Absolutely worthless tip of the day

I got an anonymous tip earlier today, claiming a “100% reliable source” within the US Air Force let slip that Boeing has won the lucrative $40 billion refueling tanker contract. I didn’t run with it because, well, it was an anonymous tip — not just anonymous to you, but anonymous to me — so it could have been any joker. And good thing I didn’t run with it too, because now the Seattle Times reports that Airbus has won the tanker deal, citing “a respected and well-connected defense analyst close to the Air Force tanker deal.”

Man, that sucks. Yet another poke in the eye from the Bush administration.

From the P-I:

In its quest for new tankers, the Air Force in 2002 negotiated a $23 billion deal with Boeing for a hundred 767 tankers, but it quickly came under fire in Congress as a financial handout for Boeing. The critics were led by Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who was on the Senate Armed Services Committee at the time and is now the likely Republican presidential nominee.

Gee, thanks Sen. McCain. Maybe some folks on the 767 assembly line will remember that next November as they ponder their future.


  1. 1

    GBS spews:


    You mean to say that Super Dave let a big chunk of $40 billion dollars in MILITARY DEFENSE spending slip out his state and into the coffers of the French??

  2. 2

    Thomas Trainwinder spews:

    You’re blaming Bush for Boeing losing this? C’mon….Goldy. Even for you that’s ridiculous. On any level.

  3. 3

    GBS spews:

    French Freedom Fuel Tankers!!

    That should help Ameican workers and American companies in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

    Why are conservatives so unpatriotic?

  4. 5

    busdrivermike spews:

    Buying French planes…why does Senator Dorf hate America. Why does Senator Dorf let God fearing American workers lose their jobs to the country that did not send one troop to Iraq?

    I hope President Obama reverses this deal. He can use this as a campaign issue as soon as Hillary leaves the race. This is another example of why Hillary is quickly becoming a hinderance to the Democrats taking back the White House.

    Senator Dorf believes in shipping our military infrastructure to China and France. The Republican party is filled with these kinds of traitors.

  5. 6

    Blue John spews:

    Let’s see,
    Is Washington being punished for being liberal?
    Is it McCain behind this?
    I read that some of the parts will be built in Mobile. Who’s district is that? What Republican gains from that?
    Why are foreign companies allowed to bid on this? Could France withhold delivery from the US of planes if they disagree with our policies?

  6. 8

    busdrivermike spews:

    Hey, maybe boeing could hire Vicki Iseman. It has been said that she is “effective” in lobbying the “head” of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Dorf.

    And by “head”, I mean the little head.

  7. 9



  8. 11

    Blue John spews:

    I found this in another blog….

    I’m no friend of Boeing, but how is it possible for Airbus to stay in business with Boeing planes priced in dollars and Airbus planes in Euros? Given that their planes and parts have gotten twice as expensive in dollar terms, they wouldn’t appear to have a snowballs chance to win this contract.

  9. 13

    Drew spews:

    McCain knows he will never win Washington State so he could care less about any ramifications. The biggest ramification is that our military policy will be subject to European approval.

    Weclome to 3rd world status!

  10. 14

    busdrivermike spews:

    Hey POO!

    Why does your party love France, and hate America. Why do they support the French socialists? Why does Senator Dorf believe in rewarding the French government, who has not sent one combat troop to America?

    Why is Senator Dorf so Anti-American?

  11. 15

    Blue John spews:

    There’s a puzzle piece.
    “I’ve never seen anything excite the people of Mobile like this competition,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said. “We’re talking about billions of dollars over many years so this is just a huge announcement.”

  12. 17

    rhp6033 spews:

    11: Actually, Airbus prices it’s planes in U.S. Dollars. It is a concession to the historical U.S. dominance in the airline industry. But this has been a big problem of late, because although they sell their planes in U.S. Dollars, most of their costs are in Euros. If the dollar dosen’t recover soon, they may be delivering quite a few planes at no profit to EADS.

    Boeing isn’t immune to the problem, however – it has to take into account parts built in Japan, Italy, and elsewhere.

