Stop the F-22

posted by Peter Rothberg on 07/14/2009 @ 2:21pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (65)

Subscribe Now

This post was written by Sarah Jaffe, a blogger, freelance journalist and Nation intern.

As symbols of the overinflated military budget go, the F-22 takes the cake. The Washington Post recently reported that the jet costs $44,000 an hour to fly (in addition to its $350 million price tag) and requires 30 hours of maintenance for every hour it spends in the air. Military experts agree that the F-22 is outdated and unnecessary. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has called the plane a "niche silver-bullet solution," and has urged President Obama to veto any bill that continues reinstated funding for the jet.

The F-22 was designed in the 1980s to fight presumable Soviet fighter planes that had yet to be developed, and has suffered since its inception from flaws and budget overruns. It has never been flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. There is even a lawsuit, recently reopened, alleging that Lockheed Martin, producers of the jet, has knowingly supplied defective F-22s to the Air Force since 1995.

In a Washington Post op-ed, Air Force Secretary Michael Donley and Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz wrote:

This is the time to make the transition from F-22 to F-35 production. Within the next few years, we will begin work on the sixth-generation capabilities necessary for future air dominance.

We support the final four F-22s proposed in the fiscal 2009 supplemental request, as this will aid the long-term viability of the F-22 fleet. But the time has come to close out production. That is why we do not recommend that F-22s be included in the fiscal 2010 defense budget.

Yet Congress seems determined to keep manufacturing the jet despite Gates' recommendation to cancel the program. The House approved a measure to spend $400 million on the F-22, and the Senate is expected to soon vote.

Both the United Steelworkers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers are appealing to lawmakers to keep production going in order to save jobs but there are cheaper and less bellicose ways to provide manufacturing jobs for American workers than building planes we don't need that hemorrhage cash. The problem is that the military budget is such a sacred cow that Secretary Gates' four percent increase in his budget was spun as, essentially, a cut that would open America up to terrorist attacks.

That's why the full Senate is taking up the issue of the F-22 this week, after the Armed Services committee voted to spend $1.75 billion more on the jet. The votes are, for once, not split along party lines--Senator John McCain is an ardent opponent of the jet, while staunch Democrats like John Kerry and Edward Kennedy are on the F-22's side. But Lockheed has done a good job of spreading the money and jobs around--more than 40 states have F-22-related jobs, and 58 percent of Lockheed's political contributions go to Democrats.

Under President Obama, we have a chance to cut some of the waste from the military budget and redirect that money to critical healthcare initiatives and for programs that will provide more jobs at less cost.

Join The Nation in urging the Senate to support the Levin-McCain Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act of 2010.

Comments (65)

"Both the United Steelworkers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers are appealing to lawmakers to keep production going in order to save jobs"

So you've got "pro-defense/any cut means the terrorists will win" Republicans on one side....and a big union supporter of Democrats...on the SAME side...

This could be tricky to pull off, PETER.

heheh

Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 2:25pm
Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 2:25pm

yep.

since the plan has started, ¿why bother to change it?

VIVA THE "STATUS QUO"!

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:34pm
america is broke.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:35pm
listen to the military...

if we just want to vomit money into the manufacturing sector...at least we can do so smartly...

if it has to be spent on military ironmongery...at least spend it on the crap the military WANTS, like the f-35...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/14/2009 @ 2:45pm
america is broke.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:35pm

Baloney.

We got lots of paper and ink.

And our printers work just fine, thank you very much.

Posted by Benchrest at 07/14/2009 @ 2:58pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:34pm

Didn't say I opposed it, did I, FZ.

I do. It's just "tricky" to see how you get something stopped that supported by all Republicans and Democrats with ties to labor that makes the jets.

But if you've got a SPECIFIC plan...love to hear it, cuz we don't need these jets.

Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 3:13pm
america is broke.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:35pm

Absolutely. Domestic spending and the bankrupt Social Security and Medicare are drowning the country in Red Ink, not defense spending.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/14/2009 @ 3:21pm
Upgrading the newer versions we already have would be more economical and achieve the same result, so unless our potential enemies have devised brand new technology that simply has to be matched, I'd say, yeah, scratch the 22. It's not like we can't put it's technology in an F-15.

