Ignoring Obama’s veto threat, Congress approves more funding for Marietta’s F-22
Updated at 5:15 p.m. Thursday.
Congress moved to add more funding for the Marietta-made F-22 Raptor on Thursday, setting the stage for a bruising fight with the White House — which threatened only 24 hours earlier to veto a major defense funding bill over the issue.
In the Senate, the Armed Services Committee finished closed-door negotiations by accepting an amendment by U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss to add $1.75 billion for seven more of the Lockheed Martin stealth fighters. The measure now goes to the full chamber.
In a separate action, the U.S. House this afternoon passed a $550 billion defense bill with an added $369 million in additional spending on the F-22. The House measure also includes language that would permit the sale of a different, less potent version of the fighter to other countries such as Japan.
Both actions occurred less than a day after the White House issued a memo detailing its objections to the House bill. The additional F-22 spending — for parts — was first on the list:
The Administration strongly objects to the provisions in the bill authorizing $369 million in advanced procurement funds for F-22s in FY 2011. The collective judgment of the Service Chiefs and Secretaries of the military departments suggests that a final program of record of 187 F-22s is sufficient to meet operational requirements. If the final bill presented to the President contains this provision, the President’s senior advisors would recommend a veto.
The emphasis is in the original. The veto threat is the first of the Obama administration, and reflects a strategic shift backed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates away from expensive weapons designed for large-scale, conventional warfare and toward simpler systems geared for “assymetrical” conflicts like those in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The House bill includes $130 billion in funding to support operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere — which makes some wonder whether Obama would carry out his veto threat.
“Is he bluffing? I wish I was clairvoyant and could answer that question for you,” Gingrey said by phone, shortly before the House vote. “I would hope that he’s bluffing. But if he’s not, I think he’s making a bad mistake — let me put it that way — for the defense of this country. I think he’s making a huge mistake.
“If he vetoes this defense authorization program for 2010 on the basis of that, then he has got that wrapped around his neck and on his shoulders. He and no one else can take responsibility for killing that program,” the Marietta congressman said.
The fight is over spending, jobs and military philosophy.
“In the past several months, Air Force leaders have consistently stated before Congress and to the media that they have a requirement for additional F-22s beyond the 187 that have already been purchased. Repeatedly, military leaders have confirmed that the decision to limit funding to 187 planes is driven by budgetary decisions, not military requirements,” said Chambliss in a prepared statement.
“It is regrettable that the administration needs to issue a veto threat for funding intended to meet a real national security requirement that has been consistently confirmed by our uniformed military leaders.”
The same press release quotes U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson: “The federal government must tighten its belt in these tough economic times just as Americans have to do, but we must also maintain a strong national defense in order to protect our country. This plane is vital to 21st century American military superiority.”
The House could direct even more money toward the F-22, Gingrey said — perhaps for as many as 20 more planes in a second supplemental defense bill.
Democratic support for the F-22 in Congress is considered substantial, but not overwhelming. And remember that U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is one of those advocating a cap on the F-22 program.
This is posted at airforce-magazine.com:
House Appropriations defense subcommittee chairman John Murtha (D-Pa.) supports further buys of the F-22 and is optimistic that more will be bought, but he said that it will take some wheeling and dealing in Congress to make it happen.
Speaking with defense reporters Wednesday in Washington, D.C., Murtha said, “I think we can reach a compromise” on Capitol Hill that would allow the F-22 to go forward. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and its defense panel, “feels very strongly about it, and I do, too,” Murtha added.
Another defense blog, Chandler’s Watch, has this from the same meeting with Murtha:
Three of the most senior House appropriators are planning to discuss exporting Lockheed Martin’s F-22 Raptor fighter jet to the Japanese government, which wants badly to buy the stealth plane.
Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the chairman of the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee, said Wednesday that he intends to meet in the coming days with Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) and Rep. Bill Young (Fla.), Murtha’s GOP counterpart on the Defense subcommittee, to discuss lifting the export ban on the F-22.
The key player in that briefing will be Obey, who in 1998 wrote the legislation that bans the exports of the F-22 mainly to keep secret the aircraft’s radar-evading stealth technology. Obey has not budged since, and it’s unclear whether he is willing to relent.
For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
119 comments Add your comment
BlackSingleMomEngineer
June 25th, 2009
1:19 pm
Obama, you just received your last vote from me. The F-22 is needed! You just want to push Georgia’s unemployment rate up to 15%.
ab
June 25th, 2009
1:22 pm
Well then why did you vote for him to begin with BlackSingleMomEngineer? Wasn’t a big secret this would happen!
Leon
June 25th, 2009
1:26 pm
If the MILITARY no less says they don’t need an aircraft that’s never flown a single combat mission, shouldn’t we take there word for it?
Reality of Politics
June 25th, 2009
1:29 pm
And this surprises you? Georgia is a Republican stronghold that didn’t vote for Obama. This administration has a track record of protecting special interests in and sending money to states that went for Obama or are swing states…..did you think he’d treat Georgia any different?
Getting re-elected is the focus…NOT NATIONAL SECURITY! Nuff said
FBHO
June 25th, 2009
1:32 pm
Worst President ever.