  13. 19

    Tam spews:

    I thought it was funny when Mike “I’m rich” McGavick ran a commercial during his senate run with McCain. Anyone with any Puget sound background could have told him that among the Boeing workers and engineers this is a kiss of death. Boeing people I know think that McCain royally screwed the PNW over – I have hard core republican friends that swear they will campaign against McCain should he get the nom, and it is all about the 2002 incident.

  14. 20

    rhp6033 spews:

    There will be a protest by Boeing, of course, which will hold up the awarding of the contract by several months, at least. It would be interesting to see if the White House put any pressure to award the contract in a way to reward the Republican Senators and Representatives from Alabama. Of course, no military contract is without some political pushing, in one way or another.

  15. 21

    busdrivermike spews:

    Maybe Bush is thinking ahead, as unlikely as it seems.

    After all, the French have a history of sheltering ex-dictators from the home countries justice.

  16. 22

    rhp6033 spews:

    Of course, if the White House had any pull in this issue, it might also be about union-busting. Any work done in Alabama would be non-union, but the Boeing work done in Everett and in Kansas would be done by unionized workers.

    Bush & Co. never saw a union they didn’t want to squash, on general principle.

  17. 23

    rhp6033 spews:

    The only way the award to Northrup/EADS makes sense is if you decide that the Air Force, despite their announcements previously as to their desired characteristics for the airplane, finally decided that they needed a bigger plane. The Airbus model offered by Northrup/EADS is bigger than the Boeing 767 model.

    On bright spot: Boeing might decide to close down the 767 line entirely. Currently it is only being used to make 767-F (freighters). Boeing can convert that line to a 787 line, and turn out a lot more aircraft to take advantage of the market right now. This year orders for the 787 are expected to be relatively few, because the order books are full and delivery dates are backed up to about 2015. If Boeing could turn more out earlier, it might help them. But this would require their suppliers to be able to meet any increased demand, and I don’t think they have enough autoclav space to make the carbon-fibre fusalage sections any faster than they are currently achieving.

  18. 24

    The Big Gipper spews:

    Why is anyone surprised?

    The Bush regime is now in the hands of a cabal of liberals … these folks have no more interest in America than they do in China, mexico, or Cuba. This would NEVER have been alowed under Rummy.

    Look at 1600 Penn. The only conservative left is the VEEP and he is now surrounded by a cordon sanitaire.

    Here is the knside scoop. Barack Obama is in the hands of these neolibs as ARE Condt Rice and the SOD. These epople or their agents are reparing the way for Obama to take over the White HOuse. This way, as usual , dumbass Bush will get the blame for this stupidity.

  19. 25

    Blue John spews:

    I just heard an interesting comment. It’s OK when Boeing outsources union work to other countries, but not OK when the military outsources to other countries.

  20. 26

    I-Burn spews:

    @22 Not specifically addressing the Boeing situation, but just from a political standpoint, why would the Republicans be interested in helping any union? Aren’t most, if not all, unions heavy Democratic Party contributors?

  21. 27

    rhp6033 spews:

    In the meantime, the DJIA lost another 315 points today. I’d like to say we are bumping along the bottom of a rescession, and we have nowhere to go but up. But it could, indeed, get worse.

  22. 28

    ArtFart spews:

    Funny thing…we don’t seem to hear as much of that “freedom fries” rhetoric since Sarkozky took office.

  23. 30

    ArtFart spews:

    27 The DJIA closed today at 12,266.39.

    Hold onto your stomaches, folks. It’s still a long, long way to the bottom.

  24. 31

    rhp6033 spews:

    BJ @ 25: The real problem is visibility. It gives the French something to use to exert pressure on us if they disagree with our foreign policy. Just the same way we will cut off arms shipments to foreign governments when they do something we don’t agree with, the French government can do the same to us. All they have to do is impose an “embargo” on airborne tanker deliveries to the U.S. until we give in to their demands. If we are doing something which requires use of those tankers – like using them to refuel B-2 bombers flying missions from the U.S. to bomb another country – the French could decide that “We don’t want them to be using military equipment we sell them to do that…” Kind of like when we cut off oil and scrap metal sales to the Japanese in early 1941, in an attempt to get them to stop their campaign in China.

    Whether it has any pressure on us will depend, in part, on how much the U.S. Air Force needs those tankers at any given point in time.

