class="archive tag tag-air-force tag-197">

Posts Tagged ‘air force’

This is a sticky post – if you want to see new discussions – please scroll down.

I’ve joined a great team fundraising event – it pits military service groups against one another – it is Project Valour-IT. This fundraising event ends on November 27, 2008. So, if you are one of my anti-war readers – surely, you can get behind a cause like this. Regardless of how our troops were wounded and whether or not you agree with their cause – you can help support them by giving to this great cause.

This is a great cause.  Please donate using this link below.  If you are a blogger – go join the team of your choice and get your own code and post it up on your blog.


Here’s the blogroll for our Zoomie (Air Force Team) – you’d figure with the top team member there – we’d have a helluva lot more in donations:

So – please – this is a great cause – it provides voice activated laptops and other technological gizmos to our wounded troops. And..yes…in case you’re wondering – I did donate – here’s my proof:

from service@paypal.com
to The BoBo
date Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 1:09 AM
subject Receipt for your donation to Soldiers Angels Foundation
mailed-by paypal.com
signed-by paypal.com

Dear The BoBo (name redacted intentionally)

This email confirms that you have donated $50.00 USD to Soldiers Angels Foundation (donations@soldiersangels.org) using PayPal.

Donation Details
Confirmation number: 1YC27543xxxxxxxx
Donation amount: $50.00 USD
Total: $50.00 USD
Purpose: Soldiers’ Angels Project Valour-IT – Air Force Team
Contributor: The BoBo (name redacted intentionally)

Recipient information
Donations coordinator: Soldiers Angels Foundation
Contact email: donations@soldiersangels.org
Contact Phone Number: 626-398-4224

If you want to see something funny – check this out – As you may know – I’m also a contributor over at 454monte.com. I don’t know what the heck Greg was thinking – but – he let me be an author over there. He’s also former Navy! I put up the Air Force donation button on his blog! LOL!

The BoBo of The Week Award

The BoBo of The Week Award

It’s that time again! So sorry for posting this up so late – you know how it goes – the real world stuff gets in the way sometimes! So – without further adieu – the winner this week goes to:

This guy, Jon from A Lie a Day for this post:  Conservatives are Cowards.  Actually, that’s not the post I was originally going to give him the beat down on – but – when I went back I saw that one and just knew he must have written that just for little ol’ me!!  Here’s the original post I was going to give him the award for:  Time to Reap What we Have Sewn -  The gist of that post was that Ronald Reagan and Dubya were directly responsible for the failures of AIG, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac.  I was going to set his ass straight and remind him of the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 that Jimmy Cahtah enacted and then was revised by Billy Boy Clinton in 1996 that essentially told any mortgage lenders that if they didn’t accept high-risk loans for the “disadvantaged” they would be considered racists and would never do business in the housing market again – then I was also going to remind him of the 2006 updated to that crafted by Congress, and ignorantly signed by GWB, that allowed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to create the sub-prime loan vehicle.  The Democrats crafted that thing in such a way that there would be absolutely no oversight.  But – that’s not the one he gets an award for – so – I guess I won’t tell him about all that or the fact that the two Managers of Freddie and Fannie who were recently found guilty in a civil suit and have to repay millions back, including fines, are economic advisors to Barack Obama.  (Isn’t it funny how all of Obama’s associates continue to turn out to be criminals?)

So – let’s get down to the post that prompted me to change my mind about the award:

First, Jon, I need some clarification here – the title of your blog – are you publicly acknowledging that you are attempting to spread one lie a day here?  You know, from my vantage point – it appears that is exactly what you are doing. He says:

I have noted before how fear filled the right wing’s bed wetting brigade can act with something goes bump. I have always considered it to be a notable factor in the make-up of many of those on the right.

Well, it appears I was right.

Me, being the actual researcher that I am and having an insider knowledge of how studies are actually conducted, decided to go check out his links. The first link just references back to a previous post of his that spews some stupid bull shit about how we conservatives are fear mongers and blah blah blah. The second link is to an on-line newspaper article that quotes a University of Nebraska study that was reported in “the prestigious Science journal.”  So – I checked out the Science Journal website – here’s what they say about their journal:

Science is a weekly, peer-reviewed journal that publishes significant original scientific research, plus reviews and analyses of current research and science policy. Our offices in Washington, D.C., and Cambridge, U.K., welcome submissions from all fields of science and from any source.

