Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
This disgusts me.
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) on Thursday placed a blanket hold on all of President Barack Obama's nominees before the Senate, according to his spokesman.Sen. Shelby puts hold on all Obama nominees - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room
Shelby's holds mean that the Senate cannot vote on a nominee unless the hold is broken using a cloture vote that requires 60 senators or if the senator lifts the hold.
Foul piece of shit senator.
Using extortion to get his Piggy Piggy PORK.
Crap, earmarks and pork nothing...Airbus/Northrop/Grumman won the bid to produce something to serve in one of the few actually legitimate functions of the federal gubmint.
You're going to get this when the previously agreed upon rules of the process are thrown out by fiat.
Crap, earmarks and pork nothing...Airbus/Northrop/Grumman won the bid to produce something to serve in one of the few actually legitimate functions of the federal gubmint.
You're going to get this when the previously agreed upon rules of the process are thrown out by fiat.
It was a consortium bid. Most of the components would be built and all of the assembly would be done in America, by Northrop/Grumman and their contractors.They didn't want the Europeans to get the contract for our defense needs. Whether or not it was right or wrong is a different story and can be argued that we shouldn't outsource our defense needs to other countries.
Political Shift
In the end, many analysts think the contract won't be decided on these exacting requirements but on politics. While the initial award was made when the Republicans were still in power and would have brought jobs to GOP strongholds such as Alabama and South Carolina, the political winds have since shifted. With the Democrats in control, that bodes well for Boeing, since most of its factories and employment hubs are concentrated in blue states such as Illinois, Connecticut, and Washington.
Already some Democrats, such as Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Representative John Murtha (D-Pa.), have pressed the Pentagon to pick Boeing, since the World Trade Organization issued a preliminary ruling in mid-September that European governments had given improper subsidies to Airbus.
There was a whole logjam of nominees being held up over the seven or so "extremist" (i.e. not down-the-line liberal hack) judges. That's the fact.
BTW...If we were talking about a grant to the Montgomery Boll Weevil Museum here, I'd be on your side. But it's not.
The bid won by Airbus/Northrop/Grumman was thrown out for pure politics and nothing more. Crap like this is going to happen.
Expediency expediency, along with the laws that apply to the rest of us, dictate that the rules agreed upon beforehand should be enforced, with the consortium building the tanker.Crap, earmarks and pork nothing...Airbus/Northrop/Grumman won the bid to produce something to serve in one of the few actually legitimate functions of the federal gubmint.
You're going to get this when the previously agreed upon rules of the process are thrown out by fiat.
I completely agree that Airbus and Northrop got hosed, and Shelby should be pissed. However, federal defense spending IS NOT based on rational market mechanisms but instead on need and political expediency.
What about the term "consortium bid" is eluding you?
Northop/Grumman is still an American company which employs lots of American employees. Airbus was merely the engineer/designer and builder of major components to be assembled right here.
Been trying to say....It was a consortium bid. Most of the components would be built and all of the assembly would be done in America, by Northrop/Grumman and their contractors.They didn't want the Europeans to get the contract for our defense needs. Whether or not it was right or wrong is a different story and can be argued that we shouldn't outsource our defense needs to other countries.
Well well well...what do we have here!!!!????
Political Shift
In the end, many analysts think the contract won't be decided on these exacting requirements but on politics. While the initial award was made when the Republicans were still in power and would have brought jobs to GOP strongholds such as Alabama and South Carolina, the political winds have since shifted. With the Democrats in control, that bodes well for Boeing, since most of its factories and employment hubs are concentrated in blue states such as Illinois, Connecticut, and Washington.Already some Democrats, such as Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Representative John Murtha (D-Pa.), have pressed the Pentagon to pick Boeing, since the World Trade Organization issued a preliminary ruling in mid-September that European governments had given improper subsidies to Airbus.
A Twist in the Boeing-Airbus Tanker Saga - BusinessWeek
Expediency expediency, along with the laws that apply to the rest of us, dictate that the rules agreed upon beforehand should be enforced, with the consortium building the tanker.
Been trying to say....It was a consortium bid. Most of the components would be built and all of the assembly would be done in America, by Northrop/Grumman and their contractors.
Well well well...what do we have here!!!!????
Already some Democrats, such as Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Representative John Murtha (D-Pa.), have pressed the Pentagon to pick Boeing, since the World Trade Organization issued a preliminary ruling in mid-September that European governments had given improper subsidies to Airbus.
A Twist in the Boeing-Airbus Tanker Saga - BusinessWeek
Thanks for digging that up.
Americans were fine flying the P-51, which was built to a Brit spec and ultimately fitted with a Rolls Royce engine, when it suited us.What about the term "consortium bid" is eluding you?
Northop/Grumman is still an American company which employs lots of American employees. Airbus was merely the engineer/designer and builder of major components to be assembled right here.
I understood it perfectly. That's why my post reflected it.
The consortium you mention is partially a foreign entity, working on a defense contract.
Why would you be angry that we would choose a different contract that did not have a foreign component???
I tell ya, it's pretty fucked when we are almost 18 months since Obama's election we STILL don't have an NSA director confirmed yet.
Expediency expediency, along with the laws that apply to the rest of us, dictate that the rules agreed upon beforehand should be enforced, with the consortium building the tanker.
Sweet, so when the Bush administration awarded no-bid defense contracts to Halliburton, the Democrats should have responded by filibustering all nominees.
Is that your assertion?
Are just playing dumb here?Expediency expediency, along with the laws that apply to the rest of us, dictate that the rules agreed upon beforehand should be enforced, with the consortium building the tanker.
Sweet, so when the Bush administration awarded no-bid defense contracts to Halliburton, the Democrats should have responded by filibustering all nominees.
Is that your assertion?
Americans were fine flying the P-51, which was built to a Brit spec and ultimately fitted with a Rolls Royce engine, when it suited us.
A single senator can place an anonymous hold on any appointee.I tell ya, it's pretty fucked when we are almost 18 months since Obama's election we STILL don't have an NSA director confirmed yet.
Let's see. Sen. Shelby put a hold on nominees yesterday. So what's Barry's reason for not getting an NSA director in the 17 mos and 29 days prior to yesterday? Could it be he was busy failing to capture the Olympics and picking up his Nobel Prize instead of focusing on the job he was hired to do? It's not as if he hasn't had a filibuster proof Congress for most of the last year.