    If Boeing has the contract, we would be a lot less likely to be subject to such influence. The Italian government will be less likely to think that they can put pressure on U.S. foreign policy by ordering the embargo of pieces of the aircraft, rather than whole fuselages.

  25. 32

    Blue John spews:

    @30 Think the coming crash will reach the level of Argentina?
    @26 Another good point. More Union Punishing.
    I cannot wait to see if having Obama in the White house will change anything.

  26. 33

    rhp6033 spews:

    Five more days like today, and the DJIA will have lost value over the for years of the Bush administration. As it is, the average 3.9% annual rate is below inflation levels.

  27. 34

    GBS spews:

    @ 33:

    Interesting point. Would any of the trolls care to calculate the average annual DJIA increase during the Clinton admin?

    Please. Oh, please do.

  28. 35

    PuddyPrick, The Fact Finding Prognosticator... spews:

    Where was that horsepower of Maria CanThinkWell or Patty Slippery Sneakers Murray?

    How about all those leftenant congresspeople? Wow in the donkey led congress you mean

    Norm Dicks
    Jim McDermott
    Adam Smith
    Brian Baird
    Jay Inslee

    had no pull. Thanks Nancy Pelosi. Thanks Harry Reid.

  29. 36

    Blue John spews:

    Well, I’m hoping our senators and representatives will have some influence on the contract’s review.
    Remember the uproar over the Dubia Port deal?

  30. 37

    abject funk spews:

    The first Boeing deal was scuttled because it was a boondoggle. Politics were involved, yes, but McCain was right to fight it, it was a long term lease instead of a purchase, and it was a huge waste of money.

    I am a lifelong Dem, I support Boeing, but it was a crooked deal. 2 people went to prison for it, as the Pentagon procurement officer was negotiating a job with Boeing while deciding to award the contract. It was crooked, it was illegal, and it is one of the few things McCain did right, for whatever reasons.

    As for this deal, well, it sucks we lost. Alabama won. The idea that we shouldn’t buy from foreign countries is silly, and the idea that Boeing is “entitled” to this is also silly given its previous scandals (not just the tanker, but also during the joint strike fighter and other overcharges that have damaged its rep).

    It is too bad, but someone had to lose.

  31. 38

    rhp6033 spews:

    35: Funny you should mention that. Actually, Air Force procurement rules specifically prohibit the Air Forces from using political considerations (at least within the U.S.) in it’s bid process.

    That doesn’t mean the politicians don’t try. But if it is found that any politicians – whether in the White House, Washington State, or Alabama – exerted any pressure on the Air Force, it would be grounds to reject the bid.

    Of course, the military always knows which side of the bread is buttered, and if the chairman of the armed services committee or the appropriations committee happens to be in the same district which will be impacted by a bid, he/she doesn’t really have to say anything to the military.

    Where Congress makes it’s enfluence felt is when it appropriates “earmarks” directing the military to purchase a specific item, who’s product characteristics happen to match exactly only one company. So even though it goes through a bid process, there is guaranteed to be only one successful bidder. Such as the appropriations for “a patrol boat of between 25-1/2 feet and 25-1/2 feet, with horsepower of at least 430, height of not more than xxxx, draft of between yyyy and zzzz, and of which is capable of……..

  32. 39

    Blue John spews:

    People are saying(tm) the specs were changed at the last moment, in a way that seemed to favor Airbus.

  33. 41

    PuddyPrick, The Fact Finding Prognosticator... spews:

    How can you get anything military when you have two anti-military peeps there?

  34. 44

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    Boeing would have probably built a better aircraft. Airbus? Hmmm…I don’t know about those guys. Who the heck are they, anyway?

  35. 45

    rhp6033 spews:

    37: I agree that the lease wasn’t a great deal. But it was what the White House instructed the Pentagon to do, in order to keep prices lower in the short term, and to put off the real cost far enough into the future that it could be blamed on somebody else – preferably a Democratic administration which happens to be in power at that tiem.

    The shady dealings with the Pentagon procurement officer, was done by Stonecypher’s people that he brought over with him from MD. They took the prime jobs because Stonecypher told the Board of Directors they had expertise in military contracts. Then when they got caught, the two Boeing guys were cast to the wolves, and so was the Boeing CEO – which brought Stonecypher back in charge, coming in on a “white horse” to “teach ethics” to all those “wayward Boeing people”.