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 07/14/2009 @ 3:28pm
It's not like we can't put it's technology in an F-15.

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 07/14/2009 @ 3:28pm | ignore this person | warn this person

or find new roles for old workhorses.

initially i was suspicious of the anti f22 rhetoric, sounded like knee-jerk anti-militarism. but with increasing numbers of high level military types chiming in...

gotta rethink my previous inclinations.

perhaps we should scrap the project and devote resources to upgrading existing equipment and developing the next project, the f-35.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/14/2009 @ 3:36pm
spend the money on bibles instead, and hand those bibles out to homeless people to burn in garbage cans to keep them warm in teh winter.

or just print the money and burn the cash.

either way

Posted by urmygyro at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm
"Both the United Steelworkers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers are appealing to lawmakers to keep production going in order to save jobs but there are cheaper and less bellicose ways to provide manufacturing jobs for American workers than building planes we don't need that hemorrhage cash. "

---------------

Peter, I read the same article and based on the information provided for once we are in complete agreeance that the production should end!

Yes, IDIDhange my mind about the subject of the F-22, but NOT for the same reasons leftist decry it.

The F-22 is designed for air superiority. It just happens to be very stealthy and fast, and can drop bombs, but they are small bombs. The F-35 is designed for many services (USAF, USN, USMC as well as the British RAF and Royal Navy). It's main role is ground attack/Interdiction and long range Strike. It can perform the air to air mission, but has a larger bomb load than the F-22. It is also stealthy and has a great avionics suite (more modern than the F-22 since it was designed later). Both aircraft are complimentary, and the country needs the capabilities afforded by both.

However, as new errcraft are being developed for another generation series of fighters to date don't need any more F-22s!

Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm
Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm

OMG!...RIO's a "peacenik gut our defenses liberal"?!?!?!?!??!?!?????

Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 3:57pm
Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

i agree. did not know the specifics of the f-35, but if that's so, sounds like a better option regardless.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 07/14/2009 @ 4:00pm
'Both the United Steelworkers and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers are appealing to lawmakers to keep production going...' -- Peter Rothberg -- The Nation -- 14 July, 2009

'Workers of the world, unite!' -- Notgroucho Orskid

Posted by HonestLiberal at 07/14/2009 @ 4:29pm
OMG!...RIO's a "peacenik gut our defenses liberal"?!?!?!?!??!?!?????

Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 3:57pm

The blog is rubbing off on him.

Before you know it, we'll be pulling the reigns back on him to keep him from voting for Nader.

Posted by Benchrest at 07/14/2009 @ 4:39pm
However, as new errcraft are being developed for another generation series of fighters to date don't need any more F-22s!

Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm | ignore this person | warn this person

My definition of "errcraft": 0ne of barry25's postings.

wa wa waaaaaah.

Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/14/2009 @ 7:18pm
I sincerely hope that, ultimately, the joke of the F-22 is on us; that the weapon will never take a single life in any conflict. If we are going to engage in lunacy, and spend billions upon billions of dollars on very destructive, utterly useless weapons, let it at least be money entirely down the money hole, with not a single life taken by the weapon in actual use.

Posted by syfriendly at 07/14/2009 @ 7:24pm
Absolutely. Domestic spending and the bankrupt Social Security and Medicare are drowning the country in Red Ink, not defense spending.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/14/2009 @ 3:21pm

Yeah, spending 1.7 billion dollars on a couple of worthless planes isn't drowning the country at all. Especially because no one has an air force that can rival ours so the planes just sit on the tarmac collecting dust. oh and that's just 1.7 billion to build them that doesn't even include the cost of flying them. What a crock. This is a waste of the nations money. You love to talk about how liberals are wasting this countries money on useless programs but you won't even admit when a defense program is a worthless waste of money.

Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/14/2009 @ 9:02pm
Wow, the commentary on this thread sure is stupid! Some of you seem OK, but some of you are just asses, childish asses. Those of you in this latter dubious category are not worthy of the gift of basic literacy that has been bestowed upon you.

