House Orders Up Three Elite Jets

Jerome · #1 08-06-2009, 05:59 AM

Quote:

The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: about $65 million) as part of an ongoing upgrade of its passenger air service.

But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and specified that they be assigned to the D.C.-area units that carry Members of Congress, military brass and top government officials.

Because the Appropriations Committee viewed the additional aircraft as an expansion of an existing Defense Department program, it did not treat the money for two more planes as an earmark, and the legislation does not disclose which Member had requested the additional money.

An Appropriations Committee staffer said the military was already planning to replace its passenger fleet, and the committee “looked at the request and decided they should speed up the replacement.”

The Gulfstream G550 is a luxury business jet, which the company advertises as featuring long-range flight capacity that “easily links Washington, D.C., with Dubai, London with Singapore and Tokyo with Paris.” The company’s promotional materials say, “The cabin aboard the G550 combines productivity with exceptional comfort. It features up to four distinct living areas, three temperature zones, a choice of 12 floor plan configurations with seating for up to 18 passengers.”

They laugh at you when you vote for them.

:yup:

Sauron · #2 08-06-2009, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

They laugh at you when you vote for them.

:yup:

Yeah, but everyone laughs at you, so it all evens out in the end.

Petra · #3 08-06-2009, 10:10 AM

I'm saving up for the G650, myself. It goes faster and further. :radioplane:

Smilin · #4 08-06-2009, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

They laugh at you when you vote for them.

:yup:

naturalist.atheist · #5 08-06-2009, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

RollCall.com

Quote:

The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: about $65 million) as part of an ongoing upgrade of its passenger air service.

But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and specified that they be assigned to the D.C.-area units that carry Members of Congress, military brass and top government officials.

Because the Appropriations Committee viewed the additional aircraft as an expansion of an existing Defense Department program, it did not treat the money for two more planes as an earmark, and the legislation does not disclose which Member had requested the additional money.

An Appropriations Committee staffer said the military was already planning to replace its passenger fleet, and the committee “looked at the request and decided they should speed up the replacement.”

The Gulfstream G550 is a luxury business jet, which the company advertises as featuring long-range flight capacity that “easily links Washington, D.C., with Dubai, London with Singapore and Tokyo with Paris.” The company’s promotional materials say, “The cabin aboard the G550 combines productivity with exceptional comfort. It features up to four distinct living areas, three temperature zones, a choice of 12 floor plan configurations with seating for up to 18 passengers.”

They laugh at you when you vote for them.

:yup:

How can they criticize the execs at GM with flying by private jet when they do stuff like this?

Zehava · #6 08-06-2009, 07:26 PM

Only in government can you submit a budget and have it come back from the approving powers saying, "We are going to force you to take this extra money/equipment whether you like it or not."

Boggles the mind.

Qingdai · #7 08-06-2009, 10:29 PM

Granted it's probably the states with aircraft industry and their senators/congressmen keeping the industry happy and forcing the issue.

Oh look here's some article here:Cutting the Fat from the US Defense Budget is Green: Obama Scraps the F-22 : TreeHugger

Once again Jerome lies.

They laugh at you when you believe Jerome.

Jerome · #8 08-07-2009, 03:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qingdai

Granted it's probably the states with aircraft industry and their senators/congressmen keeping the industry happy and forcing the issue.

Oh look here's some article here:Cutting the Fat from the US Defense Budget is Green: Obama Scraps the F-22 : TreeHugger

Once again Jerome lies.

They laugh at you when you believe Jerome.

Wait, what was that....Look over there !!!

They are especially laughing at you.
:wave:

Ari · #9 08-07-2009, 03:42 AM

You're right they are, but they are laughing at you too Jerome. This is just another case where our government is all about do what we say not what we do. They spent so much time yelling at failing company CEOs flying in on jets, and spent another bit of hot air over the F-22, now they are buying their own expensive jets, and they aren't even going to bother to defend the decision? Um, WtF?