    Nobody working at Boeing was really surprised when he got caught having an affair with a subordinate a couple of years later. They weren’t surprised he was doing it – they were convinced he had been screwing them all along, so why would this lady working in his office be any different? They were just surprised he was called on the carpet for it. In the past he had been able to slide through just about everything, including running two companies just about into the ground, then getting promoted as they get bought out just at the last minute (hey, remind you of any other fearless leader of late?)

  36. 46



  37. 47


    It even matters here near Spokane. Fairchild AFB was supposed to get some of those refueling tankers, which would have meant hudreds more personnel. Without those tankers, we’re shrinking at an alarming pace.

  38. 48

    GS spews:

    Oh this is a real riot, all the Democrats in this state, in full power I might add, with majorities in both the federal house and senate in washington, have no power at all to shape this decision towards Boeing.

    And Goldy believes it is all a Republican choice.


    Now that is a real belly wrenching laugh

  39. 49

    ArtFart spews:

    38 You forget that rules mean nothing in an administration whose chief executive refers to the rule of all rules (the Constitution) as a “goddamned piece of paper”, and that the Pentagon hierarchy is now populated with yes-men and suck-ups now that the professional senior officers have been forced out or resigned in disgust.

    I’m not saying whether I think the deck got stacked against Boeing or not. It’s a pretty dubious proposition considering BushCo’s apparent interest in keeping Reichert in the House. Nonetheless, all bets have been off for a long time regarding any contract awards being completely on the up-and-up.

  40. 50

    ArtFart spews:

    32 It’s going to take at least 20 years of responsible government to repair the damage Bush and the neocons have done to America’s social, economic and moral foundations in just seven years. The next person to sit in the Oval Office will spend most of his or her first term applying tourniquets rather than effecting any sort of cure. The first and foremost thing that needs to be done is to end the war in Iraq–that’s become the sea anchor that’s dragging the ship beneath the waves.

  41. 51

    GBS spews:

    PU @ 46 wrote:


    Spoken like a true conservative.

  42. 52

    klake spews:

    Gee, thanks Sen. McCain. Maybe some folks on the 767 assembly line will remember that next November as they ponder their future.
    Well Goldy lets congratulate the French in presenting us with a low cost bid and The Queen will be happy supporting the Government health care program in France. Now maybe the loons in Seattle will move over seas and work in France. Yes a new bunch of know-it-alls telling everybody how great they are and how bless we are with their present. Let’s understand the big picture, when Queen G. threatens to sue if we didn’t get the contract was probability why they lost the contract. Now with King County still stuffing the ballot boxes McCain knew he was wasting his time supporting the Clowns in this state. Now for pondering their future how will the Queen explain why she lost the contract to the French? Maybe she lost the art of kissing asses or did a better job at running jobs out of this state except government workers.

  43. 53

    correctnotright spews:

    Uhh – just to remind everyone – Boeing attempted originally to bribe their way to this contract. Maybe they deserve to lose this because the attempted corruption of the military (during a republican administration) was not a good idea – So bad morals and business practice may be what doomed this sale….not necessarily republican or democratic influence peddling.

    In general – our military should be buying from our own corporations…unless they are corrupt such as in this case.

  44. 54

    klake spews:

    Ryan says:
    It even matters here near Spokane. Fairchild AFB was supposed to get some of those refueling tankers, which would have meant hundreds more personnel. Without those tankers, we’re shrinking at an alarming pace.
    02/29/2008 at 4:02 pm

    Ryan the USAF is cutting its fleet by two-thirds in the next few years what makes you think they will keep Fairchild AFB open? Besides those French planes needs very large runways, the ability to land large loads, and expel large amounts of noise. With the reconstruction of the runways it would take the State 30 years to get the permits. Sorry when you have Socialist Democrats running the show everything gets out source. Remember when they are done there will be no middle class, lot of poor folks, and the upper class will move someplace else to their liking.

  45. 55

    ArtFart spews:

    54 So…these new tankers will be unable to operate in places where the KC135’s could? That’s a real advance in the state of the art.

