[Paleo Conservative]

Here's another related article.

Senator comes to defense of McCain on tankers

ERIC ROSENBERG; Hearst Newspapers
Published: March 15th, 2008 01:00 AM
WASHINGTON – Sen. John Warner, R-Va., on Friday defended Sen. John McCain’s longstanding involvement in the Air Force tanker project, a multi-billion dollar contract won last month by an Airbus consortium.

McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has become a favorite target among The Boeing Co. supporters since the company’s loss to the France-based Airbus team in the tanker competition.

McCain, R-Ariz., pressed the Pentagon in 2006 to ignore the issue of alleged foreign government subsidies to Airbus when the tanker contract was put up for competitive bidding. McCain said he did so to ensure competition in a program that was dogged by corruption, scandal and overpricing.

But Boeing proponents argue that those subsidies – which lowered the cost of the Airbus tanker – were one of the reasons Boeing ended up losing the $35 billion competition.

Warner, a respected voice on national security and defense issues who at the time was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he supported McCain’s efforts.

Boeing is protesting the contract award to the Government Accountability Office.

McCain, a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was an outspoken critic of a previous tanker deal that Chicago-based Boeing had with the Air Force.

McCain’s efforts scuttled that project in 2004 and helped uncover criminal wrongdoing on the part of a former Air Force official and a senior Boeing executive.

Both went to federal prison for conspiracy to violate conflict-of-interest rules after the former Air Force official admitted steering huge contracts to Boeing, including a $20 billion project for aerial tankers.

Boeing paid a record $615 million fine for its role in the tanker scandal and other procurement infractions.

[Paleo Conservative]

Here's another article in the Independent that I can't post, so here's a link.

McCain in trouble with conservatives as $35bn aircraft contract goes abroad

By Leonard Doyle in Washington
Friday, 14 March 2008

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off this aerospace ping list, please contact Paleo Conservative or phantomworker by Freep mail.

[Baladas]

Lol, I see the point here, but there’s no way Hillary Rodham Clinton will ever win Kansas. Reporter’s dreaming again.

[southernerwithanattitude]

I don't want my pilots having to depend on a “French” tanker for fuel!

[dr_who_2]

The defense industry is about defense. It’s not a jobs program. This is pretty cynical even for some Democrats.

[Bernard]

10 years ago, when I lived in the Seattle suburbs, most of the Boeing employees at a neighborhood block party were complaining about AirBus and saying that everybody should "buy American".

So as I pointed out all the Japanese and European cars in their driveways, they became quite outraged and spent a long time explaining why that was different.

I guess they still live there.

[LiberConservative]

Maybe Boeing doesn't hire enough illegal immigrants.

[ASOC]

This. Again?

EADS also sells two-way radios (P25) to cops in the USA - no sale of that product?

What of Beretta? (M-9/92F)

Fabrique Nationale? (SAW M249 AKA Mini-mitrailleuse?)

And PLEASE spare me the 'French = white flag crap, the Légion étrangère more than pulled thier weight in the GWI and later in Chad. France has thier own foreign policy, and it may not agree with ours. That's life.

[NonValueAdded]

Like Hillary or Obama are going to procure military aircraft at all? At least under McCain they might get a chance to bid on the next contract.

[Mr. Jeeves]

Multi-national Boeing barely qualifies as an “American” company any more, so this whole story is the reddest of red herrings.

[skinkinthegrass]

After all, McCain was right back in 2004 to scuttle the previous tanker deal after he helped expose a bribery scandal involving an Air Force buyer and Boeing executives....

while, I disagree w/ Sinister Juan "Keating Five" McCranky, on many things.....Boeing did try to bribe (or did bribe) gov. officials and the "deal" would've cost taxpayer 6 billion on a leasing agreement....

this "article" smells...badly. *is it from $hrillarys' DNC*

[PugetSoundSoldier]

A good acquaintance of mine is an ex Boeing executive (he was a VP in charge of the 767 for a decade). He was shocked that Boeing even got the chance to bid again, considering the criminal acts when the bid first came up in 2002-2003 (for which Boeing staff actually served time in prison).

Boeing in this case lost fair and square, and its incumbent upon our DOD to get the best they can for the dollars equipped. IF we went to war and France did not want to supply us, Boeing would be called upon to get new tankers rolling. We’d use the existing fleet for the year or so until replacements were needed/ready. It’s why you maintain a standing force and supplies - to hold you until you can get more production ramped up.