Here is a perfect example of the utterly skewed nature of Big Aerospace political contributions – @SierraNevCorp FYI one of the owners was appointed to NSpC Users Advisory Group https://t.co/6OqLhc7zMg pic.twitter.com/jsQ4mmNlSp
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) January 12, 2021
There’s A New “Make Space Great Again” Campaign Video From Team Trump, Earlier post
“At 4:10 the live chat begins. It is hosted by Donald Trump Jr.’s girlfriend Kimberly Guilfoyle who works on the Trump campaign. Her guests are former NASA Chief Financial Officer Jeff DeWit and former astronaut and NASA GRC Center Director Janet Kavandi who is now a Senior Vice President at Sierra Nevada Corp. Apparently the Trump family is really into space – Eric Trump’s brother-in-law Kyle Yunaska is the new Deputy Chief of Staff at NASA.”
Wow! Talk about hooking your wagon to a falling star! I used to like Sierra Nevada.
For a moment I thought you were talking about Sierra Nevada Brewery.
Most American businesses exist to make money, so isn’t this just money talking? Since it is not yet illegal to have opposing political parties, is it really the case that these companies are trying to make political statements, or are they trying to ensure favor where they might need to improve potential government/business relationships? If Republicans, for example, are creating and backing programs that are likely to use a company’s products, isn’t it more a sound business decision than a political statement as to which side to back? Don’t the companies make calculated contributions to both sides? Remember that pacifist Henry Ford scurried home from his anti-war political demonstration cruise to Europe at the start of WWI when it dawned on him what profits that his company could make if it went into arms manufacture.
Interesting that some aerospace companies have decided to halt political contributions