  46. 56

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    The Busheviks have outsourced everything else they could get their hands on, so why wouldn’t they send Boeing jobs to France?

  47. 57

    Right Stuff spews:

    This issue is not a partisan issue. Boeing execs only have to look into the mirror to see who is to blame for losing this deal.

    I don’t like the fact that this region will not see the increased jobs ( this is not all the way done, there will be a protest process) but to blame McCain?
    If anything, I applaud someone saving all of us Billions on a corrupt deal no matter where the jobs go…..

    And Blame Reichert?………
    What happened to our “oh so influential” Senators?
    And Larsen is ON the House Armed Service Committee….

  48. 58

    ArtFart spews:

    To quote the bumper sticker the principal of Our Lady of the Lake School had on her car:

    “Won’t it be great when education is fully funded and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber?”

  49. 59

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    The tanker contract isn’t the only thing Washington lost today. The Seahawks also lost kicker Josh Brown.

  50. 60

    Right Stuff spews:

    Oh this is too funny

    circa 2003


    Here’s Patty taking credit for bringing home the tanker deal!!!!!!
    The money quote?
    ” I’m proud to be able to bring this deal home not only for our workers, but for our tanker crews who truly are the backbone of America’s air power capability and who deserve the best equipment.”

    Hey Patty, guess you get the blame now that the deal is gone!!!!!!!

    Everyone can thank Patty Murray.

  51. 61

    Richard Pope spews:

    I guess Representative Jo Bonner, Governor Bob Riley and all the other Republicans in Alabama will be celebrating tonight, while former Democratic Governor Don Siegelman continues to serve his seven year sentence in a Louisiana federal prison, for being framed and railroaded by Karl ove and the (in)Justice Department.

  52. 62

    Right Stuff spews:

    “Gee, thanks Sen. McCainMurray. Maybe some folks on the 767 assembly line will remember that next November as they ponder their future.”

    You said it Goldy!

  53. 63

    GS spews:


    That just tells it all, thanks again to all the Democratic leaders in this state for yet another great accomplishment.


    Maybe if some of their time wasn’t so busy on continued socail spending and fools like Clinton and her failed healthcare plans,

    We could have had a $40 Billion dollar deal here at home!

  54. 64

    schumeridiot spews:

    Goldy, what a partisan hack you are! Where were our esteemed Senators in all this? Where was Mr Defense (Dicks) in all this? Can’t blame McCain because the lease deal was a bad deal for the taxpayers. OOPS. I forgot, taxpayers are not important for progressives.

  55. 65

    rhp6033 spews:

    Let’s see what McCain does next. If he’s in Alabama, taking credit for scuttling the Boeing deal and bringing jobs home to Alabama, it’ll be pretty obvious (but foolish on his part).

    Of course, as I’ve written here before, Alabama isn’t going to get near the number of jobs they think they are going to get. Airbus is going to deliver a pretty much completed airplane to them. Sure, they will install the tanks and refueling booms and such, much like Boeing was planning to do in Wichita. But I’m expecting pressure from the French & German unions will end up making most of those jobs rather temporary at best – they will just keep enough there to argue that they are fulfilling their end of the bargain.

    About five years from now, expect to see news stories from Alabama about how the contract didn’t pan out anything like the communities there expected, and after the communiteis have paid out lot’s of money for infrastructure improvements in order to get Airbus located there, only a handful of workers are actually employed at relatively low wages (for the aerospace industry). They will be scrambling to try to get other work to make up for it, and Northrup/Airbus will be mentioned with a scoff and a spit everytime their name is uttered.

  56. 66

    Richard Pope spews:

    Isn’t the decision a political matter, in the final analysis? So the White House would rather help Republicans in Alabama, rather than Democrats here. Next year, the tables will be reversed, and future contracts may end up coming back to Washington.

  57. 67

    ArtFart spews:

    Actually, Alabama has a history of coughing up huge incentives for industries to set up shop there, between exemption from most taxes to pouring the state’s money into building the infrastructure to support their facilities.

    Meanwhile, ordinary folks foot the bill by paying a hefty state income tax on top of sales, property and the usual array of “sin” taxes.

