“Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

My understanding is the following:

Wilson had no statements, either before or in the first few days after the incident, where he complained about the ability of illegal aliens to buy into the public option (though they couldn't, of course, use government subsidies to do so). Instead he, like, to the best of my knowledge, a large majority of the Republican caucus, was worried that there was only an unclear and insufficient mechanism (essentially to be added later) to ensure that illegal aliens didn't use government money for healthcare.

Along with that, my understanding is that the complaints about illegals being able to purchase into the public option, even without using federal funds, only arose after the fact to try to justify Wilson's remarks.

Were illegal aliens unable to purchase health insurance (using their own, and not federal money), I would actually be a little disappointed. It seems an unnecessary restriction of the free market. Additionally, and unfortunately I couldn't find a link on the first page of google, I thought I read that allowing illegal immigrants access to a public option would have the potential to actually decrease costs to American citizens.

And your quote is a paper tiger if there isn't anything in place to enforce it. Okay, so the bill says illegals can't get federal monies....and we are/were going to enforce this how? That was the issue. Obama presented his remarks that illegals werent going to get served....a lie. So what if it was illegal.....who the fuck was going to catch them? It aint illegal if you don't get caught....

"Veep via Iraq/Halliburton (which looked tame compared to Obama's industrial complex, and were only getting warmed up"

Care to explain that remark?

There are no ties between Obama and any major industry. Not the way that Enron basically bought the White House for George W Bush (and then installed their executives and thier lawyer in the Adminstration),

Nor is there anything like the no bid contracts that Cheney arranged for his former employer either.

Kellogg, Brown, Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton, won a competitively bid logistics contract known as LOGCAP in 2001.

That's because it's nice to have someone around to go do stuff at a moment's notice. Like for example dig a latrine as opposed to putting it out for bid while the troops crap in their pants. ( It's necessary sometimes to put things in a context that folks like you can connect with.)

So then, follow me on this, if you can? In late 2002 KBR was tasked under LOGCAP for a study to combat oil well fires in Iraq if Saddam should torch them like he did in Kuwait. Seemed like reasonable request in that they, KBR, put out the fires in Kuwait and were also, under the LOGCAP contract, obligated to conduct such studies. Okay so far...am I getting through? The study was completed in February 2003 about 60 days before the invasion of Iraq. Now you make the call dumbass....do you put it out for bids or give the job to the folks who did the same thing in Kuwait?

Here's the rest of the story: a little shitfaced Congressman from California demanded a briefing on why Cheney's old company was given a $7 billion no-bid contract for the job. The little rat smelled headlines, but nevertheless, he was dutifully briefed instead of rightfully being told to go fuck himself. In that briefing he learned the contract was for $0 billion up to $7 billion. That's right....zero, nada, zip up to $7 billion. The reason being nobody knew how many, if any, wells Hussein might light up. Making any sense yet Tommy?

But then, just two weeks after that briefing, Waxman went on NPR to express his outrage about Halliburton's no-bid $7 billion contract. He was correct in that the lie, with the hel[ of a complicit media, seems to have stuck with you stinkling little twits.

Get a life!

First of all, virtually everything you say about Cheney and Halliburton is false.

Cheney continued to recieve deferred compensation from his former employer for six of the eight years he was Vice President.

Cheney's staff freely admitted that they "coordinated" (read rigged) no bid contracts for Halliburton.

When the Inspector General for Iraq, Stewart Bolen wanted to do a full scale investigation of billing irregluarities involving said no-bid contracts, the Adminstration tried to eliminate his job.

The claim that Halliburton was the only company capable of handling Iraq reconstruction is a flat out lie., Halliburton was only number 17 on the Engineering News Record's list of the world's top heavy construction and infrastructure companies. It just so happened that it is handily outnumbered by both priminent British and French firms.

The claim is also easily refuted by the dismal job Halliburton did.

You rant about Obama "owning" GM and Chrysler. Show us the direct connections.

We have little trouble connecting the Bush admisntration directly with Enron and Halliburton.

Let's see you prove a real link.

Or, are you just making it up (again)>?

So murder is legal if you don't get caught? Laws against homicide contain verbage that describes how the police are supposed to catch murderers?

