Posted on 10/14/2007 9:02:53 PM PDT by jazusamo
Using congressional privilege, Rep. David Wu helped direct more than $2 million in defense contracts to a company in his district for T-shirts that Marines say they can no longer use in battle because they can melt and cause severe burns. A report in today's Seattle Times also found the company's top executives contributed to Wu's campaign account about the time the spending "earmarks" were written into the final Department of Defense budget.
Wu told The Oregonian today that he is "horrified" the Marines had to ban the polyester T-shirts in battle because of the danger they pose.
"I didn't know there was a melting problem," said Wu, a Democrat who represents Northwestern Oregon. "I thought they would be helpful because some of the people who helped me get the appropriation served in Vietnam where their (cotton) shirts were literally melting off of them."
Wu said he is "also horrified by the implication that there's a connection" between the Defense budget appropriation and campaign contributions to him.
"There are many people who seek earmarks for things like sewers or roads or research projects," Wu said. "Some people wind up being contributors. Most -- the vast majority -- do not."
Executives with InSport International, a Beaverton company that sold to a Vital Apparel of New York in late 2005, did not respond to calls Sunday from The Oregonian.
In addition to Wu, a press release from the company's Web site quotes U.S. Sens. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Rep. Darlene Hooley, D-Ore., praising both the product and the budget earmark. Wu said the four worked together to secure a $2million earmark for InSport in the 2006 Department of Defense budget and $1 million in the 2007 budget.
Federal Election Commission records indicate that only Wu received $8,850 in campaign contributions from the company's three top executives.
His campaign received $6,100 in donations in a single day from executives of InSport and its owner, Vital Apparel. The day after the bill passed on Sept. 29, 2006, one executive gave Wu another $750. Two others followed with identical donations within three weeks.
Was there a connection?
"Absolutely not," Wu told The Oregonian today.
He said InSport came to him with an alternative to the cotton T-shirts troops normally wore under body armor. He tested one of the shirts himself. "Before I asked for the appropriation I said, 'Can you smell me? I've been wearing the same shirt for three weeks.'"
Wu also cites a March 2006 letter from the Secretary of the Navy Donald Winter praising the shirts. "We concur that the use of anti-microbial, moisture-wicking technology will enhance the individual Marine's combat effectiveness," Winter wrote one month before the Marines banned the shirts from the battlefield.
But the Seattle Times reported that U.S. military officials already had encountered problems with polyester T-shirts in the heat of Iraq and elsewhere.
Capt. Lynn E. Welling, the 1st Marine Logistics Group head surgeon, told the Times that polyester clothing melts in intense heat, adhering to the skin. "This essentially creates a second skin and can lead to horrific, disfiguring burns."
In April 2006, the Marines banned polyester T-shirts for use in combat or anywhere outside the protected Green Zone bases, according to the Times. But the newspaper reports in July 2006, because of Wu's earmark, the Marines announced the purchase of 87,000 of the banned polyester T-shirts, along with 11,000 T-shirts with fire-resistant sleeves.
The Times examined the 2007 defense appropriations bill looking for relationships between the businesses and individuals who benefit most from spending earmarks and the members of Congress who deliver them.
Of the nearly 500 companies identified as getting 2007 defense earmarks, the newspaper found 78 percent had employees or political action committees who made campaign contributions to Congress in the past six years.
The Pentagon officially opposes having money directed to specific contractors or projects. Military officials say such earmarks circumvent its own efforts to set spending priorities, thoroughly evaluate products and seek competitive bids.
In addition to the InSport earmarks, the Times noted that Washington's Sen. Patty Murray and Congressmen Norm Dicks and Brian Baird, all Democrats, steered more than $8 million to Edmonds, Wash., shipbuilder Guardian Marine International and its subcontractor, Oregon Ironworks in Portland.
From 2001 to 2002, the Times reports that executives of the two companies would give more than $22,000 in campaign money to members of their local delegations, including $3,000 to Murray. In the past four years, executives of Guardian Marine and Oregon Iron Works have given nearly $125,000 in contributions to Congress members.
None of the boats built as a result of the earmarks was wanted by the military or used as Congress intended, the newspaper reports.
But on Sunday, Wu's press secretary Jillian Schoene, says the InSport T-shirts "have found a niche." On Oct. 1, 2007, the Marines announced a $14 million contract for more InSport Products -- the polyester shirts are worn by troops in training.
I think he should be tossed in jail for bribes, kickbacks..whatever. Like he cared or ever wore one of those shirts. Theres just no excuse for this to have happened & he needs to be replaced. Of course he won’t & its just another day in this scummer’s life. I wonder what else will surface.
Hey look! Another bribe-taking RAT traitor endangering our troops for a “contribution”!
Crap!
Back in the 1980s the US Navy had CNT (Certified Navy Twill) uniforms shoved down their throats when it was clearly evident that the polyester-based fabric would melt and result in horrible burns if there was an accident.
But they idiots said, Oh no! This is just for dress uniforms! Not for working uniforms. The fact that personnel had to respond to emergencies in whatever uniform they happened to be wearing at the time never seemed to make much of an impact on their thought processes.
Now, 20 years later they are buying polyester t-shirts for Marines?
If it wasn’t so despicably predictable, I could weep.
In other words, a typical Democrat. He should have one of those plastic t-shirts wrapped around his head and set on fire.
He is such a nut.
**Democrat culture of corruption BUMP!**
Agree with that!
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Oregon Ping List.
If he graduated from Yale Law, “attended” a medical school and he didn’t know that polyester fabrics melt in fire/flame, he’s dumber than a sack full of hammers and should be drummed out of Congress on grounds of simply being too stupid for the job.
The fact that he’s trying to protest his innocence when he’s the ONLY grifter in Congress receiving donations from the vendor... that tells us that he displays contempt for the voters because he assumes we’re either stupider than he is, or gullible as a three-year-old.
If I were in the GOP’s House election group, I’d be running TV ads attacking this guy for this one action. Just leave the questions about this deal hanging in the air in his district.
Two woeds:
Richard ... Pryor
As soon as I read the word, “horrified”, I knew Wu was a Democrat. They make a career of being “horrified”.
Corruption is just another name for Wu.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Cotton t-shirts melting??? This guy is truly a world class nimrod!
I moved out of this jerk’s district, just because I could not STAND the guy! Ok so we found a good house , but the side benefit is DEFINITELY got to include the fact Wu no longer represents me or my family.
I read that quote and thought he’s either too stupid to breathe on his own or he a chronic liar who thinks the voters are stupid.
Unbelievable.
Yes, to both.
"I didn't know there was a melting problem," said Wu, a Democrat who represents Northwestern Oregon.
The guy obviously never had a hot cigarette ash drop on his Leisure Suit. ;~))
Cotton shirts “melting”. I visualized “rotting”. Thinking back to photos of WWII POWs in the Phillipines with their tattered clothing.
If he really did mean “melting” - the guy’s an idiot. (”Oh - you mean polyester is the one that melts? I get so confWUsed”.)
Rotting is believable, but he said melting. I vote that he is simply an idiot as well as a crook.
Is this the same Wu that peed on The Dude’s rug?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.