  58. 70

    IAFF Fireman spews:

    This post was originated by the Cheap Labor Liberal Goldy who has admitted to driving a NISSAN (Non Union Labor) and has never paid into a labor organization before.

    From KOMO4

    “The EADS/Northrop Grumman team plans to perform its final assembly work in Mobile, Ala., although the underlying plane would mostly be built in Europe. And it would use General Electric engines built in North Carolina and Ohio. Northrop Grumman, which is based in Los Angeles, estimates a Northrop/EADS win would produce 2,000 new jobs in Mobile and support 25,000 jobs at suppliers nationwide.”

    Sounds an awful lot like the way Goldy Justifies driving a foreign made car… Since it’s partly built in America it’s just as good as buying an American/Union made auto. Now that Tax Season is here, why don’t you tell your audience how much money contributed for Union Dues in 2007. It should be printed on your W2. Thanks Goldy, your continued hypocrisy is much appreciated.

  59. 71

    Unkl Witz spews:

    “zip says:

    Our two senators sure have a lot of pull, don’t they?
    Can they be any more useless? ”

    Considering they have both pledged as super delegates to Hillary, this completes their descent into irrelevancy.

  60. 72



  61. 73

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @2 This is a liberal blog. For the version blaming this on your choice of [ ] Bill [ ] Hillary Clinton, you need to go to a wingnut blog.

  62. 74

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Well, let’s see. The Bush administration doesn’t give the contract to Boeing which would build the plane with union labor in a state that votes Democratic, but instead gives it to a country with a rightwing leader which will assemble the plane with non-union labor in a state that votes Republican — after altering the RFP (Request for Proposal) to make the plane’s requirements closely resemble the French plane’s design. And this is not politics?

  63. 75

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @71 Seems like the 8th CD’s incumbent congressman is pretty irrelevant, too. He sure didn’t deliver the goods this time.

  64. 76

    cmiklich spews:

    RR, et al.

    Actually, Boeing is a Chicago-based Company. Has been for a decade.

    So, who’s the U.S. Senator that didn’t deliver those jobs? That’d be the Senator from IL. That coffee-colored Mudlim guy: Senator Hussein Obama. Why anybody in Evt would vote for him is nuts, now.

    Gotta be honest and put the blame where it lies. BA is Chicago-based and he’s their Senator. Reichert doesn’t have Everett, BTW. That’d be “Dick” Larsen. The “D” in Dick stands for Democrat. MOF, BA management is extreeeeeeeemely left of center in all their gay-loving, diversity. And, their plane (767) is an antique POS. So, it looks like the D for Democrats (or Dumbshits, take yer pick) pulled this boner all by themselves.

  65. 77


    Boeing workers should blame Boeing management for this one, not McCain. Boeing management screwed themselves on this one by rigging the original contract illegally. If it hadn’t been for Druyun’s craptacular actions, we’d be in a totally different position with regard to the contract.

  66. 78

    drool spews:

    This was Boeing’s contract to lose. If they felt a bigger plane was needed, Boeing could have offered the 777. They stuck with a 767 vairant.

    Those of you yackcing about the airbus requiring a bigger feild should look at performance capability. The A330 has never had an issue with performance vs a 767…..the larger 767s have actually had performance downfalls vs the 767. It being bigger will actually give it the capability of operating farther fromt he fight.

    The A330 accepts standard cargo containers downstairs (LD3). The 767 does not.

    They offered the 767 and lost. Guess what? The A330 was kicking the 767’s ass in the market anyway. That is why Boeing came up with the 787.

    If Alabama offered up a bunch of incentives that made the Airbus package cheaper, so be it.

    By the way, the contract for the next generation of executive helicopters for the president went to a European design.

    McCain travels in an Airbus.

  67. 79

    ewp spews:

    I guess Boeing moving its HQ to Chicago to be in the district of then house speaker Hastert didn’t pay off too well did it.

  68. 80

    Daddy Love spews:

    I am sure there was some political wheeling and dealing insofar as WA/KS versus AL/LA, but it’s not as if there weren’t other issues in play. I don’t know this world well, but a co-worker of mine who follows such things closely wrote me the following prior to the announcement:

    My guess is that Airbus will win. When buying a air refueling tanker, it seems to me that fuel capacity is probably your biggest concern. Comparing fuel capacity of what we use now (KC-135), and what Boeing and Airbus are offering:
    KC-135 – 200,000 pounds of fuel
    KC-767 – 202,000 pounds of fuel
    KC-30 – 250,000 pounds of fuel

    Northrup says that the Air Force will require 20% fewer planes to meet their need if they use the KC-30 over the KC-767.

