The Government Accountability Office has granted Boeing’s challenge of a lucrative refueling tanker contract, citing numerous errors by the Air Force.
Officially challenging the contract was widely considered to be a risky move on Boeing’s part, as the GAO is not known for lightly granting challenges, and Boeing risked its relationship with military officials. But the GAO decision now gives more ammunition to members of Congress seeking to overturn the $40 billion contract that largely went Europe’s Airbus.
I guess John McCain has some further explaining to do to WA voters.
LMAO!! Good one!
Ok Surreal Mark let’s see you spin John Flip-Flop McSame’s shilling for France.
http://brokenlives.info/
Boeing got some unexpected help with the dismissal of the Air Force top officers recently, for what appears to be unrelated issues. Gates has had issues with the Air Force since his appointment – I’d love to hear both sides of that debate. But for now, it gives an easy out for anybody who wants Boeing to get another crack at the contract – they can blame the previous commanders for problems with the bidding process, and call for a “do-over”.
This is good news for Boeing – today’s Seattle Times article mentioned that the 35 Billion-dollar contract might bring in another 100 billion in related service contracts. And I don’t know if that includes spare parts purchases, which in the aircraft industry is close to being a license to print money. If Boeing does eventually get the contract, it means that the per-unit cost of the aircraft will go down, and this makes Boeing more competitive to provide similar aircraft to other countries (I think Japan is the only one buying the Boeing model right now, but it is very different from the one proposed for the U.S. Air Force).
Still, if there is a re-bid, Boeing may well be another couple of years away from actually building any airplanes. Northrup/AEDS will certainly protest this GAO ruling, as well as any award to Boeing upon a re-bid. So this contract, which was supposed to help Boeing when it really needed it post 9/11, now puts Boeing in a bit of a quandry. There really aren’t any customers ordering the passenger version of the 767 now, as they are all ordering 787’s. (According to rumour, ANA is getting a couple of 767’s at heavily discounted prices in lieu of late delivery penalties). Some customers are taking the new freighter versions. But the 767 line is operating about as slow as it can right now, short of closing down completely.
So what is Boeing supposed to do with the 767 line in Everett, while it is waiting to find out if it will eventually get the contract? It is incredibly expensive & difficult to close down a line for several months or years, to re-open it later. There has been talk that if the GAO report was against Boeing, Boeing would discontinue the protest so it could convert the 767 line over to 787 production. But as it stands now, Boeing is still on “standby”.
The only thing John McCain did was challenge a corrupt process, for which officials from both Boeing and the federal government went to jail. David, apparently a corrupt process doesn’t bother you as long as Boeing prevails.
The Air Force, not John McCain, made the decison to award the contract to Northrup Grummnan and EADS.
David, don’t let facts or history or your own honesty and integrity get in the way of your partisanship.
The only thing John McCain did was challenge a corrupt process
Yeah, ummmmm, sure..
http://www.iht.com/articles/20...../lobby.php
@5
McCain is neutral, and your article doesn’t contradict that point.
http://article.nationalreview......YzMGVkNjQ=
Didn’t McBush charter an Airbus plane for his primary campaign?
I’m suuuuuuuuure there were no lobbyist favors being done by the good Frenchmen at Airbus was there while fucking over American workers.
The lousy, piece of shit!
Luigi @ 6: I don’t blame McCain for the problems with the original deal. I do blame the Bush Administration in part, because their insistence that the cost of the project get pushed far into the future dictated Boeing’s lease-finanicing proposal, which made the deal so shaky in the first place. So McCain might have been “process-oriented” then, rather than “result oriented”.
But his activities with respect to the second bid was quite different. When the AEDS/Northrup entry couldn’t compete based upon the original bid specs, it was McCain who called the Air Force and – after bidding was well undeway – got the Air Force to change the specs to make sure the Airbus bid was competative. This has already been proven by McCain’s e-mail trail. What we don’t know yet is the extent of further contact by McCain.
I don’t know what McCain has against Boeing, he’s had a bee in his bonnet against them for as long as he’s been in the Senate. Maybe he just figures Boeing is from Washington, and Washington tends to vote Democratic, so Boeing must be punished, and anybody promising to do final assembly (AEDS/Northrup) in reliably-Republican Alabama must be rewarded?
