big issue really was the exporting of the technology that is used to protect us "here at home". A matter of how can we be technologically advanced if they are making our equipment for us? Kind of like buying body armour at Walmart.
If they really want to "fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" then we need to keep the technology used to fight "them" here. Promoting otherwise could be considered treasonous, no?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtkK3eijBso
burnt @ 10:
Actually, I think it's a bit too coincidental as well...
As for Boeing losing the contract to Airbus....they were out-bid. This was 2 years in the process, and Boeing lost. And Airbus is owned or a partner of Northrup Grumman...so there will still be alot of Americans actually assembling these planes in Alabama or Miss...the politians complaining are the ones that have Boeing plants in their states.
As for an al qaeda op "working" on the plane...possible...but lately, europeans seem to be better at sniffing out terrorists than we are...
John "Fetch" MyCane. Ready to finish America off once and for all.
Did anyone notice who the only Democrat to vote for that garbage was? None other than Zell Miller. What a shock!!
[deleted - see the commenting policy. sitemonitor]
juan pablo mcshitstaininsane just keeps the hypocrisy goin doesn't he. the next thing you know he's gonna try to convince everyone he's not a old decrepit senile psychotic deranged demented maniacal lunatic huh
Homo say whaa? @ 15:
U.S. has already "out-sourced" soldiers in Iraq via private contractors, most publicized example is Blackwater. We are moving to a scenario where weapons are overseas by cheaper labor, soldiers are either contracted foreigners or robots, and the money to pay all this is borrowed from foreign government, to be re-paid by future American generations. This is a stack of cards waiting to collapse!
Ironic America's first completely green city will be in Kansas huh?
http://www.greensburgks.org/
As a tax payer i have no problem with the govt shopping around. Let's not forget who is paying for all this. What I want to know is: was the Euro bid either cheaper, or for better product?
L.A. Confidential @ 19:
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Between corporate greed and the lackluster manufacturing of garbage passed off as quality, it's no wonder people buy other nation's junk. If you are going to buy junk, why not buy the cheapest? Nobody has pride in their work anymore. Hell, most young people you can't even get to do any work. My industry has had a shortage of workers for at least the last 10 years. To the point where the starting wage is actually one of the highest around. Yet we cannot get workers. The young people find the work "too hard" or the extra money "not worth it to have to work those hours and get dirty"................society has got soft. Gimme, gimme, gimme.
Not to rain on anyone's anti-McCain parade (I wouldn't vote for him for significant amounts of cash), but ...
Boeing lost the contract fair and square, by the Congress's own rules, as well they should have. Boeing did get the original contract when it was first offered a couple years ago and Airbus was eliminated almost immediately. However, the deal Boeing got was so bad (as in corrupt) that the GAO and some members of Congress (including McCain) protested. The deal was cancelled and a new RFP was issued last year. In the meantime, two Pentagon officials went to jail and the CEO of Boeing was forced to resign. From the CNN story:
In 2004, Congress, led by Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, banned the Air Force from working out a lease and purchase deal with Boeing after a federal investigation uncovered improprieties at the highest levels of the Air Force procurement processCongress called for an open competitive bidding process for the second RFP and Airbus beat Boeing hands down. In a bid with five categories, EADS/NG (Airbus) beat Boeing in four out of five and tied in the fifth. Why shouldn't Airbus get the contract, especially since they're going to build a plant in Alabama to do the assembly? Are we as a country now obligated to pay exorbitant prices on corrupt contracts as long as the money is going to American companies?
What's even scarier to me (although I do not want to lose jobs anymore than anyone) - is the very idea of outsourcing vital military equipment: Period.
I'm not a paranoid person by any stretch; but it seems to me that if your country CAN build most/all of its own military gear; it should. There's just too many risks in having it manufactured anywhere else.
From the story linled to:
Northrop and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. are offering an Airbus A330 jet that would be modified into a tanker at a factory to be built in Mobile, Ala. EADS recently announced that it would also assemble A330 commercial freighters in Mobile if it won the tanker competition.
