Is any one confused here?

e-mail | Last month | I don't know

[big bad easter bunny]

Clinton awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Yugoslavia - good... Bush awards Halliburton no-bid contract in Iraq - bad...

Clinton spends 77 billion on war in Serbia - good... Bush spends 87 billion in Iraq - bad...

Clinton imposes regime change in Serbia - good... Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Clinton bombs Christian Serbs on behalf of Muslim Albanian terrorists- good... Bush liberates 25 million from a genocidal dictator - bad...

Clinton bombs Chinese embassy - good... Bush bombs terrorist camps - bad...

Clinton commits felonies while in office - good... Bush lands on aircraft carrier in jumpsuit - bad...

No mass graves found in Serbia - good... No WMD found Iraq - bad...

Stock market crashes in 2000 under Clinton - good... Economy on upswing under Bush - bad...

Clinton refuses to take custody of Bin Laden - good... World Trade Centers fall under Bush - bad...

Clinton says Saddam has nukes - good... Bush says Saddam has nukes - bad...

Clinton calls for regime change in Iraq - good... Bush imposes regime change in Iraq - bad...

Terrorist training in Afghanistan under Clinton - good... Bush destroys training camps in Afghanistan - bad...

Milosevic not yet convicted - good... Saddam turned over for trial - bad...

Ahh, it's so confusing!

Every year an independent tax watchdog group analyzes the average tax burden on Americans, and then calculates the "Tax Freedom Day".

This is the day after which the money you earn goes to you, not the government. This year, tax freedom day was April 11th. That's the earliest it has been since 1991. It's latest day ever was May 2nd, which occurred in 2000. Notice anything special about those dates?

Recently, John Kerry gave a speech in which he claimed Americans are actually paying more taxes under Bush, despite the tax cuts. He gave no explanation and provided no data for this claim.

Another interesting fact: Both George Bush and John Kerry are wealthy men. Bush owns only one home, his ranch in Texas. Kerry owns 4 mansions, all worth several million dollars. (His ski resort home in Idaho is an old barn brought over from Europe in pieces. Not your average A-frame).

Bush paid $250,000 in taxes this year; Kerry paid $90,000. Does that sound right? The man who wants to raise your taxes obviously has figured out a way to avoid paying his own.

Pass this on. Only 42 days until the election

[Izzy Dunne]

Pass this on. Only 42 days until the election.

Pass this on. Your calendar needs winding...

[clee1]

Been passed on - all over the internet for the last month.

[uncleshag]

I am pretty new to FR. Is this posted every flippin' day?

[sport]

Bump

[SquirrelKing]

BTTT

[txhurl]

I lose track of FRtime lots, too.

[Lord Nelson]

Actually I am curious myself about Haliburton. Could no one else have done this same work? Why are American labourers being sent to Iraq when the Iraqi people can and should be doing the work? I guess it just appears as a conflict of interest.

[meenie]

Clinton intervention in Serbia-bad. Bush intervention in Iraq-bad. Republicrat intentions-bad.

[Freee-dame]

bump

[Sonny M]

Actually I am curious myself about Haliburton. Could no one else have done this same work?

Pretty much, no. Its why Kerry and Edwards may rip Haliburton, but they don't name replacements. Over on the "other website", they wrestled this question for awhile.

I don't know if its pathetic, or stupid, but the closest companies they could think of (of similiar size and scope) that compete with Haliburton or could compete, were french companies, and a couple of them have ties to Victor Boot.

[stefanbc]

13 days my friend. Good job in recounting the vile hypocrisy of our totalitarian brethren. Commit to liberty!

[Lord Nelson]

Playing the devil's advocate, the biggest economy in the world has no other firms available to go into Iraq to rebuild?

For instance there were charges being laid that a bridge that costs 100 million for Americans to build could have been built by Iraqis for 10 million.

[big bad easter bunny]

Did you read what I put in for date published? I read on this site every day and I swear I never read it!

[norton]

1) Haliburton is a company, a large organization structured to perform large and complex tasks; it's not "American labourers".
2) There were a whole bunch of things that needed to be rebuilt as soon as possible.
3)There were no massed Iraqi resources lined up to rebuild much of anything; they are still trying to create non-state initiative and capabilities two years after.
4) Haliburton, large organization etc., is paying wages to a whole lot of Iraqis and other non-Americans who would otherwise not be employed.
5) By restoring or building new infrastructure as fast as possible the rest of the country (Iraq) has a chance to start back up the cultural and economic ladder.
6) Haliburton, Brown & Root, PA&E, there is always someone in business to take charge of managing tasks within a crisis zone; big bucks but a necessary capability.
7) Outsource to the French? No way, stick with someone you know and can trust (somewhat).

[dsc]

There are pretty strict requirements for "sole source" contracts. The contractor has to be the only one capable of meeting all the requirements of the work, on time and within budget. Otherwise they have to go through the competitive bidding process.

I had a sole source contract once, because I had a particular skill set plus personal availability. They could have let several contracts for different tasks to several different people. There were people who could perform tasks 1 and 3 of 5, and others who could perform task 2 only, or 4 and 5 only, but they would then have been faced with meeting impossible deadlines for finding people and letting contracts for emergent work, and it would have been a constant struggle, a big mess, and would have cost them a lot more money--or they could just give me the contract and get everything in one bundle.

It was pretty much the same sort of thing for Halliburton. They looked at the scope of work, and made a decision (documented) that Halliburton was the only firm available, able, and willing to take on the whole package.

[Lord Nelson]

Thanks. I had always wondered if the US had legislated rules concerning government contracts to avoid cronyism.

[Lord Nelson]

I will take your word for it that they are employing Iraqis. At the time it had the appearance of wrong doing, so I was surprised Bush didn't make an effort at that time to assure Americans that all was kosher with the deal. In this age of cynicism about politicians (we all know the lobby game that is played in Washington) it is important to communicate to the people about these things. After all it was Cheney's company.

I don't blame Bush from not wanting to give a single contract to France. At least some nations were polite about not helping in Iraq - I guess the French are never polite.

[all4one]

Thanks for the post....I read this site everyday as well. This is a great post....with 12 days remaining.....some points cannot be mentioned enough.

[Sonny M]

Playing the devil's advocate, the biggest economy in the world has no other firms available to go into Iraq to rebuild?

In a word, yea. Scary as it may sound (and it should). If the lefty's can't find alternatives who are able, in size, scope, and skill, then obviousley Bush won't be able to.

Its quite likely that Clinton did try to find competitors, he was unable, No senator as far as I have followed has been naming alternates. The silence is deafening.