Haskell and Ebert: Farenheit 911 Part II

[Eddie Haskell]

MC:

According to some, Bush and Cheney's actions during the Viet Nam war reflected "integrity" whereas Kerry's actions in that same time frame showed lack of integrity.

Eddie

 

[Turfgrass]

Does anyone really think that it's fair for a company that Cheney still receives benefits from to get a non-bid contract, thats unamerican!

I am so sick of this, "Cheney gave his pals a no bid contract."

Halliburton won the competitive bidding process for LOGCAP in 1992. They then lost that bidding process five years later in 1997. In spite of the fact that Halliburton no longer held the LOGCAP contract, Bill Clinton went ahead and awarded a no-bid contract to Halliburton to do some work in the Balkans supporting U.S. peacekeeping actions. Odd, isn't it. The same people who are screaming about Halliburton right now had absolutely nothing .. nada .. nunca .. not one thing to say about Halliburton when it was the Clinton Administration that was handing out contracts .. with no bidding, by the way. You might also be interested in knowing that Al Gore was quite a fan of Halliburton. Gore's reinventing government panel had some very complimentary things to say about Halliburton and the services it provides to the U.S. government. Ahhh ... but what does Al Gore know, right?

That brings us to 2001. It's time for bidding on the LOGCAP contract again. Halliburton is right in there, and wins the bid. This means that at the time of the Iraq War Halliburton had the bid for providing logistical and other services to the U.S. government. They were the go-to company. So, along comes the U.S. Army with a fat contract for Halliburton to put out oil-well fires in Iraq and all hell breaks loose. To the left this is all the proof you needed to show that this whole war was about oil and enriching Bush pals.

Recap: Clinton awards no-bid contract to Halliburton at a time when Halliburton did not hold the LOGCAP contract. Bush awards contract to Halliburton at a time when Halliburton DID hold the LOGCAP contract.

So did Clinton go into the Balkans to enrich Halliburton?

 

[Turfgrass]

Turfgrass

"What would "liberal" mean in the Liberal lexicon?"
__________________
Beats me as there are no liberal TV stations that distinguish as such. Kosar's post re Joe Scarborough was right on the money re the 'liberal media bias' in this country. There simply aren't any liberal media outlets available anywhere for me to be able to sample their relative interpetation of what 'liberal' might mean.

But one thing I am certain is the continued 'dumbing down' of the political problems in the USA into 'liberal' vs 'conservative' for the masses. It's sophmoric and agenda driven with no useful insight into anything.

You you say you don't see any Liberal TV anywhere? How about another day of rave reviews for John Kerry and John Edwards, especially from CBS.

?It was the all important and perfectly choreographed first glimpse of the Democratic Party?s new dream team,? CBS?s Byron Pitts gushed over video on Wednesday night of the Kerry and Edwards families on the lawn of Teresa?s Kerry?s Pennsylvania estate. Leading into a clip of John Edwards proclaiming that ?people are desperate to believe again that tomorrow will be better than today,? Pitts characterized that as expressing ?humanity.?

Pitts soon trumpeted Edwards? ?passion? and how ?Kerry-Edwards versus Bush-Cheney is a contrast in style, politics, even in physical appearance.? CBS?s Bill Plante touted how Democrats ?now have someone who speaks comfortably about values, about religion and middle class concerns.?

Over on the NBC Nightly News, Carl Quintanilla claimed that the Democratic ticket is ?winning praise even through the clenched teeth of frustrated Republicans.?

Compare everything above with how the same shows treated Dick Cheney in 2000, the day after Bush announced him as his running mate.

The ideological labeling of Dick Cheney continued unabated with ABC?s Terry Moran relaying how Gore?s team is trying to hurt Bush ?by painting Cheney as an extremist.? Dan Rather called Cheney a ?hardline conservative? and though Cheney has a ?very conservative? record, Phil Jones threatened it?s not a problem now ?but this could change as voters learn more about his record.? NBC?s David Gregory tagged Cheney ?an unabashed conservative,? before listing some supposedly out of touch views.

 

[Chanman]

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1153373/posts
Is Al Franken a Lib?