Jim Callihan
June 25th, 2009
1:34 pm
This may be the one and only time I’ll say this – OBAMA NAILED IT!!! Good Job.
Now…if we can just get him turned around on the other “umpteen trillions” of dollars of corporate welfare plans.
Bubba
June 25th, 2009
1:35 pm
Let’s hope the next conflict isn’t with China or Russia.
Kelly
June 25th, 2009
1:35 pm
“BlackSingleMomEngineer”, are you saying that we should keep building F-22s because it keep people employed or we should keep it because the military say it is necessary? If you are saying we should keep it because it employs workers, then that explains why you don’t agree with President Obama.
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
1:39 pm
Daddy, Saxby, is making a lot of money on this one.
Tim Taylor
June 25th, 2009
1:43 pm
Yall voted for him!!!
EngineerArt
June 25th, 2009
1:45 pm
The foresight that this President lacks is beyond comprehension.
NO-Bama
June 25th, 2009
1:46 pm
All you idiots that voted for the Kenyan – now you want to complain? LMAO
csquared
June 25th, 2009
1:48 pm
damn right we voted for him and seems like pork is on the menu for repubs this time. If their guy, since Gates is a holdover from last admin and the generals running the pentagon say we don’t need the daggone plane, why would we keep throwing money at it? just for folks to continue high dollar jobs? look what that got UAW and the big three automakers. Reasonable wages don’t include triple overtime and nearly 6 figure salaries for welding and putting on bolts. Or making engneering drawings on computers.
Richard
June 25th, 2009
1:49 pm
Kelly,
Didn’t Obama support GM financially just to keep people employed?
F. Derrick Hall
June 25th, 2009
1:50 pm
I think this is a bad move by Obama. Not only will fear-mongering neocons jump at the opportunity to say he’s weak on national defense, but it really is a piddling small amount of $ compared to the hundreds of billions given out to rich bankers and CEOs.
Brian22
June 25th, 2009
1:50 pm
“If you rule the skies, you rule the battlefield”. Let’s hope we’re not fighting China or Russia next.
DannyX
June 25th, 2009
1:50 pm
Look here Marietta, there are no special rights in this case. You don’t have an entitlement to this worthless waste of taxpayer money. If Congress and Obama cave in on this, believe me, there will be one giant Tea Party in good ol’ Cobb County.
csquared
June 25th, 2009
1:50 pm
since raptor is the greatest thing since the AK47 in some folks minds, why haven’t we used one on Osama Bin Laden yet? or are we still trying to figure out what cave he’s hiding in? lotta good those planes will do in the caves, right?
YO_DOG
June 25th, 2009
1:51 pm
I voted for Obama
We don’t need no jet!
He needs to help our people more and let yall rich white people get real jobs where you have to work
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
1:51 pm
Even sadder, his lack of real knowledge and intelligence to lead this counrty really undermines his ability to select advisors that have any better experience or intelligence.. he lied his way to the WH and now that he has slid in, he promptly became a true ‘dyed in the wool’ politician in the worst way.. his credibility has completely left in every way and his naive existence is a joke to this nation
AH
June 25th, 2009
1:53 pm
Way to get that red meat out there Jim. Good Job, don’t write an original though provoking article just fall back on the old tried and true red meat stories.
Next time can we have an actually story? Hey I heard Obama had a huge special recently on something called “Health Care Reform”, or perhaps that silly little “Cap and Trade” vote tomorrow might be worth writing about.
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
1:54 pm
Dr Soul
Don’t talk about my Daddy that way, he is just doing what the Lobbyist pay him to do.
quiet observer
June 25th, 2009
1:55 pm
The reason the F22 has not been used in Iraq and Afghanistan is because those countries have no Air Force to speak of, and thier Anti Aircraft systems were archaic at best, and easily destroyed with conventional aircraft.
Just wait and see what happens when we have a problem with China and North Korea. That’s what that plane and F35 were designed for. guess what, the conflict is coming sooner than you think. I promise you China will back the Koreans, and they have more money than God right now, and we don’t even know for sure what kind of weapons they currently have in development.
Way to go, Obama. You just cut our throats before the shots were fired. This guy trully is a disaster in all aspects of his administration. He’s costing Americans mores than he promised to create (none which have to pass, by the way), he’s spending more money than we can ever make up for, taxes are going, and the folks who are getting government help for the right reasons are losing benefits because he doesn’t have a clue, while the parasites are living better than hard working Americans because Obama is commited to special interests, pet projects and vote buying schemes.
bad idea
June 25th, 2009
1:57 pm
The F22 is a replacement for an airplane designed in the early 70’s (F15). Most were built in the late 70’s and early 80’s. Their wings are cracked and stressed. None of us wants to get on an airplane more than 5 years old at the airport and we expect Air Force pilots to get in a 30 year old plane and pull 6 G’s. That’s a bunch of baloney. The F22 is definitely needed in the Air Force. Maybe not exactly this moment, but we can not predict what will happen tommorrow. Obama is leaving us with no options. He wants to spend money on giveaways but leave us unprotected. BAD idea. Repeat – BAD idea. Vote him out next term and definitely vote out the liberal congress that is with him.
