Afghanistan: The Land of Contractors

[PADEMJES12]

Washington Post article this morning reports that a 30,000/ 40 billion troop surge will be accompanied by a surge in
contractors, thus the cost isnt merely 40 billion, its astronomically higher.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/12/16/815114/-Afghanistan:-The-Land-of-Contractors

Lets hope they wont be building anymore swimming pools, but i wouldnt hold my breath.
The total will be around 140,000 - 160,000 contractors, making it a true international effort... of course
if you count with mercenaries included.

[Number9Dream]

1. Specter voted NO on investigating contract awards in Afghanistan

I know you refuse to acknowledge Specter's voting history prior to summer 2009, but Sen. Specter obviously feels contractors in Afghanistan need no oversight.

Specter voted NO on investigating contract awards in Iraq & Afghanistan. (Nov 2005)
Senate Bill: S Amdt 2476 to S 1042

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Arlen_Specter.htm

[PADEMJES12]

2. Thanks Number 9D.... We certainly know Sestak the hawk

is going along w the military industrial complex and Afghanistan. Given Specter's vote as I do acknowledge,
I would share some words of advice: "Its not about the past 30 years... its about the next 30 and future
leadership"...

That being said, I am glad Specter has come around and has spoken out against the policy with Murtha. He's getting it...
sadly, Joe Sestak has not. The quote above was by Joe Sestak, and i take Joe's quote at its face... we should
look to a leader who is going to make decisions for the better welfare of our country and our children's future.

That future looks a lot brighter when its not debt riddled from financing a long term commitment in Afghanistan in this time
of economic turmoil and funding a "never ending" contractor fest in Afghanistan. Thanks for sharing!

[Number9Dream]

3. Past votes impact the present & future

Specter's voting NO on investigating contractors is impacting the contractors in Afghanistan today & the future.
So you're going with your standard reply of ignore Specter's dismal voting record / Sestak is no good.
I should've known better... back on ignore.

[PADEMJES12]

4. Here's a good piece on Sestak "the war Democrat"

http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/12/15/the-war-democrats/

The author associates his mentality to that of George W Bush. If we dwelled on the
past and 2005, Number9D... Joe Sestak was still an independent and not even a member
of the Dem party until his opportunity struck.

Anyways, you seem to be "living in the past", whereas the Democratic party to be successful in
policy and elections needs to be concerned about the future. Since you're focusing on the
past, at odds with Sestak's "its about the future" quote... we can point to Sestak's past and
present support of the "surge", funding the war, and Dick Cheneys office to show that he is most
certainly not someone who we want to have making debt riddled decisions now about our future.

Point being--- even though you dislike it Number9D, "kool-aid" stains and all... your candidate
Sestak is going to be held to the same standard as Specter. And on that point, atleast Specter
is getting it. Sadly cannot say the same for Sestak.