Comments on: John McCain: Did His Lobbyist Ties To Airbus Cost American Jobs?

By: Dave in SoCal

Dave in SoCal — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:48:45 +0000

What Boeing is protesting is that the specifications were changed at the last minute (and not necessarily openly) to call out the need for a larger platform (like the A330). And here is my source for that statement.

By: Dave in SoCal

Dave in SoCal — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:17:05 +0000

The first Boeing deal was dirty, and the award to Airbus was because the A330 is just plain better, and Northrop is less prone to cost overruns than Boeing. The first deal was very dirty and needed to be tossed out. And people rightly went to jail for it. But how exactly is the A330 "just plain better"? You're comparing two entirely different airplanes. They are different sizes, fit different market niches and have different economics. Do you have facts to back up your assertion? And what are you basing your cost overrun argument on? ALL defense contractors have cost overruns to one extent or another. It's the nature of the government-contract beast. Northrop has 'em too. Here and here are two examples that took me all of 5 seconds to google. They could have offered the 777, but that would have been inconvenient, because they have a commercial backlog. They could have offered the 777 if that's what the RFP had called for. But it didn't. It called for a 767-sized tanker. What Boeing is protesting is that the specifications were changed at the last minute (and not necessarily openly) to call out the need for a larger platform (like the A330). Backlog has nothing to do with it. Sorry, I'm sure my facts are inconvenient for the BS you were trying to push. And yes, I am a Boeing employee (although I have nothing to do with either the 767 or the tanker program). But at least I do my homework.

By: For American

For American — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 22:07:55 +0000

Unfortunately Mccain was not quite up front about where his bread was being buttered when he became involved in trying to change the RFP to benefit the Airbus plane. The Airbus plane is not better! The cost to the tax payer for the increased fuel prices, the larger hangars and runways has not even been taken in to account. The Boeing plane provides more flexibility to the pilots in tight situations. My husband flew tankers in both gulf wars and his choice would be the Boeing plane by far! Ask a pilot instead of the brass and the choice would be Boeing!

By: Matthew G. Saroff

Matthew G. Saroff — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 15:40:59 +0000

This is like the only thing that McCain has been right on in 20 years.

The first Boeing deal was dirty, and the award to Airbus was because the A330 is just plain better, and Northrop is less prone to cost overruns than Boeing.

They could have offered the 777, but that would have been inconvenient, because they have a commercial backlog.

By: C.S.Strowbridge

C.S.Strowbridge — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:34:24 +0000

Linking Iraq to the economic woes is pretty easy. Linking exporting jobs to the economic woes is child’s play.