FDH
June 25th, 2009
1:58 pm
and frankly we don’t need the F-22 to whup Russia or China (not that war with either of them is a likely scenario in the next 40 years anyway).
seriously, when is enough enough when it comes to defense spending? we spend more than the rest of the planet COMBINED on our military. and we’re in the unique geographic position of having 2 oceans to protect us from invasion (not to mention all the militant police and heavily-armed populace)
for just ONE YEAR, i’d like to see half of the defense budget spent on something useful, like education or developing clean energy or better battery technology. i seriously doubt “Red Dawn” will happen.
Clay
June 25th, 2009
1:58 pm
It’s rich folks who provide jobs. How many jobs have poor people created?
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
1:58 pm
Yes, better to spend money educating and caring for millions of illegals and deadbeats.
With each passing day, Jimmy Carter is more secure in the knowledge that he will not die as the worst President of this country.
csquared
June 25th, 2009
1:58 pm
dr soul, the how do you explain GATES, which was SecDef under W? moron
Dan
June 25th, 2009
2:00 pm
First and formost the respobsibility of the executive office is defense of the country, contrary to the bleeding hearts that want the president to “help people” which would be the job of local politicians. This case is one of the few logical moves O has had, actually listening to the Pentagon and not letting congress play their games. Now lets hope the money is diverted to a defense initiative that the pentagon actually needs and not to some other wasteful social program
Road Scholar
June 25th, 2009
2:03 pm
Dr Soul: “…his lack of real knowledge and intelligence …”
He’s alot smarter than you. And you’re a doctor?
So, I hear and read the conservatives want our president to be more forceful (including directly causing regime change) in Iran, and for the F-22. I’ve got a solution for Iran.
First all warmongers and chest beaters line up for your tattoo which reads:”Do not return to sender!” Then we’ll give you a gun, and a parachute and drop you inside Iran to “Make it happen!” Heck, it may be cooler there than it is now in Atlanta!
Arthur
June 25th, 2009
2:03 pm
The U.S. can rule the skies with existing aircraft for the next two decades.
FDH
June 25th, 2009
2:04 pm
GREAT argument, clay. you’re obviously a student of the “conservative talk radio” school of economics. let me guess- you also believe that if you distributed all the world’s wealth evenly among the population, the same small # of people would end up with all the $. you know, all those really smart, hard-working people like Paris Hilton.
csquared
June 25th, 2009
2:04 pm
dan, i agree with u. we don’t need a plane in afghanistan, what we need is enough boots on the ground ARMORED U enough so some pissant with an IED looking to make a name in his village can’t take out guys out. Planes no, armor and intel yep. and for those folk that really think China’s waiting to take us over, look around, they can BUY us out and foreclose just about anytime they want. fighting without the bloodshed.
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
2:08 pm
To ‘csquared’…you answered your own question, cupcake..!!!
To Road Scholar…obviously, you cannot read nor interpret well..’his intelligence or lack thereof to lead’…
Hal
June 25th, 2009
2:08 pm
Also, the original F-15 was designed in the 70’s, but most of its more advanced variants (the ones we actually use, like the Strike Eagle) were designed and built much later. Their airframes are perfectly fine and the F-15 is still superior to most every other fighter on earth.
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
2:08 pm
Clay – Poor peopel provide plenty of jobs. Government jobs that adminster to educating them, feeding them, providing medical care for them and now, paying for their mortgages and new cars. It makes me feel all Hopey and Changey?
csquared
June 25th, 2009
2:11 pm
the doctor is out. obviously
Hal
June 25th, 2009
2:11 pm
So what’s your brilliant solution, DontTreadOnMe? You’ve already said you think spending money to educate the poor is a bad idea (even though all statistical data, historical fact, and common sense says you’re DEAD WRONG). So what’s your idea?
Kelly
June 25th, 2009
2:11 pm
Richard, you asked “Didn’t Obama support GM financially just to keep people employed?” This is where people take a topic and twist it to fit their opinion and try to justify it with something that is totally unrelated. The question that you should have asked yourself is should the U.S. continue to pay for a program that the military leadership have indicated is not needed any longer?
Whether you agree or not, you cannot compare this to GM because that bailout was to keep the ENTIRE company from going out of business. No where have I read that Lockhead will go out of business if they stop making the F-22. To me, there is no comparison. I trust the opinion of the military leaders on military issues and they say it is not needed.
You do know that we have a newer version with some of the same technologies from the F-22, it’s called the F-35.
Hal
June 25th, 2009
2:15 pm
F-35 is a cheaper but more versatile plane. it’s not designed for overwhelming air superiority like the F-22, but it’s a lot more practical for the types of things our military does these days.
Keeping It Real
June 25th, 2009
2:22 pm
Obama belongs in prison, and so does Vick!
Timus
June 25th, 2009
2:28 pm
Lockheed was charging the government $100 million MORE than what they initially bid. They were robbing the government. I live in Cobb and I mourn the loss of jobs but Lockheed was JUST WRONG!!!