Sounds mostly like the jobs are moving from Seattle to Mobile, AL.
BobD @ 20:
You are forgetting something. A lot of that technology is from "there" or "there" and not from "here"........if it wasn't for German scientists around World War 2, missile technology might have taken decades to succeed in the US. Waving the flag does not necessarily produce superior technology.
#7. Agree with you there. The hat is also not too fetching. Looks like he is ready for a retirement home in Florida.
Let's see, as far as I know we have yet to be "reimbursed" the billions we have spent on our Iraq misadventure with oil revenues and we are going to spend billions outsourcing defense contracts which will cost American jobs. But not to worry it's not like this money could have been better spend on crumbling bridges, roads, schools, education, healthcare or any of that "big government" stuff the liberals want to waste it on.
ConcernedCanuck @ 30:
Thats right. And one of the big reasons I have opted out of carrying the risk of a big business enterprise. Sadly, because it's something I wanted to do. Finding help thats going to stick with the enterprise in this new something for nothing I can be an American Idol too society is next to impossible.
I'd prefer they not build the bullshit, full stop. That said, how much will $40b= really as the Euro gets stronger and the dollar weakens? It's a 15 year contract. Unless the quote was for $ only, and I doubt that.
I'm surprised that Murray and Cantwell didn't muscle Roberts and Brownback into voting their way...Ooops, I was thinking of Magnuson and Jackson. The 'Hos for Boeing' need to be pimps.
And how were the Illinois votes? Boeing dumped this backwater Seattle for Chi-town a few years back for its 'International HQ'
Remo @ 31:
If the surge is working and progress is being made in Iraq and Baghdad is safe... then why the heck is McCain wearing a disguise ..... IN THE GREEN ZONE !?!?!?!?!?
Right on Remo
Chico @ 40:
Oh wait, that's McCain's mom.
nevermind.
Brownback is now complaining about it No mention of his vote that caused it.
Boeing had the contract until this scandel was exposed. I believe it was McCain the headed up the Senate investigation and the contracts were rescinded.
http://www.nlpc.org/view.asp?action=viewArticle&aid=822
YEAH, and look at which Dem. Senator it was... everyone's favorite Dueling Republican, Zell Miller!
ConcernedCanuck @ 11:
Besides what Remo wrote, Boeing bid their 767, which not only is smaller than the Airbus 330 (including by max takeoff weight), it's older (1982 vs 1992). Also has fewer accidents (total, which is due in part to a shorter operating period).
Not knowing all of the AF criteria, I'd have to say that they made the right choice, looking at the technical data.
The Airbus has fewer accidents, that is.
Look guys, I'm as much of a democrat as the next guy, but when all of you are talking about shipping jobs overseas, and out-sourcing jobs, the new NG plant in Mobile, AL will employ 1,800 of your fellow Americans. Not to mention, several thousand more sub-contractors. So please, get off your buy American high horses.
Why give the airmen of this country an inferior product, just to appease a couple of sore losers. Why were they not crying foul when it looked as like it was a given that Boeing was going to get the contract. The Air Force wants the best available jets, why give them anything less. By the way, Boeing could only guarantee that 85% of their offering would be American made.
Thank you, and drive safely.
Sigh @ 33:
It sounds like Airbus, like most other European manufacturers, are trying to protect themselves from whimsical US tariffs by putting symbolic factories in the US of A.
In any case, Boeing is now mostly just an assembler of foreign made subassemblies. Heck, the 777 is mostly made in Japan, and shipped to be assembled in Seattle.
The Good Doctor @ 7:
Outsourcing defense spending kills one of the main arguments for spending: it builds/maintains American manufacturing infrastructure and spends the money here to support our economy. The GOP is shipping this money overseas so that the foreigners can use it to buy more US Bonds and US assets;A hollowed out America is going to collapse like a house of cards someday. Why is the GOP at war with the United States?
especially if the jobs are american.
