Discussion:
"Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms"
(too old to reply)
Mike
2008-04-22 13:48:28 UTC
Permalink
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....


Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms

Defense Daily

If Sen. Barak Obama of Illinois wins the Democratic presidential
nomination and then goes on to be elected to the White House, the
defense industry better brace for tough times, according to Heidi
Wood, Morgan Stanley defense analyst.

While Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican
presidential nominee, might be better, with his military and prisoner-
of-war background, his past crusades against contractors also could
mean a McCain presidency might be bad news for Pentagon programs and
the companies involved in them, Wood predicted.

She spoke before a Missile Defense Agency-American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics conference in Washington, D.C., last
week.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, another contender for the
Democratic presidential nomination, might not be that bad for defense,
Wood said. Both Clinton and McCain sit on the Senate Armed Services
Committee, where McCain is the ranking Republican.

"Obama looks to be a growing concern for [Department of Defense]
spending," Wood said. "McCain and Clinton are probably better for
overall defense spending. Obama is an uncertainty."

However, Wood said, McCain "going after defense contractors worries
investors," while Clinton gives investors "less of a worry."

For example, McCain blasted an Air Force tanker plane leasing contract
for costing more than buying planes outright. He also helped to
unearth the fact that Darleen Druyun, an Air Force procurement
official, negotiated with Boeing [BA] to lease 100 new aerial
refueling tanker aircraft at the same time she negotiated with Boeing
to get a $250,000 a year job there.

Boeing helped to discover the deal; fired Druyun and Mike Sears, the
CFO who hired her; and cooperated with authorities who later put
Druyun and Sears behind bars. But Boeing lost the contract, and then
the Air Force gave it to a Northrop Grumman [NOC] and European
Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. team to supply Airbus tanker planes.

Clinton's home state, New York, includes some contractors, such as
Lockheed Martin [LMT], which is outfitting the US101 helicopters based
on an AgustaWestland Italian-U.K. design that are to become the future
Marine One helicopters transporting presidents from the White House
South Lawn.

Wood also said that defense contractor stocks have performed
brilliantly in the past year, with aerospace stocks and defense
company stocks jumping by 19 percent in price, versus a gain of only 4
percent for the Standard & Poor's 500 index.
f***@gmail.com
2008-04-22 13:51:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....
Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms
Defense Daily
If Sen. Barak Obama of Illinois wins the Democratic presidential
nomination and then goes on to be elected to the White House, the
defense industry better brace for tough times, according to Heidi
Wood, Morgan Stanley defense analyst.
While Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican
presidential nominee, might be better, with his military and prisoner-
of-war background, his past crusades against contractors also could
mean a McCain presidency might be bad news for Pentagon programs and
the companies involved in them, Wood predicted.
She spoke before a Missile Defense Agency-American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics conference in Washington, D.C., last
week.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, another contender for the
Democratic presidential nomination, might not be that bad for defense,
Wood said. Both Clinton and McCain sit on the Senate Armed Services
Committee, where McCain is the ranking Republican.
"Obama looks to be a growing concern for [Department of Defense]
spending," Wood said. "McCain and Clinton are probably better for
overall defense spending. Obama is an uncertainty."
However, Wood said, McCain "going after defense contractors worries
investors," while Clinton gives investors "less of a worry."
For example, McCain blasted an Air Force tanker plane leasing contract
for costing more than buying planes outright. He also helped to
unearth the fact that Darleen Druyun, an Air Force procurement
official, negotiated with Boeing [BA] to lease 100 new aerial
refueling tanker aircraft at the same time she negotiated with Boeing
to get a $250,000 a year job there.
Boeing helped to discover the deal; fired Druyun and Mike Sears, the
CFO who hired her; and cooperated with authorities who later put
Druyun and Sears behind bars. But Boeing lost the contract, and then
the Air Force gave it to a Northrop Grumman [NOC] and European
Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. team to supply Airbus tanker planes.
Clinton's home state, New York, includes some contractors, such as
Lockheed Martin [LMT], which is outfitting the US101 helicopters based
on an AgustaWestland Italian-U.K. design that are to become the future
Marine One helicopters transporting presidents from the White House
South Lawn.
Wood also said that defense contractor stocks have performed
brilliantly in the past year, with aerospace stocks and defense
company stocks jumping by 19 percent in price, versus a gain of only 4
percent for the Standard & Poor's 500 index.
All I know is that McCain screwed over Boeing big time and they have
no use for him.
GhostofFDR
2008-04-22 13:58:19 UTC
Permalink
It's about time we put our money to better use. The less to the
military the better.
unknown
2008-04-22 14:04:18 UTC
Permalink
The Pentagon has robbed Americans of trillions.
Harry Dope
2008-04-22 14:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Gotta have all them billions to pay for reparations.
Amanda Williams
2008-04-22 14:28:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....
Excellent.. yet another reason to vote for The Obama.
--
AW