Speaking of McCain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBALqvp08Vk
Let’s not forget how the bidding characteristics of the tanker deal changed in the midst of the process. The specs published at the time of bidding wanted a size of plane comparable to the Boeing 767 or Airbus equivilent. Boeing double-checked with the Air Force to confirm, they said they didn’t want a bigger plane because that would require them to fly with excess capacity (wasting fuel) most of the time, as well as upgrade runways at air force bases around the world to handle the wear and tear caused by heavier (larger) planes.
If the Air Force had said they wanted a bigger plane, the Boeing could have submitted a bid based upon any one of several versions of the 777.
But instead, Boeing submits the 767 entry, and Airbus submits the entry for the larger airplane. McCain intervenes to change the bid requirements to expand the size so that the Arirbus entry isn’t automatically disqualfied as non-conforming. He also gets the Air Force to drop a requirement that each bidder disclose, and the Air Force consider, the impact of trade subsidy cases being brought against it. He also insisted that the Air Force be specifically prohibited from considering whether the origin of manufacture of the aircraft or it’s major companants might affect (a) jobs in the U.S.; (b) the ability to deliver or provide support for aircraft in times of foreign policy conflicts between the countries, or (c) the impact upon the defense industry manufacturing base within the U.S.
Then, when the contract was awarded, Airbus was given extra credit for having provided the larger airplane – the size of plane which Boeing was actively discouraged from using when it submitted it’s bid.
McCain made no similar efforts to make sure Boeing’s entry remained competative.
All in all, McCain doesn’t sound too neutral to me.
Slightly off-topic perhaps, but Reuters is reporting that Carly Fiorina has assumed a prominent role in the McCain campaign.
Since she is easily the most despised person in high tech, this certainly isn’t going to garner McCain any support among the cubicle dwellers in Silicon Gulch (and a lot of other places) any more than the tanker deal is making him any friends among US aerospace workers.
Yep! John McCain has proven to be Cantankerous!!
@12
Fiorina would be a horrendous pick for McCain’s VP. Charlie Crist is probably the only pick who’d be more of a disaster for McCain.
BUT Carly Fiorina
might be ab awesome VEEP candy-date for MCain.
In doubt, in nay case, that he is expecting lotsa votes form Boeing employees in WA state or Illinois.
As for Carly Fiorina being “despised” I ‘spect this isa gender issue. The GLOP )(Go Ladies Old Party) has more than enough
…ctd ,,
spinnery to make her a post Hillary heroine of the great battle to crack the glass parasol.
15 The only “gender issue” is that Carly’s tenure at Hewlett-Packard was proof positive that women can commit rape.
When it was announced that she was leaving, cheering broke out at HP facilities around the world.
I guess McCain hopes to syphon off the disenchanted Hillary votes, if he goes with Fiorina as V.P. But I don’t know how much good that will do him.
Fiorina has never been a mother herself (Wikiepdia says she “helped” raise her husband’s daughters, but doesn’t say if he had custody or not). If her husband didn’t have custody, that means she never probably had to leave an important meeting to pick up her child at school with a fever, arrange to get off early every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday afternoons to take her child to soccer practice, deal with the daughter’s first periods and splits with boyfriends on the same night when she is supposed to be at an important business dinner, and still manage to compete with “the guys” for job assignments and promotions.
Her education was in liberal arts and later graduate work in buseinss/marketing, which probably didn’t help at H.P. where technical credentials have always been rated highest. It appears her meteoric rise at AT&T (from management trainee to Vice-President in 15 years) was probably significantly assisted by her relationship and marriage to her husband, an AT&T executive (married five years into her career there – a second marriage for both).
Sure, she could have gotten promoted so highly on her own merits, but in the absence of some incredible information regarding her phenominal workplace performance, I don’t see any other explanation which significantly seperates her with the thousands of other management trainees hired that same year, who were still toiling in middle-management after fifteen years.
