Metal Sludge Gossip Board

You know, the same Halliburton that liberals started jacking off to at the mention of it's name.

Obama Administration has awarded a $500 million contract to Halliburton.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ate1-.html

Uh oh. A no-bid contract to Halliburton. I'll be waiting for those very same people who condemned Bush to condemn Obama for the very same action.

Cheney must be diggin' it, he's still a stockholder in Halliburton I'm sure....

Nevermind wrote:You know, the same Halliburton that liberals started jacking off to at the mention of it's name.

Obama Administration has awarded a $500 million contract to Halliburton.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ate1-.html

Uh oh. A no-bid contract to Halliburton. I'll be waiting for those very same people who condemned Bush to condemn Obama for the very same action.

How much Halliburton stock does Obama hold?

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:

Nevermind wrote:You know, the same Halliburton that liberals started jacking off to at the mention of it's name.

Obama Administration has awarded a $500 million contract to Halliburton.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ate1-.html

Uh oh. A no-bid contract to Halliburton. I'll be waiting for those very same people who condemned Bush to condemn Obama for the very same action.

How much Halliburton stock does Obama hold?

It doesn't fucking matter. No bid contracts are highly unethical at best.

WhiteHouseSubsAC wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:

Nevermind wrote:You know, the same Halliburton that liberals started jacking off to at the mention of it's name.

Obama Administration has awarded a $500 million contract to Halliburton.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ate1-.html

Uh oh. A no-bid contract to Halliburton. I'll be waiting for those very same people who condemned Bush to condemn Obama for the very same action.

How much Halliburton stock does Obama hold?

It doesn't fucking matter. No bid contracts are highly unethical at best.

Exactly. Besides, the govt. could be getting kickbacks and donations from Halliburton in a myriad of ways the public will never know about.

so the politician from Illinois, one of the most politically corrupt states in the US, who's already spent billions of dollars bailing out failing corporations, the same guy who aggressively pushed through a bill requiring all Americans to do business with the private sector is giving a no bid contract to Haliburton?

Shocker

he's been nothing but the lapdog to the private sector since he was elected, he may be even more corrupt than Bush 2

I condemn Obama for this action. Many of his policies are way too similar to Dubya's for my liking.

That being said, Wiggaz please. Explain how he's corrupt. Just because you don't agree with his actions, just because he's from Chicago, just because the grapes taste sour doesn't make him corrupt.

WhiteHouseSubsAC wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:

Nevermind wrote:You know, the same Halliburton that liberals started jacking off to at the mention of it's name.

Obama Administration has awarded a $500 million contract to Halliburton.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-0 ... ate1-.html

Uh oh. A no-bid contract to Halliburton. I'll be waiting for those very same people who condemned Bush to condemn Obama for the very same action.

How much Halliburton stock does Obama hold?

It doesn't fucking matter. No bid contracts are highly unethical at best.

The main issue people had with the Bush admin. issuing no-bid contracts to Halliburton was the documented financial links they had with the company.

This really pisses me off. Seriously.

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:


The main issue people had with the Bush admin. issuing no-bid contracts to Halliburton was the documented financial links they had with the company.

The truth is, the Clinton Administration gave Halliburton no-bid contracts for work in Bosnia And Kosovo. Obama is now doing the same thing in Iraq.
For Bush/Cheney, it was just another liberal media driven story with no balance given like I did above about Clinton.

SmokingGun wrote:

Never saw that before...Pretty funny but also sad it's seemingly becoming more true all the time...

Nevermind wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:


The main issue people had with the Bush admin. issuing no-bid contracts to Halliburton was the documented financial links they had with the company.

The truth is, the Clinton Administration gave Halliburton no-bid contracts for work in Bosnia And Kosovo. Obama is now doing the same thing in Iraq.
For Bush/Cheney, it was just another liberal media driven story with no balance given like I did above about Clinton.

No-bid contracts are pretty unethical, true. What's worse is being in a position of executive power and directly profiting from conflict that your administration has taken the action to instigate. Next to the jackals that comprised the last administration, 19th century robber-barons look positively benign.

Ugmo wrote:I condemn Obama for this action. Many of his policies are way too similar to Dubya's for my liking.

That being said, Wiggaz please. Explain how he's corrupt. Just because you don't agree with his actions, just because he's from Chicago, just because the grapes taste sour doesn't make him corrupt.

