dtwclipper
Posts: 6668
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:17 am

House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:42 am

First, let's put this disclaimer up.

The funding for the jets was pushed by two members of the Appropriations Committee, Democrat Sanford Bishop and Republican Jack Kingston.

It looks like a nice bipartisan effort.



http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=8261754&page=1


So, congress slams GM/Ford/Chrysler for flying to DC in corporate jets, but then they turn around and do this!

High Flying Congress
House Approves Nearly $200 Million for Gulfstream Jets to Ferry Government Officials and Members of Congress

Call it Jets for Junkets. Congress is poised to spend $200 million to buy the Air Force three of the highest performing passenger jets in the world, including two planes that will be used for members of Congress and other government VIPs.
Compare New York Air, the Airline that works for your Business
 
User avatar
yowza
Posts: 4275
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:01 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:25 pm

Renditions flights are getting harder to do on private charters.

YOWza
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5543
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:40 pm

The Congress has long been unhappy with the US Air Force and their limitations on using the small fleet of B737, B757, Lear 35 and Gulfstream III/IV aircraft for domestic travel by Congress.

Didn't a west coast senator get into a public battle with the USAF awhile back because they "needed" to travel non-stop to California and the jet the USAF provided did not have that range?

However in the past, most of these aircraft have been purchased used, not new. There is some modification work necessary.

There may well be a need for these planes - but this is pure pork barrell politics as usual - two members of Congress from Georgia getting a $200 million contract for work in Savannah Georgia.
 
JetBlueGuy2006
Posts: 1482
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 5:38 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:52 pm



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 2):
Didn't a west coast senator get into a public battle with the USAF awhile back because they "needed" to travel non-stop to California and the jet the USAF provided did not have that range?

That was Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Dennis Hastert used to be able to travel back to Illinois using the Gulfstream, but Nancy Pelosi wanted a bigger a/c to make sure that she could get there non-stop. But she also wanted to make sure there was enough room for others to travel with her (her staff, friends, family, but they would pay the Air Force for the flight.)

So she was granted the use of the C-32.
Home Airport: Capital Region International Airport (KLAN)
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 12:52 pm

It's really pathetic, because it's turning the Air Force into a personal taxi service, not to mention adding to the widening gap between the life of a politician, and the life of the average constituent.

$200million? Christ, we could sure build one hell of a combat support hospital with that cash. Hell, or we could use that money to pay to send men and women home on mid-deployment leave.

The point being - that money could actually be used by the Air Force for the betterment of the lives of those in uniform. Flights out of DCA are perfectly capable of being to provide service for the vast majority of their travel needs.

Screw it. While they're at it, they ought to vote themselves yet another raise.  Yeah sure
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:00 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
While they're at it, they ought to vote themselves yet another raise.

I totally agree with you. Actually, Congress wants to take control of all three G-550s. The original C-37A was being ordered for the new commander of the new Africa Command to stand up next FY.

They want these jets so they don't have to fly commerical, possibly having to sit next to someone who will ask them "embarassing questions".

The way Congress has their pay raises set up, they are automatic. Congress has to vote to NOT take a pay raise.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:32 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
not to mention adding to the widening gap between the life of a politician, and the life of the average constituent.

As I've posted on numerous occasions, without a massive public referendum to freeze their lifetime pensions and medical benefits, none of the do-nothings who slip into so-called public service will ever give a flip about any such gap. Hit em where it hurts or they simply won't pay attention.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
futurepilot16
Posts: 1756
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:20 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:36 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
It's really pathetic, because it's turning the Air Force into a personal taxi service, not to mention adding to the widening gap between the life of a politician, and the life of the average constituent.

That's true, they shun the car company ceo's (who make way more money than they do btw) for spending money on jets, which it was reported the company would lose money on the jets if they didn't take the order. Congress wasn't even sure whether they used taxpayer dollars or not, the just HAD to make themselves heard. But now they are using actual taxpayer dollars to buy jets because they themselves think they're too good to fly on the ones right now or fly commercially. The Air Force is not a personal taxi service for the gov't, the only people who should get the use of these aircraft are the president, his closest advisors (i'll let you guys decide who) and their families. The public needs to make their voices heard because we need to tighten our belts as much as possible. I don't care if it is $200 million, this needless spending all throughout gov't needs to stop.
"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 1:41 pm



Quoting FuturePilot16 (Reply 7):
I don't care if it is $200 million, this needless spending all throughout gov't needs to stop.

