BestOfBid.com

Why does a US Government document attack Haliburton for chargeing for 42,000 meals when it only served 14,000?

Some people didn't like my Rolling Stone Source, Kelly B found the information from a US government document: http://lautenberg.senate.gov/documents/domestic/dpc_transcript.pdf So, rather than attack me and rollingstone, now the good conservatives can either attack the US Senate, or address my questions regarding Haliburton and the plutocracy and kleoptocracy we live in. And liberals you aren't off the hook either, George Soros is a major shareholder and under Bill Clinton Haliburton got no bid contracts. ---- We're getting ripped off and everyone wants to blame the other party, wake up America, wake the %^&( up!@

Public Comments

1. It's all Clinton's fault. That must be it now.
2. Because it is fraud.
3. "We're getting ripped off and everyone wants to blame the other party." Well said! If we stopped looking at politics like a football game ("rah for our side! boo for the other side!") then maybe we'd be able to work together as a COUNTRY to solve some of our worst problems. Halliburton is a problem, and it's a lot bigger than Cheney.
4. Preach.
5. that and the 998,000 dollar shipping bill for the 2 washers. If the government used the effort it expends on subverting the constitution on checking how it spends money we could have a balanced budget on that alone.
6. It is sad that the media does not make this headlines. News like this goes unnoticed and besides the fact that Dick Cheney's Haliburton get the contracts but also overprices because they know they can. Thanks for sharing this.
7. How much money are we really talking about? Now lets compare that to the billions in aid NK received in a bill created and signed by Bill Clinton to build a nuke program. The US provided Billions of dollars in food and heating oil so the NK's would not pursue nukes. They did anyway. The billions upon billions of dollars in earmarks both sides of the isle place into bills at the last minute so they are approved without over-site. The Democratic Congress said they were going to put an end to this, it has gotten worse. Why focus on the small stuff and if you think corruption is a Rep thing, think again. Or in your own words wake the (&(^(*&(* up. Besides it is not like Halibuton forces itself in these contracts. The governement hires them. Someone mentioned overpricing. Just how much does it cost to provide fuel and food in a war zone? How much do you need to pay people, how much insurance do they need, etc.... None of us has enough information to determine what fair pricing really is. I know if most of you were asked to work in Iraq you would state a salary that is likely too high, or overpriced you might say.
8. Calm down Spartacus. You'll never get to Sicily with that attitude.
9. Because there have been billing "irregularities" This is old news, there have been all kinds of abuses by Halliburton. For example, its KBR subsidiary was at one time supplying the troops with bacteria laden bottled water. Halliburton won the bidding for a contact in the Balkans in 1992, and Clinton allowed it to be renewed in 1996 or 1997 so as not to change horses in mid stream. There's absolutely no comparison in scope or number to the KBR and Halliburton contracts awarded by the Bush administration. At the start of the Iraq war, a few democrats raised the issue of why Halliburton was getting the contracts without competitive bidding. The Bush administration responded they were absolutely the best and only company that could do the job. Despite all the problems such as over-billing and poor service, they keep getting contract after contract. Clinton and the Democrats have no responsibility for these contracts; the war in Iraq did not exist when Clinton was in office and the Bush administration which is responsible for this war profiteering is run by Republicans. If you'll do the "research", you'll see.