Posted by syfriendly at 07/14/2009 @ 9:15pm
Domestic spending and the bankrupt Social Security and Medicare are drowning the country in Red Ink, not defense spending.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/14/2009 @ 3:21pm

BONG HITS 4 JESUS!

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 9:20pm
Gee, I wonder what the next off-the-wall target of the whacko left fringe will be...The F22 and the F35 should be built because they represent air superority for many years to come. The large "cost" you state is not the fly-away cost but adding in the development cost spread out over the total production. The fact is the development cost has already been paid. It is an accounting issue and rather dishonest.

Posted by pyeatte at 07/14/2009 @ 9:49pm
Posted by pyeatte at 07/14/2009 @ 9:49pm

with the F22, the air force will be able to blow up twice as many wedding parties!

RAPTOR!

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/15/2009 @ 12:11am
Posted by pyeatte at 07/14/2009 @ 9:49pm

Uh, pyette, you DID see that RIO/Big Posture opposes the 22 as well, didn't you???

You calling him a "wacko left fringer"!?!????!!?

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 07:52am
don't need any more F-22s!

Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm

We also don't need any F-35's. The development cost of this immoral obscene waste of money is $40 Billion. Most of which is underwritten by the american taxpayer. And then the purchase of 2,400 planes is an additional $200 Billion.

When you add in flight time costs and maintenance and a whole bunch of other costs, this stupid plane will end up costing the American Taxpayer upwards of $1 Trillion dollars.

We can afford to produce killing machines for enormous amounts of money. But we can't provide healthcare to our citizens?

That is just one example of the insanity of empire and a culture of death. Disgusting..

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 07:53am
What is even more disturbing is the list of countries that are contributing to this insanity. The United Kingdom, Italy, Netherlands, Canada, Turkey, Australia, Norway, and Denmark.

I guess much of the world finds a flying metal penis of death worthwhile.

We are doomed. And the planet will be a better place without us.

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 08:02am
Black Hole Sun Won't you come And wash away the rain Black Hole Sun Won't you come Won't you come

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 08:11am
"I guess much of the world finds a flying metal penis of death worthwhile"

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 08:02am

Radar Operator: Colonel, you better have a look at this radar.

Colonel: What is it, son?

Radar Operator: I don't know, sir, but it looks like a giant...

Jet Pilot: Dick. Dick, take a look out of starboard.

Co-Pilot: Oh my God, it looks like a huge...

Bird-Watching Woman: Pecker.

Bird-Watching Man: [raising binoculars] Ooh, Where?

Bird-Watching Woman: Over there. What sort of bird is that? Wait, it's not a woodpecker, it looks like someone's...

Army Sergeant: Privates. We have reports of an unidentified flying object. It has a long, smooth shaft, complete with...

Baseball Umpire: Two balls. [looking up from game]

Baseball Umpire: What is that. It looks just like an enormous...

Chinese Teacher: Wang!! pay attention!

Wang: I was distracted by that giant flying...

Musician: Willie.

Willie: Yeah?

Musician: What's that?

Willie: [squints] Well, that looks like a huge...

Colonel: Johnson!!!

Radar Operator: Yes, sir?

Colonel: Get on the horn to British Intelligence and let them know about this.

Posted by Benchrest at 07/15/2009 @ 08:31am
Posted by Benchrest at 07/15/2009 @ 08:31am

Was that from Mars Attacks! or from an Austin Powers film. I can't recall.

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 09:03am
Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 09:03am

Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me.

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 09:20am
How foolish we human beings are. We spend most of our wealth and endanger our planet for the sake of profit. We attempt to protect greed with military force. We arm ourselves against ourselves in the vain attempt to secure material wealth.

And we slay humanity in the process. When you step back and look at us with a clear mind, devoid of nationalism, prejudice and self interest. We are all one big dysfunctional family.

Until we realize these faults in our cultures and world views, we will never achieve balance as a species. We are lost.

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 09:28am
Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me.

