When you're serving your country, there's a good chance you'll move around a few times . . . which can conflict with the traditional American dream of homeownership. Soldiers who bought homes several years ago could be stuck selling now at depressed prices -- and on fairly short notice.

Needless to say, the financial pressure can be profound. A Staff Sergeant with a decade of service behind him, for example, is paid just under $37,000 a year. Even when you add in the health care and other benefits provided by the Department of Defense, it's still hard to handle a serious loss on a home.

The February stimulus plan included provisions to help military personnel in this situation, but little has happened. Soldiers complain that information is hard to find and guidelines aren't available. So far, none of the funds have been disbursed, and the federal government is keeping its collective mouth shut.

BusinessWeek reports that Boeing Co. (NYSE: BA) has repeated its threat not to bid on the $35 billion competition to supply an airborne refueling tanker to the Air Force. This is a competition that pits a Republican presidential candidate and his lobbyist former finance chair on the dole of a French aircraft company and its Alabama partner against the future prospects of a Democratically controlled Congress and White House that would tend to favor Boeing -- which has many workers in Washington state.

By threatening not to bid, Boeing is taking many big risks. The Air Force may decide to keep the terms of the competition the same -- bids due October 1 -- and contract wrap up before New Year's Day. If Boeing does not bid and the competition proceeds, EADS, parent of Airbus, and Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC) -- with many of its workers in the Republican-leaning Alabama -- would win the bid uncontested. If the Air Force extends the process another four months -- which Boeing would prefer -- there is a chance that the Air Force would still end up choosing the French company.

But Boeing is gambling that the odds of a more favorable outcome are greater if it threatens not to bid. Boeing thinks that Congress will not want only one bid for the Tanker and that Congress and the White House are likely to be controlled by the Democratic party in January. With the French lobbyist-backed candidate in the Senate minority, Boeing will be in a better position to shape the Tanker competition in a way that favors its victory.

Boeing (NYSE: BA) lost its bid for the new Air Force tanker to Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC). The aircraft builder was able to get the process re-opened and now has a shot at getting the business that was awarded to Northrop.

Winning another chance at the big contract is not enough. According to The Wall Street Journal, "Boeing Co. said it is inclined to bail out of its effort to win a $40 billion contract to build aerial refueling tankers for the U.S. Air Force unless the Pentagon agrees to give it a total of six months to submit a new bid."

Boeing claims that it will take a long time to figure out how to configure one of its airplanes to haul the amount of jet fuel required by the Air Force.

The request is bogus. Boeing has been through the bidding process for the tanker once before. The idea that the company did not understand the specifications is remarkable.

Boeing may be trying to gain time to shave some of its costs off the project so that it can bring the price of its bid down. It should have done that in the first round. There is no reason it should get that additional time.

It is no wonder Northrop got the original approval, and it is likely to get it again in this round.

Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.

As I suspected, Boeing Inc. (NYSE: BA) was trying to exert pressure to change the terms of the competition when it signaled this week that it might withdraw from the bidding for the $35 billion Air Force contract for airborne refueling tankers. BusinessWeek reports that Boeing wants the Air Force to delay the date for submitting the proposal and to change the specifications to favor Boeing's smaller modified 767.

BusinessWeek also reveals that the competition is tied in with this November's election. John McCain's former finance committee chair, Tom Loeffler, is a lobbyist for EADS, parent of France's Airbus, which has joined with Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC) in a bid for the tanker. In June, the General Accounting Office (GAO) agreed with Boeing that the February award to Loeffler's client had process irregularities. So the Air Force announced it would rebid, but it did so in a way that -- if my hunch is correct -- Boeing believes will put Loeffler's French client at a big advantage.

As BusinessWeek points out, if the Air Force sticks with its current schedule and specifications, it will help McCain win Republican-dominated Alabama in November, which is where Northrop would build the modified A330 that it would deliver to the Air Force if it wins the competition. Democratic Washington would benefit if Boeing won the competition.

The Associated Press reports that John "Freedom Fries" McCain employs former lobbyists for EADS, the parent of Toulouse, France-based Airbus, on his staff. EADS and Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC) recently won a $100 billion contract to build refueling tankers for the Air Force, edging out Boeing Inc. (NYSE: BA) which has filed a protest.

McCain now employs the people who lobbied for EADS on his own staff. According to the AP report, EADS retained The Loeffler Group to lobby for the tanker deal in 2007. Loeffler Group lobbyists on the project included Tom Loeffler, who lobbies for EADS and serves as McCain's national finance chairman; Susan Nelson, who left Loeffler and is now the campaign's finance director; and former Secretary of the Navy William Ball III, who has campaigned for McCain.

EADS also had a long-term relationship with Ogilvy Government Relations, formerly known as the Federalist Group. Ogilvy lobbyist John Green, who records show worked on the EADS account, recently took a leave of absence to volunteer for McCain as the campaign's congressional liaison.