Illinois isn't that big a place and Chicago is even smaller. I'd be willing to bet that Obama at least KNEW some of the shit that was going on. That doesn't make him bad, it just makes him a politician.

Nevermind wrote:

MasterOfMeatPuppets wrote:


The main issue people had with the Bush admin. issuing no-bid contracts to Halliburton was the documented financial links they had with the company.

The truth is, the Clinton Administration gave Halliburton no-bid contracts for work in Bosnia And Kosovo. Obama is now doing the same thing in Iraq.
For Bush/Cheney, it was just another liberal media driven story with no balance given like I did above about Clinton.

Except Clinton was never a Halliburton executive with considerable stock options either. To be fair, Cheney put his in a blind trust and the proceeds are donated to charity. I don't know whether they are unequivocally unethical by nature, but no-bid contracts do lend themselves to giving the appearance of impropriety, not to mention they usually don't deliver the cost savings that competitive bidding can. Just ask Dick Cheney.

Ever notice how even though Obama goes back on specific promises he made, you have people here who just REFUSE to think he is doing anything less than a stellar job?

Oct. 2, 2008 - "I will finally end the abuse of no-bid contracts once and for all,"
Oct. 2, 2008 - "The days of sweetheart deals for Halliburton will be over when I'm in the White House."

May 8, 2010 - President Obama has awarded a no-bid contract to KBR Inc. for $568 million. That’s more than 20,000 times the maximum he set for a no-bid contract. (Go find it if you don't know who/what KBR is)

Now what's next is even though I'm simply pointing out complete an undeniable fact, the lemmings and minions will post links to sites saying why this was done and how it's "Not the same thing." We realize you all think he's just the cats meow, but come on. When Bush did this, he was torn apart by libs. When the Savior is, they look away.

Qualified to give props to Ugmo for being honest.

wylde342 wrote:Ever notice how even though Obama goes back on specific promises he made, you have people here who just REFUSE to think he is doing anything less than a stellar job?

Oct. 2, 2008 - "I will finally end the abuse of no-bid contracts once and for all,"
Oct. 2, 2008 - "The days of sweetheart deals for Halliburton will be over when I'm in the White House."

May 8, 2010 - President Obama has awarded a no-bid contract to KBR Inc. for $568 million. That’s more than 20,000 times the maximum he set for a no-bid contract. (Go find it if you don't know who/what KBR is)

Now what's next is even though I'm simply pointing out complete an undeniable fact, the lemmings and minions will post links to sites saying why this was done and how it's "Not the same thing." We realize you all think he's just the cats meow, but come on. When Bush did this, he was torn apart by libs. When the Savior is, they look away.

Qualified to give props to Ugmo for being honest.

Thanks for posting that...I remember hearing Obama specifically mentioning Halliburton and no more no bid contracts....I've been searching for the very quotes you just provided....Thanks for saving me some time and hassle... This contract is utter bullshit, despite the circumstances...

wylde342 wrote:Ever notice how even though Obama goes back on specific promises he made, you have people here who just REFUSE to think he is doing anything less than a stellar job?

Oct. 2, 2008 - "I will finally end the abuse of no-bid contracts once and for all,"
Oct. 2, 2008 - "The days of sweetheart deals for Halliburton will be over when I'm in the White House."

May 8, 2010 - President Obama has awarded a no-bid contract to KBR Inc. for $568 million. That’s more than 20,000 times the maximum he set for a no-bid contract. (Go find it if you don't know who/what KBR is)

Now what's next is even though I'm simply pointing out complete an undeniable fact, the lemmings and minions will post links to sites saying why this was done and how it's "Not the same thing." We realize you all think he's just the cats meow, but come on. When Bush did this, he was torn apart by libs. When the Savior is, they look away.

Qualified to give props to Ugmo for being honest.

What you mean is you don't understand why people don't revile Obama like they did Bush and why he doesn't inspire the level of hatred that Bush did. When Bush did this, his Vice President owned a large amount of stock in the corporation that benefited from those contracts. It's a bit more difficult to imply cronyism in Obama's case.

Obama doesn't always live up to my expectation but he hasn't been too far from the mark for the most part.

He's just a puppet.

WhiteHouseSubsAC wrote:
Illinois isn't that big a place and Chicago is even smaller. I'd be willing to bet that Obama at least KNEW some of the shit that was going on. That doesn't make him bad, it just makes him a politician.

By nature, doesn't Chicago kinda have to be smaller than Illinois?