But it's creating jobs in two Georgia counties!!  Yeah sure Same twisted logic used for the bloated stimulus.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
D L X
Posts: 11628
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 7:51 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
Flights out of DCA are perfectly capable of being to provide service for the vast majority of their travel needs.

In fact, if I'm not mistaken, that was the biggest reason that DCA wasn't closed when IAD moved into full swing.

Oh and KC135, for once I agree with you 100%.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7795
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:32 pm

200 million is a lot of money... but it's not a lot of airplane. My guess would be 4 or 5
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:38 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
They want these jets so they don't have to fly commerical

. . . and avoid the giant mess they've created at the airports.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:26 pm



Quoting Dtwclipper (Thread starter):
The funding for the jets was pushed by two members of the Appropriations Committee, Democrat Sanford Bishop and Republican Jack Kingston.

It looks like a nice bipartisan effort.

Bipartisan had very little to do with it. From the link you provided:

The funding for the jets was pushed by two members of the Appropriations Committee, Democrat Sanford Bishop and Republican Jack Kingston.

Both are from Georgia, where the Gulfstream is made, and both have received more than $10,000 over the past two years in campaign contributions from General Dynamics, the parent company of Gulfstream.


Quoting Dtwclipper (Thread starter):
So, congress slams GM/Ford/Chrysler for flying to DC in corporate jets, but then they turn around and do this!

Hey, to the victor go the spoils. That's politics.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
It's really pathetic, because it's turning the Air Force into a personal taxi service, not to mention adding to the widening gap between the life of a politician, and the life of the average constituent.

Unfortunately they (the AF) has been doing this for decades so its not really something new is it? I was surprised to read that Pelosi has actually started using commercial flights under certain circumstances so I will give her credit in this case since credit is obviously due.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090806/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_cushy_jets

But Pelosi generally flies commercial on political and personal travel such as a trip Thursday between San Francisco and Denver in which she flew first class, accompanied by a security agent.

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
$200million? Christ, we could sure build one hell of a combat support hospital with that cash. Hell, or we could use that money to pay to send men and women home on mid-deployment leave.

Well the Congress knocked $369 million from the budget when it cancelled further funding for F-22's so even if they were forced to spend an additional $130 million that leaves $239 million for what you are asking for. Where is it? Ask your Represenative. I think military men and women deserve both.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:32 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 9):
In fact, if I'm not mistaken, that was the biggest reason that DCA wasn't closed when IAD moved into full swing.

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

Quoting D L X (Reply 9):
Oh and KC135, for once I agree with you 100%.

 bigthumbsup   bigthumbsup   bigthumbsup 

Quoting EMBQA (Reply 10):
200 million is a lot of money... but it's not a lot of airplane. My guess would be 4 or 5


The list price for a G-550, with basic interior is $65M each. The USAF usually pays list prices. So The 3 C-37s are $195M, plus another $5M for extra plush toilet paper and barf bags for Congress.

 relieved   relieved   relieved   vomit   vomit   vomit 
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 12:54 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 13):
plus another $5M for extra plush toilet paper and barf bags for Congress.

You left out what they pay the pilot that crawls in back and picks out the green M&Ms from the bowl cause Pelosi doesn't like those.  rotfl 
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:23 pm

Why shouldn't congresspeople ride on a Gulfstream? $200M is not much compared to the budget every single year. Better than spending it on more weapons I say. DD budget is already bloated to the max.
oh boy!!!
 
NWADC9
Posts: 3938
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 12:33 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:49 pm



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 15):
Why shouldn't congresspeople ride on a Gulfstream?

Because they can easily fly commercial. If they want to fly private jets, let them buy their own instead of wasting taxpayer dollars.
Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:51 pm

The REAL reason for the cancellation of the F-22.  Yeah sure Oh, and notice that Obama may still get his Presidential choppers.

Yup, it's nice to see them fighting wasteful programs.  Yeah sure

I suppose it could be seen as an apology to the GA industry after Congress recklessly trashed that industry for personal gain after their grandstanding against the automaker CEOs, calling private jets a waste of money/making them political poison, and destroying the jobs of thousands of innocent Americans in Wichita, Duluth, Savannah, etc.

There's no other word for these people other than jackasses...greedy jackasses.

Congress hasn't served American in a meaningful way in years. We need to hand out serious punishments in the next election cycle. Question is, will America shun the evils of Democrat and Republican idealogy and vote based on the virtues of pragmatism?