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 09:20am

Thanks. Now I can rest. Stuff like that drives me crazy.

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 09:30am
Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 09:30am

It's the best of the three. My favorite part is where Austin is asked by Felicity-

"So, what's the future like?" (ref he returning from the late 90s to 1969)

"Well, everyone has a flying car....entire meals come in pill form.....and the world is ruled by DAMN DIRTY APES!"

(Those of us of that generation laughing hardest)

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 10:28am
Posted by BigPasture at 07/14/2009 @ 3:45pm

OMG!...RIO's a "peacenik gut our defenses liberal"?!?!?!?!??!?!?????

Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 3:57pm | ignore this person | warn this person

A truely ignorant unintelligent assumption totally ignoring the facts at hand! But, we expect no less mAsKeD fool!

Posted by BigPasture at 07/15/2009 @ 11:14am
Posted by BigPasture at 07/15/2009 @ 11:14am]

Talk to pyette, not me, RIO.....HE's the one saying you're a "wacko leftist fringe" member, not me.

Posted by pyeatte at 07/14/2009 @ 9:49pm

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 11:24am
Posted by Mask at 07/14/2009 @ 3:13pm |

Mask, I'm sure the steelworkers would be just as `happy' to make steel for turbines as they would for air-superiority fighters.

There's a very narrow window in which we'll still be able to compete with China in this arena before we'll need to use our F-XX craft (manned flight is so passe) to attack them, which may be the only real way out of this depression (for those intent on printing their way out).

I'm going to go order Rosetta Stone Mandarin...

Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 11:28am
america is broke. Posted by frosty zoom at 07/14/2009 @ 2:35pm

Absolutely. Domestic spending and the bankrupt Social Security and Medicare are drowning the country in Red Ink, not defense spending. Posted by antisocialist at 07/14/2009 @ 3:21pm |

Solution: draft people over the age of 55 into the military to fight in Af-ghastly-stan...that'll help our SS and Medi-care projection numbers right?

Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 11:29am
Solution: draft people over the age of 55 into the military to fight in Af-ghastly-stan...that'll help our SS and Medi-care projection numbers right?

Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 11:29am

Better Solution:

How about we send all the people who have received some sort of free check from the govt and all those who paid no taxes in a generation or more(wealthy to welfare) to Afaganistan and Iraq...that should amount to generations and layers of multi millions of people(sorry, mostly libs and democrats probably by the numbers)...or, we send all the illegals here for a 6 month tour in each place with the promise of citizenship when they return...

that should allow the military to regroup, re arm and recoup...and the with the multi millions we send over there, the insurgents would be out numbered and have to place to go since the country would be full of "new immigrants",PLUS! Christanity would take over, since most here are Christians of some flavor...then we could put them to work rebuilding the 3rd century country and bring it up to the standards of modern day Mexico...

then, give them free health care....and then..

keep in mind, we would also be getting rid of all the politicians in Washington and half the states with this method..

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:32pm
Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 11:28am

But somebody's got to put in the order for the turbines, snow.

I just think that with "Gotta have the latest X-49 or the terr'urrists...or the Chinese...will win" Repubs...

and Dems with union backing or from districts where "the parts" are made...

aren't going to be keen on stopping the program.

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 12:46pm
"How about we send all the people who have received some sort of free check from the govt ...."---Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:32pm

Isn't that going to include Granny Maasch????

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 12:46pm
Isn't that going to include Granny Maasch????

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 12:46pm

Granny Maasch is on her death bed.

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:55pm
And Granny Maasch worked all her life paying taxes...something very few can claim today...I think Granny Maasch has paid her share and a share of many others who are todays "victims"...who have collected something from the rest of us for generations.

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:57pm
Just a wild guess here, but I would guess that military spending has probablely spawned more private sector jobs and lead to more consumer products that led to private jobs in after markets ...

same with NASA...despite $ 600 hammers that all govt projects are infested with....

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 1:00pm
Just a wild guess here, but I would guess that military spending has probablely spawned more private sector jobs and lead to more consumer products that led to private jobs in after markets ...

same with NASA...despite $ 600 hammers that all govt projects are infested with....

