Small beer by the standards of this corrupt Administration (Halliburton anyone?) but given that former F.D.A. Chief Crawford is going down in a conflict of interest scandal, I can safely assume that at least one THCB reader is quietly smiling over his cornflakes today!
“Who can take you seriously when you can’t spell Kool-Aid?”
OK. I concede, you are the official expert on sipping Kool-Aid and you can even spell it too. Congrats.
“95% of the world and even 65% of Americans don’t think we should be there”
I was speaking to a retired US Navy Captain today in clinic who served during WW2 and he was telling me that prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor there was a poll out from George Gallup that basically had 40% supporting a war against the Axis Powers, 30% antiwar, and (believe it or not) 30% supporting joining the Axis Powers. He stated that today’s current mood closely mirrors what he saw prior to Pearl Harbor. Additionally, he thought a nuclear attack against one of our major cities is inevitable and that will end up being our own Pearl Harbor.
“I bet if pgbMD saw $2 billion of tax money being spent each week on healthcare he’d be screaming socialism and government waste”
Response to pgMD: Haliburton should even be an issue because either we shouldnt be in Iraq in the first place, or we should have planned better and gotten out when the bushies really wanted to, in 2004. If you havent seen any of the Frontline segments on Iraq, they are must see TV…makes me laugh when the right wingers criticizes us lefties for cutting and running! Hell, Bush wanted out in 2004!
I bet if pgbMD saw $2 billion of tax money being spent each week on healthcare he’d be screaming socialism and government waste not saying what good things we’re getting from it. So how’s that for bringing back the conversation to healthcare. It’s all about priorities and political power. This administration will go down as probably the most corrupt, incompetent, and untruthful this country has ever seen.
pgbMD–Who can take you seriously when you can’t spell Kool-Aid?
But if you want to write the defnintive treatise on why we’re necessarily in Iraq and why believing that we shouldn’t be is “a left” opinion when 95% of the world and even 65% of Americans don’t think we should be there (including such communists as Jacques Chirac, Brent Scowcroft & Pat Buchanan) — Be my guest. Literally!
And Haliburton company’s leadership including the Vice President is as guilty as sin. Don’t believe me? Explain away the nine audits by that biased leftist institution, the US Army.
Of course they will never see a court-room while this Adminstration remains in power.
It’s not biased if it’s the truth–whatever Fox news tells you.
“political connections they have not been punished in any way.”
You seem to be missing the over-riding point that they are doing good for the troops whether or not there have been accounting errors, overcharging, etc. If the law was broken they will be punished, but this blog can not determine their guilt or innocence only a court of law will.
“we are needlessly in Iraq”
Statements like these plainly put on the left side of the aisle and no longer can your opinions be judged as unbiased. Again I suggest you limit yourself to the topic of healthcare and try to moderate your political biases by pulling your face out of that bowl of cool-aid.
pgbMD–The point is that they (Haliburton) especially have been found with their hand deep in the cookie jar, usually for charging for the supply of those niceties AND NOT HAVING SUPPLIED THEM, and because of their political connections they have not been punished in any way.
Even ignoring the fact that their former CEO’s Administration is the direct reason we are needlessly in Iraq, that is still corruption of the highest order. Much worse than seen in other Adminstrations, including FDRs.
Many of the billets for the supply/service side of the US military have been replaced by contractors more so than in any other armed conflict. This obviously makes such contracts vulnerable for what you describe as “grand larceny”. The reason the billets for these service/supply side positions have been drawn down over the years is to allow replacing those service side billets with soldiers that actually do the fighting (boots on the ground). Just a Pentagon numbers game that allows increasing the number of soldiers that actually do the fighting, while at the same time keeping the overall size of the military the same. They are even downsizing the medical side of the house, although more slowly.
I grant you that there will be the unscrupulous when civilian contractors are brought in and if found guilty they should be fined/punished/imprisoned. As far as the Truman Committee is concerned, I am all for scrutinizing the checkbook and holding those accountable to the fire if money is wasted or stolen.
Ultimately though, all the soldiers in theatre sweating it out in the sand box do appreciate the niceties that are furnished by the contractors that you so much despise.
Jeez pgbMD. They are in that situation because the US Army under pressure from bought and paid for politicians gave them exclusive no-bid contracts to take over what were traditionally military roles. And with the willing help of their former CEO–who put the US into Iraq in the first place–and lots of others, they’ve been continuing to steal from the taxpayer using the “war” as a cover.
If you bothered to look into what Harry Truman did in WW2 you would note that war doesn’t have to involve grand larceny.
This has nothing to do with being a liberal. Conservatives who care about wasting public money should be equally as appalled.
Last time I checked, there is a war going on in Iraq not some game of “grand larceny” that you liberals like to play it off as. Fortunately, for you, the truth can’t hit you in the mouth, because yours is gaping so wide open!
I am not saying Haliburton is untainted, but they are doing a lot of good over there and were one of the only companies with the resources available to get things done fast at the beginning of the war. Something you just obviously can’t understand.
I suggest that you stop your political hit pieces, because they really hurt your credibility and take away from the meaningful discussion that is occurring here.
pgmMD–You wouldnt know the truth if it hit you in the mouth, would you? It’s not the money that was spent on the troops that the taxpayer (i.e. me and theoretically you) should be objecting to. That wasn’t Haliburton doing anyone a favor. The taxpayer paid for that and they made a very very good profit, mostly by faking their costs and being paid for on a cost-plus basis.
I’m objecting to the the money Haliburton stole, not to mention the Iraq sanctions they busted WHILE Cheney was CEO, and the nine audits under this Administration that have shown them to be crooks.
But if you want to think they’re distributing flowers and candy to Iraqi school kids — then that’s your right. But don’t try to pretend that the grand larcenry that’s been going on in Iraq is “just like any other Adminstration”. Do you have any idea what Harry Truman did in WW2? If not you should find out.
“Small beer by the standards of this corrupt Administration (Halliburton anyone?)”
No corrupt than any other administration.
By the way, listening to the BS the MSM puts out, you may not know that if it wasn’t for Halliburton many of the troops over in Iraq/Afghanistan would not have AC, nice gyms, rec rooms with widescreen TVs, etc. Old Hal even hooked up your Brit troops as well with the fancier things in life while stationed down south. As far as I am concerned, money well spent.
This strikes me as small potatoes – I find it hard to believe that he would have been motivated to behave differently had he divested.
But this is not a “no harm, no foul” situation. Public officials are expected to adhere to at least the letter of the law. Either he was sloppy, arrogant or both. He clearly didn’t put the attention and time into this that he should have. I suspect that he used his own judgement as to which stocks would represent a conflict of interest instead of having his portfolio vetted by either the agency attorneys or outside counsel. If so, dumb.
Certainly not the acumen you’d expect from the head of a significant US Agency.
Just one more example why Bush will go down as the President who pardons more people on leaving office than any other pres. If you’re one of the Bush bandits you’d better hope that A. You’re caught and convicted before Bush leaves office to get that pardon B. You never get caught. Keep those campaign donations coming.