Andre
June 25th, 2009
2:32 pm
If the military says the plane isn’t needed. Don’t get mad at Obama. Get mad at the Pentagon. I’m sorry the jobs were lost, but if they’re charging $100 million more than what was needed in the very beginning. That’s just highway robbery.
pcj,
June 25th, 2009
2:32 pm
All one needs to do is look at history. The great military minds and government official thought it would be a great idea to eliminate much of our military after WWII. They actually destroyed plans and naval vessels. I ask you what happened after that? Oops, we needed that stuff after all, Korean war, Vietnam, and the cold war.
The Commander in Chief has a responsibility to this nation to make sure we have the proper readiness and defenses should the circumstance require. We learned that deterrence is a great ally to have, maybe we should scale back a little, but we need these programs to protect the sovereignty of these United States of America. IMHO
Kelly
June 25th, 2009
2:33 pm
Hal I agree with you totally. I was not trying to imply that they were the same aircraft but rather the F-35 can be used for some of the same things that the F-22 is used for. It is my understanding that the F-35 is second in air-to-air capability to the F-22 but the F-35 is better in air-to-ground than the F-22.
And yes, the price of the F-35 is cheaper. Not arguing which plane is better, just arguing if the F-22 is still needed.
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
2:33 pm
Hal, I’m not brilliant by a long shot. There were brilliant guys however who wrote this thing called the Constitution. You sound brilliant, so point out where in that piece of paper it says there is a right to education, health care, a home or a car. I’m pretty sure there is wording in that piece of paper though about defense of this country and its borders.
Here’s a hint on my “idea”…
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Timus
June 25th, 2009
2:33 pm
I forgot to mention $100 million MORE PER AIRCRAFT!!!!………Bad Obama! Why would he have a problem with that???
Hankman
June 25th, 2009
2:37 pm
Isn’t it wonderful that we’re in America where dumb opinions fall under the 1st amendment. Kelly is right on point. I’ve worked in the aircraft industry for 30 years. Take it from me folks, politics out of it, it’s just good business.
Reader
June 25th, 2009
2:39 pm
The military recommended that we no longer need to pay for this program. Why are you mad at Obama? He just save this country a bunch of money. Spend wisely.
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
2:41 pm
F-35 is cheaper, for now, because of the projected production size and the cost sharing with international customers.
Sherman
June 25th, 2009
2:42 pm
$100 million per aircraft!??!?!?!?! Are you serious??
KW
June 25th, 2009
2:43 pm
As a Cobb County resident of 20 years, and a voter who generally votes Republican (voted for Romney and then unfortunately had to vote for McCain), I agree with President Obama on this one. Don’t waste our (and when I say “our” I mean taxpayers, not the portion of our citizens who are leeches) tax dollars on something that’s not a part of the Pentagon’s long-term strategy just to save jobs for a small fraction of the population.
Hal
June 25th, 2009
2:45 pm
DontTreadOnMe: Where in the constitution does it call for a standing army (especially one that consumes half of all federal spending)? Where in the constitution does it specifically list the rights of the people to vote for president? Where in the constitution does it say there’s a right for the government to tell people they can’t kill themselves?
More importantly: Where does it say in the constitution that we cannot enact laws or provide people rights other than the ones listed in the constitution?
Education is incredibly important and to EVERYONE’S benefit, and you better thank your lucky stars for public education. I don’t want to live in a 3rd-world country even if I’m in the 1% on top, and you don’t either. You should be arguing about how to improve public education, not how to dismantle it. Or are you too blinded by your disdain for the poor to see how that would serve your interests?
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
2:48 pm
Saxby’s plan to cut the cost of the F22.. build them with illegals
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK5TprmkgRw&feature=related
Hankman
June 25th, 2009
2:48 pm
DontTreadOnMe try reading all of the “piece of paper” especially the Preamble. There something about the general welfare.
Sec Gates
June 25th, 2009
2:51 pm
, Lockheed’s chief executive, Robert J. Stevens, said in a memorandum to employees that while some of the recommendations were disappointing, “I embrace Secretary Gates’s call to put the interests of the United States first — above the interests of agencies, services and contractors — and I will support him in every way.”
The shift in thinking about the F-22 was detailed in an op-ed article on Monday in The Washington Post by Michael Donley, the Air Force secretary, and Gen. Norton Schwartz, the service’s chief of staff.
Before the announcement by Mr. Gates, both had fought hard for the F-22, saying the Air Force needed it as a hedge against Russia and China and even a possible war with Iran. They had advocated buying 60 more of the planes, which would have brought the Air Force’s fleet to 243. But in their essay, Mr. Donley and General Schwartz wrote that “the time has come to move on.”
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
2:56 pm
Hal – I don’t disdain the poor at all, far from it if you knew me personally. I disdain the Federal Government playing nanny and caretaker. Our current public education system is an unmitigated disgrace.
Hankman – Two words in that preamble. It says “people” not Federal Government and it says “promote” not pay for.
TRUTH
June 25th, 2009
2:57 pm
You would think that with all the legitimate and expensive claims on the government pocketbook — including two wars, an economic crisis and desperately needed health care reform — Congress would be extra judicious about how it spends the taxpayers’ money. But no, at least not when it comes to the House Armed Services Committee and lucrative defense contracts.