Competition for space in Science is keen, and many papers are returned without in-depth review. Priority is given to papers that reveal novel concepts of broad interest. We are committed to the prompt evaluation and publication of submitted papers. For the quickest and most efficient processing of your manuscript, please follow the guidelines and procedures laid out in this author help site.

Please pay particular note to the statement “Priority is given to papers that reveal novel concepts of broad interest.” That’s where this study falls. Even though they consider themselves a peer reviewed journal – apparently, not all studies are scrutinized to ensure the data is statistically valid. Here’s what I found in the news article regarding the study:

In the study, 46 volunteers were asked about their political views on such hot button issues as immigration and gun control, which have a strong correlation to voting booth behaviour.

All righty then!!!  One of the key aspects of any study is that you need to do a power calculation to determine the statistical reliability and validity of the sample itself.  The reason for the power calculation is that you need to have an appropriate sample that is generalizable to the target population as a whole.  In any real study you need to have a study group and a control group.  Since this paper gives no details about the study design – and the fact they measured all 46 volunteers – this leads me to believe there were no controls.  Additionally, the newspaper article did not link back directly to the study – so – we have no way of reading the actual report to critique for ourselves.  We also need to know whether or not the researchers controlled for any biases or made corrections for the random/cluster effect or even took in to account for alternative reasons for the results.  Lastly, we don’t know what analysis tool they utilized to determine the statistical validity of the results.

What we need to know is one of the following:  the alpha value, the degrees of freedom, the standard deviation, or the p-value, in addition to confounders.  But – even without knowing any of these, I can tell you with certainty that a sample of 46 volunteers is not a statistically valid or reliable sample given there are almost 150 million registered voters that align themselves as liberal, conservative, independent, and all others in between.  There is no possible way that the results of 46 college students are a representative sample that can be generalized to the entire voter population.

The next question I’m sure Jon might ask me is – how do you know they were college students?  Well, dipshit, this would be one of the very few University studies that wasn’t based entirely on college students.  Where the hell do you think the universities get their subjects?

So – I need to ask you, Jon, why didn’t you include that small little detail in your post?  Is it because when you read it you knew that it had to be bogus?  Was it because libtards like you will take everything out of context and just use pieces of articles that suit your purpose to continue spreading lies?  Why is this the only section of the entire news article that you quoted on your blog?

a new study in the prestigious journal Science says that people with right wing views blink and flinch far harder than liberals when confronted with startling stimuli.

In the first study to directly link politics and physiology, the University of Nebraska led study suggests that people who hold conservative views on things like foreign policy and gun control, are more frightened than those with a more left-leaning bent on those issues.

Let me take a moment here, Jon, to point something out for you – but, given you are such an educated and knowledgeable liberal – I’m just sure you already know this – do you see that part in the article up there where it says “the University of Nebraska led study suggests….” Do you see that word, “suggests”? Here’s what this means in terms of statistical analysis, reliability, and validity – ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!!!! This tells me, the guy who actually knows statistics and is in the process of doing my own research and has been published myself in journals, there is no statistical significance to their findings.  If there were, that is exactly how the study results would have been presented to the public.  Rather, what this means is that it is a hack job and is being rushed to print to mislead the public about conservatives and to have USEFUL IDIOTS like yourself continue to distort the truth for them just furthering their liberal agenda.  Here, try this out – I too conducted an observational study, honestly, in which I watched and followed 10 homeless panhandlers.  My study suggests that panhandlers are not homeless, and they are in fact making an average of $60,000 a year from their panhandling efforts.  What do you have to say about that?  Actually, I did observe two of the ten leave at the end of the day, change out of their “bum” clothes into nicer clothing and drove their mid-sized cars, that they retrieved from the parking garage at $12 a day or $65 a month, to go to their homes.  I was able to infer by the cars that they were driving and the homes they drove up to that they would have to be making at least $60,000 a year to be able to afford the cars and the homes.  But, this was an observational study with no statistical significance – but – my findings do indeed “SUGGEST” exactly what I said.