What would Zeus do? @ 51:
because americans are too stoopid to realize that they are their own worst enemies.
NYT:
McCain Gets President Bush’s Endorsement
By DAVID STOUT 2:18 PM ET
John McCain went to the White House to receive the blessing of a man with whom he once feuded bitterly.
LOL. Pure gold.
ConcernedCanuck @ 11:
And if we just eliminate our military and vow that we "ain't-a gonna study war no more" the entire world will smile and regard us with loving good cheer.
Please...I'm 100% for getting out of Iraq and ending the sacrifice of lives to bolster dubya's ego, but if we were to unilaterally disarm we would find ourselves having to learn a different language in order to talk to our masters. You can take that to the bank.
Tuesday’s contributions to the McAKAlist, in ‘high’ definition:
.
.
and
.
.
The entire current (as of Friday 12:01 am PST) McAKA List – alphabetized for easier reference:
I'm confused. You mean the Democrats are supposed to be mad at McCain for NOT being part of the military industrial complex? It's now a bad thing to make military decisions based on strategic reasons rather than economic reasons? I think the issue here is that, once again, McCain has made a total flip-flop.
Hi McObsessedlikemecontributorsmartasses! Thanks for your conts so far today...lol
gotta go...will come back to clean up any McMesses... ;-}~
bajasteve @ 55:
Um.....the US spends more on military than it does on anything else...who's gonna take you over with a tank or plane? I didn't say to eliminate the military, but I'm sure you could cut funding a little, seeing as that funding is borrowed money anyway.
Actually, I think it's one of the few times that a major weapons system was decided on its merits, rather than whose congressional district it benefits. The Northrup/Grumman/EADS aircraft was just plan better and cheaper, and could be delivered earlier than the Boeing counterpart. Don't people remember that Boeing got caught red-handed in a bribery scandal for this very contract? Do you think they'd be offering bribes to govt contracting personnel if their plane was better? If there's no competition for military contractors, we're just going to get the same overpriced, unreliable, elephantine systems that we've been getting from the same people over and over again. Look at the V-22 Osprey, a project that should have been killed decades ago, now limping into field use, missing a bunch of its requirements, like defensive weaponry. Examine any of the major weapons projects, and it's a litany of overpromising, underdelivering, and overcharging, because they know the govt can't go elsewhere. Well, now they can, and this should be a wakeup call for the management of these companies. Well, it should be. Their reaction is to whine to their senators to put pressure on the military to open up the feeding trough for them again.
Cantor de Mambo @ 54:
Yup, AND here's the topper....he kept Bushy-boy waiting, and bush was telling "jokes" to keep the "press" from cannabilizing themselves.
OMG, my grandmother used to dress exactly the same way McCain is dressed in that picture when she went out to do her gardening in the chilly early spring. .
This fool really pisses me off. Military contracts once strengthened our local economies. Awarding a contract to a foreign company to build helicopters to transport the President was unconscionable. Also, the Base Relocation and Closure Committee (BRCC) was one of the worst decisions ever made by Congress. Hundreds of communities are still reeling from these closures yet the defense budget has skyrocketed. Anyone in the middle class who votes for this prick deserves to lose his/her job.
ysbaddaden @ 18:
Commence ROFLMOA sequence...
Sequence initiated....
Sequence running...
Sequence complete.
JJohnson @ 32:
JJ,
If you want a real scary scenario, you ought to see how much of our integrated circuits and chips are produced in offshore. We have close to zero % of our military electronics subcomponents, including extremely sensitive stuff being produced at home.
What´s wrong with ending the production of an outdated oldtimer?
Quote from the linked article
At Boeing, shock -- and then anger
Outcry over huge contract loss takes on a tone of nationalism
Air Force Gen. Arthur Lichte, commander of the Air Mobility Command that flies the tanker fleet, sought to rebut anticipated criticism that the Air Force has chosen a French-based aircraft maker over a major American company.
