It's because the government directing no bid contracts to the company formerly led by the VP, which provided that VP with a severance package of more than $30 million, is as clear a (perceived, at least) conflict of interest as you'll find anywhere.The ONLY reason people like you targeted Halliburton was because there was a Political angle.
Its why you CONTINUE to target Halliburton.
Did you even read what I wrote? I'll quote myself:Hell yea, the Libs are easilly amused, because a quick Google search would reveall the Hundreds of Defense Contractors that we've used over the years.
So why do I need a google search to confirm what I readily acknowledged in the post you QUOTED?Are you not concerned that 'war' now means that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of companies will enjoy far higher profits, bonuses, etc. if we send our kids off to get maimed and killed in wars? There was no downside to any of those companies for going into Iraq, and many fortunes were made because we did. The incentives are just horrific. The 'military industrial complex' and the problems identified by Eisenhower decades ago are simply real. You call the people who worried about that 'easily entertained.' I'd call anyone who wasn't concerned about Halliburton and hundreds of other companies ignorant, foolish, shortsighted, and/or just plain stupid.