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39079

Plenty of blame to go around on both sides-IMO.

 

[auspice]

Turfgrass

"You you say you don't see any Liberal TV anywhere? How about another day of rave reviews for John Kerry and John Edwards, especially from CBS."
-----------------

You got to be kidding me, right? There was no embracement or coronation of Kerry or Edwards, even on CBS. It was simply the news of the day. But what would you and other compassionate conservatives do about a network that talks day and night about the Harken engery fiasco with GWB? You know the one. The one where as president he sold his stock 8 frikkin' days before the price of the stock collapsed. It was later found that notes by GWB had suggested putting liabilites of the company 'off book' to conseal the value of the company just like his biggest contributor Enron later did. And of course the SEC reports on who purchased his shares of stock that were required to be filed with the SEC but weren't. Of course, those records have all now been sealed in his daddy's library along with his arrest records and other damaging stuff. But this sort of stuff could be continually brought up on a left wing network. It simply isn't. It's never mentioned. Never.

Or how about one that daily talks about Laura running a stop sign and killing someone in her car. Again, no message. There is no AGENDA driven liberal network out there. The major networks are corporate controlled and have failed in asking any of the questions that could have kept us out of this Iraq fiasco.

The only thing that's different from the other major networks (barring faux) from a content standpoint is some flowery language or footage one might have one day and the other the next. No real difference. As a matter of fact, the news networks in the USA have deteriorated to the point of almost worthless. I used to somehow think that the network news agencies were the 'protector' of the american public but no more. They're under duress and have a muzzle over their mouths as well.

 

[StevieD]

Thanks for missing me guys but for reference I look like a cross between Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise. But I won't tell you what parts!
We got another another terror warning today. It appears, at least according to Tom Ridge, that al-Qaeda could strike somewhere, sometime. Yup, these guys are right on top of things.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Eddie We could have saved 50 million if Clinton simply was told the truth so put the blame where it lies.All he had to do is say yes I am an immoral-lieing SOB and we'd wouldn't have went thru the trial for obstruction of justice.

On who the terrorist would rather have---next time someone posts from terrorist media READ it instead of skipping over it. You might find what they say interesting.Get away from cnn and New york times for a few minutes a day you might find the world is bit larger and quite interesting. Seriously!
That is reason I ,Cman ,AR and others post links to other media to try and broaden your horizens--didn't you read CMan post on Algezeera hype on M Moore or the ones I posted with there rah rah of Kerry from the NY Times? Are you not aware Hezbalah is trying to find ways to show Moores picture in the Arab world? ---you can lead a horse to water ---------

 

[auspice]

Hey StevieD

"We got another another terror warning today. It appears, at least according to Tom Ridge, that al-Qaeda could strike somewhere, sometime. Yup, these guys are right on top of things"
-------

Makes you wonder how much fear can be generated by this administration before the election. If Kerry gets a substantial lead, look out. They'll throw out the kitchen sink to try and get it back. I'd hate to be in the stock market in a long position if Kerry is leading or appears to be leading.

Makes you wonder how much of a 'fear factor' will be needed to generate the reinstitution of the military draft after the election?

 

[djv]

Yup Kerry and Mr Ed getting to much attention. Time to blur our vision with a punch of BS about Pending attacks. Pending for when tomorrow. Also wanted some info out in the air waves to hide as much info about Republican crook Ken Lay.

 

[StevieD]

Considering it is Ridges job I would like to think that he could come up with something more than that they will attack someplace at sometime. It is a joke. The sad part is that they don't have a clue. As for the draft I think it is a given that we will have to have one no matter who gets elected. If Bush had any balz at all he would institute it as soon as possible. But of course he puts his own election ahead of the security of the country.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

One thing about it DJV there are countless #'s of these corporate theives getting prosecuted this administration how many last administration?? and I said prosecuted NOT pardoned.

NOW on to liberal logic----
Per Bobbys quote that every liberal here climbed on board and appluaded and agreed with.

