Haley Barbour: War Criminal

[John Simkin]

The important point to grasp about people like Bush and Cheney is that they are not really conservatives. A major factor in conservative philosophy is the belief in a reduction in government spending. Bush, like Reagan before him, has greatly increased government spending during his period in power. When Bush took over in 2000, the long-term fiscal liability of the federal government was $20 trillion. It now stands at $43 trillion. Bush has increased government spending at a faster rate than any Congress since the 1930s (Roosevelt’s New Deal).

Reagan and Bush had no option but to increase government spending in certain parts of the economy. This is the way governments pay back their financial supporters. Large Corporations do not give donations, they make investments. Who made money from the Vietnam War? LBJ’s long-term financial backers: Halliburton, General Dynamics, Bell Corporation.

The same is true of the Iraq War. The contracts for rebuilding Iraq was organized by a company called New Bridge Strategies. This company was owned by Barbour, Griffith & Rogers. The majority shareholder in this company is Haley Barbour, the Republican governor of Mississippi. His partners, Lanny Griffith and Ed Rogers, are two lawyers who formerly worked in the George H. W. Bush administration. Barbour is also in charge of raising money for Republican Senate campaigns.

Barbour is a long-term supporter of George Bush. He arranged for a small group of companies, Bechtel ($1 billon), Halliburton ($2.3 billion) and International American Products ($527 million), to get most of the contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq schools, airports, roads, bridges, hospitals and power plants. It is no coincidence that these three companies are all major political donors to the Republican Party.

This is the reality of American capitalism. You can’t let the deaths of US military or Iraqi civilians to get in the way of profits.

[John Geraghty]

John,

Bush, with the help of Rove, has transformed the face of conservativism from economic issues to social issues (i.e. abortion, gay rights, terrorism etc). Conservatism, by its name preaches a reluctance to spend vast amounts and in the case of the US it also traditionally means less state control. Bush and Rove have turned this around, much as Reagan did, the result is the sidetracking of the public, to decide votes upon trivial matters that do not directly involve them (terrorism excluded).

John

Edited October 31, 2006 by John Geraghty

[Ron Ecker]

the result is the sidetracking of the public, to decide votes upon trivial matters that do not directly involve them (terrorism excluded).

This requires a stupid public, of course, and that's just what the U.S. government has the privilege of exploiting. Distraction works every time. The world may be going to hell, but what Americans need to fear is gays getting hitched.