MAJOR PAPERS:

• What Countrywide Financial Corporation (NYSE: CFC) knew about its mortgage borrowers, and how it handled that information, is under review by Federal investigators, according to the Wall Street Journal. Some of their findings reveal that Countrywide had questionable information, which it then put together many of those mortgages into securities, and sold them to investors.
• The Air Force's award of a $40B contract for aerial refueling tankers to Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE: NOC) and European Aeronautical Defense & Space, will be protested by The Boeing Company (NYSE: BA), reported the Wall Street Journal.
• The Financial Times reported that News Corporation (NYSE: NWS) CEO Rupert Murdoch dashed the hopes of Yahoo! Inc (NASDAQ: YHOO) executives seeking an alternative to Microsoft Corporation's (NASDAQ: MSFT) $40B offer after Murdoch endorsed the view of analysts and investors that it could not match the value offered by Microsoft.

OTHER PAPERS:

• According to General Motors Corporation (NYSE: GM) president and COO Frederick A. Henderson, the New York Times reported that the auto maker will not intervene in the dispute between parts supplier American Axle and Manufacturing Holdings Inc (NYSE: AXL) and the United Auto Workers union. Given that the strike has not yet hurt the company's ability to sell vehicles, Henderson said company officials "just have to keep to our own knitting."

The comments on a recent blog post by Sarah Gilbert, about Starbucks retraining efforts took an interesting turn towards discussion about whether or not that company supports our troops. This seems to be a subject which elicits strong passion among many blog readers, which prompts me to ask this question of you: Does a company's position, openly declared or not, regarding support for our troops, affect your perception of that company and whether or not you'll intentionally do business with them?

This issue can be difficult to assess, because often times a company's position on the matter is cloaked, unavailable or skewed by misinformation. The comments on Sarah's blog post give clear evidence of that. Some folks seem convinced that Starbucks doesn't care about our troops, yet packages bearing its logo are reported to arrive at military addresses every day. What's more is the fact that often companies elect not to state a position regarding our restructuring efforts in Iraq. To some people, silence on the matter is interpreted as contempt rather than consent.

I must admit that my own opinions about individual companies regarding their stance on our military involvements are sometimes colored by unconfirmed email commentary and careless internet banter. That is why I generally refrain from discussing the issue. What about you? Do you base your opinions on random emails which purport to reveal a company's stance regarding our military, or do you research the topic before coming to your conclusions?

MAJOR PAPERS:

• The Goldman Sachs Group Inc (NYSE: GS) plans to back a $2B private equity fund set up by Fang Fenglei, its Chinese partner, sources said. The Wall Street Journal reported Goldman will invest about $300M in the fund.
• Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc (NYSE: BRK.A) continued setting up a new bond insurance company last month, after Berkshire was urged to enter the bond insurance market by New York government official Eric Dinallo, the Financial Times reported.

OTHER PAPERS:

• The LA Times reported that the Air Force could shrink its fleet of F-15 fighter jets, many of them up to 30 years old, because of critical structural flaws.
• According to the Detroit News, people familiar with the deal said that General Motors Corporation (NYSE: GM) agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit for about $39M. The suit was brought about by retirees and employees for claims that involved retirement funds and pension.

For the second time this month, the United States Air Force has decided to ground hundreds of its older Boeing Co. (NYSE: BA) F-15 fighter jets. Yesterday it grounded 452 of the fighters in its continued investigation into an accident earlier this month that has exposed some flaws in the planes.

Yesterday's grounding represents approximately 60% of the entire F-15 fleet, and the Air Force has stated that each and every plane will remain grounded until they can all be individually inspected and possibly repaired. Earlier this month, the entire fleet had been grounded, and was only put back into service on the 21st.

The problems first surfaced when Missouri Air National Guard training exercise went wrong. In the accident, the pilot was able to safely eject from the plane before crashing. Investigations into the accident have revealed flaws in the planes fuselage. Specifically, metal rails that hold the fuselage together.

The Air Force investigation has decided there are "possible fleet-wide airworthiness problems".

Shares of Boeing are trading up 0.2% on the day to $93.80, up $0.19.

[photo: JMZawodny]

Michael Fowlkes has worked as a stock trader for seven years and spent the last two years working as an analyst for the online investment advisory service Investor's Observer.

Tom Taulli's recent post about AIM Pages reminded me of my high school days.

My freshman year, the Air Force had a recruiting slogan that was two words: Aim High. They gave out book covers and bumper stickers and lapel pins sporting this short catch-phrase. Of course, the other students in my class -- unlikely candidates  for military service -- changed the words to read "I am High".

What does this have to do with the new AOL counterpart to MySpace, AIM Pages? Well, aside from the fact that it's ridiculously easy to make fun of as well, I fear that it will be as short-lived as the Air Force's "Aim High" campaign.

Why? Well, take a look at the average age and demographic of a MySpace user -- under 35 and Internet-savvy. Whereas the name AOL will be immortally associated with the "You've got mail!" set -- an over-35, less Internet-savvy crowd.

While I commend AOL for trying to reach out to a younger demographic, this is probably not the silver bullet it needs right now. To tap into this more youthful demographic, AOL (the folks who brought you "Parental Controls") is going to need nothing short of a revolution of the spirit .

Aim high, AIM Pages, aim high.