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

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.

On Apr 22, 9:48 am, Mike wrote:
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.

Remember Jimmy Carter?

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
...
On Apr 22, 9:48 am, Mike wrote:
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.

Remember Jimmy Carter?

What about Jimmy Carter?

And, btw, if aerospace and defense stocks have performed brilliantly in the
past year, does that mean that war is good for business?

- nilita

On Apr 22, 10:28 am, "La N" wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message

...



On Apr 22, 9:48 am, Mike wrote:
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.

Remember Jimmy Carter?

What about Jimmy Carter?

And, btw, if aerospace and defense stocks have performed brilliantly in the
past year, does that mean that war is good for business?

- nilita

War is very good for business. Did you see or hear Hillary's bit on
Olbermann last night? If Iran nukes Israel or acts like it wants to be
a nuke power we nuke them, just for drill.

Clinton warns Iran of U.S. nuclear response
Senator: ‘Massive retaliation’ for attack on Israel would likely
include NATO

Video
Iran ‘risking massive retaliation’
April 21: Hillary Clinton talks with Countdown’s Keith Olbermann on
the eve of the crucial Pennsylvania primary.

Countdown

Video

Clinton rallies in Pennsylvania
April 21: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at a rally in Pittsburgh.


MSNBC
updated 9:07 p.m. ET, Mon., April. 21, 2008

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton confirmed Monday that as president she
would be willing to use nuclear weapons against Iran if it were to
launch a nuclear attack on Israel.

Clinton’s remarks, made in an interview on MSNBC’s “Countdown With
Keith Olbermann,” clarified a statement she made last week in a
Democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia. In that debate,
Clinton, D-N.Y., said an Iranian attack on Israel would bring “massive
retaliation,” without defining what the phrase meant.

In the interview Monday, Clinton affirmed that she would warn Iran’s
leaders that “their use of nuclear weapons against Israel would
provoke a nuclear response from the United States.”

She said U.S. allies in the Middle East were being “intimidated and
bullied into submission by Iran,” raising the prospect of an
“incredibly destabilizing” arms race in the region.

“I can imagine that they would be rushing to obtain nuclear weapons
themselves” if Iran were to develop a nuclear arsenal, she said.

Clinton said it was vital that the United States create a new
“security umbrella” to reassure Israel and its other allies in the
region that they would not be threatened by Iran. She said she would
tell them that “if you were the subject of an unprovoked nuclear
attack by Iran, the United States, and hopefully our NATO allies,
would respond to that.”

Clinton seeks tougher profile than Obama
Clinton’s hinting at a nuclear option last week set off a wave of
commentary in political circles that she was seeking to position
herself as a hawk as the primary campaign winds toward an end. Her
opponent for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois,
has said that he would not rule out any options if Iran were to become
a nuclear power, but he has not explicitly said he would be willing
use nuclear weapons.

Clinton’s remarks reflected the theme of her latest advertising in
Pennsylvania, where Democratic voters go to the polls Tuesday with
analysts in both camps saying she must win the state’s primary if she
is to remain a credible candidate.



Carter, the closest thing we have ever had to a real active duty
officer, not staff or command, wanted everything justified and cut if
unjustified.

Please...EITHER of the candidates on that side is a nightmare.
But the lib media loves them and lemmings will follow anything...
expect to see a lot more of this...
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives...OffColor-X.gif

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
...
On Apr 22, 10:28 am, "La N" wrote:
"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message

...



On Apr 22, 9:48 am, Mike wrote:
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.

Remember Jimmy Carter?

What about Jimmy Carter?

And, btw, if aerospace and defense stocks have performed brilliantly in
the
past year, does that mean that war is good for business?

- nilita

War is very good for business. Did you see or hear Hillary's bit on
Olbermann last night? If Iran nukes Israel or acts like it wants to be
a nuke power we nuke them, just for drill.

Clinton warns Iran of U.S. nuclear response
Senator: ‘Massive retaliation’ for attack on Israel would likely
include NATO

Video
Iran ‘risking massive retaliation’
April 21: Hillary Clinton talks with Countdown’s Keith Olbermann on
the eve of the crucial Pennsylvania primary.

Countdown

Video

Clinton rallies in Pennsylvania
April 21: Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks at a rally in Pittsburgh.


MSNBC
updated 9:07 p.m. ET, Mon., April. 21, 2008

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton confirmed Monday that as president she
would be willing to use nuclear weapons against Iran if it were to
launch a nuclear attack on Israel.

Clinton’s remarks, made in an interview on MSNBC’s “Countdown With
Keith Olbermann,” clarified a statement she made last week in a
Democratic presidential debate in Philadelphia. In that debate,
Clinton, D-N.Y., said an Iranian attack on Israel would bring “massive
retaliation,” without defining what the phrase meant.

In the interview Monday, Clinton affirmed that she would warn Iran’s
leaders that “their use of nuclear weapons against Israel would
provoke a nuclear response from the United States.”

She said U.S. allies in the Middle East were being “intimidated and
bullied into submission by Iran,” raising the prospect of an
“incredibly destabilizing” arms race in the region.

“I can imagine that they would be rushing to obtain nuclear weapons
themselves” if Iran were to develop a nuclear arsenal, she said.

Clinton said it was vital that the United States create a new
“security umbrella” to reassure Israel and its other allies in the
region that they would not be threatened by Iran. She said she would
tell them that “if you were the subject of an unprovoked nuclear
attack by Iran, the United States, and hopefully our NATO allies,
would respond to that.”

Clinton seeks tougher profile than Obama
Clinton’s hinting at a nuclear option last week set off a wave of
commentary in political circles that she was seeking to position
herself as a hawk as the primary campaign winds toward an end. Her
opponent for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois,
has said that he would not rule out any options if Iran were to become
a nuclear power, but he has not explicitly said he would be willing
use nuclear weapons.

Clinton’s remarks reflected the theme of her latest advertising in
Pennsylvania, where Democratic voters go to the polls Tuesday with
analysts in both camps saying she must win the state’s primary if she
is to remain a credible candidate.



Carter, the closest thing we have ever had to a real active duty
officer, not staff or command, wanted everything justified and cut if
unjustified.

********************************

Okay, thanks for that.

- nilita

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:42:41 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
wrote:


Carter, the closest thing we have ever had to a real active duty
officer, not staff or command, wanted everything justified and cut if
unjustified.

Are we overlooking George H.W. Bush, John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower,
Harry S Truman, Teddy Roosevelt, Ulysses S. Grant, Andrew Jackson,
Abraham Lincoln, Henry Harrison, George Washington, to name just a
few...?

Carter cut programs in the military aggressively, froze promotions and
military pay/allowances for three of his four years, gave us 22%
inflation and an 18% prime interest rate, presided over the collapse
of our greatest ally in the middle East, allowed our embassy to be
seized and then micro-managed the bungled rescue attempt, etc. etc.

And, now he believes Hamas is willing to co-exist with Israel...

One can only say the Jimmy Carter meant well.

....but executed poorly.
Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
www.thunderchief.org
www.thundertales.blogspot.com

"Jack Linthicum" wrote in message
...
On Apr 22, 9:48 am, Mike wrote:
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.

other industries would benefit and we need to spend money on the U.S.

Translation: "The gravy boat may be sailing."

Dan

"Mike" wrote in message
...
Goodbye to your favorite weapon programs. The money will go to liberal
social welfare programs....

As with your toilet habits, your political ideas are of absolutely no
interest to me. Take it to a political group.

Vaughn