Of course they are also laughing at the Birthers because some crackpots have given the news media fodder. Why do an indepth story on government waste when morons with birth certificates in plastic baggies stand up, scream and then force the congregation into a gold star worthy round of the pledge? Of course nutcase is more interesting than gov waste. Duh.

Jerome · #10 08-07-2009, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ari

You're right they are, but they are laughing at you too Jerome. This is just another case where our government is all about do what we say not what we do. They spent so much time yelling at failing company CEOs flying in on jets, and spent another bit of hot air over the F-22, now they are buying their own expensive jets, and they aren't even going to bother to defend the decision? Um, WtF?

Of course they are also laughing at the Birthers because some crackpots have given the news media fodder. Why do an indepth story on government waste when morons with birth certificates in plastic baggies stand up, scream and then force the congregation into a gold star worthy round of the pledge? Of course nutcase is more interesting than gov waste. Duh.

I think you misunderstand me, I really do not care about these things one way or the other, I am not here to change minds. What will be, will be. It always has been and will continue to be. I have lived and worked in Washington DC for most of my life.

As an example: When President Clinton leased the West coast ports to the Chinese, the GOP supporters freaked that he was selling out the nation to the communists, whilst the Dems supported the idea. When President Bush leased the East coast ports to middle eastern nations the GOP supporters supported the idea and the Dems freaked out.

The two parties are moving in the same direction without opposition, only a fake presentment of such which plays to the emotions and team spirit of the proles.

I am only interested in the discourse and logic inherent in these questions. We are living in the most interesting times, times which will be written about and studied for centuries.

:cool:

Ari · #11 08-07-2009, 04:16 AM

Ah so standard libertarian bullshit.

California Tanker · #12 08-07-2009, 04:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qingdai

Granted it's probably the states with aircraft industry and their senators/congressmen keeping the industry happy and forcing the issue.

Oh look here's some article here:Cutting the Fat from the US Defense Budget is Green: Obama Scraps the F-22 : TreeHugger

Not sure I see the merit in that statement.

Raptor provides a very unique capability which cannot be provided by other sources. G-550s provide a service which can be provided when required from a number of sources, to include commerical airlines or charter jets. If you had to spend money, I would submit it makes more sense to spend it on that which you can't get anywhere else.

NTM

Jug Pilot · #13 08-07-2009, 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I think you misunderstand me, I really do not care about these things one way or the other, I am not here to change minds. What will be, will be. It always has been and will continue to be. I have lived and worked in Washington DC for most of my life.

Sorry, that lie just doesn't jive with your postings on other boards. You are over the top pro republican and I have no problem calling you a liar to your face.

Jerome · #14 08-07-2009, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jug Pilot

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEROME DA GNOME

I think you misunderstand me, I really do not care about these things one way or the other, I am not here to change minds. What will be, will be. It always has been and will continue to be. I have lived and worked in Washington DC for most of my life.

Sorry, that lie just doesn't jive with your postings on other boards. You are over the top pro republican and I have no problem calling you a liar to your face.

Which postings exactly on other boards?

Why is it that you want so bad for me to be a Republican?

Jug Pilot · #15 08-08-2009, 02:28 AM

Quote:

Why is it that you want so bad for me to be a Republican?

Just calling a spade a spade.

Don't want to be called a nutjob right wing republican, don't act like a nutjob right wing republican.

Simple logic even a low IQ republican can get.

Kael · #16 08-08-2009, 03:38 PM

I haven't checked any of his stuff on other forums, but my impression here is that he's not a Republican because he doesn't think they're conservative enough. I actually know quite a few people like that, and I get it for things like lower taxes and government spending, since the Republican party's been preaching that steadily for decades but always seems to forget it when they get elected. I find it a little disturbing when it's about social issues like gay marriage ect., since what some of the ones I know are after is often little short of a Christian Theocracy, of their own particular brand of Christianity of course (And doesn't banning gay marriage equal more government intervention? Aren't we against government intervention as conservatives?).

naturalist.atheist · #17 08-08-2009, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kael

Aren't we against government intervention as conservatives?).

It's only government intervention if conservatives oppose it, otherwise they are simply putting things right the way god intended.