Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
McCain Faces Boeing Blowback  
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12970 posts, RR: 25
Posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3964 times:

Looks like the Washington State Democrats have McCain in their sights:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080513/...;_ylt=AtiNqJC5eerVWi.Brpp6azhh24cA

Quoting McCain, from mid-March:

Quote:
"I had nothing to do with the contract, except to insist in writing, on several occasions, as this process went forward, that it be fair and open and transparent. That was my involvement in it"

So, will that fly with the general public?

My $0.02: I'm not sure Mr. McCain is viewed as being open and transparent, so I don't think it will fly.


Inspiration, move me brightly!
33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3806 times:

It doesn't matter, the washington Democrats are not going to vote for John McCain, anyway. Even though I am a supporter of the KC-767AT, I think McCain is the best of the 3 choices for the POTUS.

User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3791 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
It doesn't matter, the washington Democrats are not going to vote for John McCain, anyway. Even though I am a supporter of the KC-767AT, I think McCain is the best of the 3 choices for the POTUS.

 checkmark 
Exactly!
Actaully, the WA Dems are in a pickle of sorts. They can either support a Republican (never gonna happen) or elect one of the Dem candidates who is sure to cut defense spending across the board. Quite a situation indeed.... Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3720 times:



Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 2):
Quite a situation indeed....

Yes, they have two bafones for candidates still fighting it out (and an idiot for the DNC Chairman). Hillary just won (expected) West Virginia. They have not solved what to do with Florida and Michigan, yet. They are also looking at riots from the loosing nominee camp in DEN in August.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3712 times:



Quoting Revelation (Thread starter):
So, will that fly with the general public?

John McCain fits the definition of an American Hero in my book, but I find his role in the NG/EADS deal a little suspect. I have to wait for the 2 final cannidates to propose a plan to put the US back on track as far as defense and social issues go. so far, it is the usual smokescreen by all concerned. The two Democrats are pitiful. John McCain, I hope does better than he has so far.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineRuscoe From Australia, joined Aug 1999, 1607 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3332 times:

You guys must be Americans..

The rest of the world wants change.

Rightly or not both Clinton and McCain are seen as part of the old school ewstablishment.

With Obama at least there is a glimmer of hope of chnge.

I would not worry about defence spending too much.

Even the Democrats know the best way to conduct yourself is to "speak softly and carry a big stick"

As for the effect on MCains chances of making the Whitehouse of the Boeing Tanker Scandal, I think it gives his enemies a lot of ammo to throw at all Americans not just the North West.

Also as I and many others have noted, all McCains actions did was "get out of the frying pan into the fire" as far as corruption goes. EADS history of questionable sales activities make Boeing look like a real amatuer.

Cheers

Ruscoe


User currently offlineFlyUSCG From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3318 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
The rest of the world wants change.

no offense, but I think most American's don't care what the rest of the world thinks (yah yah, thats the problem with America blah blah blah). The only "change" obama brings is someone who has no experience in politics. Besides, what the hell kind of campaign is run on ONE WORD!? Could someone please outline this "change" for me? Because all I see is a word that everyone wants to hear coming from a young minority democrat but with no real thought behind it and thus he gets the votes. What grand sweeping changes does he propose? The democrat led congress that we already have has the worst approval rating of any congress in HISTORY! So that should tell you something. But back to McCain, if it's like what he said then more power to him for only doing his job (and I'm a 100% supporter of the KC-767 by the way). He has had my vote since the last time he ran for Pres.

*good quote I got in an e-mail from I believe Sir Charles Barkley(?): "Poor people have been voting for democrats for 50 years and they are still poor"  duck 



Go Trojans! Fight On!
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3263 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
EADS history of questionable sales activities make Boeing look like a real amatuer.

Well and honestly said.

Quoting FlyUSCG (Reply 6):
"Poor people have been voting for democrats for 50 years and they are still poor"

I agree, but I think that applies to both parties here, they are all liars and thieves, the Democrats have it down to a science, they are hypocritical. The Republicans make no bones about screwing the people. Democrats make millionaires, the Republicans make billionaires. (certain people) The Air force Generals make themselves millionaires by hiring out to defense contractors, such as Boeing and EADS. John McCain is caught in the middle with his hand in the cookie jar. Remember what happened to Duke Cunningham, Viet Nam Hero, and disgraced member of congress. he really got caught with his whole arm in the cookie jar.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlinePGNCS From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 2858 posts, RR: 49
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3084 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 1):
It doesn't matter, the washington Democrats are not going to vote for John McCain, anyway.