I’m wondering – how much will the hard-working women who have spent their working lives fighting against the “glass ceiling” identify with her? Will they see her as the embodyment of their dreams, or will they see her as just the type of unfair competition they’ve always had to contend with – an ambitious woman who marries the big boss, isn’t significantly encumbered with child-raising daily duties of her own, has important social and business connections but little technical expertise, but is praised for rising so fast in the ranks while leaving the others behind, and held up as an example of what women can accomplish if they really try???? From what I’ve seen, that’s not necessarily the type of resume which working women will want to support.
Besides, for both her and Hillary, being a vice-presidential nominee isn’t a first – Geraldine Ferraro already did that (even though she wasn’t elected). I think in order to “capture” the working-women vote merely by nominating a woman as the vice-presidential candidate, either party would have to make it clear that they would be almost an equal partner in the Presidency. Being relegated to traditional duties of attending state funerals in between presiding over the Senate will not be enough for them to see their nomination as a significant step.
I’ve made much of her marriage to her husband, an AT&T Executive, but I should qualify that to say that virtually every executive of a large company gets there primarily becuase they have a mentor or other influential connections – whether they be male or female. Some happen to also be very qualified, others merely “connected” (George W. Bush comes to mind). Lots of other very qualified workers get passed by in the process. It’s pretty much the way things work in this world. Although those who happen to rise to the top often assume they are the the smartest and hardest-working of the group, a few acknowledge it is mere luck, or an accident of birth, which puts them in that position.
Re: Fiorina.
I thought a woman had to start at city council or something before qualifying for being a heartbeat away from the highest office in the land?
But all I know is just the right wing bullshit I read here.
I suspect you utterly misjudge the nature of feminism, esp old school feminism.
Did you know that the mjority of female presidents of Universities are single women? The incidince of lesbianims in the first generation of female e=leaders is also very high. As for HRC, with al,l due respect to Chelsea any image of Hillary as a tradition sitcom Mom ain’t reality.
The real problems for working (i.e. almost all) women today have no more to do with the glass ceiling than Barack Obama has to do with some third generation single parented black kid serving time for crack cocaine. What Barack and Hillary offer t most women and most AA is just image.
So, I ‘spect Carly is easily painted as a saitly victim of male prejudice AND a greatly knowledgeable American Business-person.
Hiw many vites will that bring? How many poor Kansans voited for GWB because he was “like us?” As an atheist and a Jew I never did relich the thought of having a beer with GW … but he obvioulsy manged to convince a LOT of working whites that he was one of them.
In the same manner Hiorini may have the ability to convince some of the vagina-enabled that she is the gal they would like to be.
None of this is really going to matter in the long run if Obama and the Dems take full control. They’re planning to nationalize everything anyway.
And the opening salvo:
@15, @21
Steve, Fiorina was widely regarded as incompetent within the company she ran. Maybe it was a chauvinistic perception within a male-dominated industry, but it was definitely there. But that’s not even the biggest reason she’s a bad pick. She’s a bad pick because she reinforces one of the worst frames possible for the GOP, that they are simply an extension of corporate interests (see: McGavick, Mike).
@5
Hehehe…. Go YLB!
Do we really need these tankers in the first place?
@22 And why shouldn’t we nationalize the oil industry? All the more reason to do so if it causes your head to explode.
The French airplane did appear to me a better design, but if flaws in the bidding process prevented Boeing from being able to offer the Air Force what it wanted, it’s in our nation’s best interest to give Boeing a chance to come up with what the Air Force wants.
Busted!! One of Mark’s Gooper heroes:
Former Maleng aide pleads guilty in sex-sting case
By Natalie Singer
Seattle Times staff reporter
The former financial director of the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office pleaded guilty Tuesday to trying to arrange sex and having sexual chats online with someone whom he believed to be two teenage girls.
Larry Corrigan could face a standard sentence of up to 2 ½ years in prison for one count of second-degree attempted child molestation and one count of communicating with a minor for immoral purposes. He is scheduled to be sentenced May 4 and will have to register as a sex offender upon his release.
After entering his plea, Corrigan was handcuffed by King County Jail guards and taken into custody. His attorney, John Wolfe, said Corrigan decided to plead guilty to move on with his life.
