Quote:
|
Originally Posted by 1oldman3
You may want to see how many years and under how many Presidents that Haliburton has prospered. They were doing large government work in unfriendly areas long before the VP.
|
When I replied, I replied with FACTS. Many of your statements are unfounded because they can be disproven by looking at FACTS.
Example 1 above:
This is chart represents Halliburton's public performance upto 2000 when Cheney was selected. Notice that Halliburton does not do very well compared to the Standard and Poors 500. Their performance starts at the same point-this is called a comparison chart.
So post election (and post war) we'll put Halliburton and the good ole SnP against one another again.
Do you notice anything? Halliburton is doing much better with Cheney in power and war in progress.
---------------
As far as your other unfounded "stuff" about democrats really being in charge and all that "liberal media" blah blah blah... It really doesn't address the central issue -
THAT THE PEOPLE IN CHARGE ARE NOT TRYING TO WIN THE WAR IN IRAQ.
In the very least, you are poorly presenting yourself. If you want to sound off I suggest you look up some facts and then see how they relate to the question at hand.
(I couldn't resist dropping this here: It's all about Cheney and Halliburton
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/conten.../040216fa_fact)