You couldn't have put this any better. Thank you.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
You guys must be Americans..

The rest of the world wants change.

Change simply for the sake of change is a moronic proposition. Change can be for the worse, too.

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
John McCain is caught in the middle with his hand in the cookie jar.

I am no fan of John McCain, but I found no evidence in your rant that you have any proof of this allegation.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3060 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 8):
Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
John McCain is caught in the middle with his hand in the cookie jar.

I am no fan of John McCain, but I found no evidence in your rant that you have any proof of this allegation.

Go to thread (USAF decides on KC30 Part 3), click on link in reply 380 click on business, aerospace, click on So why did Boeing lose contract? It mentions McCain. It was all over the news a few weeks back about possible pressure, or influence from McCain's office. He had, I believe 3 advisors, or somebody working on his campaign who were lobbyists for NG/EADS, or just plain EADS. I am a fan of John McCain, he is a Hero in my book. Gee, I hope this does not qualify as another rant.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 3041 times:



Quoting PGNCS (Reply 8):
Change simply for the sake of change is a moronic proposition. Change can be for the worse, too.

Well said. I believe, and I don't think I'm too off track here, the American people would like to see a return to old fashioned values, money that will buy something and a government that's more representative of what the masses want.

I for one would like to see businesses, airlines and otherwise, settle down to effective management. And I'd love to see a return to more manufacturers building airplanes. I miss North American, Grumman, Northrop, Martin, Chance Vought and Republic.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2980 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
Also as I and many others have noted, all McCains actions did was "get out of the frying pan into the fire" as far as corruption goes. EADS history of questionable sales activities make Boeing look like a real amatuer.

Ummm, there is another interpretation. ?The real pros would not be found out so often.  Wow!  duck 


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2909 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
With Obama at least there is a glimmer of hope of chnge.

Change for the sake of change is not necessarily going to be good thing - I don't think inexperienc, whining rhetoric, and sheer appeasement are the way of change that is going to solve the US's problems...

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 7):
. John McCain is caught in the middle with his hand in the cookie jar.

McCain married into money, he didn't necessariliy make it via his fifty plus years of public service...


User currently offlineBHMBAGLOCK From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 2698 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2886 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
You guys must be Americans..

The rest of the world wants change.

It's Americans that elect the President here so the rest of world will just have to take what they get.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
Even the Democrats know the best way to conduct yourself is to "speak softly and carry a big stick"

Explain Jimmy Carter then.



Where are all of my respected members going?
User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2849 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 12):
McCain married into money, he didn't necessariliy make it via his fifty plus years of public service...

I agree, he married money, but she cannot bankroll a Presidential Campaign, they need the big rollers for that, like NG/EADS and all the other corporations our politicians coerce to get elected. a very crooked system we have, let us not overlook that, and it may have possibly played a part in this drama about the tankers. They, congress especially seem to do well in building wealth while in office. John Glenn, left office, I believe he was worth 20 million, he did not do that on his pension and salary. the list is endless.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12181 posts, RR: 51
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2805 times:



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 5):
You guys must be Americans..

The rest of the world wants change.

Rightly or not both Clinton and McCain are seen as part of the old school ewstablishment.

With Obama at least there is a glimmer of hope of chnge.

What hope does Obama bring to the World? IIRC, England once had a PM full of hope and Change. His name was Neville Chamberlin, remember "peace for our time"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chaimberlain

The United States does not need to repeat history.


User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2787 times:



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
What hope does Obama bring to the World? IIRC, England once had a PM full of hope and Change. His name was Neville Chamberlain, remember "peace for our time"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chaimberlain

The United States does not need to repeat history.

Exactly! Appeasement has never worked, throughout history. You can "sit down" with your enemies all you want, all the while they're sticking a knife in your back. We appeased North Korea for all those years and didn't really do anything. Now Kim Jong Mentally Il has nukes and is sharing them with his Middle-Eastern "allies". I really hope we don't have to lose cities before some folks recognize, but I'm afraid that isn't the case.

Quoting BHMBAGLOCK (Reply 13):
It's Americans that elect the President here so the rest of world will just have to take what they get.

 checkmark 
Pretty much...

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 14):
John Glenn, left office, I believe he was worth 20 million, he did not do that on his pension and salary. the list is endless.