Hey, Jon – you nimrod – learn to read between the lines and quit being a shill for the loony left there. Here’s how he ended this post:

And that is why the Bush administration worked so hard to keep everyone freaked out from 2001 to 2006; It help in their political efforts.

This clearly would not apply across the board to everyone who has conservative views and it does appear to apply to protective issues more than broader issues. That said, this is the first step in confirming a detail that I have long suspected; Many of those on the right who have been screeching the loudest are doing so because they are afraid.

As s follow up to this study I think that there is another effect that should be reviewed. I would love to see the effect that ever increasing scare tactics has on how voters vote. I bet it moves them to the right, at least a little, no matter where they are on the political spectrum.

You really are an idiot aren’t you? So – you say you wouldn’t apply it across the board (is it perhaps because you also understood that only 46 people were OBSERVED) but then you go on as if you are some kind of all knowing omnipotent individual to continue the smear yourself by stating that we speak up only out of fear. Actually, if you really understood the conservative movement, you would know we speak out because of lilly livered little pussies like you who want to turn this country in to a socialist state that goes completely against our constitution and what our forefathers intended. We really do believe in protecting this country from enemies. Unfortunately, there are morons out there like you who don’t realize that the threats are real. Iran really is in the process of building nukes. North Korea really did have nukes and are continuing their program again. The islamofascists really do want to kill you and me. There really are bad guys out there that want to harm us and our way of life and want to take that from us. Sometimes, the only way to deal with fanatics like this is to kill them before they kill us. But, you don’t get that because you would rather try to talk to them and get to know how they feel – just before they take that machete to your head.

Regarding your second assertion – the idea that you want a follow up study to determine the effect of “scare tactics” on voters. This just proves to me that you live with your head in the sand. I guess you live in that pre-9/11 world where you think everything was just peachy-keen. Let me tell you about the world I grew up in -as the son of a career Army Airborne Infantry service member – I travelled around the world.  I was living in Germany when the Palestinian terrorists killed the Israeli Olympians in Munich.  I was living in Germany when the Arabs blew up the Abrams building in Frankfurt.  I lived under terrorist alerts as a child.  I’ve seen what those bastards could do.  I remember the images of the Marine Baracks being blown up in Lebanon in 1983.  I remember the images of Leon Klinghoffer being thrown overboard of the Achille Lauro from his wheelchair by Palestinian terrorists in 1985.  I remember the images of one of our Navy seamen being thrown out of the back of a TWA plane on to the tarmac in Lebanon by Hezbollah terrorists in 1985 after they shot and killed him.  I was living in Greece and serving in the USAF when our American ambassador’s car was blown up and his head was found on the street in 1987.  Are you getting the point here?

For this idiotic post just passing on lies and continuing to spread results of a faulty study that has no significant findings and for the fact that you are too stupid to open your eyes to reality – you get The BoBo of The Week Award!  Congratulations – wear it proudly!

If any of you have been following this saga – It looks like the government has decided to open up the bids again for the new Air Force refueling tankers. The French company EADS and Northrup Grumman originally won the bid over Boeing – even though Boeing had been supplying our USAF for decades. Well, Boeing appealed stating they had the best proposal – and – after review – the GAO agreed there were errors in the selected proposal – so – Boeing is back in the running again.

Here’s the article:

US reopens $35bn air tanker deal

The US government has reopened a $35bn (£17bn) contract to supply the US Air Force with refuelling tankers, which had been given to European group EADS.

It said mistakes had been made when the original bids were evaluated.

US plane maker Boeing will get the opportunity to rebid after losing out to the European aerospace consortium.

The Air Force’s decision to award the valuable contract to EADS and its partner Northrop Grumman has been controversial in the United States.

Boeing had emphasised its home-grown credentials during the competition for the contract, urging the Air Force to “Buy American”.

Its rival’s air tankers would be assembled in the US using components largely made in Europe.

When the decision went against Boeing, the company and a number of US senators campaigned to get the tender process reopened.