The panel has proved again how the insatiable drive to keep fancy weapons systems alive can trump all good sense. With Representative Rob Bishop of Utah and other Republicans leading the charge, and with the support of six Democrats, the committee this week narrowly voted to keep producing the Air Force’s F-22 stealth fighter jet.
We adamantly opposed Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s proposal to buy four more F-22s in next year’s budget. But at least he wanted to cap the fleet at 187 planes. The House committee has voted to approve a $369 million down payment on 12 more. If all of those are bought, the total price tag would be about $2.8 billion.
The Pentagon budget must be more closely attuned to military and economic reality than the misdirected and undisciplined spending of the last eight years. Mr. Gates has made a compelling case for ending programs that significantly exceed their budgets or use limited tax dollars to buy “more capability than the nation needs.”
No weapons system fits that criteria better than the F-22. It is a cold war relic, designed for defense against the Soviet Union. It has never flown in combat, much less in the wars this country is actually fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air Force’s new high-performance F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which begins production in 2012, uses stealth technology to elude enemy radar like the F-22, and should be sufficient.
Lockheed Martin and its partners parceled out work on the plane widely to ensure maximum political protection. And we deeply regret that jobs will be lost by phasing out the F-22. But the United States cannot keep paying for redundant and dubious systems. There are too many other compelling demands on the country’s battered budget — some of which will certainly create new jobs. It is up to House Democratic leaders to make this case to their members and ensure that the committee’s decision on the F-22 is overturned
JT
June 25th, 2009
2:58 pm
The military was forced to cut the program. They never said it wasn’t needed. Obama forced them to cut their budget so we can pay for other more important things like researching why pigs stink. Very short sighted, the F-22 was a great plane that kept us on top as far as air superiority. Now we can all be secure that the Russians have the best fighter aircraft in the world.
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
3:04 pm
Saxby’s earmarks can help anyone just send your check, here’s what hed did for a privetly owned company. You do NOT need to be a resident of Georgia to apply. From the May 8,2009 AJC.
“Advanced lithium battery research/Alpharetta: Would provide funding to Excellatron Solid State LLC for scale-up and manufacturing of new batteries; $10 million; Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-GA “
Splavistic
June 25th, 2009
3:11 pm
Good job, President Obama. Keep up the good works! God help us if the GOP ever gets back into Washington with their old (outdated) ways of doing things.
RealityKing
June 25th, 2009
3:12 pm
Socialized countries don’t spend very much on the military.., according to Obama’s European model for America.
Obamoron
June 25th, 2009
3:13 pm
PAY GO!!
BPJ
June 25th, 2009
3:17 pm
Defense Secretary Gates, who was originally appointed to that post by President Bush, says we don’t need this plane. Other than its being built in Georgia, most of the posters here have no idea why they’re for it.
Hankman
June 25th, 2009
3:23 pm
If you don’t think the Government is ‘of the people’, ‘by the people’ and ‘for the people’ then go live somewhere else!
Ron N' Mexico
June 25th, 2009
3:23 pm
Give me an F-22 before health care insurance. Health care will be worthless when little Chinamen are invading this country.
Jim Martin
June 25th, 2009
3:24 pm
John Murtha and Saxby Chambliss, now that’s a pair of earmark lovers. Wonder what they are getting out of it?
The Snark
June 25th, 2009
3:26 pm
What is the big shock Jumbo G? Obama and his leftist buddies regret our military strength and think that way too much is spent on it anyway. You bet your sweet arse he is going to kill the F-22 or anything else military that he can get away with.
Truth
June 25th, 2009
3:27 pm
Ron N’ Mexico 3:23 pm
Why would China invade us when they can simply call in their note. We are wasting money that we don’t have. This is making us weaker not stronger but then that’s what you Democratic Liberals want.
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
3:28 pm
Hankman if you think this current government and at least the past three administrations are ‘of the people’, ‘by the people’ and ‘for the people’ then give me some of those drugs your on because they must be good stuff.
findog
June 25th, 2009
3:30 pm
Let’s see, when the Speaker of the House resigned in 1998 the F22 was on the chopping block because it was a porker and divided government was reducing spending to the point where we were not adding to the national debt. I for one say that if the Representative and Senator for Lockheed will deliver legislation increasing taxes to keep the assembly plant in Marietta open then build as many as you want; just pay for them with NEW TAXES!
JT
June 25th, 2009
3:32 pm
Ron – Agreed, I would take the F-22 over National Healthcare any day of the week.
Splavistic
June 25th, 2009
3:32 pm
What is happening is called a FREE MARKET. A better, cheaper product is being built called the F-35. Stop wailing against the natural flow of capitalism and the advancement of a superior design, people. Buck up.
JT
June 25th, 2009
3:34 pm
the F-35 is not a better product, period.
findog
June 25th, 2009
3:37 pm
Just got a call from 877-648-0958 and talked to Brian, who works for a company he identified as Account Services.
They can reduce my interest rates on all the credit cards I don’t have.
Almost identical to the people who could help me get extended warranty’s on cars I don’t own…
Best part is that the number they called is a temporary office number for me at a hazardous waste site.
I love those robo-call companies; I look forward to the same offer to come to my cell phone!
