Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. In this time universal belt tightening (universal meaning everyone but the government of course) and exploding deficits, we recall how just a few months ago the the Democrats in Congress lambasted the Auto-industry execs for flying on corporate jets to DC. So it should come as no surprise that the Democrat controlled congress is proposing to order $500 million dollars worth of new private jets to fly its members around.
When I see this level of hypocrisy, I can’t help but sing…
The spotlight’s hitting something
That’s been known to change the weather
We’ll kill the fatted calf tonight
So stick around
You’re gonna fear for election time
As deficits abound
chorus
Say, Steny and Nancy, have you seen them yet
But they’re so spaced out, D-D-D-Demmies and the Jets
Oh but they’re 500 mill worth of wonderful
Oh Nancy she’s really keen
Do what I say – not what I do
Craziest thing I’ve ever seen
D-D-D-Demmies and the Jets
August 10, 2009 at 6:08 pm
Actually, this is one of the BEST things they can do. For months now economists have been saying the govt needs to invest in public projects that involve steel, timber, quaries and any/all other natural resources in the US. The aviation industry is a major consumer of steel, so this is a good move all around. Not saying they should actually USE the planes since they are expensive to run, but it's good they are being made to stimulate the economy. This is a good thing.
August 10, 2009 at 6:08 pm
That was funny Patrick.
August 10, 2009 at 6:26 pm
Anonymous must be a party hack. Yes, perhaps we can get the government to pay for them all to build vacation homes too- that would jump start the housing industry. Give me a brake.
August 10, 2009 at 7:07 pm
Anonymous: Might as well build a momument for these Democrats who stimulate the economy with their spending. Why not have lavish parties with fountains of champagne, lobsters and caviar that I am sure that will help some other industry? And while we're at it, build monuments to the saviors of the economy because of all the stimulation that they've brought. (Recall IBM's motto.)
August 10, 2009 at 9:12 pm
Not to mention the cost of said planes is coming out of the DoD's budget and not their own budget. DoD was just handed a ton of budget cuts. We military folk know where we stand with these yahoos.
August 11, 2009 at 2:42 am
The plane in the picture looks like a "cheap" Citation. I imagine they are buying the much fancier Gulfstreams for their highnesses.
August 11, 2009 at 3:16 am
What's even more delicious than pointing out the hypocracy of Democrats is that we've almost defeated this obamacare scare. Don't get me wrong, I think abortion can be unfortunate, but I'm more concerned about having to pay more taxes. I don't want no government taking my money and telling me what to do. We need to keep up the tactics of shouting down our opponents. I don't even want to hear what they want to do. I'm happy with doonothingism – not that I don't care about children, but REALLY, it's not my problem if their parents won't get off their lazy behinds and get a job like the rest of us. All they have to do is work harder to be successful. Apparently these people are not proud to be Americans.
August 11, 2009 at 4:52 am
Rob K, no, I am not a party hack. I am just using my brain, unlike a lot of people who read these posts obviously. Once again, many economists (look it up if you don't understand the word) have been saying the stimulus money should be spent on industry and have be cautioning against simply putting it all into public works like FDR did. The steel, mechanical assembly and aviation industries involved in the production of these planes are home-grown. Where would YOU like to see the money spent?
August 11, 2009 at 1:48 pm
Anonymous,
The money used for these planes was not going to be stimulus money. It was going to come from the DoD budget, money that could be better spent, oh I don't know, on the troops and not on upgrading the lifestyle of spoiled rotten congressmen.
August 11, 2009 at 4:08 pm
All our ANGER is making a difference. Keep shoutin'. We're FIERCE, we're ANGRY, we're REPUBLICANS, AND WE'RE IN YOUR FACE!!!!
August 11, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Anon@11:52. There's such a thing as optimization. (Look it up if… never mind.) It's getting the biggest bang out of our buck.
The POTUS campaigned against gov't waste. Having public servants travel in luxury is not really economical. It may help some industries no doubt, but it could have helped more had it been spent wisely.
Where to spend the money, you ask? Infrastructure, technology, education, … got the idea?
August 11, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Rick you obviously didn't read the links. And FYI, last I checked the economist was not some shill for the left. Investing in education? That is throwing money down a well and we all know it. Technology? If you mean spending money to upgrade IT systems I'm with you. But if you mean funding ventures then I strongly disagree. Infrastructure? That's exactly what the economist (magazine) and other economists have been warning about. If you simply put people to work, this will do nothing but put a band-aid on a corpse. The country needs to PRODUCE things (machines, vehicles, software, hardware etc) specifically ones which utilize local labor, industries and resources (steel, wood, coal etc). The house ADDED the funds to the DOD budget specifically to buy the planes (they didn't take it out of the existing budget).
Like I said, I agree with this purchase. And make no mistake I'm coming at this as a Republican who wants any and all measures taken which will stimulate the economic recovery. I'd rather the money be spent on planes than "consultants", "counsel" or "advisers".
August 12, 2009 at 12:12 am
"If you mean spending money to upgrade IT systems I'm with you." & I am with you too!
Just think about it, what will be the ROI of $900M when spent in these jets vs. when spent in upgrading the security of our systems.
1.) There will be less obsolescence b/c it won't be hacked as often.
2.) There can be synergistic returns as new H/W, S/W & middle ware gets developed.
3.) More people will be employed than building a few jets.
4.) Peoples lives are safer. Imagine having the identities of assets compromised.
Bottom line, I'd say the IT will yield an ROI of 5% at the very conservative estimate w/o factoring intangibles e.g. lives & security. It can engage 10 times more people too than building a few planes. The ROI for the planes are negative.
So, the taxpayers are better served spending the money elsewhere. To find the optimal choice though we need to compare projects and their ROIs & NPVs. But we agree so mazels all around.
August 12, 2009 at 12:55 am
Rick I honestly don't think the planes and IT are mutually exclusive (and I hope not). I've worked in IT for the last 10 years (Clinton/Bush/Obama) and pitched/deployed on more DOD accounts than I can remember. There is always a budget for IT spending alocated. Obviously, it benefits ME and MY industry more if they were to put it all in that bucket. But I am saying I see the benefit in purchasing planes as well. I don't know how many jobs each plane equates to, but I do know that half of them were from Boeng which definitely could use more contracts overall.
I guess my point is out of all the bad decisions this administration has made in the very short time they've been around, this one doesn't seem so bad. But we'll see.
August 12, 2009 at 2:32 pm
As far as stopping them from living big, I don't think it will happen. Have they ever turned down a raise or stopped from proposing one?
Nevertheless, one never knows how the Lord will use these jets specially with the supporters of abortion flying in them. God writes straight with crooked lines.