Tiahrt shares tanker outrage

tankerThe subheading that Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, chose for his “tanker blog” says it all: “the outrage.” The congressman is using the blog, on his congressional Web site, to pass along news and views about the Air Force’s decision to let Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. build its new refueling tankers. Tiahrt’s Monday post linked to a letter he wrote to Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne calling the evidence of EADS’ corruption “overwhelming” and demanding more answers.

23 Comments

  1. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 6:32 am | Permalink

    People should understand that Tankerless Todd worked for Boeing in the area of government pork procurement. So, he is and has been intimately familiar with Boeing’s practices in that area. Perhaps it would have been better for Boeing and its allies to have come up with a great contract instead of that corrupt lease that they tried to get through with their corrupt connections. It was that blatant corruption that led to the re-opening of the contract and ultimately to Boeing losing it.

  2. JMWalker
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 6:38 am | Permalink

    My guess? The tanker will come in at over 100% increase in bid price. It will do so regardless of who builds it because there is no oversight on military contracts at all. Name me ONE military contract that came in on or under budget.

    Until that gets settled, I would halt ALL military contracts. It’s getting ridiculous.

  3. BlueJay
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Boeing is to blame for their loss of this contract.

    It is precisely because Boeing works on mid management toady mentality and wastes its time mistreating its workers that they lost out. Tiarhrt himself started out in Boeing mid management.

  4. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 8:34 am | Permalink

    The survivability of the 767 was far superior than the Airbush, believe boeing rated highly in about 30 different survivablility factors, and airbus rated average in about 5 areas.
    You’d think a little factor like survivability for a military re-fueler would carry more weight than how much weight and bodies the tanker can carry!

  5. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 8:35 am | Permalink

    But, if we’ll send the fodder out in unarmored military vehicles, maybe it isn’t such a big factor.

  6. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 8:36 am | Permalink

    I watched Lions for Lambs last weekend, pretty good, and pretty right on.

  7. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 8:39 am | Permalink

    Speaking of corrupt, nearly all of Airbus’s top Executive are being investigated for corruption. Nothing to see there. Not to mention that paying kickbacks is a tax deduction for Airbus.

  8. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    I thought NOC was supposed to be a more reliable supplier for the military.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINBNG32265120080415?rpc=44

  9. writerdog
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    Tiahrt has a blog! How come he has never mentioned it in all the form responses to all the e-mails I have sent him? I now feel slided, rejected and forlore…

  10. Posted April 15, 2008 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    If there is one thing Tiahrt is intimately acquainted with it’s corruption, so he knows it when he sees it.

  11. littlejohn
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    “The survivability of the 767 was far superior than the Airbush, believe boeing rated highly in about 30 different survivablility factors, and airbus rated average in about 5 areas.”


    Speaking of corrupt, nearly all of Airbus’s top Executive are being investigated for corruption. Nothing to see there. Not to mention that paying kickbacks is a tax deduction for Airbus”

    “I thought NOC was supposed to be a more reliable supplier for the military.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idINBNG32265120080415?rpc=44

    for all you Boeing bashers, and Airbus supporters—-I said it before and I will say it again. The contract was awarded to Northrup/Airbus for no more than policial reasons (probably asshole McCains) Political reasons are always a factor in major contract awards. Have been since I have been involved in aerospace industry. (30 years)

  12. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    “(probably asshole McCains) Political reasons are always a factor in major contract awards.”

    When YOUR company benefitted from that corruption you cheered. Now that it goes the other way you whine.

    And, of course, Kansas will reward McCain by voting for him in November.

  13. littlejohn
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 12:03 pm | Permalink
    “(probably asshole McCains) Political reasons are always a factor in major contract awards.”

    “When YOUR company benefitted from that corruption you cheered. Now that it goes the other way you whine.”

    Sorry, don;t know what the hell you are talking about. THe company I work for hasn;t received a major military contract in over a decade. I don;t work for Boeing or Spirit. I own stock in neither. I would suggest you not speculate.

