A local contractor in Tehran won the bid to supply HVAC equipment with McQuay Chillers, Air Handling Units, Control systems and associated components for one of the phases of the South Pars Oil Project in Iran. The units are to be built to high end specifications, to meet the harsh operating conditions in this region. Total contract value is in excess of USD 4 million. This order would pave the way for subsequent phases down the line, which are part of the major development of the South Pars oil fields.

The contract was won amid tight competition with local and regional manufacturers.

However, Industry sources are wary on how McQuay can supply their equipment to Iran, considering the sanctions in place.

You, like most liberals, seem to be a socialist in denial. I love the line suggesting the “definition of socialism” has changed. That is so funny…if you don’t like the definition, just change it, right? That’s great stuff…knowing the liberal agenda, I’m sure they’ll try and implement that into government books in high school.

You mention a takeover of free enterprise as an ingredient of socialism; or at least it was in the olden days before liberals decided to change the definition. That said, I would label a takeover of partial ownership of GM as partial government takeover of a private sector company. How about the desire to take over banks? How about the desire to take over oil? How about the desire to dictate to companies to whom they give money and how they spend it and where they invest? I suppose you would deny these things exist, or that they were prudent in some way…but you, I’m sure, would never link them to the 21 century brand of socialism…since the definition has, of course, changed….as our current generation would say, “whatever…”

In terms of legalization of marijuana…I disagree with the notion that taxing and regulation, liberal’s favorite key word for government expansion, will lower border violence. That is what I meant in my original response. In fact, I believe it will increase it. What do think the gangs that have taken over tax payer land in Arizona will do? Do you really think they will turn into entrepreneurs? I think the reaction will be a violent one.

I believe the liberal democrat is desperate to redefine as many political definitions as they possibly can before November. They are going to lose in Missouri, Montana, and Nevada, and maybe even in the liberal empire that is California. That will follow up loses in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia. They’re going to lose the House and, thankfully, the White House. It’s going to happen because liberals have no compass, because obama has failed as a leader, failed as an American and failed as President because he refuses, whether because of arrogance or ideology, to listen to the majority of the people of the United States. Of course, I realize that he’s trying to change who the majority is, but I think he’ll come up short before his next election….Thank God.

I suppose to a liberal mind my numbers would be slanted. After all this is from a conservative viewpoint. Unfortunately, we could go back and forth about economic numbers all day long. That’s one of the reasons people have such a hard time deciding on who’s best to run the country. The confusion of who creates debts and who should shoulder the numbers makes one’s head spin. I remember when Bill Clinton was trying to take credit for a surplus during his Presidency even though experts from both sides of the isle were reminding people that his success was put in motion by George H. Bush. However, the fact of the matter remains that Obama has dramatically increased our debt while blaming Bush for anything and everything.

Despite the liberal fog that exists, the debt, if you include the full effect of Obama’s bailout, is 14.3 Trillion dollars. Do you really thing he’s not going to spend the remaining bailout funds? Get real…of course he is, and that will put our debt at 14.3 Trillion dollars. The liberal Dems aren’t done yet either…they refuse to use unspent amounts of the bailout for unemployment extensions, opting to add another 33 billion to the deficit using the emotions of people’s economic struggles to justify more spending.

Let me be clear; no fiscal conservative supported the ridiculous spending of the Bush administration. He spent too much money, period. That did not, under any circumstances, give Obama a right to announce an open season on spending and expanding the size of government in the name of reform and oversight. That is a ridiculous solution and highlights either Obama’s inexperience OR his deep appreciation of socialism.

I am so sorry that you live in the liberal fog that creates such confusion for you. Obama is a socialist, as are Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Their actions support that position. I don’t really know that any of them disagree, even publicly, with that statement.

Dean Russell wrote that the same situation exists today that did in France in 1848. He wrote that the “same socialist-communist ideas and plans that were adopted in France are now sweeping America.”

