As we await the GAO's decision this week on Boeing's challengeto Northrop Grumman's tanker win, Randy H. writes:
"What's missing from your analysis is the fact that Boeing got arrogant and NGC came in and took that contract away. Northrop Grumman was going to pull out of the competition because the RFP (request for proposals) read like the award was signed sealed and delivered to Boeing. The government updated the RFP to level the playing field, but according to Boeing's spin machine, it 'favored' Northrop Grumman. Well, Duh! If I were Boeing execs I wouldn't want the RFP leveled either...Boeing's arrogance lost that contract...I contend the award will stick."
Geoff M. takes issue with my reference to the current aging tankers as "buckets of bolts":
"...the KC-135 aircraft has served honorably and will likely to continue to serve honorably even if this deal goes through. There aren't enough new tankers to go around. Second, the current KC-135 is hardly a 'flying bucket of bolts.' It has been modernized with new engines, new cockpit, new wiring, significant structural mods, etc. etc. which make it newer in many ways than brand new aircraft rolling off the production line...the men and woman who fly and maintain these aircraft don't typically view them as 'buckets of bolts.' These men and women take pride in their aircraft and you are disrespecting them by disrespecting one of the best maintained aircraft in the world."
Note from Jane: my apologies to those whom I've offended.
On the Air Force's math problem in figuring out which tanker is cheaper--followed by the discovery of a math error in the report on the math error, Kevin S. writes:
"So - what's $34M when it's the DOD? Having seen my own personal share of DOD contracting - it's all a bunch of 'Junior High School'-acting vendors being managed by competency-challenged bureaucrats... Can't imagine it is any different anywhere else…"
On the legal brothel in Nevada--the Bunny Ranch--offering double the services for customers using their stimulus package checks, Jeff J. writes:
"Kudos on courage to post BunnyRanch news (disclaimer: never been there...good to see Rita Cosby is busy). We're grownups, and married men would NEVER be cruel to their beautiful wives by visiting those places, right? If a man is separated but not divorced, does he still get the $1,200? Also, thanks for buffet-eating pigs video (in Vegas)...Do the pigs play keno during dinner? It's great to recycle and avoid high corn prices. With crop / crappy weather issues, corn will be the next Oil…and soybeans will be the next Gas (I couldn't resist). I've learned new things from your farm reports, like the table scraps and the 6-6 hog heaven post about separating sows to avoid infighting like Lindsay Loham in 'Mean Grills.'"
Damion C. points out I could be wrong when I suggested a man spending a $1,200 stimulus check at the brothel had to be married to receive that amount:
"...he could be a single father with three kids. Not that that makes it any better, but just a detail."
Brian P. reacts to the blog about special deals Countrywide may have given high-profile "Friends of Angelo":
"It needs to be mentioned that many mortgage companies waive discount points in order to be competitive with other companies. I have had three Countrywide loans and have never been charged any points. In fact they waived 7/8 of a point on my last loan because USAA Bank was priced better than they were at that time. It's called being competitive."
On the Belmont performance of Big Brown, Vano B. writes of Kent "Des-no-more":
"Kent will have to move to Europe to get a mount. Big Brown lost interest with all the over-control Kent put on him."
On the blog about "manscaping"and also removing veins from the busts of breast implant patients, Jason J. asks:
"Of the two pictures you have in the blog - which person received the breast augmentation? The guy or the girl?"
Questions? Comments? Funny Stories? Email funnybusiness@cnbc.com
