No faair, maaaaan! Did they give Joe Sandalhippy a chance to bid? I didn't thiiiink soooooo!

Mitch,

You'll never make points defending Haliburton, good or not at their jobs.

First, they are now synonymous with Corporate Croneyism.

Second, they have been found guilty (or rather penalized) for numerous overcharges.

The bottom line is, I don't believe a civilian contractor costing $600-$1000 per day to drive a truck is more efficient or economical than troops. There was a case presented, but it was presented by then SecDef Cheney to a favorable White House. Having seen enough of the military to understand how good it actually is at it's job, I'm sorry, but I've yet to see a civilian company work as well. So whether Haliburton COULD do the job is less the question than SHOULD they. There are people in LA who need jobs (kind of like Iraqis), just as there are people in MS and AL, and rather than creating another croney situation, we should do some actual PUBLIC works, put some folks to work who could use the money and the distraction. We sure as hell shouldn't put in a company that will shove it into the hands of it's shareholders rather than it's workers, unless you believe enriching shareholders really is the key to economic success. I think the past 15 years have shown pretty conclusively that the market is a deceptive thing, it can overly reward false idols (internet), and it can undervalue good old fundamental value.

On the political front, even suggesting Haliburton is a gaffe at best, and somewhat "tin ear"ish at worst. They have a low reputation (whether you think they should or not is irrelevant) and bringing them up now is lacking in class, it makes it seem like the administration will use any excuse or calamity to advance the cause of corporate welfare.

PB

oh, one quick comment..

Brian,

My father once paid a compliment to a man whom he admired because, "he'd never even uttered a swear word in his life." Now my father is no pious saint, his comment was in the vein of admiring someone who could express themselves so well that vulgarity was unnecessary.

Sandhippy is a bigotted, racist term. Why is it that I run into so many on the right who use such base and ugly and moronic terms, oh yeah.. its because so much of their message is born from hatred and underlying resentment.

The left has issues, they lack spine, but at least, other than a few militant blacks who remind me an awful lot of the folks on the right, the left generally does not degrade itself by basing its belief system on bigotry, and then going out and seeking out facts to justify it.

70% of Iraqis don't have jobs, I guess it's better that we give the jobs to underpaid foriegn nationals to take life and death risks so that Haliburton stock does well, than give the jobs to Iraqis so they stop hating us quite so much and stop killing our soldiers quite so much. But then again, for the pawns it's about getting a little back against the sand"hippies" (I'll bet you wanted to use a different word), and for the kings, it's about money, not lives.

PB

"....it makes it seem like the administration will use any excuse or calamity to advance the cause of corporate welfare."

Was Clinton using any "excuse or calamity to advance the cause of corporate welfare" when he used them in the Balkans?

I believe the term used was sandalhippy as in "sandal wearing hippie". I could be wrong, but I don't see a racist under every bed.

Leave PD alone. He's trying to show how good and tolerant he is, unlike those hateful and resentful righties. It's the underlying point that's important.

PB,

Robert B noticed it also; Brian said "sandALhippy". It would seem to be a rather crucial distinction, especially given your rather extensive accusations of racism. I know Brian at least as well as I know you, and suffice to say that your accusations are misguided.

"Why is it that I run into so many on the right who use such base and ugly and moronic terms"

Like "gun nut", "jesusland", "chimpy bushitler", "rethuglican"? Like "I think Second Amendment Activists are making up for some sexual deficiency?" Like "Blue states have a higher IQ than Red States", "Republicans hate black people", "Republicans hate gays", "Assrocket", "Republicans want to send the military into New Orleans to kill the poor black people", "Republicans want to throw the elderly and children into the street"? And on, and on and on and on?

The big difference is, on the right it's the peanut gallery that occasionally dishes out the base trash talk. On the left, it's the leadership. In fact, I'd say that the left has a near monopoly on base, moronic trash talk among people who matter.

"oh yeah.. its because so much of their message is born from hatred and underlying resentment."

Just curious - have you ever read Daily Kos? The biggest leftyblog - and the commentary is like reading a white supremacist site. Half a million good ol' lefties hit it a day.

"The left has issues, they lack spine, but at least, other than a few militant blacks who remind me an awful lot of the folks on the right, the left generally does not degrade itself by basing its belief system on bigotry, and then going out and seeking out facts to justify it."

PB, I don't know a better way to say this - you're absolutely wrong. As in, light leaving "right" now will not reach you until we are both long dead. Even wronger than your riff on "Sandalhippy". Which was mighty wrong.

Hi you have a nice homepage geico nasonex tegretol tegretol car finance cheap check business degree slot craps bad credit mortgage