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 1:55 pm



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 15):
Why shouldn't congresspeople ride on a Gulfstream? $200M is not much compared to the budget every single year. Better than spending it on more weapons I say. DD budget is already bloated to the max.

Are you serious!? The USAF is meant to defend the US...not be a taxi service to greedy and inept lawmakers!

An F-22 does far more to protect you and me than a G550 for Diane Feinstein.

These idiots can ride coach. Period.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:15 pm



Quoting NWADC9 (Reply 16):

Because they can easily fly commercial. If they want to fly private jets, let them buy their own instead of wasting taxpayer dollars.

Hear, hear.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 15):
Why shouldn't congresspeople ride on a Gulfstream?

Why should they? They are tasked with representing the people who elected them, and that means mingling with them when they travel as well - not enjoying the frills of private air travel - which are usually earned by considerably more hard work in most cases.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 18):

An F-22 does far more to protect you and me than a G550 for Diane Feinstein.

Well not really, considering our prime adversaries at this point in time are more dangerous as passengers and ground handlers than possessors of fighter aircraft, but that case has already been made.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:31 pm



Quoting DXing (Reply 12):
Well the Congress knocked $369 million from the budget when it cancelled further funding for F-22's so even if they were forced to spend an additional $130 million that leaves $239 million for what you are asking for. Where is it? Ask your Represenative. I think military men and women deserve both.

The "Congressional fleet" has now grown to 8 new airplanes, 5 G-550s (C-37As) and 3 new B-737-BBJ/-BBJ2s (C-40B/Cs). The new price tag is now over half a billion, at $550M.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124960404730212955.html

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 15):
Why shouldn't congresspeople ride on a Gulfstream? $200M is not much compared to the budget every single year. Better than spending it on more weapons I say.

First of all, Congressmen and Senators are not that important, you can replace anyone every 2 or 6 years. Second, defending the country is a Constitutional requirement, treating Congress like fat cats is not. Third, when you run a $1.5T deficet, this year alone, wasting another half billion dollars is not needed. Fourth, Congress, just last year, critisized the car makers for flying in corprate jets, but now it is okay for Congress? Not on MY dime, it isn't.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 17):
Oh, and notice that Obama may still get his Presidential choppers.

Yup, it's nice to see them fighting wasteful programs.

Correct.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 18):
These idiots can ride coach. Period.

Yeah, on a Greyhound Bus..........

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
not enjoying the frills of private air travel - which are usually earned by considerably more hard work in most cases.

Correct, but those in Congress think they are 'entitled' to such a luxury. They have not 'earned' it. No other ligslature body in the world has their own fleet of private jets. What makes thim think they are spiecal?

Maybe they don't want to have to sit next to "joe six pack" on a commerical airplane because he might ask them questions they don't want to answer?
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 2:34 pm



Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Well not really, considering our prime adversaries at this point in time are more dangerous as passengers and ground handlers than possessors of fighter aircraft, but that case has already been made.

An F-22 is not as useful in a theater like Afghanistan, but let's not forget that we still have potential adversaries that can field large air forces. Gulfstreams meant to shuttle members of Congress around do not aid in the mission of the USAF. An F-22 thus does more to protect you and me than an inept lawmaker tooling around in a G550.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 3:45 pm



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
The new price tag is now over half a billion, at $550M.

2 gulfstreams and 2 737's are above and beyond what was requested in the budget. At 66 mil and 70 mil a piece that comes to an additional 272 million above and beyond what was requested by the AF. Since the Raptor program was axed at 369 million there should still be an additional 99 million to get the troops home mid deployment and build a hospital.
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 4:48 pm



Quoting NWADC9 (Reply 16):
Because they can easily fly commercial. If they want to fly private jets, let them buy their own instead of wasting taxpayer dollars.

Ok.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 18):
Are you serious!?

Yes. Big grin

Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 19):
Why should they? They are tasked with representing the people who elected them, and that means mingling with them when they travel as well - not enjoying the frills of private air travel - which are usually earned by considerably more hard work in most cases.



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 20):
First of all, Congressmen and Senators are not that important, you can replace anyone every 2 or 6 years. Second, defending the country is a Constitutional requirement, treating Congress like fat cats is not. Third, when you run a $1.5T deficet, this year alone, wasting another half billion dollars is not needed. Fourth, Congress, just last year, critisized the car makers for flying in corprate jets, but now it is okay for Congress? Not on MY dime, it isn't.

