In article ,
says...

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21bcaib@4a x.com...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon, since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.


What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume


There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because a
CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to be
an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops Here"
part of the Presidency.

I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume


He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says people
prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have made the
hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would have gone in
to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following? Perhaps
you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the population
supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Scrrrrreeeeeech.. Hold on there. Some polls have been taken out of
context by the minority media, but 70% of the people do not want "the
public option". 70% may want some kind of reform and the minority media
has fudged the polls, but to be sure, 70% do not want "the public
option" They did have a poll that came out last week but it was
illegitimate with them polling 30% less republicans, but that's what
they call "news", fair and balanced.. snerk Please look beyond the 8
second sound bite...


Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21bcaib@4 ax.com...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon, since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.


What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume


There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because a
CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to be
an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops Here"
part of the Presidency.

I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume


He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says
people prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have
made the hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would
have gone in to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following?
Perhaps you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the
population supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.
--
Nom=de=Plume


He did not leave a surplus! The National debt did not go down. The dot.com
bubble just poured more money in to the coffers than they could spend right
away. Lots of that money was committed to future spending, which is hurting
us now. Same thing with California. So much extra cash that the budget has
doubled in the last 8 years before now, and lots of that money was committed
as if the gobs of extra money was a permanent source. Bosnia was and is a
disaster. Still an ongoing disaster, and was a European problem. Did not
concern us. Somalia. He refused the heavy tanks, etc that were requested.
Black Hawk down was a disaster because of no heavy armor. Why didn't
Clinton authorize gays in the military, instead of pushing under the rug?
Man up Clinton. Make a ruling. Just like Truman ruled the military was
desegregated. Make the ruling. As to gays destroying the military. Seems
to work ok in the UK and some other European countries. Clinton was
extremely lucky on the financial front. It was already starting to crash,
before the election. And Gore accelerated the meltdown with his election
claims. Clinton should have fired Greenspan or at least had looked at the
overheated market. But Clintons choice of advisors was lacking a lot of
knowledge. Barrack is listening to some polls on the healthcare. Those who
think they should have free healthcare. Same ones who thought he was going
to pay their mortgage and put gas in the tank. Too many problems just now
to tackle healthcare. Man Up. Tell the country we need health care, and we
will take a year or two and get it correct. Not a 1000 page bill no one is
allowed to read, or have 15 minutes to look at it and vote. Direct the
justice Department to prosecute any body who was in charge of Naked Shorts
and uncovered short sales on Wall Street, and force them to return all
profits and 10x punitive damages. Including Paulson's buddies. Fire the
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac officials, not give them a $2 mega buck signing
bonus. He is listening the polls (slanted polls) and doing leadership that
way. He is not stupid, he is also not an Einstein, but he is naive as hell.

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21bcaib@4a x.com...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon,
since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any
kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the
trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.


What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't
do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume


There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because
a
CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to
be
an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops Here"
part of the Presidency.

I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume


He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says
people
prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have made
the
hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would have gone
in
to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following?
Perhaps
you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the population
supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Scrrrrreeeeeech.. Hold on there. Some polls have been taken out of
context by the minority media, but 70% of the people do not want "the
public option". 70% may want some kind of reform and the minority media
has fudged the polls, but to be sure, 70% do not want "the public
option" They did have a poll that came out last week but it was
illegitimate with them polling 30% less republicans, but that's what
they call "news", fair and balanced.. snerk Please look beyond the 8
second sound bite...


Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.

Here's one from Rasmussen, which doesn't exactly have a liberal bias:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 57% oppose
the plan if it doesn't include a government-run health insurance plan to
compete with private insurers.

Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...T2009101902502

SurveyUSA (#2):

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/Poll...8-62b9d1ba8693

Have a nice day!

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21bcaib@ 4ax.com...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon, since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any
kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.


What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume


There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because
a CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to
be an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops
Here" part of the Presidency.

