Article

2003-08-31 Home Front

Fresh Questions Raised About Lease of Boeing 767s by Air Force

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2003-08-31 12:29:25 AM|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 We better not give the deal to Airbus. The last thing I want is to pay a EU Agency for our planes. Especially if they were made in France.

Posted by Charles 2003-8-31 1:05:38 AM|| 2003-8-31 1:05:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 A little honesty here folks... Tom Daschle(D-SD)'s wife is the lobbiest for Boeing trying to shoehorn the lease deal over an inexpensive straight purchase...

Posted by DANEgerus 2003-8-31 3:22:54 AM|| [http://www.danegerus.com/weblog] 2003-8-31 3:22:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Pretty amazing stuff. We get attacked in the US on 911, and instead of the INS making a concerted effort to deal with those who are trying to kill us, the federeal government goes after and wrecks the domestic aviation industry.

Now we find out that the US government all of a sudden has no problem with the domestic aviation industry as long as they can ensure it gets buried later with surplus aircaft, as these planes will surely be.

Something way wrong in D.C.

Posted by badanov 2003-8-31 7:20:35 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2003-8-31 7:20:35 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Boeing and its engineering and production staff are national assets that are not readily replacable. If Boeing were to go bust and ten years down the road we need a large airframe manufacturer who are we going to go to? Lockheed who seems to have gotten out of that business? Northrup you was never really in it? If there was shinnagens going on in the contract prosecute the individuals responsible not the company as a whole. Starting up a new aircraft manufacturer from scratch ain't like opening up a freaking law office, not that most of the people in Congress or the Senate would understand that

Posted by Someone who did NOT vote for William Proxmire 2003-8-31 9:11:10 AM|| 2003-8-31 9:11:10 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 And let's remember that until the last election cycle ending January 2003, Tom Daschle was running the Senate.

Posted by Don 2003-8-31 9:20:00 AM|| 2003-8-31 9:20:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Hmm...we got a 43-year old fleet that desperately needs to be replaced, a domestic company that could use the business, and we're gonna hold it up for $5-17 million out of a $4.4 billion dollar deal?
I think Senator McCain has forgotten that he represents Arizona and not France.

Posted by Baba Yaga 2003-8-31 1:23:40 PM|| 2003-8-31 1:23:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 republican congress, republican senate, republican pentagon,republican president but somehow senator tom daschles wife is to blame. where r bush's veto powers, McCain would have vetoed the deal so should bush or doesnt he have the ball. Pretty soon you rightwingers r gonna blame this on Hillary Clinton and Babra Streisand and the dixie chicks. Yes the dixie chicks are to blame for this corporate welfare deal

Posted by steveerossa 2003-8-31 2:32:27 PM|| 2003-8-31 2:32:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 If one of the current tankers goes down, opposition will disappear. I hope the pilots get out safely. To save money it would be more worthwhile to try to buy a common replacement airframe for the P-3.

Posted by Super Hose 2003-8-31 3:00:32 PM|| 2003-8-31 3:00:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Ah, Stevey, you're so-o-o-o misinformed it's comical. Really, we don't laugh with you, we laugh at you!

Sen. Daschle's lovely wife has angled for the lease-buyout because it puts more money in the pockets of Boeing, for whom she's a registered lobbyist. Not her fault, it's her job and she's good at it (evidently!) but it's not the best deal for the Air Force.

[ the Air Force -- among those who defend your sorry ass even though you don't deserve it ]

Bush won't veto because this is the best deal they can get now, and those aircraft have to be replaced. Far better for Sen. McCain to sponsor a resolution to buy the planes outright. I'm waiting.

SuperHose: yep, P-3 ought to be on the list.

Posted by Steve White 2003-8-31 3:53:31 PM|| 2003-8-31 3:53:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 I've read that a lot of the reason this deal has to go through is that the Clinton administration signed away our ability to complain about the massive subsidies Airbus recieves from the European Union. So our choices are: impose tarriffs and have our head handed to us by the WTO; not impose tarriffs and do nothing else and see Boeing go out of business, thus winding up with the French as the supplier of tanker aircraft, shutdown the WTO, or subsidize Boeing. McCain's right in that this is a bad decision, but where the heck was he when Clinton was busy making this the least bad decision available to us?

Posted by Phil Fraering 2003-8-31 4:06:04 PM|| [http://thenostromo.com/pgf/weblog] 2003-8-31 4:06:04 PM|| Front Page Top

00:18 Steffan
11:25 Jennie Taliaferro
06:27 nick
23:17 Watcher
22:39 Matt
22:38 Zhang Fei
22:24 Paul Moloney
22:19 Super Hose
21:56 tu3031
21:37 GregJ
21:37 tu3031
21:34 tu3031
21:21 Frank G
21:10 tu3031
21:09 Frank G
20:56 Frank G
20:52 Kathy K
20:05 Frank G
19:56 Shipman
19:53 Dishman
19:52 Dishman
19:08 Old Patriot
18:56 Old Patriot
17:39 Ptah