    Hmmmm, perhaps this saves money for all of us?

  69. 81

    James spews:

    As for this deal, well, it sucks we lost. Alabama won. The idea that we shouldn’t buy from foreign countries is silly, and the idea that Boeing is “entitled” to this is also silly given its previous scandals (not just the tanker, but also during the joint strike fighter and other overcharges that have damaged its rep).
    And it is useful to remind ourselves that Boeing regularly outsources major components of airplane construction overseas. The Dreamliner is a prime example. This is strictly a business decision, but Boeing will have a tough time using the argument the Air Force decision sends jobs overseas I don’t recall Patti Murray raising about the Dreamliner, incidentally.

    The Air Force went with what they determined was the best product, which is not much different than what Boeing does in the commercial sector when it sends construction abroad.

    Perhaps Mr. Obama and Ms. Clinton will have something to say, since both have made a great deal of late regarding American jobs going overseas.

    My sympathies are with the workers, who are buffeted by these decisions.

  70. 82

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Goldy once again hints at some vast right wing conspiracy that denied Boeing the contract as payback for the HorsesAss Blog.
    Goldy, your naivitee is exceeded only by your ego.
    Grow up.

  71. 83


    It’s worth noting that when Sarkozy got elected in France, he made Airbus top priority in France’s national industrial policy to outdo Boeing. Virtually all republicans, especially readers of Sound Politics lamented Sarkozy’s victory as a victory of their own. It might be interesting in retrospect to ask these same people: why do you hate Boeing workers so much?

  72. 85

    I-Burn spews:

    @83 How could Republicans *lament* Sarkozy’s victory as “a victory of their own”?

    1 : to express sorrow, mourning, or regret for often demonstratively : mourn
    2 : to regret strongly

    I think you actually meant *celebrated* Sarkozy’s victory, but I certainly don’t want to make any kind of assumption – since not being a dim myself, I’d hate to be accused to impugning dims in general, or anything…

  73. 86

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Boeing was outworked on this.
    That is the bottom-line.
    I suspect they felt confident with Norm Dicks and the other Dem state legislators pulling for them that they didn’t have to sharpen their pencils and invest in this bid.
    For shame.

    But blame Bush & the R’s without any evidence whatsoever if it makes you feel better LEFTIST PINHEADED KLOWNS!

  74. 88

    Mr. Rcguy spews:

    Or you know it could just be Boeing execs and govt employees negotiating jobs in lieu of contracts. Or that the Airbus is bigger and can carry more.

    Don’t get me wrong, it is stupid to “outsource” our country’s safety regardless of the fact that Boeing regularly outsources some production. They are getting bit in the ass for that now. Parts coming in from over seas that aren’t to spec and having to re-engineer here in the states (what are you going to do? Ship a wing back overseas to fix a defect or design flaw? bahhh). Having to constantly push back delivery dates. Off shoring the production of a shirt or a toy is one thing. Off shoring a complicated system is entirely different and is not as full of cost savings as people think. Boeing, MS, Dell, others. MS and Dell have both brought entire divisions back from India, Ireland, Japan because the logistics and lack of quality negated any savings.

  75. 89

    mark spews:

    Absolutely beautiful. Murray and Cantwell. This lies
    squarely on democrat shoulders. All that forced union
    contribution and this is what they get. HA HA HA HA HA HA

  76. 91


    OK ,,,

    so next time we can buy our subs from Chinkasub and our new missiles form AeroIran?

    Just member folksies here, yall ma be lefties but this here Airbus is product of socialism? Didn’t Stalin say something abut selling us the roper to hang ourselfes wirh?

  77. 93

    correctnotright spews:

    @93: boeing got hammered in this deal because they were corrupt – if they didn’t sink to trying to buy off the airforce – they would not have lost this deal.

    corruption and ineptness – Boeing followed the republican example.