Well, I think his case is a somewhat unique. He was the first Mercury astronaut and I'm sure that notoriety alone made him a few bucks here and there.  Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2764 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 14):
agree, he married money, but she cannot bankroll a Presidential Campaign, they need the big rollers for that, like NG/EADS and all the other corporations our politicians coerce to get elected

Don't forget that one of the reasons money matters so much in politics is because of laws made for the purpose of keeping money out of politics. If you want money to matter less in politics, make it EASIER to raise money. The current ethics laws makes it HARDER to raise money. The kind of "reform" Mccain wants would make it harder still. If you want to make money matter less in politics, stop unconstitutional regulation of political speech. Let anyone give as much as they want to whoever they want, just require full disclosure. And get government out of places it doesn't belong. If government didn't have its fingers everywhere, there would be less incentive to buy it off.

II don't think politicians are on the average any more evil or corrupt than the average person on the street. However, that's not saying much. The kinds of things that ordinary people - not just those we call criminals - will do to scam the system are amazing. It is common practice, for example, for people to move assets around among family members to make sure that public aid pays for a relative's nursing home stay. This kind of thing, by and large, is NOT being done by poor people trying to scrape together enough to eat. . It is done by middle class people wanting enough money to get an SUV rather than a subcompact or a house in a B neighborhood rather than a C neighborhood. People think of government money as some sort of endowment from on high. They will do anything to get government money, regardless of the purpose of the program in question. Where these kind of activities are illegal, they are often not prosecuted because there are bigger fish to fry. And besides, cheating the government isn't really cheating, is it?

It is that attitude that makes programs like Medicare and Medicaid as expensive as they are. It is killing us.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 15):
What hope does Obama bring to the World? IIRC, England once had a PM full of hope and Change. His name was Neville Chamberlin, remember "peace for our time"?

Well...from what I've read...the consensus seems to be that Mr. Chamberlain had no choice but to make the deal he did. The allies were much better prepared to fight in 1939 then they were right after Munich. Hitler hated the Munich deal. He did it because it was his only hope of keeping England and France on the sidelines while he conquered Eastern Europe. He hoped to eventually have England, at least, as an ally. England's fleet would protect him while he got his "leibensroom" in the East. He wanted to conquer Russian and all the slavic states, thinking the Slavs were subhuman. It is a credit to the British people that they didn't buy this garbage. I'm not sure I could say the same for today's Americans and Europeans.


Chamberlain hated Munich also. If he had a military to match Hitler's he would not have signed the deal. The true blame for Munich does not lie with Chamberlain but with those who thought all war was over after armistice day(the end of world War I). These people simply abandoned most military spending in favor of social programs. The modern counterparts of these people are found in the H Bush and early Clinton administrations, and in the congresses they had to deal with. These are those that insisted on a radical downsizing of the military after the end of the Cold War. They crippled our human intelligence capabilities with political correctness(and are trying to do the same thing again today).

I would also blame those who did nothing to resist Hitler's earliest provocation - the remilitarization of the Rhineland.
Suppose France + Britain had gone to war with Germany after Hitler did this. They would be reviled as warmongers. Those who pointed out Hitler's reniging on the Versailes deal would no doubt be called insensitive and ignorant - who are we to judge the German culture?. Since this was before the worst of Hitler's rearmament effort, there would be little concrete evidence to appease the critics. There would probably be a prolonged insurgency. When the leaders of Britain and France refused to pull out after this insurgency, the world left would hate them as butchers. They would take further flack by going against the League of Nations, since there is no way the league would approve such an operation. Remember, this was back in the days when there was great hope that the League of Nations would end ALL war simply by making pronouncements from on high.

But if Britain and France stood firm on the Rhineland, there would have been no World War II. There would have been no holocaust. The only thing that would suffer is the reputation of Britain and France. They would get the same grief that George W and his followers get now. They would go down in history as imperialist, waremongering fools. Hitler would be seen as a fallen petty dictator at worst, and perhaps even a hero in struggle against the hated imperialist Britain and France. The left made Castro and Che Guevera into romantic heros - some people even gave Pol-Pot this honor before the full extent of his barbarism was discovered. The right gave similar treatment to many overseas dictators simply because they violently opposed communism, as did Hitler. There is no reason Hitler would'nt get the same treatment. Remember, the visceral reaction we have at the name simply would not be there were it not for WWII and the Holocaust.

People would not think about what would have happened had Britain + France not intervened in the Rhineland. They rarely do, when looking at history. They also don't look at what the world would be like if thugs like Pol Pot and Ho Chi Minh had overrunn all of Southeast Asia. It is simply assumed that since it didn't actually happen it was foolish for the people of the time to think it could happen. They only think about who to blame for the fact that they don't have a perfect world. They soak up the luxury of hindsite. The fact is, if we had not intervened in Vietnam and later in Iraq the things we feared might really have happened. That is not necesarily a case for those operations - it's just a case for careful thought rather than knee-jerk opposition.