It doesn’t matter that liberals don’t appreciate the socialist title; I don’t blame them. The fact is Obama believes the state is here to dictate to the people and he is making it attractive to live and prosper at the expense of others; the rich OWE the poor. Obama said as much during a radio show in San Francisco during the final days of his campaign. Obama supports the origins of plunder; the idea that it is acceptable for a person to satisfy their wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others.

Now, if you really believe that the idea that people didn’t want obamacare is based on polls from 2000 then you are sadly diluted and I can’t help you. Blue dog Dems prove my point that the unconstitutional idea of FORCED health care was not supported. People came out of the woodwork to fight this legislation but obama’s arrogance and deep socialist beliefs would not allow him to respond to the call of the people; it is a decision that thankfully will cost him a second term.

As for some of your other comments; Canada has been quite outspoken about their disinterest in their product coming to America. They have made it clear that their system couldn’t keep up with the demand and they would take steps to protect themselves. I’m not sure what that means and to my knowledge the Canadian government has not elaborated. Legalizing marijuana is a joke. I can’t wait until California becomes the first state to take that step. Do you really think the drug lords in California or going to roll over, become law abiding citizens and sell their product on the open market? That is laughable, but the blood bath that may ensue will be tragic. I don’t buy the utopian idea that everyone stoned legally is the answer but it will create an even more apathetic state which is a liberal utopia.

Frederic Bastiat wrote, “Immediately following the development of a science of economics, and at the very beginning of the formulation of a science of politics, this all-important question must be answered: What is law? What is its scope; its limits? I do not hesitate to answer?” Bastiat continued, “Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle to injustice…it is not true that the legislator has absolute power over our persons and property…it is not true that the function of law is to regulate our consciences, our ideas, our trade, our talents…the function of law is to protect the free exercise of these rights…”

If Obama had the audacity to believe in people, he might understand Frederic Bastiat…sadly, he’d rather live blind and deaf to the needs of liberty all in the name of embracing socialism…leaving him just plain dumb.

You’re numbers are very slanted. First of all at the end of 2010 the national dedt was nearly 10 trillion (not 8 trillion) and when Bush began being president it was about 5.5 trillion (nearly doubling the dedt). And You are also including the initial bailout passed by Bush as part of “Obama’s dedt”. And on top of all of that right now the dedt is 13 trillion not 14 trillion.

The dedt put on in the last 10 years mainly comes from 3 different places. The Bush tax breaks, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and in the efforts to deal with the financial collapse of 2008. You have to wonder about the wisdom of giving tax breaks when going into war. It would be like FDR having asked people to please use more rubber and steel for yourself in 1942. One has to also wonder about the wisdom of having gone into iraq as it appears now that Saddam had nothing to do with Sept 11. The Bush administration knew he had nothing to do with Sept 11. And the Bush administration was willing to ruin the careers of anyone that was willing to state this obvious fact.

I am confused on how exactly a democratically elected congress passing legislation to expand the number of people that have health insurance is socialism. Although I am sure that there are some Research 2000 polls that indicate that the American people do not want Heatlh Care Reform, these polls were taken only after so much misinformation was put out by the republicans about the Health Care reform being pushed. Misinformation like there being Death Panels, people not being able to keep their existing plans, and misinformation like the health care reform being a government take over of the insurance companies. In fact the Health Care Reform passed was in large part the same health care ideas pushed by Bob Dole and the Republican congress during the first debate about Health Insurance in 1993-94. The very moderate health care reform bill passed helps poor people gain health care insurance, prevents insurance companies from denying people with pre-existing conditions, and encourages everyone to get heath care insurance so that the hospitals do not have to take on the cost of people that do not have insurance or a method of paying for the services they get. These measures I think are incomplete. It would be helpful if President Obama’s health care reform had attacked cost in a more direct manor. Allowing drugs from canada, legalizing marijuana, allowing insurance companies to operate across states, setting up a public health insurance plan to compete with private insurance, and establishing a committee to oversee health care malpractice lawsuits all would have reduced the total cost of health care in this country. Sadly the republican congress gave to help in creating a better health care plan.