Referring to the EADS-Northrop model, Lichte told reporters at the Pentagon briefing: "This is an American tanker. It's flown by American airmen. It has a big American flag on the tail, and every day, it'll be out there saving American lives."
Lichte said the aircraft, based on the Airbus 330-200 commercial passenger airliner, was twice the size of the Boeing aircraft, providing more tanker capacity, more passenger space if converted to air transport, and more space for patients if converted to the aero-evacuation mission.
"From my perspective, I can sum it up in one word -- more," Lichte said.
...
Huge win for Alabama
Northrop and the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co. are offering an Airbus A330 jet that would be modified into a tanker at a factory to be built in Mobile, Ala. EADS recently announced that it would also assemble A330 commercial freighters in Mobile if it won the tanker competition. That would boost the company's U.S. footprint, help it with the Airbus bottom line and gain the European defense giant more powerful friends in Congress.
Although Boeing was considered the heavy favorite, Northrop and its supporters, especially politicians in Alabama, argued that the bigger Airbus plane, to be called the KC-45A, would make a superior tanker to the 767 offered by Boeing.
Business leaders and politicians in Mobile say that the win will turn the region into an aerospace hub on par with Seattle.
...
The decision also is a boost to EADS in establishing a key foothold in the global tanker market. EADS has won several international tanker competitions, in which the A330 was picked over the 767, but the total orders for its tanker had been small. The U.S. Air Force has nearly 600 tankers, more than double the number in the rest of the world combined.
Boeing has enjoyed a monopoly on building tankers for the U.S. military. Before the jet age and the KC-135, Boeing supplied the U.S. military with a tanker based on its B-29 bomber.
Analysts who monitor Boeing said the Air Force's decision was a huge blow to the Chicago-based company and its shareholders.
"As a result of this decision, we are looking at the end of the road for the 767 line in the near future because commercial demand for that plane has waned fairly rapidly," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute, a public policy think tank.
...
Northrop Grumman Chairman Ronald Sugar said the firm's "vast expertise" would give the Air Force "the most capable and versatile tanker ever built," adding that the aircraft "will be a game changer."
...
The Air Force said its selection was based on five criteria: mission capability, proposal risk, cost and price, past performance and aircraft design characteristics such as tanker fuel capacity, takeoff performance and fuel consumption.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/353250_tanker01.html
Lots of that work is going to Mobile, Alabama... where union workers are rarer than hen's teeth.
Coincidence?
Paul @ 64:
I buried Paul...
Maybe it's time to outsource some of our politicians?
I bet we could save a lot of money and get some that are a whole lot better than what we currently have.
Talk about undermining national security! All this country has left as a manufacturing base is military and they want to get rid of that too.
sagra @ 67:
I think not! Hens ain't got no teeth!
greg white @ 69:
Well, of course- it's all so annoying and messy! Betty Bowers for President!!
Shouldn't this be his tanked Dukakis moment?
One wonders what companies the fellas from Kansas and ol' Johnny himself invested in during that legislation.
Check their offshore accounts while we're at it!
Exploitation of the many, by the very few at the top is in progress. Every other country in the world protects their workers and their jobs... what does America do? Export their jobs overseas.
Do NOT elect this man. He comprehends economics as well as GWB does.
Actually this was Boeing's fault. Remember the tanker lease fiasco and all the corruption in that case? The Airbus A330 tanker is a superior product to any Boeing 767 tanker. This should be the final nail in the coffin for the 767. Boeing already shut down the 757 line. Also the new presidential helicopter will be a european design EH101 but the American version is called US101. These new A330 tankers are going to be assembled in Mobile, Alabama and West Virginia so it's not like all jobs are going overseas.
Fearmongering!
"If you want a real scary scenario, you ought to see how much of our integrated circuits and chips are produced in offshore. We have close to zero % of our military electronics subcomponents, including extremely sensitive stuff being produced at home."
This previous quoted paragraph is misinformation & hollow fear mongering.
