Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

DCKit

(18,541 posts)

11. James Bond stuff. Paid directly by the government.

Reply to JaneyVee (Reply #10)

Tue Jun 11, 2013, 08:11 PM

Jun 2013

The contractors are costing us more than you will ever believe, and they're doing all the government jobs now, even the military jobs.

Rebublics may crow about small government, but they love the gigantic MIC and outsourcing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What would be the best alternative plan to balance privacy & National security? [View all] JaneyVee Jun 2013 OP

quit going around the planet murdering people to support american corporations nt msongs Jun 2013 #1

I agree, ending all wars would be a great first step. JaneyVee Jun 2013 #5

That is the answer, in a simple, easy to understand sentence. RC Jun 2013 #12

Government spies who work directly for the government. DCKit Jun 2013 #2

How would the spying aspect work without surveillance? JaneyVee Jun 2013 #7

Is the concept of spying lost on you dear? Seriously? DCKit Jun 2013 #9

That's what I'm asking YOU, what do you mean by old school? (I'm 31yrs old) JaneyVee Jun 2013 #10

James Bond stuff. Paid directly by the government. DCKit Jun 2013 #11

Stop giving the secret information to a select few in the House and Senate. kentuck Jun 2013 #3

there are many people not interested in solutions treestar Jun 2013 #4

I actually think their current 'total surveillance' approach is worse than a more narrow focus. reformist2 Jun 2013 #6

But who would they focus on? Wouldn't it essentially be racial profiling? JaneyVee Jun 2013 #8