Contracting “US Companies” in Afghanistan

US Contract Companies are hiring 15 to 20 Third Country Nationals (Indians, Filipinos, etc) for every one American in Afghanistan. 10% of Americans out of work and DynCorps, Fluor, CACI, AECOM, KBR and all of these other “American” International Contract companies aren’t interested in hiring any of them.  Maybe they’ll hire some illegal immigrants as well.

They are keeping their bottom line in check with these moves.  Making millions of dollars in profit by stiffing the American worker.  DynCorps, KBR and Fluor can hire 20 Indians for the cost of hiring one US Citizen.  The US Government is awarding these multi-million dollar contracts to these “American” companies and they here 80-90 percent foreign employees.

What I think is even more humorous is that the US Government is making this concerted effort to break up large contracts such as the KBR LOGCAP II contract as well as others.  There are very few companies that can handle the logistics of these operations.  What ends up happening is that Company A wins the contract from the US government.  Company A then subcontracts to KBR (or whatever company) or a subsidiary of KBR.  The same company winds up with all of the contracts that they had before.  The difference is that there is now a middle man.  It’s all a shell game.  I guess Congress and the average American out there are idiots and are fooled by all of this muddling of facts and actions.

Another thing that Company B (KBR) does is form another company/corporation.  It looks like a separate company on paper but it’s indirectly owned by the same people.  They even hire the same folks from earlier contracts to run them.  Same PM, same DPM, same cast and crew.  On the surface, a new company is in business and winning contracts.  In reality, it’s the same group of folks making the same money.

And it’s easy to see.  Easy to investigate, but, the US government is too lazy or incompetent to see the obvious.  I’ve been laughing for 5 years.  Same crooks winning the same contracts and the same Congress and DOD/DOS getting scammed for more and more tax dollars.

Fools!

It’s been the same story since at least World War II.  I bet that some of these companies can be traced back to the War between the States.  The US Government never learns.  They just open that check book and sign more checks.

No, I’m not a disgruntled employee or former employee.  Most of my contract work requires that I am a US citizenship.  This doesn’t affect me and never will.

 

Governor Sarah Palin for Vice President: A Feminist View of her Candidacy

A Feminist’s Argument for McCain’s VP

By Tammy Bruce

In the shadow of the blatant and truly stunning sexism launched against the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, and as a pro-choice feminist, I wasn’t the only one thrilled to hear Republican John McCain announce Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. For the GOP, she bridges for conservatives and independents what I term “the enthusiasm gap” for the ticket. For Democrats, she offers something even more compelling – a chance to vote for a someone who is her own woman, and who represents a party that, while we don’t agree on all the issues, at least respects women enough to take them seriously.

Whether we have a D, R or an “i for independent” after our names, women share a different life experience from men, and we bring that difference to the choices we make and the decisions we come to. Having a woman in the White House, and not as The Spouse, is a change whose time has come, despite the fact that some Democratic Party leaders have decided otherwise. But with the Palin nomination, maybe they’ll realize it’s not up to them any longer.

Clinton voters, in particular, have received a political wake-up call they never expected. Having watched their candidate and their principles betrayed by the very people who are supposed to be the flame-holders for equal rights and fairness, they now look across the aisle and see a woman who represents everything the feminist movement claimed it stood for. Women can have a family and a career. We can be whatever we choose, on our own terms. For some, that might mean shooting a moose. For others, perhaps it’s about shooting a movie or shooting for a career as a teacher. However diverse our passions, we will vote for a system that allows us to make the choices that best suit us. It’s that simple.

The rank bullying of the Clinton candidacy during the primary season has the distinction of simply being the first revelation of how misogynistic the party has become. The media led the assault, then the Obama campaign continued it. Trailblazer Geraldine Ferraro, who was the first Democratic vice presidential candidate, was so taken aback by the attacks that she publicly decried nominee Barack Obama as “terribly sexist” and openly criticized party chairman Howard Dean for his remarkable silence on the obvious sexism.

Concerned feminists noted, among other thinly veiled sexist remarks during the campaign, Obama quipping, “I understand that Sen. Clinton, periodically when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal,” and Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen in a television interview comparing Clinton to a spurned lover-turned-stalker in the film, “Fatal Attraction,” noting, “Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub, and Sen. Clinton has had a remarkable career…”. These attitudes, and more, define the tenor of the party leadership, and sent a message to the grassroots and media that it was “Bros Before Hoes,” to quote a popular Obama-supporter T-shirt.