“He made a mistake. He needs to move through this and come out the other side,” Wolfe said.
But Corrigan, who also has been accused of embezzling tens of thousands of dollars by King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng’s campaign committee, could soon face additional criminal charges.
Late last year, just after Corrigan was arrested on the attempted molestation charge, the committee announced that Corrigan, who handled bookkeeping duties, had admitted to misappropriating more than $70,000 from campaign funds between May 2004 and early 2005.
Maybe bringing in Fiorina is supposed to herald a continuation of the old BushCo mantra of “running government like a business”. Let’s see…concerning her past record, what things might that lead to?
Perhaps spinning off California, followed by a hostile takeover of India?
It’s also worth noting that by the time the HP board fired her, the company’s value was just about half what it was before she became CEO, even counting the purchase of Compaq. Seems not unlike what’s happened to America during Bush/Cheney’s watch.
You know, once conservatives figure out that McCain’s going to lose to Obama whether they vote for him or not, a lot of them will just say “fuck it” and Obama may have a landslide on his hands.
27 RR
If ny “flaws in the bidding process” you mean “John McCain,” I’m with you.
@18: rhp, just go ahead and say it: It looks like Carly fucked her way to the top.
Corrigan, a typical Republican – he is both a perv and a thief – is just the kind of person the Real Mark admires.
@32 “It looks like Carly fucked her way to the top.”
Of course. She’s a Republican woman.
How about we not build any new tankers, close our bases in Okinawa and Greenland (where they’re not wanted or needed anyway) and apply the savings to the national debit.
While were at it we could close a couple hundred of the golf courses that the department of defense owns. There are plenty of golf courses in Pierce County, we don’t need one at Fort Lewis.
T @ 32: Gee, I was trying really, really, hard not to say that.
They’re planning to nationalize everything anyway.
Bullshit. There’s no need. A windfall profits tax should be enough incentive for the oil companies to spend their money expanding production instead of grossly enriching executives and shareholders.
Outer continental shelf, ANWR – just deflection. Oil companies are sitting on piles of leases they haven’t bothered with. And why should they? What they’re doing right now is working fantastically for them.
Hmm, selling off California. I guess that’s one way the Republicans can win an election. Subtracting California’s electoral votes entirely would create quite a vacume. Of course, while they are at it, they might as well sell of Oregon and Washington as well.
You know those “perspective” maps they sell in tourist shops, which show a particular city and everything else in the unrecognizable distance, with humerous labels? I imagine the Republican idea of an “ideal” map of the U.S. would ignore everything west of the Rockies/Cascade ranges, and drop off all major cities on top of that.
Roadkill @ 27
I… uggghhh… would say… that… I agree with you there. ONLY there.
YLB @ 37
You DO realize that 100 million people in this country can directly or indirectly be called “shareholders,” right? Every time you decide to punish (big, bad) “corporations and shareholders,” you’re hurting people who may have less than you do – either their personal investments or those of their pensions, etc.
But what do you care? If it LOOKS like you’re hurting the “rich fat cats,” who cares what the actual result is, right?
The Democratic Party: Perception over principle
Comrade Steve @ 26
I wouldn’t be so worried if I though you were just feebly trying to slam me or make some joke.
@41 Are you try to articulate a thought? Try again, please.
35: I’m not going to argue about some extensive cut-backs in bases in areas where they are causing political problems (especially Okinawa & S. Korea). But if we do so, that’s an argument for MORE tankers, not less – our aircraft would have to fly further w/ aerial re-fueling, rather than stop at those bases.
And the airframes of the KC135’s are getting pretty old. They can last quite a long time with proper maintenance, but by the time you get up to enough cycles (liftoff & landing), and the corresponding stresses associated with those maneuvers and pressurization & depressurization, then you have the potential for some catastrophic airframe failures due to metal fatigue. Remember the 737 in Hawaii a few years back, where the top of the cabin peeled back in flight? Photos of Flight 243
40 – Calm down Surreal. Yeah a lot of people own stock directly or indirectly. No one’s for punishing the little guy or even against the rich guy getting a little bit richer just NOT A WHOLE LOT RICHER AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYONE ELSE.
