These idiots. The reason "Halliburton" gets these contracts (and got the ones in Iraq) is that Brown & Root, the company that's actually getting the contract, builds and maintains oil rigs, and they're the leaders in that field.

The reason it isn't newsworthy is because this is a Republican administration and the recipients are Democrats. If they (not Blanco and Company) are granting a no-bid to a major-league Democrat, there is the presumption that everything is above board. Bernhard has no political ties to the administration. Can't quite say that about Halliburton.

Oh, and he's not the Vice President of the United States of America.

I'd be curious to know what Halliburton's US government contract values were pre-Bush.

After reading the Other Mike S., consider this: That is what passes for honesty and integrity among Democrats and their supporters these days. It is why the Democrats are more and more not trusted to run things. It is why my parent's entire Irish Catholic Democrat family now votes Republican. Because we don't have the stomach to preen in such fashion. We have a conscience.

Maybe its because Halliburton has earned its reputation - they've siphoned off billions and billions of dollars (" including 1.03 billion questioned costs and $422 million in unsupported costs" ). Because with Cheney as VP its quite obvious that Halliburton's interests come before that of the American taxpayer, and certainly far ahead of the Iraqis.

Its considered news because it is news. It happened, and the newspaper wrote about it. I'm never quite sure how you see that as bias. It didn't happen ?

Shaw runs a company, he is a philanthropist, he is in Lousianna. He recently became chair in that state. That's not a conflict of interests. He got $200 Million. And he'll probably actually do the job, unlike Halliburton who routinely fail to complete the job they were contracted for.

Its kind of like giving 500 pro-war protesters the same amount of TV time as the 500,000 anti-war protesters. But in that case at least we get to laugh at you.

We don't hate you because you're Republicans, we hate you because you're assholes who steal from the American people.

A laugh a minute. So when a company is identified with Republican Party connected lower officers, it is an evil construct. But when the media decides to not take notice that the highest officers of the SAME company are high Democrat officials in the same damn state, the same company suddenly become roses and fragrance, bringing light and goodness to the world. That passes for integrity among Democrats today.
Thanks for the civics lesson.

I thought hate was wrong.

Mikem: Huh?

WHAT passes for honesty and integrity amongst Democrats?

I was addressing why it is newsworthy when a Republican administration is giving no bid contracts to the company formerly run by their party's number two guy. What does this have to do with the honesty or integrity of Democrats?

And what are you talking about when you say a company is associated with "Republican Party connected lower officers"? Lower officers? He is the frigging VP of our country! We only have one officer that's higher.

Finally, what are you babbling about saying the Dems are high officials in the same company? You need to read the article again. Different companies, different leaders, different political parties.

Read the post again. I guess you missed the whole point of it. Certainly you're not just ignoring such obviously suspicious connections, are you?
Again, Democratic 'integrity', on display.

Then explain it to me. What suspicous connections? The grantors of the no-bid contracts are Republicans, not Democrats. Are you suggesting that Blanco and Nagin pressured Bush to give The Shaw Group no-bid contracts? If so, I'd like to see some evidence of that.

Also, if you're implying that I'm trying to defend the Democrats, you're sadly mistaken. I'm a libertarian, sport. Both of our major parties are scum buckets. In this case, though, it's the Republicans, not the Democrats.

If you can't understand the point that Ravenwood is making about the Shaw group and the way in which the media 'overlooked' the Democratic Party connections of the CEO, then it is deliberate on your part and I could waste an entire day and you would still be saying "Huh?".

I'm going to say this slowly, so maybe it will sink in: He asked why the media didn't equate the Haliburton angle with the Shaw one. I explained why. Meanwhile, off in mikem world, you were spinning out of control over "integrity among Democrats". Pay attention now, this is the important part: The post was about the press, not the Democrats.

It seems as though you are so obsessed with the Dems, you've lost the ability to comprehend or discuss without jumping to "talking points".

Sigh. I understand that you are trying to claim that Shaw does not matter because Bush (who controls all aspects of local, state and national government) is a Republican and therefore only Republican connections matter, but you are also (deliberately?) ignoring the point of Republican complaints: that reporters mentioned the lower company officers' Republican connections, while the CEO's Democratic connections were not mentioned at all. My integrity remark referenced your convenient downplaying of a CEO's connection, as I assumed you were a Democrat. I think that is a logical error, if it is one. If someone thinks dogshit doesn't stink, I assume he is a dog lover.

My mother always told me never to fight with the retarded. I'll honor that.

OK, you're right. My bad. Goodbye.

Real Harvard material, your Mom, eh? Don't fight with the retarded, but calling your opponent a retard is permissable. Real style.