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
3:40 pm
At 2:57 and 3:27…good posts Truth…
amazing how few people really get into the issues and look deeply at
how our ’so-called’ stewards of the ‘citizens bank’ spend without any
regard to real budgets or care for anything but their own ego and standing among colleagues… more amazing is how we continue to elect
these bums over and over, then just complain… there is such apathy when it comes to voting and a very misunderstood theorem that nothing will ever change… we have noone but ourselves to blame… we really need to get to work as an electorate nation and clean house.. and, why don’t we.. “it will not make a difference”..says 95% of voters..!!!!
so, where do you go…. ‘bitch on blogs’…. later
Jason
June 25th, 2009
3:41 pm
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!”
DontTreadOnMe
June 25th, 2009
3:42 pm
Has nothing to do with the FREE MARKET. The F-35 and F-22 serve two purposes. The F-35 is the Swiss Army knife while the F-22 is an air superiority fighter.
Hotlanta
June 25th, 2009
3:55 pm
Marietta pull yourself up by your bootstraps isn’t that what you guys always tell us in SW Atlanta to do. These same folks are harping about they don’t govment intervention in health care but will be mad if Obama doesn’t sign this bill. They want the government in their lives when it is CONVENIENT for them.
Big Bucks GOP doing the Lords work
June 25th, 2009
3:56 pm
The additions to the F22 program is a waste of $3,500,000,000.00 yet out “CONSERVATIVE” Congressmen and SOCIALIST Senators are for it. How can you be a Conservative and vote for this waste. Saxby & Johnny the Socialist voted for TARP but our Congressmen voted against it. You can’t have it both ways, you ar are either Conservatives or SOCIALIST.
wheezy
June 25th, 2009
4:02 pm
The GENERALS AT THE PENTAGON say “we don’t need the F-22″ that’s good enough for me. If this plane was being built in Nebraska no one here would even care. Let the President and Secretary of Defense do their job you numbskulls.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:03 pm
Georgians are idiots most on this blog have no idea what a F-22 is .If Obama is for it they are against it. For the money we spend on it should never sit we could have used it too find that S.C. governor
JT
June 25th, 2009
4:08 pm
I could care less where the plane is built. This plane keeps us competitive in the world of air supremacy. The Pentagon was forced to make tough decisions and this is what they came up with. If we are “cutting back” it shouldn’t be in defense spending, it should be in our entitlement programs.
cheapman
June 25th, 2009
4:09 pm
My vote is for Nixon. Hell, even with his descrepancies, he was far better than the Big “O”
Bo Chambliss LOBBYIST
June 25th, 2009
4:12 pm
Saxby got over $2.5 Million to vote for TARP. With Saxby MONEY talks & BS walks.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:12 pm
If the F-22 serves no purpose in the wars we are in whats the use other than to line the politicans pockets.
southside
June 25th, 2009
4:13 pm
Saxby is abigger crook than Regan was.
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:14 pm
Yo…JT.. you hit it on the head…
NOBAMA is nothing but the ‘Pied Piper’ of Socialism and there are a lot
of rats in step with him..primarily because they live off these entitlements and expect more, because he has implied more will be coming.. he gives people very little incentive to work..!!!
And, do not expect the economy or his programs to move very fast; as long as he keeps people down and living off entitlements, he has a large supporting electorate.. we will only see progress in the last year of his administration when he scares them into believing that he has tried, and making progress, but will need 4 more years to make it happen for them.. that people are fighting against them and he is trying to get it right.. ‘won’t happen overnight’ (heard that one before).. all a big game folks..
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:16 pm
The election of Saxby is the largest show of ignorance in Georgia
Get Real
June 25th, 2009
4:17 pm
Some of you are real twits. If China wants to go to war with us, it doesn’t have to fire one missile. All it has to do is call in the $3 Trillion marker we owe them. That would bring this country to its knees financially. And Obama’s spending is a fraction of that. You all blame him for this when the Republican Secretary of Defense and “Generals on the ground” say we don’t need it. I thought listening to Generals on the ground was so important these last 6 years? Real hypocrites you are. You rail against pork-barrel spending until its in your backyard.
Tony Starks
June 25th, 2009
4:18 pm
Russia and China has a plane that is dominant over the F-22 called the Su-47 and the MiG 1.44. Outperforms what there making in little old Marietta. Scrap that old thing (F-22). Second, President Obama is moving critical funds away from the Republicans which might help them get re-elected in the future against him and any other Democrat (Smart Tactics). Third join me in the welfare line and see what it feels like (LMFAO).
JT
June 25th, 2009
4:22 pm
Nothing is dominant over the F-22, competitive yes, dominant, no. And those 2 planes would destroy an F-15 or F-35. Makes me feel safe.
Island Dawg
June 25th, 2009
4:32 pm
What a bunch of rubes! Non politically appointed generals who have worked their way up the military echelon to that level say we don’t need it. I love how the most blow-hard neo-con “patriots” are also the most scaredy cat wussbags. Also that comment about Russia having the best fighter is the stupidest thing I’ve heard in quite some time. They can’t even keep their conscripts enlisted for more than 2 years. Bunch of idiots!