If the oil companies behave like they’re in the oil business instead of the oil shortage business then they’ve got nothing to worry about.
Actually the Dems have the right idea – they want them to invest their profits in clean, renewable energy. The Dems want them to be in the ENERGY business minus the externalities of the old business.
The Republican Party: for the richest, always. The rest can eat cake.
C.indy
U.nbelievably
N.utty
T.ramp
Hey, I’m just repeating a McCain talking point.
40 Right…if you lay off “employees” to benefit “shareholders”, what does it mean when they’re the same people? This issue was brought into particular focus by companies like Enron that rather strongly arm-twisted their employees into putting their 401K dollars into the employer’s own shares.
When things go to hell, both parties get screwed, but the little guy gets in multiple orifices. Case in point: Ms Fiorina, after she not only put thousands out of work but sacrificed profit and goodwill and put her company’s stock in the tank, walked away with a $21 million severance. Similarly, it’s been in the news lately how much money some bank CEO’s have been making while their institutions circle the drain.
For those on the top of the food chain, a different set of rules seem to apply from what we mere mortals must contend with. I wish I could get paid better and better the more I fucked up.
Does this mean Airbus is going to take away McCain’s Airbus. Or as those of McCain’s generation call them, his “flying machine”.
New Poll: Obama Leads in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida
A Quinnipiac poll released today shows Obama leads McCain in Pennsylvania by 52%-40%, in Ohio by 48%-42%, and in Florida by 47%-43%.
The numbers are significant because this is the first post-primary-campaign poll and it shows Obama making large gains among two key groups: Women, and Hillary supporters who previously said they would vote for McCain if their candidate didn’t win the nomination.
(Source: Newsweek)
@43
Good point! Thanks.
But, the “job” that we are currently “doing” with those bases and tankers is being the worlds last remaining imperial power. We may need some new tankers, but unless we want to continue being an imperial power I doubt we need more tankers than we currently have.
I vote we end the empire.
Republican campaign button (with black background!):
http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6411
“If Obama is President…will we still call it the White House?”
And Republicans aren’t racists?? Yeah, sure. Whatever.
@37 I would not support a windfall profits tax that doesn’t exempt oil company profits reinvested in E & P.
50 – Good catch. Nice thing to show PuddyIdiot after one of his “racist donk” rants.
37 – Exactly
The U.S. currently produces 5.1 million barrels of oil per day. The widespread adoption of hybrid, fuel cell, and electric cars by American drivers would have the same effect as adding another 2.5 million bpd of domestic production.
Conservation has always been the cheapest and cleanest energy source, but Republicans consistently opposed conservation (e.g., raising the CAFE standard), and it is Republicans who buy gas guzzlers and brag about how much fuel they burn.
If you want driving to remain affordable, you must support a rational energy policy; and if you want a rational energy policy, you can’t vote for Republicans.
@49 U.S. military hegemony isn’t necessarily a bad thing IF we use that power to protect peace and freedom, and not for our own aggrandizement. A weaker U.S. might tempt local and regional tyrants to enslave their neighbors, commit genocides, and start wars. It goes without saying that I don’t trust our homegrown nationalists and xenophobes with either our foreign policy or command of our military. In Republican hands, military power is a bad thing.
YLB @ 53 “37 – Exactly”
Man, you’re really used to that Liberal Echo Chamber, aren’t you?
You know that you’re agreeing with YOUR OWN POST @ 37, right?
56 – Let’s just say I prefer whatever you call it to whatever you drag in here.
scuse’ me, I meant 51.
@55
You’re a day late and a dollar short Rog, they’re already doing just that and we’re helping them do it.
@55, 58
Maybe I’m being a bit selfish. You see I bike around a lot, don’t consume much and grow a big garden. The end of American imperialism would have very little impact on me.
Rog,
You should check out Chalmers Johnson’s books and the American Empire Project.
If you think Boeing should not get that contract, you are clearly unpatriotic at best, and probably hate America in secret.
Why does McCain hate America?
After all, they “swift boated” Kerry.
It is time to “Boeing” McCain, by highlighting his “French Connection” to Airbus.