The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) reassessed the Air Force’s decision and last month said “significant errors” had been made, including the evaluation of which of the two proposals was cheapest.

The initial evaluation had suggested that the Northrop Grumman bid would probably work out cheaper over the life of the deal. But when reexamined, Boeing looked to be the cheapest, the GAO said.

‘Best tanker’

The deal – one of the biggest in the Air Force’s history – is the first of three contracts to supply up to 600 new refuelling tankers. The 30-year deal could be worth up to $100bn.

Northrup Grumman, who was awarded the contract along with EADS in February, said the “best tanker” had already been picked.

“We are reviewing the decision to ensure the re-competition will provide both companies a fair opportunity to present the strengths of their proposals,” the company said in a statement.

The Pentagon is expected to decide by the end of the year who will be awarded the contract. It has taken over responsibility for the process from the Air Force.

EntreCard

BoBo Badge
The BoBoFiles
Click Here to Advertise on My Blog
Never Forget
Free Shipping
Sponsored Ads
Twitter BoBo
My Blog Catalog
Proudly Served
Socialist Joker
Conservative T’s
Conservative T-Shirt Store
Condemned to Hell

DMV Employees
Circle I Limbo

General asshats
Circle II Whirling in a Dark & Stormy Wind

Greens
Circle III Mud, Rain, Cold, Hail & Snow

PETA Members
Circle IV Rolling Weights

Democrats
Circle V Stuck in Mud, Mangled

River Styx

Nancy Pelosi
Circle VI Buried for Eternity

River Phlegyas

Barack Obama
Circle VII Burning Sands

NAMBLA Members
Circle IIX Immersed in Excrement

Osama bin Laden
Circle IX Frozen in Ice

Design your own hell

Disclosure Policy
This policy is valid from
13 March 2009. This blog
is a personal blog written
and edited by me. This blog
accepts forms of cash
advertising, sponsorship,
paid insertions or other forms
of compensation.

The compensation received
may influence the advertising
content, topics or posts made
in this blog. That content,
advertising space or post may
not always be identified as
paid or sponsored content.

The owner(s) of this blog
is compensated to provide
opinion on products, services,
websites and various other
topics. Even though the
owner(s) of this blog receives
compensation for our posts
or advertisements, we always
give our honest opinions,
findings, beliefs, or
experiences on those topics
or products

The views and opinions
expressed on this blog are
purely the bloggers' own.
Any product claim, statistic,
quote or other representation
about a product or service
should be verified with the
manufacturer, provider or
party in question.

This blog does not contain
any content which might
present a conflict of interest.
To get your own policy, go to http://www.disclosurepolicy.org

My Sponsors
Blogger Ads

Subscribe
Subscribe to The BoBo Files RSS by clicking here or by typing your email below to receive the latest updates straight to your inbox.
Enter your email address:


Site Stats

Backlinks USA Free Backlinks Service at BacklinksUSA.com!

USA Backlinks Free Backlinks Service at USABacklinks.com!

Valid Robots.txt

The 2008 Weblog Awards

Blog

Page Ranking Tool

My Zimbio

TheBlogGallery – The Blog Directory

free web site traffic and promotion


Blogs That Follow
Blog Directory <
Advertise Here
Get PAID to host ADs at Project Wonderful!
BlogUpp
Blog Badges
Archives
Terrorist Blogger
Facebook BoBo
BoBo Files's Profile
BoBo Files's Facebook profile
Create Your Badge

Fair Use Policy

Fair Use: This site may contain copyrighted materials, with use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner.
I am making these materials available in my efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc.
I am also using such materials to rebut and dispute arguments, when they ARE not based on FACTS.
I'm here to offer my own argument, opinions and judgments on the subject matters, which MAY interfere with my constitutional rights, towards receiving, fair political representations from my federal, state and local representatives.
I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes.
When I post photos, I may have inadvertently posted one without prior knowledge of actual ownerships.
If you feel I may have violated some of YOUR copyright of some sorts, you HAVE the right to email or post a comment, requesting my removal of such material(s), such as photos and full postings of articles, however I reserve the right to keep the main idea, of your article on my blog, protected under the FAIR USE ACT.