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 1:00pm

When I worked in the defense industry, the rule of thumb used by both the US govt and defense contractors was that every direct job for a defense contractor produced 3 more jobs in the community.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 1:04pm
Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 1:04pm |

You don't think people at hospitals serving medi-care patients go out to eat at local restaurants?

"Money multipliers" don't care from whence the original dollar comes.

Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 1:19pm
Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 1:19pm

no no no

Larry gets to have it both ways.

He's special.

Posted by Benchrest at 07/15/2009 @ 1:24pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:32pm |

A couple problems with your proposal:

Large numbers of the 'po folk' you'd select are already or have already served (the same is true for my geriatric draftees, however)...I heard a horrible stat on Colbert about foreclosures being 4x more likely in areas around military bases.

The illegals are a fraction of the elderly and don't collect Medi-care/caid or SS benefits (outside of those perpetrating fraud, that is).

I'm trying to attack the problem as Larry sees it...using the 1st Regimental Entitlement Brigade!

Posted by snowball777 at 07/15/2009 @ 1:27pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:57pm

Didn't say that, did you, MAASCH. And most of those folks "getting a government check"?....are "Granny Maasch" types, not Reagan's mythical "welfare queens".

A point you guys often "forget".

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 1:00pm Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 1:04pm

Interesting these libertarian/conservative "No make-work jobs from the Gov't/Government spending doesn't produce a good economy" types....

who now tell us that SOME "government stimulus" (in the DoD) DOES produce jobs and a booming economy.

Interesting, huh???

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 1:51pm
Interesting these libertarian/conservative "No make-work jobs from the Gov't/Government spending doesn't produce a good economy" types....

who now tell us that SOME "government stimulus" (in the DoD) DOES produce jobs and a booming economy.

Interesting, huh???

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 1:51pm

I won't deny that govt spending can produce jobs Mask. That's not my point. It's what the govt spends it on and whether it is within the authority given to Congress or not. Clearly defending the nation ranks as the first priority of the Fed govt. Whereas healthcare is neither a right nor essential to maintain the nation.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 2:41pm
Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 2:41pm

Okay, so, if you could...if for a moment...throw out the "un-Constitutionality" part....

you'd support a government program/spending to create jobs to alleviate unemployment.

if the "total un-Constitutionality" could be ignored....just hypothetically....?

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 2:53pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:32pm

Almost every farmer in the nation would be shipped overseas, considering most of their farms are subsidized by the government.

Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/15/2009 @ 2:54pm
Okay, so, if you could...if for a moment...throw out the "un-Constitutionality" part....

you'd support a government program/spending to create jobs to alleviate unemployment.

if the "total un-Constitutionality" could be ignored....just hypothetically....?

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 2:53pm

I didn't say that at all. the jobs element of national defense is a byproduct of doing what is necessary to keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces.

I don't support military contracts just to create jobs.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 3:04pm
keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces. Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 3:04pm

And just how many nations have been destroyed by outside forces lately? Iraq and Afghanistan come to mind..

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 3:27pm
Granny Maasch is on her death bed.

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:55pm

be strong, brother.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/15/2009 @ 3:28pm
DAMN DIRTY APES!"

(Those of us of that generation laughing hardest)

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 10:28am

i hadn't realized your simian implications.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/15/2009 @ 3:30pm
How about we send all the people who have received some sort of free check from the govt and all those who paid no taxes in a generation or more(wealthy to welfare) to Afaganistan and Iraq...

•• goldmans sachs to the front!

that should amount to generations and layers of multi millions of people(sorry, mostly libs and democrats probably by the numbers)...

•• what the fuck is a "lib"?

or, we send all the illegals here for a 6 month tour in each place with the promise of citizenship when they return...

•• actually, that's already policy.

that should allow the military to regroup, re arm and recoup...

•• buy borrowing more!

and the with the multi millions we send over there, the insurgents would be out numbered and have to place to go since the country would be full of "new immigrants",

•• you mean like people named "maasch"? or is that a fine sioux name?