Why does John McCain love France, and hate America?
busdrivermike @ 61,62 & oozing elsewhere…
Wow. Ya know, most people might think that your nick means you’re a bus driver named Mike. That would be wrong.
Instead, you simply operate LIKE a bus driver’s mike (“microphone,” for those slow on the uptake): you take the words spoken into you by MorOn.org and you amplify and repeat them to the world around you.
Why does the the Real Mark collude with French loving politicians who want us to buy inferior French tanker airplanes?
Why does the Real Mark hate America?
@63: WTF? “Bus driver’s mike”?
Weak. That is one lame jibe. Pathetic to see you drunk this early in the AM.
Hmm, today’s papers include McCain’s comments on the GAO overturning the award of the tanker contract to Northrup/AEDS (Airbus). McCain said the GAO’s report that the Air Force bidding process was flawed and should be re-done, was
Boeing gets major boost in Air Force tanker battle (Everett Herald, June 19, 2008).
“Unfortunate”???? He doesn’t say that it was unfortunate that the bidding process was flawed, he said the GAO ruling was unfortunate. You would think that if it was the American taxpayer (and the American military) you were primarily concerned with, then you would welcome any attempt to make sure the bids resulted in the best airplane at the best overall cost. But that’s not what he is saying.
I guess the GAO ruling WAS unfortunate, if you liked the original outcome of the bidding process and didn’t want it to change, regardless of flaws in the evaluation process. When McCain said that “I hope that this time they will get it right”, I suspect McCain is sending a message to the Air Force that they needed to make sure they needed a better paper trail to cover their decision.
In all fairness, I honestly don’t know whether the Boeing or Airbus entry is the best fit for the Air Force. That’s certainly a valid question which someone with more information than I have available can decide.
The process does need to be fair, though, and there is every indication that this process was interefered with by political influence which changed the bidding requirements and the evaluation process AFTER the bids were submitted, in favor of the Airbus proposal. A fair bidding process is important not only in fairness to the considerable effort made by both bidders, but also because it is in the national interest to have both bidders competing head-to-head on the same basis, rather than one of them working against a stacked deck.
In addition, I also think that it is fair to consider how much of the aircraft will be made in the U.S. vs. overseas, given that other nations can put the screws to the U.S. by holding up shipments of parts if they are involved in a diplomatic dispute with us (we do it all the time – placing an “embargo” on “arms shipments”).
Also, in evaluating cost I think it is fair to evaluate how much of the taxpayer money being spent on the program is exiting our economy to other nations, as opposed to remaining in this country to support our jobs, industry, and to pay taxes here. I have concerns that the Airbus proposal to conduct final assembly in Mobile is mostly a bidding and political strategy. Since no part of the contract REQUIRES the airplane to be built in Mobile, I suspect that “final assembly of major componants” will shortly get shifted back to Toulousse (France), and the airframe will be flown to Mobile only for for some final modifications (much as Boeing had planned to fly the 767 to Wichita for final modification into a tanker).
I also think it is appropriate to consider how much of our industrial base we want to continue to lose, and the accompanying technological and manufacturing expertise which the U.S. will lose in the process. I’ve was concerned about the loss of heavy manufacturing in the U.S. during the 1980’s (steel, etc.), but the flight of almost all manufacturing overseas (other than aerospace) in the past decade has been alarming.
Finally, the degree in which the bidders receive governmental subsidies, and whether or not those subsidies are legal or not, is important. It could impact the ability of the bidder to perform, if suddenly a significant part of their financial base is pulled out from under them by a court decision (the U.S. has a challenge to Airbus subsidies pending in the World Court, and France has also claimed that U.S. defense contracts to Boeing offer a similar subsidy.
But John McCain doesn’t agree. He thinks none of that should matter, as long as Airbus gets the contract. You have to wonder why, if iu’s the “American taxpayer” he is so concerned about.
The French plane was bigger – but we would have to spend how much more money building bigger runways for it?
In the end – the process was very flawed – and while boeing deserves punishment for trying to bribe the process in the past – each new bid should be fair and this was clearly NOT fair. McCain certainly tried to influence the process for his airbus lobbyist buddies.