The campaign’s chauvinistic attitude was reflected in the even more condescending Democratic National Convention. There, the Obama camp made it clear it thought a Super Special Women’s Night would be enough to quell the fervent support of the woman who had virtually tied him with votes and was on his heels with pledged delegates.

There was a lot of pandering and lip service to women’s rights, and evenings filled with anecdotes of how so many have been kept from achieving their dreams, or failed to be promoted, simply because they were women. Clinton’s “18 million cracks in the glass ceiling” were mentioned a heck of a lot. More people began to wonder, though, how many cracks does it take to break the thing?

Ironically, all this at an event that was negotiated and twisted at every turn in an astounding effort not to promote a woman.

Virtually moments after the GOP announcement of Palin for vice president, pundits on both sides of the aisle began to wonder if Clinton supporters – pro-choice women and gays to be specific – would be attracted to the McCain-Palin ticket. The answer is, of course. There is a point where all of our issues, including abortion rights, are made safer not only if the people we vote for agree with us – but when those people and our society embrace a respect for women and promote policies that increase our personal wealth, power and political influence.

Make no mistake – the Democratic Party and its nominee have created the powerhouse that is Sarah Palin, and the party’s increased attacks on her (and even on her daughter) reflect that panic.

The party has moved from taking the female vote for granted to outright contempt for women. That’s why Palin represents the most serious conservative threat ever to the modern liberal claim on issues of cultural and social superiority. Why? Because men and women who never before would have considered voting for a Republican have either decided, or are seriously considering, doing so.

They are deciding women’s rights must be more than a slogan and actually belong to every woman, not just the sort approved of by left-wing special interest groups.

Palin’s candidacy brings both figurative and literal feminist change. The simple act of thinking outside the liberal box, which has insisted for generations that only liberals and Democrats can be trusted on issues of import to women, is the political equivalent of a nuclear explosion.

The idea of feminists willing to look to the right changes not only electoral politics, but will put more women in power at lightning speed as we move from being taken for granted to being pursued, nominated and appointed and ultimately, sworn in.

It should be no surprise that the Democratic response to the McCain-Palin ticket was to immediately attack by playing the liberal trump card that keeps Democrats in line – the abortion card – where the party daily tells restless feminists the other side is going to police their wombs.

The power of that accusation is interesting, coming from the Democrats – a group that just told the world that if you have ovaries, then you don’t count.

Yes, both McCain and Palin identify as anti-abortion, but neither has led a political life with that belief, or their other religious principles, as their signature issue. Politicians act on their passions – the passion of McCain and Palin is reform. In her time in office, Palin’s focus has not been to kick the gays and make abortion illegal; it has been to kick the corrupt and make wasteful spending illegal. The Republicans are now making direct appeals to Clinton supporters, knowingly crafting a political base that would include pro-choice voters.

On the day McCain announced her selection as his running mate, Palin thanked Clinton and Ferraro for blazing her trail. A day later, Ferraro noted her shock at Palin’s comment. You see, none of her peers, no one, had ever publicly thanked her in the 24 years since her historic run for the White House. Ferraro has since refused to divulge for whom she’s voting. Many more now are realizing that it does indeed take a woman – who happens to be a Republican named Sarah Palin.

Tammy Bruce is the author of “The New American Revolution” (HarperCollins, 2005) and a Fox News political contributor. She is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women. A registered Democrat her entire adult life until February, she now is registered as a decline-to-state voter.

This article first appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle.

Another interesting Palin article from the Brits

This is an election that will be decided by identity politics more so than any other Presidential race since the election of Kennedy.  Obama will more than likely get upwards of 95% of the Black vote.  Much of it simply because of his race.  But how will Palin play into this?  How many cross party votes will she bring based upon her gender.  How many women will vote for her based on gender.  How many men?  Will this affect Black women enough for them to vote with their gender?  Will Black women seek to elevate a woman as opposed to a Black male.

If the McCain/Pallin ticket wins, she is the likely candidate for 2012 as McCain has stated that he will run for office one time.  At his age, I don’t think he was using the line as a soundbite.