All U.S. military electronics of a sensitive nature are manufactured in the U.S. Not only that, the companies doing the manufacturing can only hire U.S. citizens and they must pass a background check and receive a security clearance.
Sorry to say this but the Air force got a plane which could go further and carry more. What would you want your troops to have? Better equipment or inferior "Made in America" equipment? There was an article on C&L about an American contractor which supplied defective helmets to the US Army. When the original specifications for the refuel were issued the Air force gave a list of 28 roles it wanted the aircraft to carry out, Airbus could meet 24 of them, Boeing could only meet 6. Also the Boeing aircraft could not refuel Navy or Marine aircraft, they only offered a modification at some unspecified future date for an unspecified cost. As to the US weapons systems coming from overseas, well I have some bad news for you America, it has been happening for years. Colt which makes the M16 and M4 rifle is owned by Fabrique National (FN) of Belgium. The M193 rifle round used by the US military is based on Belgium's SS109 round. The M249 squad automatic weapon is made by FN of Belgium as is the M240 machine gun which replaces the M60 machine gun. It looks as though the Heckler and Koch G36 (Germany) will replace the M16, reports carried out by the DoD indicate it is a far superior weapon than the offerings by its rivals. The pistol used by the US armed forces is the Beretta (Italy.) The main gun on the M1A2 main battle tank is by Rhienmettal (Germany) and the armour is Chobham (Britain.) The M252 mortar used by the US Army is a derivative of the British 81mm L16 mortar.
Don't cry for Boeing. First they got caught trying to swindle the American taxpayer, and to his credit McCain went after them and now two people are in jail and Boeing was sanctioned. Second, Boeing won contracts to supply commercial aircraft to China by agreeing to transfer a fairly sizable chunk of the construction to China, just as Airbus will transfer aircraft assembly jobs to Alabama. Oh, and in a recent interview with the head of the Airbus consortia, he indicated that the exchange rate makes it more economical to do the work in the U.S.
Keep in mind that the more U.S. wages approach the level of India and China the more we can expect to see all those manufacturing jobs return. So let's keep pushing forward in our race to the bottom and all will be well again soon.
what? the way the defense industry is scattered across the country every district has a stake in approving whatever comes down the pike it's all about profit and jobs why else have piles of not used items? well, other than greed
juanchopancho @ 75:
Oh, I forgot that one! I remember talking to one of the US Navy aviator's who was flying those, he thought they were fantastic. I bet the modifications are the altimeter will be in feet not meters and the fuel gauge will be in pounds not kilograms!
Paul-UK @ 80:
And the cigarette lighter will be re-installed.
Today's Republican Party, Strong on Defense, weak on reasoning and logic.
Why do they hate America?
Paul-UK @ 77:
"The main gun on the M1A2 main battle tank is by Rhienmettal (Germany) ..."
May I correct that? "Rheinmetall" is the proper spelling.
I fully second your post. But you see, Americans, even Dems and Liberals, still believe they are the bestest and so are their products. The old superiority complex. Change, yes we can?
So when do we start a Lieberman like calling out for Zell Miller's job? Why have we not already?
Guess what, Logan- Boeing deserved to lose.
The plane they submitted lost or tied in every subcategory of the competition but one. They came in arrogantly expecting "Buy American" to win the day. The EADS entry flies further, with a bigger payload and more capability. The US military keeps its supremacy by buying the best equipment possible- if it means armoring M1 Abrams with British developed Chobham armor, using French tracking systems in Humvees or German optical sights in our armored vehicles.
I understand the desire to take a swipe at McCain's maddening ability to meander on an issue. But shame on you for not bringing the right perspective to the table; if the EADS submission brings 28,000 jobs to the US how the hell can you call that not buying American?
This appears to be a bed of Boeing's own making enabled by McCain. It looks to me like the AF bought the more capable plane.
burnt @ 10:
If I am correct the assembling of the "parts" is in one of US southern states. and approx. 25,000 new jobs go with it. Just clarifying.