Jaja. I dunno, I can't really get worked up over $200M of taxpayer dollars. Just can't. There are so many billions of tax dollars wasted every year...with nothing to show for it... I do understand why it comes across as wasteful. I also think the military budget should be chopped by a good $100-150 billion pa by better spending and less of these F-22s and billion-dollar satellites/B-2s/black projects.
oh boy!!!
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:19 pm



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 23):
I also think the military budget should be chopped by a good $100-150 billion pa by better spending and less of these F-22s and billion-dollar satellites/B-2s/black projects.

And of course you support giving it to your dear leaders...

Items that keep you safe and preserve your freedom vs. bloated fat cats. And you choose fat cats.

What was that saying...Nero fiddled while Rome burned?

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 23):
Jaja. I dunno,

Exactly how our Congress works...and look how messed up our nation has become in the past 10 years.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:29 pm



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 24):
And of course you support giving it to your dear leaders...

Items that keep you safe and preserve your freedom vs. bloated fat cats. And you choose fat cats.

What was that saying...Nero fiddled while Rome burned?

Haha. No I just think the military should be smaller but more capable. I don't believe it's America's responsibility to police the world. I am an extreme cost cutter, give me the purse strings I will have this deficit at 0 and make huge dents in the national debt. Nero? I like that? Are you calling me out of touch with the common man, sequestered in my palace like a Roman emperor? Cute.  mischievous 
oh boy!!!
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:39 pm

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 25):
Haha. No I just think the military should be smaller but more capable. I don't believe it's America's responsibility to police the world. I am an extreme cost cutter, give me the purse strings I will have this deficit at 0 and make huge dents in the national debt. Nero? I like that? Are you calling me out of touch with the common man, sequestered in my palace like a Roman emperor? Cute.

Yes as a matter of fact I am. You're the only one who thinks that a bunch of political hacks who have plunged us into this deficit deserve to fly in Gulfstream jets. This especially after they hypocritically criticized companies for having business jets. You'll have the deficit at zero eh? Not with reckless spending on Gulfstreams you won't.

You believe in a more capable military? Tell me, how are our pilots going to dogfight Sukhoi's or take out Taliban in G550s?

  B4e-Forever New Frontiers  

[Edited 2009-08-07 10:40:18]
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5543
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:43 pm



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 23):
I can't really get worked up over $200M of taxpayer dollars. Just can't. There are so many billions of tax dollars wasted every year...with nothing to show for it...

As Everett Dirkson never said "A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon you're talking about real money."

The nice thing is this proposal is dead - gone - will not happen this year.

The Air Force will get the money they requested to replace some of the C-20's with C-37's and some of the older C-40s (will the old one go to Janet Airways?)

But the extra planes will not happen.
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:15 pm



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 27):
As Everett Dirkson never said "A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon you're talking about real money."

I was about to post the SAME QUOTE, only I couldn't remember who said it, thanks.  thumbsup 

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 26):
You believe in a more capable military? Tell me, how are our pilots going to dogfight Sukhoi's or take out Taliban in G550s?

Slice them with the wingtip like the Embraer versus the GOL 737. (sorry I know it's a tacky comment with innocent lives lost) How about more of these pilotless drone thingies, development of smaller drones, a shift toward smaller organizations of highly-trained insertable ground troops and less massive infantries. Yes I would chop chop chop chop chop this bloated budget. With all of the savings, how about a new Presidential Palace somewhere else in DC, maybe on the bank of the Anacostia. Must be at least 100,000 sf., all gold and marble, on 200+ acres of land, with a small private airstrip just for the congressional and presidential Gulfstreams. Think of all the DC/MD/VA residents we'd employ as servants! (This is a joke.)
oh boy!!!
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Sat Aug 08, 2009 3:39 pm

Gates and Defense Dept weighed in this morning; a good read with a lot of numbers.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124969431303416161.html
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Mon Aug 10, 2009 5:04 am



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 28):
Slice them with the wingtip like the Embraer versus the GOL 737. (sorry I know it's a tacky comment with innocent lives lost) How about more of these pilotless drone thingies, development of smaller drones, a shift toward smaller organizations of highly-trained insertable ground troops and less massive infantries. Yes I would chop chop chop chop chop this bloated budget. With all of the savings, how about a new Presidential Palace somewhere else in DC, maybe on the bank of the Anacostia. Must be at least 100,000 sf., all gold and marble, on 200+ acres of land, with a small private airstrip just for the congressional and presidential Gulfstreams. Think of all the DC/MD/VA residents we'd employ as servants! (This is a joke.)

