The Shock Doctrine: The Clintons and the Cheneys

[Joanne98]

In the Balkans, where Clinton deployed nineteen thousand soldiers, US bases sprang up as mini Halliburton cities: neat, gated suburbs, built and run entirely by the company. And Halliburton was committed to providing the troops with all the comforts of home, including fast-food outlets, supermarkets, movie theatres and high-tech gyms. Some senior officers wondered what the strip-malling of the military would do to troops discipline-but they too were enjoying the perks. "Everything with Halliburton was gold-plated," one told me. "So we weren't complaining." As far as Halliburton was concerned, keeping the customer satisfied was good business-it guaranteed more contracts, because profits were calculated as a percentage of costs, the higher the costs, the higher the profits. "Don't worry, it's cost plus," was a saying made famous in Baghdad's green zone, but the deluxe war spending was pioneered during the Clinton era.



In the mid-nineties, Lookheed began taking over information technology divisions of the US government, running it's computer systems and a great deal of it's data managment. Largely, under the public radar, the company went so far in this direction that, in 2004, The New York Times reported, "Lockheed Martin doesn't run the United States. But it does help run a breathtakingly big part of it...It sorts your mail and totals your taxes. It cuts Social Security checks and counts the US census. It runs space flights and monitors air traffic. To make all that happen, Lockheed writes more computer code than Microsoft.



It made for a powerful husband and wife team. While Dick was steering Halliburton to take over the infrastructure of warfare abroad, Lynne was helping Lockheed to take over the day-to-day running of the government at home. At times husband and wife found themselves in direct competition. In 1996, when the state of Texas announced that corporations could bid to run it's welfare program-a contract worth $2 billion over five years-both Lockheed and the IT giant Electronic Data Systems, which boasted Dick Cheney as a board member, bid on the contract. In the end, the Clinton administration intervened and halted the auction. Though it was generally an enthusiatic supporter of out-sourcing, deciding who was eligible to receive welfare was determined to be an essential role of government, not suitable for privatization. Both Lockheed and EDS cried foul, as did the Governor of Texas, George W Bush, who thought privatizing welfare was a terrific idea.



Previous thread. If they can't pay/let them die..
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2527827

[K Gardner]

1. Going to go back and read all these threads, don't have the

book yet.. thank you for posting ! K&R

[mmonk]

2. The book is a great resource.

I recommend it.

[tekisui]

4. I got The Shock Doctrine for Christmas. Just started it.

Already, I am wowed.

[mmonk]

5. It does open one's eyes.

[Joanne98]

3. You're Welcome. We should all have the most information possible

before we vote!

[bobthedrummer]

6. k

:hi:

[scarletwoman]

7. k&r -- I wish more people would get the big picture. (nt)

[CorpGovActivist]

8. Camps Monteith and Bondsteel?

Aerial photos and maps of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Bondsteel">Camp Bondsteel and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_Monteith">Camp Monteith hung in the Halliburton/KBR proposal "war room" where I worked.

The inside-scoop stories about the relationship with the Clinton Administration are legion.

- Dave

[CorpGovActivist]

9. You May Find the LOGCAP I and III Contracts...

... to be as interesting as the DOJ/FBI task force has, vis-a-vis the Clinton and Bush Administrations.

- Dave

[bonito]

10. And all this time I thought it was "we the people"

But it was "wee on the people" :shrug: give the media lap dogs a bone.

[Ichingcarpenter]

11. Great picture of Hillary and Bill taking an oath to Cheney's bible.

What' in Cheney's left hand?

A solemn pledge?
Because with my non-SMILING oath to defend the constitution I wouldn't need
Cheney's bible to swear upon to do that.

Oh, and by the way, that is Cheney.

[Swamp Rat]

12. Here ya go:

:D

[Perry Logan]

13. Post your picture at Free Republic. They'll love it there!

[Swamp Rat]

16. I wouldn't know. I never go there. How about you? You spend a lot of time there?

[Perry Logan]

17. No need. The anti-Hillary folks trot over here and post it for free!

[Swamp Rat]

18. You seem to know a lot about "anti-Hillary folks" and freepers.

[Perry Logan]

20. The parallels are striking--the focus on character assassination, for example.

Also the fulsome assumption of moral superiority.

[Swamp Rat]

21. Me too. I track BushlerBots who pose as Hillary fans in order disrupt Democratic message boards.

I play whack-a-mole with them, when I am bored.

[Perry Logan]

24. That's amazing. How do you know they're "BushlerBots who pose as Hillary fans"? Some psychic thing?

[Swamp Rat]

25. A lot of experience.

[Perry Logan]

26. Deleted.

[mmonk]

30. Swamp Rat is on a roll.

[Perry Logan]

22. Another parallel: an obsession with finding or creating ugly images of their opponents.

[Perry Logan]

23. And another: they make up accusations, then instantly and totally believe them.

[Perry Logan]

14. "I'll just trot over to DU and post this anti-Clinton stuff. That'll demoralize everybody. Hilk!"

[Joanne98]

15. This is the primary. We're suppose to bash each others candidates.

if you are worried about the thugs using this is an election you can forget it. They consider these things to be compliments. That's why they never talk about it. The importance of this book is that if we get the Clinton's back in the WH we can expect them to futher the same policies. I think that's a horrible idea! People need to know that the Clintons are supporters of "free trade" and "privatizing" our government. They didn't have to give all power to Lockheed, but they did it anyway. I think it's an outrage. Even I didn't know that happened until I read the book. I wouldn't worry about Hillary though. I'm sure the republicans will cross over and vote for her, just like they did Lieberman, and that will make her our candidate whether we like it or not!

[Perry Logan]

19. Well defended, Joanne98. And I like "The Shock Doctrine." But I think you worry too much.

With respect, I find Hillary's record hearteningly progressive in most respects. And she has a lot of support from progressive organizations, most of wh9om we would all probably respect as not being foolish or stupid. This leads me to hope that her Presidency will not be heavy on shock tactics.

[Joanne98]

29. Well, I can say in defence of her that most of this stuff was done by her husband.

But, if you have to know, I'm supporting Edwards because I don't think she can win a general election. I think she's the candidate that the republicans want to run against. I want some policy changes in Washington. Policy matters and she won't even talk about it. If she's the candidate I'll shut up and live with it. BUT this time. The Clintons have to be watched to make SURE they don't try to pull any fast stuff, like auction off the rest of our public assets. Bill's comment the other day, "America is open for business." Just what did that mean? They helped break up and sell off everybody else's country's, now it's our turn? Over my dead body!

[CorpGovActivist]

27. Understanding of Primary Process Purpose Kick n/t

[bobthedrummer]

28. k