  14. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    lj - that was a rhetorical ‘YOUR’ - referring to Boeing which you seem to be defending here. The fact is that Tankerless Todd played the game to the hilt; now that the tables turn against him he whines.

  15. littlejohn
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

    Okay. I could give a damn about tanker todd or tankerless todd, or any other todd that has the last name of tiahrt. I do give a crap about American Defense (including budgets), American military (including it’s people) and Ameican jobs.

    The contract should have gone go Boeing. That it didn;t was celebrated by some here as “big business getting theirs”.

    Wrong attitude, in my opinion.

  16. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    lj - I am not convinced that they cannot build just as good a tamker in Alabama as they can in Wichita. IF the Boeing proposal was better then I would agree that it should have won.

    Boeing shot themselves in the foot - repeatedly. That is not McCain’s fault.

  17. TomPaine
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    LJ, Boeing planned on farming out a large % of their tanker oversees, hellholes like China, so Boeing isnt some great protecter of american jobs, and last I checked Alabama is part of the USA.

  18. Phantom
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    If we’re going to share our tax revenues with a company, I’d rather that boeing share holders rather than EADS share holders reap some of the rewards.

  19. littlejohn
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

    bth and TomPaine-

    The work in Alabama isto be rework into tankers, as I understand it. Not the building of the airframe. The airframe will be built in Europe, they will be flown over for conversion work. At least, that is my understanding. And yes, Boeing has shipped much work oversees? SO? There was clamoring on this blog for the best airplane at the CHEAPEST price to save taxdollars. That’s what happens. Work gets outsourced. Why? ITS CHEAPER!
    I for one am not for outsourcing. I for one buy local when I can, and buy American if possible without spending any more than about 20% differential. Funny thing about outsourcing and made in china. Wal Mart parking lot is full of cars displaying the IAM logo. Oh well, I guess the idea is “no foreign purchases for companies, just for me”. You get what you pay for.

  20. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 3:02 pm | Permalink

    Phantom - with mutual funds it is likely that I own EADS shares and that Europeans own Boeing shares.

  21. bth
    Posted April 15, 2008 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

    lj - Boeing is outsourcing their airframe too. And it appears that EADS will outsource theirs in order to ramp up production - to Alabama. The last version I heard is that the Northrup/EADS deal will create more American jobs than the Boeing one.

  22. donjohnson
    Posted April 16, 2008 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

    I AM FOR ” WE THE PEOPLE ” SO IF THEY KEEP GIVING AWAY AMERICA AND ALL WE DO IS BITCH THAN SO BE IT BUT I AM RUNNING FOR A LEADERS FOR ILLEGAL ALIENS JOB AND THAT SURE IS ALOT OF JOBS ” WE THE PEOPLE ” WILL DO. PLEASE JOIN ME AND FILE FOR A SEAT ON ANY OPENING THAT A AMERICAN CAN VOTE FOR AND WE THE PEOPLE WILL NOT HIDE AND TAKE A BACK SEAT TO THE ILLEGAL ALIEN INVADERS AND THERE LEADERS. WHATS THAT GOT TO DO WITH THIS NEWS ARTICIAL NOTHING JUST LIKE THEM. SEMPER FI.

  23. Posted April 27, 2008 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    Great

    WBR,
    Alex
    http://www.world-viagra.com - best cheap drug-store
    cheap drug-store

One Trackback

  1. [...] WE Blog | The Wichita Eagle Editorial Department Blog wrote an interesting post today on Tiahrt shares tanker outrageHere’s a quick excerptTiahrt shares tanker outrage PostedAbout an hour ago The subheading that Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-Goddard, chose for his “tanker blog” says it all: “the outrage.” The congressman is using the blog, on his congressional Web site, to pass along news and views about the Air Force’s decision to let Northrop Grumman and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. build its new refueling tankers. Tiahrt’s Monday post linked to a letter he wrote to Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne calling the evidence of E [...]