<small but dangerous>
Zeno
2008-04-22 16:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amanda Williams
Post by Mike
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....
Excellent.. yet another reason to vote for The Obama.
In the "land of opportunity" shouldn't all welfare programs be
dissolved?
Salad
2008-04-22 16:05:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....
Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms
I wrote in my first post to alt.politics.bush, 1.5 years before the
election, that defense firms already had the POs written for when bush
was president. It was a certainty we'd be going to war with bush in office.

I'd certainly want our tax money spent on social welfare programs in the
US instead of Iraq. If we were bettering Iraqi's lives that'd be one
thing. We've made their lives worse.
o***@earthlink.net
2008-04-23 01:52:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
social welfare programs....
Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms
Defense Daily
If Sen. Barak Obama of Illinois wins the Democratic presidential
nomination and then goes on to be elected to the White House, the
defense industry better brace for tough times, according to Heidi
Wood, Morgan Stanley defense analyst.
In general, none of the 3 remaining major contenders for the White
House would be "good" for the defense industry. McCain would be good
for the military because as a former soldier he understands military
needs better than most. Either of the Democrats would be a disaster.
In the 1990s the Clintons fudged the books to achieve a "surplus"
largely at the expense of military readiness and were willing to play
games with soldiers' lives in pursuit of UN objectives. Obama is
totally clueless and there's no indication that he's got anyone on his
team remotely able to deal with military matters.
--
The Stone Age did not end
because we ran out of stones.
Amanda Williams
2008-04-23 02:12:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@earthlink.net
Post by Mike
social welfare programs....
Analyst: Obama Would Be A Nightmare For Defense Programs, Firms
Defense Daily
If Sen. Barak Obama of Illinois wins the Democratic presidential
nomination and then goes on to be elected to the White House, the
defense industry better brace for tough times, according to Heidi
Wood, Morgan Stanley defense analyst.
In general, none of the 3 remaining major contenders for the White
House would be "good" for the defense industry. McCain would be good
for the military because as a former soldier he understands military
needs better than most. Either of the Democrats would be a disaster.
In the 1990s the Clintons fudged the books to achieve a "surplus"
Really?

You got a credible cite for that "fudging the books" bullshit seeing as how
the figures were produced by the non-partisan OBM and endorsed by Newt
Gingrich's Republican Congress?
Post by o***@earthlink.net
largely at the expense of military readiness and were willing to play
games with soldiers' lives in pursuit of UN objectives.
Gee.. as opposed to your BELOVED LITTLE LEADER whao has managed to get <>
35,000 american soldiers killed and wounded for SFA ?
Post by o***@earthlink.net
Obama is
totally clueless and there's no indication that he's got anyone on his
team remotely able to deal with military matters.
rotfl...

Yeah... he just can't measure up to the SHEER MILITARY GENIUS of g. w. bush
and the neocon fuckwits around him eh?

Fucking moron....
--
AW

<small but dangerous>
Loading...