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 10):
Well said. I believe, and I don't think I'm too off track here, the American people would like to see a return to old fashioned values, money that will buy something and a government that's more representative of what the masses want.

Unfortunately, what the masses want is more government dough to make the local school look fancy enough to keep property values up. Or, they want to keep the "rif-raff" out of the neighborhood. Or a job for their nephew. Or some change in regulations to make it easier on local industries and harder on competitors. The problem with politicians is that they give us what we want. One reason I generally like Mccain is that he is willing to take unpopular positions. Sometimes. So does Obama, though he hasn't been in politics long enough to really tell. And Obama has never really gone against his core constituancy like Mccain does sometimes. If the people want someone who will give them what they want they want Hillary Clinton. The Clintons have not purposefully taken any unpopular positions since the massive tax increased they got passed in the early days of Bill's administration. Even the Clintons' actions in the National Security arena have been largely determined by political considerations.

With the budget in trouble the way it is, we need a politician that is able to say "no" to us. I think Mccain is the best hope for that at the moment. But even his election will not change the fundamental selfishness which people all the way from President to ordinary voter bring to politics. That selfishness is our main problem and has been for a long time.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 2737 times:



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 17):
Chamberlain hated Munich also. If he had a military to match Hitler's he would not have signed the deal. The true blame for Munich does not lie with Chamberlain but with those who thought all war was over after armistice day(the end of world War I). These people simply abandoned most military spending in favor of social programs. The modern counterparts of these people are found in the H Bush and early Clinton administrations, and in the congresses they had to deal with. These are those that insisted on a radical downsizing of the military after the end of the Cold War. They crippled our human intelligence capabilities with political correctness(and are trying to do the same thing again today).

I would also blame those who did nothing to resist Hitler's earliest provocation - the remilitarization of the Rhineland.
Suppose France + Britain had gone to war with Germany after Hitler did this. They would be reviled as warmongers. Those who pointed out Hitler's reniging on the Versailes deal would no doubt be called insensitive and ignorant - who are we to judge the German culture?

Excellent post Cloudy. What you might have added is that the Versailles treaty was itself provocative and was not what Germany agreed to at the Armistice date - all the allies were culpable in moving the goalposts.

The entry into the Rhineland was the critical point. Opposed, Hitler would likely have retreated - although into what is highly uncertain. After that, the British in particular never felt they were strong enough right until after, to quote a well-loved phrase, "the day waaar broke out". (Rob Wilton)
http://monologues.co.uk/004/Day_War_Broke_Out.htm
GDB has posted about the dilemma of countries that really had lost a generation - and best to remember that included Germany. How would Britain 1938 have fared - virtually no Hurricanes and no Spits. Germany with a Luftwaffe fresh from its "practice" in Spain. Appeasement or playing for time?

In any case negotiating and concessions are actually two different things. I wonder why some are trying to make them seem the same. Do I detect an agenda there?

But I am a little hazy how directly this relates to McCain and Boeing. It seems likely that history will be kind to him over the tankers, but his election campaign will be in the here and now. There does seem to be a tendency in the US for at least some factions to whip up minor issues - some of their own imagination - into major conflagrations.

If McCain were to fail, it would be better if it were to be on substantive grounds, of which there may be many and not over confected sins.


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2676 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 18):

If McCain were to fail, it would be better if it were to be on substantive grounds, of which there may be many and not over confected sins.

According to the Prov. Journal May 19 (Projo. com) (Key McCain fundraiser resigns over conflict.) Former texas Congressman Thomas G. Loeffler stepped down from McCains campaign to avoid conflicts of interest. This man runs a lobbying effort which worked for EADS, Airbus. The article also mentions McCain's efforts to scuttle the contract for the Boeing tankers in 2004. a cozy arrangement, too cozy for me. He also did major work for other foreign interests and governments. He was National Finance Co-chairman of McCains campaign.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2661 times:



Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 19):
According to the Prov. Journal May 19 (Projo. com) (Key McCain fundraiser resigns over conflict.) Former texas Congressman Thomas G. Loeffler stepped down from McCains campaign to avoid conflicts of interest. This man runs a lobbying effort which worked for EADS, Airbus. The article also mentions McCain's efforts to scuttle the contract for the Boeing tankers in 2004. a cozy arrangement, too cozy for me. He also did major work for other foreign interests and governments. He was National Finance Co-chairman of McCains campaign.

Erm this Loeffler?

