NOYB wrote:
"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Yes, but if you discount the hard-left base that would claim disaster
regardless of circumstances, its not such an impressive list after all.
The
fact is that about 80-85% of the country is pacified, and the

Had to laugh at Ashcroft today. He sees nothing wrong with an election
held
only in selected portions of the country. It's better than no election at
all,
he says.

Maybe he can apply that logic to the US?
Just hold the election in the red states? :-)


Haven't I been saying that for the last 12 months? We'll take the
Republican-sponsored programs ...and you guys take the Democratic ones like
Social Security, Medicare, and Socialized medicine. But don't come crying
to us when you can't afford to pay for your social programs (because there
are no rich people to soak with taxes), the doctors all flee your "New"
America, and some third World terrorist-sponsoring country invades you
because you have no military. Oh yeah...and we get the oil in ANWR, Texas,
and the Gulf, as well as the nukes in the silos across the Midwest and
Plains states. If you don't like it, then too bad...'cause our military
will be stronger than yours.





Underneath your inexperience in life, you really are a kind of
militaristic fascist, eh?

--
We today have a president of the United States who looks like he is the
son of Howdy Doody or Alfred E. Newman, who isn't smarter than either of
them, who is arrogant about his ignorance, who is reckless and
incompetent, and whose backers are turning the United States into a pariah.

What, me worry?