Anthracite, I understand your misgivings right now. Frankly I’m feeling some myself. But I’d like to think that it’s just shock at seeing US servicemen dead and taken as prisoners of war. I’m counting on once again feeling that what Bush did was truly the right course once Iraq is free again and we’re out of there. For now and until he proves me wrong, I’m of the opinion his choice was one made on moral convictions.
We won’t be out of there for a long long time.
We helped Osama. we helped Hussein. I wonder who they will put in Iraq that will come bite us in the ass 20 years from now.
Well there were a few scumbags he pardoned 10 minutes before leaving office. Oh yeah, he hadn’t had much sleep so when Corporal Radar put the clipboard in front of him he just signed his name as usual. Heck, how did he know that he had just pardoned the biggest tax cheat and a convicted drug trafficker?
And how did these companies bid if we haven’t even finished destroying the place yet?
One other note - I didn’t mean to beat on the Clinton horse as much as I did. I guess the reason why the comparison keeps arising is that I actually felt like I could have felt much better about Clinton if I had trusted him and his Administration.
I thought I trusted Bush and his Administration more than the previous situation. I think a lot of Bush voters also felt the same way, and they wanted a change from the antics of the previous Administration (which Gore, unfortunately, was associated with).
I feel that I no longer can say that things have improved. What I was trying to express, in a way that seemed to beat on Clinton, was that I have that same level of distrust and malaise.
That’s what I was trying to get at. I don’t want to bring Clinton into it any further, for better or for worse. I’m just explaining my tone.
I am not opposed to a “strong” attitude towards Iraq, including the use of force. But as this thing kept developing, it seemed to me (and Fierra, who feels very similar to me on this) that there was absolutly nothing that was going to stop the potential for conflict. Every time the Iraqi’s made any attempt at a concession, or tried to negotiate, instead of a tone of “highly guarded optimism” which I would have liked to have seen, instead I saw open hostility. Any time a third country offered to seriously negotiate or mediate, or offered any type of plan, it was thrown back immediately.
Maybe it was the seeming (to me, at least) lack of decorum? Not even appearing like you are open to suggestions which do not include war? 
I mean, shit. Of course, a leader should assume in private that, based on past performance, Iraq likely won’t come through, and prepare for that potential eventuality. But the public statements and public tone seemed so incredibly hostile to me, so adversarial. And Bush and Blair did everything they could to try and force this issue through the UN, when so many other key countries were opposed to it. And the way they tried to “bribe” Turkey with the loan guarantees and aid issue turned my stomach.
Bush has pissed off a lot of people around the World, and it makes me feel, for the first time ever, embarassed for my country. And a little afraid.
And that really, really sucks ass. I would, and will eagerly give Bush another chance if I honestly believed (or come to believe) that things would change for the better, and if he turned things around for the country and in some policies in a serious manner. I mean, I voted Republican, but not out of blindly following a party.
For fuck’s sake - I voted for a party which is, among a large number of its members and candidate, either hostile or at the least very unappreciative of persons of my sexuality. That must tell you that I believed in some of the beliefs, ideals, and programs more than I feared those which are contrary to or even hostile to me as a lesbian. Doesn’t it?
What am I to do, really? I call myself an “arch conservative”, but what am I, really? I don’t seem to fit in with any political party nowadays, and especially not the Republican one. I will not be registering Republican this next election, but I don’t know what I will be.
I don’t know if I can join wring in her “liberal but not a fucking lunatic” group. There are still more things I agree with on the conservative side than the liberal side.
I guess I’ll just be me for now, and play it by ear.
Not defending Bush, but, why? All else being equal - if the company is just one of many that was capable of doing the job - wouldn’t you want one working for you that you have personal experience with?
did the company even have to bid?
So I should hold off on mailing you application forms for the American Trotskist anarchist party then? 
Agreed, Weirddave, but you’ve just described local politics–both on the Republican and the Democratic side–in a nutshell. Everywhere I’ve lived in the States thus far–rural PA, suburban Los Angeles, rust-belt upstate New York–it seems like the tills are wide open.
Part of my job is to check out political contributions of potential donors to my institution. It’s amazing how many local businesses contribute money to a Congressional or mayoral race and within months…bada-boom, bada-bing, they land a fat governmental contract. There’s a certain local politico (who I won’t name here) who runs a “kitchen cabinet” at the best club in a certain city to the south (which I won’t name here) comprised of the top business honchos in the area. If you’re not in the cabinet, and you want a government contract in the city, you’re SOL.