F22Raptor4Ever
June 25th, 2009
4:33 pm
Enter your comments here
CVL
June 25th, 2009
4:33 pm
I feel bad for the folks that went through their schooling,and got all their wonderful clearances and skills that can ONLY USE THEM TO BUILD OBSOLETE AND OVERPRICED AIRPLANES…….
how about a nice tall glass of WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
I’m glad to finally have a president with the cajoles to spend the money where its needed and not to hookup his buddies. Besides since Georgia didnt vote him, he owes you nothing.
Your party is in such disarray, if you dont support Obama in 2012, who do you support? The pig in lipstick who cant control her family, the Argentinian adulterer, or the kind gentleman from Louisiana who has all of the charisma of a Q-tip.
When you guys say the democrats are ruining the country, it makes us feel great, because your idea of a great country clearly needs to be ruined.
Tony Starks
June 25th, 2009
4:39 pm
You old timers are still stuck on this one plane, one tank or object. Let it go cut the program were doomed. There is a new military strategy we have to meet over the next twenty years and its not with the F-22. Why send a jet with missiles against a nuclear armed country? I just dont get it. Fly the thing in your backyard after they can it.
F22Raptor4Ever
June 25th, 2009
4:39 pm
All I can say is – this is an abomination (Obamanation – get it?) Whatever they say about the F-22 vs its cousin the F-35 – well – who did it all first? It is THE FIRST Fifth Generation Stealth Fighter, and God help us if we need it for the purpose for which it was conceived. ‘Cause there won’t be enough to protect our nation and its allies.
Dr Soul
June 25th, 2009
4:41 pm
“I’m glad to finally have a president with the cajoles to spend the money where its needed and not to hookup his buddies.”
The optimum point here is ‘where it is needed’ and we have not really seen evidence of that yet.. lot of debt spending and waste.. as to hooking up his buddies, the ‘entitlement rats’ are his real buddies and what keeps him going…!!!
Little Head
June 25th, 2009
4:42 pm
For those not familiar with the F-22 and why it’s a waste, let me explain. It’s one of the most – if not the most advanced air-to-air fighters in the world…. To fight the Soviet Union’s next generation fighters. That’s right, that’s why it was developed. The fighter has limited air-to-ground capabilities, which renders it pretty much useless in the wars we’re fighting right now, and might be fighting well into the future. President Obama and Secretary Gates have rightly decided to shift our procurement to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, which we could actually use, because of its air-to-ground and stealth capabilities.
BW
June 25th, 2009
4:46 pm
How far will Defense Secretary Robert Gates go? Even before the House Armed Services Committee voted to slip in $369 million for more F-22 Raptor jet fighters this week, people on Capitol Hill were abuzz about what the Obama administration might do in response – to make a point about the direction of U.S. defense policy.
Veto the entire defense spending bill because of the provision? Far-fetched as it seems, some politicians think Gates might want Obama to do so.
Gates has a point to prove, and Lockheed Martin’s F-22 and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter are looming as the point’s mightiest pair of symbols. He wants to redesign Pentagon procurement around counterinsurgencies rather than against a major adversary such as Russia or China, and his promotion of the F-35 as the next generation fighter jet has energized enthusiasts around the world. Lockheed Martin expects to eventually sell thousands of them.
The Defense Secretary also might be aggravated by what appears to be a limited rebellion from within the U.S. Air Force ranks, as commanders and generals start speaking out in favor of the F-22.
And Gates is no doubt irritated by Congress itself, which isn’t about to give up its say-so on spending. The military “needs to learn who’s in charge, and the Congress is,” says Neil Abercrombie, a Hawaii Democrat.
aeroguy
June 25th, 2009
4:50 pm
During Viet Nam, we found out the hard way by air superiority in a third world country is hard to come by (from SAM’s and foreign trained pilots). Let not be naive again.
Mark Twain
June 25th, 2009
4:50 pm
All weapons systems have fixed costs. The initial estimate was that the Air Force would order 648 F-22 aircraft thus reducing cost per aircraft. The program now is stabilized at 183. The last sixty ordered in 2007 cost 121 million each.
Secretary Gates said in April 2009 that the US will buy 2443 JSF-35 Lightning II’s at an estimated cost of $83 million each. That will put the total cost of the fighters, minus sunken development costs, at $202,769,000.
There goes your free healthcare.
Suppose you were an idiot, and suppose you are a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
That’s the difference between governments and individuals. Governments don’t care, individuals do.
G.L. Huggins
June 25th, 2009
4:52 pm
Having followed many contracts as a retiree from LMASC, I can tell you that politics figures heavily in awarding aircraft monies. Because people voted a dem in for pres, republican states stood to lose money. As some would say” We won, get over it”. Facts of today unfortunately won’t take care of future
needs in military hardware. The time to R&D aircraft such as the F-22 won’t be available for an unprepared US. There is never a second chance for making fatal mistakes. Such is the biggie that this regime has made. By The Way assembly workers at auto makers have better wages, benefits, and more job security than aircraft industry professionals. Pity , but so……..
JT
June 25th, 2009
4:52 pm
CVL – it is not a political debate really. You can be a Democrat and still want the best and most advanced military equipment possible.
And yes, the Russians have the best fighter jet in the world now, not really even up for debate.
jc_atl
June 25th, 2009
5:03 pm
Good riddance to wasted tax dollars. Please veto it, Obama.