PLUS! Christanity would take over, since most here are Christians of some flavor...

•• stupid bigot.

then we could put them to work rebuilding the 3rd century country and bring it up to the standards of modern day Mexico...

•• ruined by stupid america policies. you are so lost.

then, give them free health care....and then..

•• it's not free. sheesh.

keep in mind, we would also be getting rid of all the politicians in Washington and half the states with this method..

•• maybe we should just send all the bigots.

Posted by YourJomamma at 07/15/2009 @ 12:32pm

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/15/2009 @ 3:35pm
Wow, the commentary on this thread sure is stupid! Some of you seem OK, but some of you are just asses, childish asses. Those of you in this latter dubious category are not worthy of the gift of basic literacy that has been bestowed upon you. Posted by syfriendly at 07/14/2009 @ 9:15pm | ignore this person | warn this person

pretty slimy, not naming names in your attack.

you're not exactly Solon either.

Posted by emile duBois at 07/15/2009 @ 3:51pm
Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 3:04pm

Didn't say you "said that", Larry.

I'm asking if "un-Constitutionality" is your only objection to government spending to provide employment. Are there others or not?

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 3:56pm
Weren't some of wingers here the ones that were saying that Government spending doesn't create jobs? But then jump in with "statistics" like:

When I worked in the defense industry, the rule of thumb used by both the US govt and defense contractors was that every direct job for a defense contractor produced 3 more jobs in the community.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 1:04pm

So the biggest recipient of Government Welfare, the DOD creates jobs by building killing machines but any money from the stimulus bill that would create infrastructure that would last for decades is a waste of money?

When you drop a bomb or shoot a bullet that money is gone forever. When you build a bridge or a school that money has multiple returns on investment.

Where do these hypocritical idiots come from anyway?

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 5:21pm
I'm asking if "un-Constitutionality" is your only objection to government spending to provide employment. Are there others or not?

Posted by Mask at 07/15/2009 @ 3:56pm

And I answered you by saying that even with defense spending, we should not have the govt spend just to create jobs.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 6:57pm
When I worked in the defense industry, the rule of thumb used by both the US govt and defense contractors was that every direct job for a defense contractor produced 3 more jobs in the community.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 1:04pm

So the biggest recipient of Government Welfare, the DOD creates jobs by building killing machines but any money from the stimulus bill that would create infrastructure that would last for decades is a waste of money?

When you drop a bomb or shoot a bullet that money is gone forever. When you build a bridge or a school that money has multiple returns on investment.

Where do these hypocritical idiots come from anyway?

Posted by chaoszen at 07/15/2009 @ 5:21pm

If you would have bothered to read the followup post you would not have made such a dumb post.

<I didn't say that at all. the jobs element of national defense is a byproduct of doing what is necessary to keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces.

I don't support military contracts just to create jobs.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 3:04pm>

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 6:58pm
<I didn't say that at all. the jobs element of national defense is a byproduct of doing what is necessary to keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 3:04pm>

the insanity of your military "policy" is destroying america from within.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/15/2009 @ 8:03pm
RAPTOR!

hey, what's the nickname for the F35?

.......

LIGHTNING! (2)

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/16/2009 @ 09:52am
RAPTOR AND LIGHTNING.

sounds like an '80s cop show.

Posted by frosty zoom at 07/16/2009 @ 09:53am
Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 6:57pm

But you admitted that government spending does create jobs, didn't you?

Posted by Mask at 07/17/2009 @ 10:59am
<I didn't say that at all. the jobs element of national defense is a byproduct of doing what is necessary to keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces.

I don't support military contracts just to create jobs.

Posted by antisocialist at 07/15/2009 @ 6:58pm

Spending ludicrous sums of money on over complexed military hardware that doesn't work is unreliable does not keep the nation from being destroyed by outside forces. In fact it makes us weaker and more vulnerable.

The F-22 is a failure. It's performance characteristics are not better than the F-15 Eagle, which is a much cheaper, more versatile and more reliable aircraft.

Posted by Shingo at 07/18/2009 @ 11:28pm