Anthracite, I respect your political decision-making processes, but this is something that both sides are guilty of. I consider myself a liberal, but I’ll never really consider myself a Democrat, because deep down I know that both parties are really all about money. I don’t consider myself any less of a liberal because the Democrats are greedy bastards.
The world makes a lot more sense once you realize George W. Bush isn’t telling the truth. 
See, when it comes to Clinton vs. Bush, corruption-wise, I do feel that Bush’s administration outdoes Clinton’s, though not by orders of magnitude or anything. I admit that this is subjective and up for debate.
However, one place where Bush and his administration are light years ahead of the Clinton crowd is in the openness of its corruption. The cronyism is blatant, the bullshit is transparent, and the appearance of impropriety is just par for the course.
It’s like Clinton would sidle up to the barstool next to you and strike up a conversation before cooing in your ear that it would be $1200 for the night, while Bush just strolls up to your car window at the stop light and says, “Looking for a good time, sailor?”
Given that you’re fucked either way, which do you prefer? Matter of opinion, I think.
Oh, and according to the Yahoo! News story I read, Halliburton did not in fact have to bid for the job.
Can someone explain “deferred compensation” to me? Does that mean that they’re still paying him, but he won’t get any of it until he’s out of office? Can they give him a nice fat “deferred bonus” for delivering this sweet little plum to their laps?
Dr. J
As bad as this smells, I’m still on the fence about it.
There just aren’t many companies with the breadth of experience in cleaning up an oil mess and repairing oil and military infrastructure than Halliburton, plain and simple. With Halliburton it seems like you get a whole military industrial complex in one neat package ready to ship out at a moment’s notice.
What troubles me is the feeling I got from the article that it will be the US calling the shots with regard to who will be rebuilding Iraq’s oil infrastructure. If the Bush administration is interested** at all** in making nice once this WTNFO* is over, they’re going to have to bring in some other countries (hey, maybe even the new Iraqi government!) and/or the UN to do something.
*War That’s Not For Oil
Most people seem to be under the mentality, “the party I happen to agree with must be the most honest and trustworthy”.
The reality is, they are truly all scum. Republican, Democrat, whatever. Dirt. Shit. Vile puddles of pustulence. Rancid sacks of maggot-ridden rectum-meat. Fly-blown moldy chunks of cum-ridden shit recovered from the autopsy of a dead leprous anal-whore.
When people say they look to the president (any president) as a moral guide, I look at them as if they said they want Michael Jackson to babysit their kids.
I don’t really recall Clinton’s exploits pissing the world off to no end, and that’s where I start to worry.
Eloquently put, I wholeheartedly agree.
At one time Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy were going to start a law firm together.
the name of the firm: Trickem, Dickem, and Dunkem
c’mon…James Traficante seems like a good dude.
Normally I think the proverb “don’t tie your shoes in a pumpkin patch” is a big load, but in this case I’m tempted to think that it is appropriate. Halliburton may be the best for the job, but considering that so many are already crying “No blood for oil” we really don’t need to put America’s credibility at greater risk.
js, that’s a great proverb! What does it mean?
(I’m guessing that it has something to do with tying your shoes accidentally with the little curly bits on pumpkin vines, but I still don’t know what it means)
Daniel
I took it to mean “don’t look like you’re doing something shady, even when you’re not.” So if you’re tying you shoes in a pumpkin patch, it will look like you’re trying to steal a pumpkin (by cutting/breaking the vines) even though you’re not.
I heard it first when our spy plan ended up having to land in China a few years back–even if what we were doing was legal, it still looked pretty shady. Some commentator said that it is an old Chinese proverb, but I cannot verify that.
Very briefly, this award, and other news in regards to Americans shopping contracts in unseemly haste is playing into a very, very negative view of the events in the region.
Insofar as the ostensible reason for the war is to achieve regional security, it would behoove this Administration of Incompetence to work against such imagery, not for it.
Commentary in Arabic media on this has been extensive and highly negative. This is further feeding the coloniaist rhetoric, and I am now finding that even that small percentage of Arabs who were “for” toppling Hussien becoming very anti-American as there is a rising level of anger at American high-handedness.
If this Administration wants to achieve security, it bloody well better begin to stop shooting itself in the foot in its public relations, and diplomacy.
C