Yup, you tell jokes. You think this is a joke. And apparently so does Congress. So how about more of those "pilotless drone thingies"? (They're called unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs) Well, Gulfstreams don't apply. They are neither unmanned, nor capable of attacking the Taliban. They're for pampering the bloated asses of our congressmen and women.

You seem confident that you can chop the "bloated" budget of the DoD, yet you don't know what a UAV is. It's funny hearing people talk about how they'd reshape our military to save money and have little clue as to what they're talking about. Then watch as it all backfires and winds up costing more than what they started out with...

You whine about the DoD having a "bloated" budget, but you don't have a problem with Congress acquring private jets for themselves. You may as well just admit it. Those who complain about bloated budgets are usually just pissed that the money isn't going to them or to their (selfish) interests... And don't give me "healthcare" or something else you think is non-selfish. You'll be complaining about your tax bill soon after that anyways, and then fantasize about how you'd "chop chop chop" that bloated healthcare budget...while tooling around in your G550.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:27 pm

They now want $550 mil for jets.  no 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124986067095218079.html
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12359
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:30 am

I suspect in part this is do to ethics laws passed I think last year that banned free travel by Members of Congress/Senate and staff members on corporate owned aircraft. Many want the flexibilty of not having to use commercial, some come from places and districts where it would require changing a/c, spend more time traveling, and so on.

If Pres. Obama has any guts he should say he will veto any bill for buying these aircraft.
 
rfields5421
Posts: 5543
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 12:45 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 1:09 am



Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 32):
If Pres. Obama has any guts he should say he will veto any bill for buying these aircraft.

Remember, the USAF requested FOUR aircraft be purchased to replace older planes. There would be no increase in the fleet size.

Members of Congress increased the funding to EIGHT aircraft.

The Air Force still wants the original four.
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:07 am



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 30):
Yup, you tell jokes. You think this is a joke. And apparently so does Congress. So how about more of those "pilotless drone thingies"? (They're called unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs) Well, Gulfstreams don't apply. They are neither unmanned, nor capable of attacking the Taliban. They're for pampering the bloated asses of our congressmen and women.

You know these congresspeople are all jokes right? They never get anything substantive done.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 30):
You seem confident that you can chop the "bloated" budget of the DoD, yet you don't know what a UAV is. It's funny hearing people talk about how they'd reshape our military to save money and have little clue as to what they're talking about. Then watch as it all backfires and winds up costing more than what they started out with...

Look forgive my limited military terminology. I think I may have early-onset dementia.  rotfl  But you know what? There is a lot of wasteful spending in the defense budget, I'm sorry some of these contractors just charge too much for BS. They need a good squeezing.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 30):

You whine about the DoD having a "bloated" budget, but you don't have a problem with Congress acquring private jets for themselves.

Hmm maybe I am thinking too much of the final number and not of the actual usage. Couple hundred million for Gulfstreams vs. ~$700 billion pa in defense spending, I know which number I will care more about.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 30):
Those who complain about bloated budgets are usually just pissed that the money isn't going to them or to their (selfish) interests...

You're right, without all this defense spending I would not have to pay Uncle Sam so much $$$$$. What is this tax now like 45% (I live in the district, which has a high local tax rate...but I do not mind, someone has to pay for these poor children)? I need a new write off. I dunno. I don't think comprehensive healthcare is selfish...I think this is a human right, so I do not mind paying taxes for it. I can't be bothered to study this though I already pay out the *** for private insurance...and will continue to.

You know what? This may sound like mumbo-jumbo, but my very valid point is this is much ado about NOTHING. Just like the GM/Chrysler dudes coming to congress with cap out in their PJs. The public gets worked up over a good story=nothing substantive in reality.
oh boy!!!
 
dxing
Posts: 5859
Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:09 am

Looks like the planes are toast.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/26000.html

"After an uproar over a proposed purchase of new executive jets for use by senior government officials, including members of Congress, the top Defense appropriator in the House has offered to eliminate funding for the planes – but only if the Pentagon, which operates the jets, agrees."


Of course he tried to take the blame off of Congress at the same time.

