Obama's stimulus will cost more than the entire Iraq war.

[fastyxx]

TheRealMafoo said:

fastyxx said:

Again, Mafoo, you are so completely deluded by the completely biased blogs you are reading.   One is spending by choice, out of the country, on a war, with billions on non-compete bids to companies such as Halliburton that are heavily in bed with the people like Cheney. 

Sorry dude, but you say something like this in the same thread that you accuse me of being a shill for the republican party, is just laughable.I'm not sure I ever called you a shill for the GOP.  I referred to your penchant for quoting "conservatives" that provide no verifiable support for their arguments.  I notice you never provided any support anywhere I suggested it was needed.  You skip those comments every time.

I think the largest non-compete contract given to Halliburton, was done by Clinton (at least at the time it was). It was also the right thing to do.

If the US government wanted to award a multi-billion dollar contract for computers with the primary OS being UNIX based, and it had be accompanied with an industry standard music player. Also, the computers needed to be metal laptops and less then an inch thick. Why would they put a bid out?

There is only one company in the world who can deliver such a requirement. Asking people to spend 10's of millions of dollars to bid on something that only one company can do, is stupid.

What Halliburton does, no one else can. It's why you give them non-compete contracts. Obama gave Halliburton a $500 million dollar non-compete contract as well, and it was the right thing to do.

Both presidents that have bookmarked Bush did the same thing as Bush, but Bush was bad for doing it and they were just fine doing it.Equating the contracting of the Iraq War with what came before it is funny.  You need to do a little more reading about this.  I'm not pulling it up right now, because I only have a moment.  But they spent billions on contracting work that could have been done much more cheaply by military and government workers.  And then they paid those contractors up to 10x more than what the soldiers were getting.  

It's a laughable partisan argument, based on fear over logic.

 

On, and if you're going to try and argue that Thomas Jefferson was for big government, I got to see where this goes, because that would be the biggest re-write of american history I have ever seen.I'm not arguing he was pro-big government.  I'm arguing that you are quoting corrupted text that has been altered to make the Right's use of the statement seem stronger.  Again, you ignore everything about the quite valid point I'm making and focus on the one item you think you have a small light emanating from, when really you have nothing.  Jefferson was reacting to getting bullied by the big bad government of England.  In many ways, we ARE England now.  And many of the policies espoused by you  are in direct conflict with what he felt the role of government should be.  I gave you some nice examples about diplomacy and war for examples.  

See bold.  Again, you answer nothing of all the legitimate criticisms posed in your direction.  None.  Because you have no answers.