"I think the liberals want him out more. I think the terrorists would love him to stay. Ask yourself if Al Qaeda is more powerful on July 8, 2004 than they were on January 20, 2000 or on September 12, 2001. They have an immoral nation invading an arab state that never provoked them. It's hard to develop a scenario that Bin Laden would have prefered our country to take then the one that we have. They don't even have to pay for marketing anymore"

"It's hard to develop a scenario that Bin Laden would have prefered our country to take then the one that we have. They don't even have to pay for marketing anymore"

I don't think OSB much cares for scenerio of hiding knowing its a matter of time and I believe Saddam didn't look to thrilled when they pulled him out of hole.If you think OSB relishes numerous arab states joining with U.S. against his org you been smoking something.
And as far as marketing I hope we piss em off real good as I would much rather fight them on there turf then let them train-plan and carry out their atrocities unmolested as in the past.
Evidently you do!!!! I don't understand how you think the world was better off before declaring war on them--and think a look the other way attitude was more effective--but then again I am not a liberal.

1st for you to believe this liberal logic you would have to believe that Islamic terrorist need us to invade Arab country to "provoke them".

Really ? How many thousands of lives including Cole incident-Beiruit-911 (just the tip of iceberg) and that is just U.S not every other country where they kill every week.Pray tell me what invasion provoked them. Right I know--It was Bush since all these were planned or took part after he invaded Iraq as you liberals tried to spin it.Apparently you need someone to tell you you it is and has been them against any other religion and way of life.

"They have an immoral nation invading them" Evidently you all did read Algezeera during last administration as that was their slogan then--I wonder why??

" Ask yourself if Al Qaeda is more powerful on July 8, 2004 than they were on January 20, 2000 or on September 12, 2001."

This has got to be the ultimate of liberal logic.
Do killing 1000's of them plus numerous leaders and have having OSB in hiding rather than training and openly recruiting make them stronger or weaker?

Does removing their main playground and supporter "Afgan and Taliban make them stronger or weaker?

Does having Pakistan-Lybia-Saudi-Jordon-Turkey ect declaring war on them instead of harboring them make them weaker or stronger??

Does setting up shop in 2 countries in the middle of terrorist heartland make them stronger or weaker?

I could go on endlessly but it would not change liberal logic.

I sure hope this type of logic don't spill over into your concepts of wagering.

 

[djv]

DTB you and I know going to war on just B S. Thats wrong. We want to fight terror. I think that 150 Billion blow-en in Iraq would have help at home more then what it's done there. And were sill not done in Afgan. In fact yesterday they said Afgan could become like Korea where we need folks stationed for years. I don't mind that if there not getting shot at all the time.
As for the real terror guys. I think we have seen how they can be very patient. They like to plan big attacks here. We don't see then running around with these car bombs. If they did they would try and make it big with about 10 or 15 same day in different cities. Thats the kind of big splash they like. They waited 10 years last time. What make everyone think they wont wait again. However there are more of them now since we pissed half the world of at us. So I guess I cant say Bush has done a hell of a lot to make any of us safer. Pray these ass hole don't get some of our Olympic team.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Ya know DJV I always speak of logic and reasoning and I never could make much out of Viet Nam. While I agree we shouldn't have been there in the 1st place I am clueless as how that war was fought with a defined boundary between the north and south. Could of ended that in short order by concentrating on the north vs defending the south with 1/10 of casualties.I assume because China was 70 miles from border--but they knew that going in
---and why did the north continuely send troops south to get massecred when they could play the waiting game knowing we would not stay there forever.
It is next to impossible to beat someone on their turf unless there are folks in that country on same side with a goal and the courage like South Korea.
I think we will need troops in Afgan for long time and glad to have them there for logistical reasons if nothing else as I see it imperative to have base in the midst of these Islamic nations if they are going to produce generations of terrorists. If and granted it is big if Iraq takes over shows the other Islamic nations democracy is not that bad an idea it could go longways in changing their views--however the terrorist are quite aware of that and will concentrate all their efforts in keeping that from happening for years to come I am afraid and not sure the Iraq's have the guts for it. Their appointed leaders appear now to be on right course but will be matter of time till each are assasinted and whether other Iraqi's step up to the plate in their place will determine if all was for naught.