"And in his statement, Murtha basically put the blame on the Pentagon, whose spokesman has been quoted saying that the House Appropriations Committee added four executive jets beyond the Pentagon’s original request. The Defense Department originally requested $220 million for four jets – a total bumped to $550 million and eight jets by the committee.


“These aircraft will not increase the overall passenger aircraft fleet, but instead will replace older aircraft that have both safety and maintenance issues,” Murtha said. “In addition, these newer model aircraft cost significantly less to operate than the current aircraft.”
Warm winds blowing, heating blue skies, a road that goes forever, I'm going to Texas!
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:41 am



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 34):
You know these congresspeople are all jokes right? They never get anything substantive done.

About the first thing you've said right all thread...

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 34):
Look forgive my limited military terminology. I think I may have early-onset dementia. But you know what? There is a lot of wasteful spending in the defense budget, I'm sorry some of these contractors just charge too much for BS. They need a good squeezing.

There is no more wasteful spending in the defense budget than in other budgets. I don't see you targeting those for a good "squeezing".

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 34):
Hmm maybe I am thinking too much of the final number and not of the actual usage. Couple hundred million for Gulfstreams vs. ~$700 billion pa in defense spending, I know which number I will care more about.

It's crap like those Gulfstreams that have made the entire government budget bloated. Where does it stop? The sh$t adds up son.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 34):
You're right, without all this defense spending I would not have to pay Uncle Sam so much $$$$$. What is this tax now like 45% (I live in the district, which has a high local tax rate...but I do not mind, someone has to pay for these poor children)? I need a new write off. I dunno. I don't think comprehensive healthcare is selfish...I think this is a human right, so I do not mind paying taxes for it. I can't be bothered to study this though I already pay out the *** for private insurance...and will continue to.

Defense spending is not where most of our budget is spent on. Maybe try taking a look at some of the real pork barrel projects. The vast majority of your taxes doesn't go into defense. And cry me a river on taxes. I live and work around LA, and have had to pay steep Illinois taxes in the Chicago area. Maybe take a look at what your state spends, because they a. don't spend on defense, and b. you don't pay more federal tax based on your district, you pay it based on your income. If you need a new write off, Gulfstreams will not get it for you...and as for healthcare, that is indeed a human right, just like our Constitution stipulates the government provide for the national defense.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 34):
You know what? This may sound like mumbo-jumbo, but my very valid point is this is much ado about NOTHING. Just like the GM/Chrysler dudes coming to congress with cap out in their PJs. The public gets worked up over a good story=nothing substantive in reality.

Your very valid point? Congress, and you included, went ape when GM/Chrysler asked for a bailout arriving in their own business jets. Now Congress wants to shove a deficit on us and is asking for their own business jets to boot. It's called hypocrisy.

You claim you're for chopping the budget, but you call a blatant case of wasteful spending "much ado about nothing".

Have a good night, congressman.

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 
 
L-188
Posts: 29870
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:00 am



Quoting DXing (Reply 12):
Quoting Dtwclipper (Thread starter):
So, congress slams GM/Ford/Chrysler for flying to DC in corporate jets, but then they turn around and do this!

Hey, to the victor go the spoils. That's politics.

Gotta love the hyprocracy

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 32):
I suspect in part this is do to ethics laws passed I think last year that banned free travel by Members of Congress/Senate and staff members on corporate owned aircraft.

You may be right there.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35):
Murtha basically put the blame on the Pentagon

Murtha has really proven to be a worthless piece of work over the past few years.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 8524
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:37 am



Quoting DXing (Reply 35):
“These aircraft will not increase the overall passenger aircraft fleet, but instead will replace older aircraft that have both safety and maintenance issues,” Murtha said. “In addition, these newer model aircraft cost significantly less to operate than the current aircraft.”

What a liar! Safety and maintenance issues? Examples please Mr. Murtha??

An accident involving Congressional executive transport...that'll be the day!
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
User avatar
stasisLAX
Posts: 2924
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:04 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:54 am

The Congress has temporarily come back to reality and has canceled plans to purchase these executive jets.

"House Democratic leaders said Monday that they will not force the Pentagon to buy four new passenger jets used to ferry senior government officials. Democrats have been criticized for adding $330 million to the Air Force's 2010 budget to buy the jets even though the Pentagon didn't request the money."

Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32366094/ns/politics/
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
 
User avatar
fxramper
Posts: 5837
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:03 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:26 am



Quoting StasisLAX (Reply 39):
The Congress has temporarily come back to reality and has canceled plans to purchase these executive jets.

