It was a really long article, but still really worthwhile. Please read it.
Yesterday's NY Times finally had a front page story on the disintegration of Haiti. In the months that I've been blogging, I have posted a few times about the damage we have done to that fragile nation.
The piece is overly kind to Bush, but the harm done to Haiti by this ever arrogant and incompetent administration is still obvious. Once again Bush's corrupt and inept appointees have added to a catastrophe.
Haiti was barely functioning under the governance of it's democratically elected President. But he was not sufficiently pro Bush or America, and so we participated in a coup d'etat that removed him from office. Chaos has been the entirely predictable result.
Bush's confidence in his own superiority, and his adamant refusal to walk on any path upon which Clinton had walked, has now hurt the Haitians, just as it hurt us on 9/11.
Agree that the Times article on Haiti is a must-read. Found it interesting that the organization that worked so hard to undermine the Aristide government was in part sponsored by Halliburton and Chevron. What's that about? Do with think those corporations are interested in fostering democracy? Or are they interested in installing a pro-US, democratic-appearing oligopoly? Then when the US again gives aid, all those Yankee dollars will come their way.
Remember when Cheney during the 2000 campaign debates said he hadn't made his fortune because of government? Exactly the opposite is true. The trick is to manage a corporation or investment firm that can get its hands on govenment money. That's what Cheney did at Halliburton, using his political access, and they paid him handsomely for that. The latest Bush iniative-health savings accounts--simply gives Wall Street a cut of about 750 billion of health care money. Social Security "Reform" was the same deal. The real gold is in them thar government hills.
Posted by: art&craft | January 31, 2006 at 10:13 AM
We participated in a coup de tat? I really don't believe you are lying about this. It is the left that tosses that word around until it has become ineffectual. I think it is far more likely that you actually believe this drivel. It took no longer than your first commenter to throw in Halliburton. Thinking on your side is so profoundly broken that you are no longer worthy opposition. Very sad.
Posted by: Rick | January 31, 2006 at 11:38 AM
Thanks for the comments. I really do appreciate them. I am working on a full answer regarding Bush's role in Haiti, but have not completed it.
I would like to ask Rick why the mere mention of Halliburton is so bad. It does receive amazing contracts from the U.S Government. The V.P. recently ran it. He gets income from it. You probably do not recall the name "Rose Law Firm" -but even though it's name is engraved in my poor memory, I never heard of it getting any federal largesse.
Posted by: bbbustard | January 31, 2006 at 06:49 PM
If we participated in a coup de tat in Haiti and you scooped the story, you have my most sincere apology for characterizing your post as drivel. We then can debate the merits of the coup. On the surface, I cannot say that I would necessarily be opposed. God knows Haiti has been a revolving door for scoundrels. On the other hand, if you intend to simply point by point disagree with the administration's Haiti policy, call that policy "failed", then say that metaphorically that constitutes a coup, I would ask you not to waste the effort.
I do not suggest that using the word Halliburton is bad. I am saying that your "side" uses the word as the epitome of evil. You know this as well as I. I am suggesting that to be silly. It is unserious. It is a waste of your time. It is not criminal to be a large, successful and well run corporation capable of performing critical functions better and more efficiently than any of it's competitors, not only in this country, but elsewhere. As long as your side continues to behave in an unserious manner, you will wallow in the minority.
You mention Halliburton and the Rose law firm in the same sentence. Ok, I give up.
The Rose law firm is an old and storied and well respected Little Rock law firm. That one of it's senior partners became assistant Attorney General of the United States, was convicted of criminal activity and sentenced to prison, is an unfortunate smear on an otherwise remarkable American success story.
Lastly, how much income does the Vice President "get" from Halliburton? What is your source? What is the exact number? If he "gets" income from Halliburton, as you claim, I will be furious. You do understand the seriousness of your charge? Put up.
Posted by: Rick | February 01, 2006 at 11:10 AM
Details of the money he gets, and of his separate corruption are posted on "Cheney's Corruption."
If there were actual evidence of Halliburton's being more efficient, better, than it's competitors, I haven't seen it. You seem to be arguing that because it gets contracts, this must be true. Not so.
I am glad that you hope we regain the majority status which would be ours in any honest, representative democracy (OK: That was just to bait you, I apologize)
My mention of the Rose Law Firm may have been unfair and obviously unclear. I was hoping to refer to what I remember as the many "mysteries" and alleged "irregularities" that Republicans kept bringing up about Hillary's involvement with that firm during the Clinton years. My impression was that her former employer was discussed in all kinds of negative ways, and thus your comments about Halliburton seemed oddly innocent.
Posted by: bbbustard | February 01, 2006 at 06:03 PM