What Obama said.... "The changes being proposed would not apply to those who are here illegally". I've shown you what the text of the law said. The fact is that it would be up to the administrators of the public option to determine how to enforce it.

LOGCAP was specifically designed by Dick Cheney in 1991 and 1992, during his quest to privatize the military,.

Little wonder that the former Defense Secretary should be the one to show his own company how to bid a contact he wrote!

This is the ultimate golden parachute, and the ultimte example of the revolving door between the Pentagon and the military industrial complex.

It also signals a seminal change in the way business was done in the Pentagon.

Before, the Pentagon contracted with vendors to supply specific things (ships, fighter planes, etc).

LOGCAP and other similar requirements contracts do not have a clear scope of work, and instead are written around a vague set of yet to be defined services.

Halliburton, Flour, Parsons, CaCi, SAIC and others have grown rich in this cost plus envirnment,.

In truth, virtually none of the work done under these contracts is competively bid. It's all negotiated between the Pentagon and a vendor it has already committed itself to using.

There is no hint of free market there. In fact, it's a classic mercantile arrangement.

I had the occasion to sit at a table with a bunch of CaCi executives at a dinner a couple of years ago, They were all retired bird colonels double dipping on the LOGCAP gravy train, Not only did they enjoy the well deserved perks having worked their way up to full bird, but, now they were belly up to the Bush White House feeding trough.

And they made no bones about it either. The name of the game was getting the most out of the Pentagon for the least amount of actual work.

I've found it ironic that so many right wingers now say that Bush wasn't a true conservative.

Where where these people when this gravy train was in full swing?

Most of them were rooting for Bush and ignoring the graft.

So, I find the sudden interest in fiscal responsibility and ethics hypocritical at the very least.

Halliburton subsequently rant the tab up past 8 billion, plus another 1.2 billion for a program called RIO.

Meanwhile over 20 of their employees have been killed while in Iraq, and their widows and families are left with nothing.

Little wonder that KBR's employees in Iraq refer to their company as Kill em, Bury em and Replace em!

LOGCAP was established in 1985. You lie.

About $900 million was spent on the oil field tasking....not the $7 billion that piece of shit Waxman pumped you parasitic ridden worms up with.

you're the one who's doing the lying now. You know full well that Halliburton rode the Logcap gravy train past eight billion dollars, even more than Waxman's iniitial claim.

Since you're loudly parsing your facts in order to assert Halliburton's innocence and its integrity, I assume that you're as outraged as I am at the way the Bush people stonewalled any attempts to have Halliburton's (or any of the other defense contractors riding the gravy train) audited.

After all, if these guys are all the innocent true patriots you are trying to portray them as being, then they have nothing to hide.

We both know better.

His stock options had been worth about $240k in 2004 but were worth $9.2 million by 2006.

Ask yourself what a guy who had never had a job outside of the government had to offer a company like Haliburton that would make it worth more than $60 million for 5 years work.

<link>

You lame-brained idiot! Can't you EVEN read? I clearly wrote that the oil field fire tasking came to about $900 million; the same one that the little pig Waxman lied about on NPR as being a no-bid $7 billion contract. I notice you've said nothing about that. Doesn't bother you at all does it? Liars impress you I imagine.

And I said absolutly nothing about total contract costs! You know that very well, yet you persist in your viscous little lies. Which, by the way, brings up the question of why you choose to lump all the other work done, all the other LOGCAP taskings, hundreds of them over 5-6 years into the same little basket you so desperately need and want to be considered thievery. Your hatred has clearly metastisized into a mental illness.

From your link....

Representative Henry Waxman, a liberal Democrat from California and the ranking minority member of the House Committee on Government Reform, has argued aggressively that the Bush Administration has left many questions about Halliburton unanswered. Last year, for example, a secret task force in the Bush Administration picked Halliburton to receive a noncompetitive contract for up to seven billion dollars to rebuild Iraq s oil operations. According to the Times, the decision was authorized at the "highest levels of the Administration." In an interview, Waxman asked, 'Whose decision was it? Was it made outside the regular channels of the procurement process? We know that Halliburton got very special treatment. What we don't know is why."

If on the outside chance you have any interest in the truth - now that you've got one up and going, I certainly wouldn't want to rain on a good and satisfying hate.