Did they think they were going to try and slip this by taxpayers?  Yeah sure

After all the grief they gave automaker and bank execs about travel and they try to pull this; unbelievable.  no 
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 4:19 pm



Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 23):
I can't really get worked up over $200M of taxpayer dollars. Just can't. There are so many billions of tax dollars wasted every year...with nothing to show for it... I do understand why it comes across as wasteful. I also think the military budget should be chopped by a good $100-150 billion pa by better spending and less of these F-22s and billion-dollar satellites/B-2s/black projects.

This would be interesting to see what you would cot, government wide, not just the DOD.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 24):
And of course you support giving it to your dear leaders...

Items that keep you safe and preserve your freedom vs. bloated fat cats. And you choose fat cats.

What was that saying...Nero fiddled while Rome burned?

LOL  rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 25):



Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 26):
Not with reckless spending on Gulfstreams you won't.



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 33):
Remember, the USAF requested FOUR aircraft be purchased to replace older planes. There would be no increase in the fleet size.

Members of Congress increased the funding to EIGHT aircraft.

The Air Force still wants the original four.

You do know that 2 0f the 4 requested jets (both C-40Cs) are already in the USAF inventory? The two C-40Cs the USAF wants to buy are currently being leased.

Quoting DXing (Reply 35):



Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 38):
What a liar! Safety and maintenance issues? Examples please Mr. Murtha??

It is only a safety issue flying these jets is getting into his personal government funded airport in PA. The oldest planes flown by the 89th is the C-20s., and they are not being replaced, they are being transferred to other units.

Quoting StasisLAX (Reply 39):
The Congress has temporarily come back to reality

Wow, I must have missed that. When did that happen?  duck   duck   duck 
 
slider
Posts: 6805
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:29 pm



Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
The point being - that money could actually be used by the Air Force for the betterment of the lives of those in uniform. Flights out of DCA are perfectly capable of being to provide service for the vast majority of their travel needs.

Exactly right- they are elected public servants, not royalty and not aristocracy. Maybe if more of them flew coach and saw the ATC bullshit they refuse to fix, we’d see legitimate reforms. Make them go through the travails as any other business person would.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 17):
There's no other word for these people other than jackasses...greedy jackasses.

Congress hasn't served American in a meaningful way in years. We need to hand out serious punishments in the next election cycle. Question is, will America shun the evils of Democrat and Republican idealogy and vote based on the virtues of pragmatism?

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoting DXing (Reply 35):
Of course he tried to take the blame off of Congress at the same time.

"And in his statement, Murtha basically put the blame on the Pentagon, whose spokesman has been quoted saying that the House Appropriations Committee added four executive jets beyond the Pentagon’s original request. The Defense Department originally requested $220 million for four jets – a total bumped to $550 million and eight jets by the committee. “These aircraft will not increase the overall passenger aircraft fleet, but instead will replace older aircraft that have both safety and maintenance issues,” Murtha said. “In addition, these newer model aircraft cost significantly less to operate than the current aircraft.”

I’m surprised Murtha didn’t slander the Pentagon brass and call them babykillers while he was at it. He’s got such a great track record slandering the military.

Hey Jack(ass): guess what, those older aircraft that have ‘safety and mx issues’ are no different than the commercial fleet that airlines have to maintain and fly. Bite my ass!
 
Pellegrine
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:31 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):
This would be interesting to see what you would cot, government wide, not just the DOD.

No I'd cut nonperforming social programs too, not just the DoD budget.

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 36):
Have a good night, congressman.

:D I don't do politics, but maybe I should! You made me laugh, first laugh all day  thumbsup  (today was a serious day).
oh boy!!!
 
Boeing4ever
Posts: 4479
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2001 12:06 pm

RE: House Approves $200 Million For Gulfstreams

Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:11 am



Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):
You do know that 2 0f the 4 requested jets (both C-40Cs) are already in the USAF inventory? The two C-40Cs the USAF wants to buy are currently being leased.

That's fine. Two more that the Pentagon actually wants and I have no problem. Adding four more just for a bunch of idiot congressmen to ride around in...bad medicine.

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 43):
I don't do politics, but maybe I should! You made me laugh, first laugh all day (today was a serious day).

I'm sure we would all love to see that. You certainly seem to believe that politicians deserve all sorts of perks on our dime...

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Redd, Scorpio and 37 guests