I will express the same concern for the Boeing employees that are expressed by the vast majority of Amercuns when something like this happens to some other group. Boo fucking hoo. You got what you voted for so suck it up.
f)(*) you.... we are the GOP and we want cheap labor....
you don't get it
you won't get it
you are too stoopid to get it
and if you ever did get it your head would explode
Outsourcing of crucial military contracts such as this puts American lives at risk..
"Just a refueling plane", I hear? Ah, but in order to design such a plane, a contractor will need DETAILED specs on ALL planes to be refueled. How much sensitive information will be transmitted to Airbus as a result of this contract?
Sorry if I'm repeating somebody else's commentary, but I don't have time to read the entire thread above; most of what I've read falls somewhere along the "Snark / Schadenfreude" axis.
Glib remarks may be fun, but this smells like an issue which, properly spun, could be of great value. "Republicans value dollars over American security." "The Bush Administration wants to give sensitive military information to a European company."
Friends, push yourselves beyond the snark, and think of long-term strategy. Yes, Karl Rove may be evil incarnate--but sadly, he's been amazingly successful in moving the neocon agenda forward. If we're living in Karl's World, then maybe it's time to start playing Karl's Game.
This isn't about a single contract, it's not about Boeing--this is about protecting our country, defending our freedom! Why do the Neocons hate America?
Yes, I'd much prefer to take the high road. But the other side has turned it into a knife fight--and it's about time we started abiding by the rules of a knife fight. (For those who miss the reference, revisit "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid". )
The US Govt goes around the world promoting 'free trade', 'open trade' etc etc. The trade deals signed with Europe, Canada Australia and other countries all state that these countries HAVE to open ALL of their industries to US companies, who are allowed to compete under equal terms. Now that a joint foreign-US company has won a contract to build 'some' parts of an air force tanker fleet that's suddenly outrageous and vaguely treasonous??
And the damn planes are mostly going to be built in the US for Chrissakes!
Give me a frickin' break.
2 things:
1. If you're pissed off at the outcome of the competitive bid process then ask your Congress to change the rules before the bidding starts. But then you better be willing to allow other countries to respond in a similar fashion. That'll mean a hell of a lot of 'protected markets' all around the globe with US producers on the outside looking in.
2. Work on improving the productivity AND overall labour costs of the US workforce (from a company's POV this means a better, more affordable health care plan/system and improved access to education/training for it's workforce) and bringing originality and creativity back to the mix.
The whole '...puts American lives at risk...' arguements are a load of crap; unless workers in Alabama and our NATO allies are somehow now the 'enemy'.
And that one Dem Senator supporting it... Zell Miller!!
In that picture, McCain reminds me of the movie "hollow man" starring kevin bacon, when the hollow man put on some clothes and went out into the world to wreak havoc.
[Deleted. Please do not post the same message in multiple threads. Thanks-Sitemonitor]
This is the second McCain red herring that I've seen on C&L in as many days. I live in Mobile, Al, and this contract means a lot to us. This isn't a Dem vs. Repug issue, and it's certainly the worst possible way to go after McCain. If you ask me, he did the right thing (investigated bribery charges and insured a fair contract). Why not focus on substantive issues where he's been on the wrong side instead.
Don't get me wrong, I think McCain has plenty of flaws. But when you start throwing mud like this, you start to look like the right wing machine that you're supposed to present an alternative too. I've been sorely disappointed with liberal blogs (and some MSM) ever since the primaries became a race between Hillary and Obama.
It is called free trade and competition. Is crooks and liars encouraging 21st century protectionism? Welcome to an increasingly globalizing world. I think it is a good thing that Boeing is losing its contracts.
A couple of clarifications. The fuselage and wing sections will be manufactured in Europe. Those components will then be shipped to Mobile, Alabama for assembly. Once in flying condition they will be flown to an Air Force base, Tinker AFB? I forget wich one, for final assembly of all the sensitive equipment.
Login or Register to post comments.