"And why did Loeffler leave? Michael Isikoff at Newsweek:

"One top campaign official affected by the new policy is national finance co-chair Tom Loeffler, a former Texas congressman whose lobbying firm has collected nearly $15 million from Saudi Arabia since 2002 and millions more from other foreign and corporate interests, including a French aerospace firm seeking Pentagon contracts. Loeffler last month told a reporter "at no time have I discussed my clients with John McCain." But lobbying disclosure records reviewed by NEWSWEEK show that on May 17, 2006, Loeffler listed meeting McCain along with the Saudi ambassador to "discuss US-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia relations."

Oops!"
http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsid...wings/2008/05/there-goes-anot.html

There I was thinking it was illegal to take foreign money in the US. However, to the present case, is there a link, or are links not needed in US politics?


User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2638 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 20):

Thanks for that link and Information, my goodness! "Oh what a tangled web they weave in trying to deceive" it is out of control. I admire John McCain for his duty to the US, but he is caught up in the web, just like all the rest, and now it it damage control time. The three little monkey's are at work here. "See no evil, hear no evil. speak no evil" or that is what they think we are stupid enough to believe.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2637 times:

I understood John McCain was the one who wanted to change the fact that if you'r not a millionair you can't run for president?

User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9294 posts, RR: 12
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2630 times:



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 22):



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 22):
I understood John McCain was the one who wanted to change the fact that if you'r not a millionair you can't run for president?

As preposterous as that idea seems, I do believe they think that way, oh! what a few million dollars makes in the way people look apon other people. The sad part is, the American people elect millionaires to the government and wonder what happened after. I believe that a millionaire is a millionaire above anything else and they vote their own pocketbook everytime in congress. they call themselves Democrats and Republicans, no, no they are millionaires first. John McCain has not gotten any poorer in congress, nor has anyone else.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 2591 times:

Quoting WarRI1 (Reply 23):
John McCain has not gotten any poorer in congress, nor has anyone else.

be that as it may, he has a strong voice against political influence by campaign financers (thus wants to minimize the whole system) and has a history of speaking his mind eventhough the group he belongs to has a different opinion.

I don't think I would ever vote for a Republican if I were a US citizen, but that man has my respect.

[Edited 2008-05-19 11:03:41]

25 LAXPAX : I remember wondering during the KC-767 leasing scandal whether McCain's ardent criticism of Boeing and the USAF would somehow come back to bite him. M
26 WarRI1 : He certainly has my respect as a hero, once again the tangled web, power and influence and money. I supported John McCain back then and might again,
27 Baroque : And invented the Swiftboats affair - the GOP should be condemned to eternal fires for that scam. It would be as bad if a campaign erupts saying McCai
28 Atmx2000 : You are a fool if you think it was a scam.
29 Baroque : Yes Bluebottle, I am the famous Eccles.
30 Baroque : You don't think your assessment of me as close to a cretin would have just a little more cred if you produced some evidence, and not one of those scu
31 LAXPAX : I agree 100%. At least the current issue seems to be his own doing, unlike in '99, when he was "swiftboated" by Karl Rove. Rove did the exact same th
32 WarRI1 : In pursuit of power, anything goes, the term swiftboating says it all, no matter what your accomplishments, they will hack you to pieces. I am not a
33 Cloudy : The swiftboat adds would have been uncalled for if Kerry had not massively distorted his own war record. Kerry was making himself out to be a war hero
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic McCain Faces Boeing Blowback
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Role Of Military Planes Declines In Boeing's Defen posted Mon Apr 7 2008 05:59:11 by Stitch
DOD Awards Bell/Boeing $10.4B V-22 Contract posted Fri Mar 28 2008 20:59:20 by AirRyan
NG And Usaf Ask GAO To Dismiss Boeing Protest... posted Thu Mar 27 2008 18:16:12 by AirRyan
F-15 Driver Sues Boeing Over Inflight Breakup posted Thu Mar 27 2008 08:19:48 by MD-90
Boeing Doing Media Tanker Blitz posted Wed Mar 26 2008 03:09:20 by Venus6971
Boeing C-18 posted Tue Mar 18 2008 16:01:25 by Pastorino
Boeing Co Tanker Blog posted Tue Mar 18 2008 06:04:21 by Stratofortress
India Potential Boeing P-8i Poseidon Order posted Tue Mar 18 2008 01:33:36 by PanAm_DC10
Boeing Appeal Of KC-45A Award posted Fri Mar 14 2008 16:13:12 by RedFlyer
Wall Street Journal: Boeing To Protest KC-X Bid... posted Mon Mar 10 2008 15:36:37 by AirRyan

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format