???
June 25th, 2009
5:04 pm
Is this the same Saxby Chambliss who dodged the draft and voted 3 times to cut spending on VA hospitals during a time of war? If so I sure would NOT trust him.
JT
June 25th, 2009
5:05 pm
Military = wasted tax dollars???? Idiotic.
LFP6
June 25th, 2009
5:21 pm
This is troubling, and not just for Marietta, but for those that have to fly and service the F-22s. Not having the proper parts handy to properly maintain such a complex machine, in my opinion, is a clear and present danger to our airmen.
Conservative
June 25th, 2009
5:31 pm
Wonder how much Saxby is being paid for his time, normally he is busy playing golf this time of the year.
Copyleft
June 25th, 2009
5:40 pm
JT: Yes, it IS in fact possible to waste tax dollars, even on military spending.
Remember the $800 toilet seat and $140 wrench? Those were defense contractors stealing our money and delivering bupkis in return… kinda like the no-bid contractors in Iraq did.
Family Values
June 25th, 2009
5:55 pm
One truly have to believe if Obama decided to do all the republicans wanted him to do, and even become a republican himself, these haters will still not vote or approve of him. HYPOCRASY, HYPOCRASY,…
Obama, stay focused and steady, we had enough of poor leadership from republicans in the last administration. The origin of this lack-luster economy can be traced back to lies, lies, and more lies (WMDs’…)
Not again hate mongers, you can’t fool the American people any more.
Saul Good
June 25th, 2009
6:02 pm
Just a “waste” of money. Time to “break ties” with the Military Industrial Complex. It’s not Obama’s job to go against what the GA rethug wants for his state. talk about PORK?! The Pentagon recommends AGAINST purchasing more f-22’s. Weak on Defense you say? Obama is spending MORE that sissy boy Bush did last year. The very one who got us INTO this mess of WASTING ONE TRILLION DOLLARS fighting a war that not only WASTE money…it ended WAY too many lives…most of them GOOD, HONEST, HARD WORKING, MUSLIM IRAQI’s…. they who never ASKED us to come invade their country was was as much a threat to us and the world at large…as Iceland was!
Saxby….GOODBYE! Nobody is listening to a rethug from GA any longer. You really don’t even figure into the equation in DC any longer… you’re a Bookmark on a BAD CHAPTER in history… one who Rubber Stamped ALL that was EVIL in this World…Bush and Cheney. People will listen to Dr. Phil before they listen to what YOU have to say.
GA: Last in Education and showing it every single day!
When you vote republican you vote against your OWN best interests!
Cruzin
June 25th, 2009
6:26 pm
Money goes to bail out the loser car companies, but money isn’t available to keep the F-22 program going. What Obama is saying, if you make stuff we don’t like, you will lose your job. Keeping America safe and strong is not what the Democrats plan to do. Y’all voted for change, now you got in rammed down your throat sideways….
Shameless
June 26th, 2009
6:02 am
How much is Saxby selling our vote for? Saxby the draft dodger could care less about the defence of the US he is in it for the money. Don’t forget his son is a lobbyist. The F22 is just a total waste of our tax money.
Copyleft
June 26th, 2009
9:19 am
Cruzin: Just because you’re unhappy with Obama doesn’t mean we all are.
And he IS keeping America safe and strong, thank you. He’s just not doing it the expensive and stupid way that previous administrations favored….
What happened to "Country First" ?
June 26th, 2009
10:13 am
The military doesn’t want this, it has never been used in the wars we are fighting today. It is a WASTE OF MONEY.
The Snark
June 26th, 2009
11:16 am
Copyleft, you are out of your mind. Obama is not doing “it” the expensive way? Really? Trillions in new dbt for programs that history proves will not work. The only thing The Obama. peace be upon him, is not expanding is the military. Lets see how well universal health care and that stupid Cap and Tax bill serves us when we are no longer a super power and unable to defend ourselves? You libs never learn. You just throw more cash at your idiotic, but well intentioned (rolling eyes), programs. I am convinced that Obama will be far worse than Jimmy Al-Carter.
I have been meaning to ask, with the economy in the crapper, unemployment still rising, inflation just around the corner and a the knowledge that Obama is weakening our defenses… How is that Hope and Change working out for you?
Copyleft
June 26th, 2009
12:01 pm
Snark: Quite well, thank you. It’ll be a long time recovering from the Bush Depression, of course, but we knew that even before Pres. Obama was sworn in. Fortunately, he’s handling it the right way (although a bit too moderate in his approach, still pandering to the lobbyists who want their failed and broken schemes propped up).
The point about spending was specifically about MILITARY spending, of course. And that’s been out of control and unaccountable for far too long. Cancelling wasteful boondoggles like the F-22 makes good economic AND security sense for America.
You wingnuts never learn; spending on ourselves is better than spending to prop up, overthrow, and invade other countries.
DontTreadOnMe
June 26th, 2009
1:26 pm
Cancelling wasteful boondoggles like the F-22 makes good economic AND security sense for America.
You wingnuts never learn; spending on ourselves is better than spending to prop up, overthrow, and invade other countries.
——
Wow. I wish I could live in your Fantasyland.