I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume


He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says
people prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have
made the hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would
have gone in to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following?
Perhaps you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the
population supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.
--
Nom=de=Plume


He did not leave a surplus! The National debt did not go down. The
dot.com bubble just poured more money in to the coffers than they could
spend right away. Lots of that money was committed to future spending,
which is hurting us now. Same thing with California. So much extra cash
that the budget has doubled in the last 8 years before now, and lots of
that money was committed as if the gobs of extra money was a permanent
source. Bosnia was and is a disaster. Still an ongoing disaster, and was
a European problem. Did not concern us. Somalia. He refused the heavy
tanks, etc that were requested. Black Hawk down was a disaster because of
no heavy armor. Why didn't Clinton authorize gays in the military,
instead of pushing under the rug? Man up Clinton. Make a ruling. Just
like Truman ruled the military was desegregated. Make the ruling. As to
gays destroying the military. Seems to work ok in the UK and some other
European countries. Clinton was extremely lucky on the financial front.
It was already starting to crash, before the election. And Gore
accelerated the meltdown with his election claims. Clinton should have
fired Greenspan or at least had looked at the overheated market. But
Clintons choice of advisors was lacking a lot of knowledge. Barrack is
listening to some polls on the healthcare. Those who think they should
have free healthcare. Same ones who thought he was going to pay their
mortgage and put gas in the tank. Too many problems just now to tackle
healthcare. Man Up. Tell the country we need health care, and we will
take a year or two and get it correct. Not a 1000 page bill no one is
allowed to read, or have 15 minutes to look at it and vote. Direct the
justice Department to prosecute any body who was in charge of Naked Shorts
and uncovered short sales on Wall Street, and force them to return all
profits and 10x punitive damages. Including Paulson's buddies. Fire the
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac officials, not give them a $2 mega buck signing
bonus. He is listening the polls (slanted polls) and doing leadership
that way. He is not stupid, he is also not an Einstein, but he is naive
as hell.



You might want to trim your rants or at least break them up into
intelligible paragraphs. Too much jumble for me to even try to respond to
without wasting lots of time. Believe what you want. It's a free country
(expecting another rant any second.....).

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:25:55 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

He is not stupid, he is also not an Einstein, but he is naive as hell.

And you've had so many years on the planet and governed millions in
that time, taking into account all factors, contingencies and
predictions and you'd do a better job.

It's damned funny that I never heard you bitch so succinctly during
Bush's presidency.

Come on Bill, you haven't been a Dem in decades. Isn't time to stop
fooling yourself?

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon, since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any kind.
Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.

Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.
I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.
This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?

This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.

What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume

There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because a
CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to be
an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops Here"
part of the Presidency.
I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume

He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says people
prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have made the
hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would have gone in
to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following? Perhaps
you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the population
supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.

Another "woman" who suffers from Monika envy.

On 10/23/09 3:13 AM, jps wrote:
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:25:55 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

He is not stupid, he is also not an Einstein, but he is naive as hell.

And you've had so many years on the planet and governed millions in
that time, taking into account all factors, contingencies and
predictions and you'd do a better job.

It's damned funny that I never heard you bitch so succinctly during
Bush's presidency.

Come on Bill, you haven't been a Dem in decades. Isn't time to stop
fooling yourself?


Actually, I think it is BiliousBill who used to be a Democrat...unless
he and McKee underwent a vulcan mind meld. McKee always "impressed" me
as one of the "I've got mine, so screw everyone else" Repubs.

nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon, since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any
kind.
Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.

Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.
I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.
This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?

This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.

What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume

There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because
a CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to
be an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops
Here" part of the Presidency.
I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume

He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says
people prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have
made the hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would
have gone in to the books as one of the great Presidents.
And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following?
Perhaps you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the
population supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.
--
Nom=de=Plume

He did not leave a surplus! The National debt did not go down. The
dot.com bubble just poured more money in to the coffers than they could
spend right away. Lots of that money was committed to future spending,
which is hurting us now. Same thing with California. So much extra cash
that the budget has doubled in the last 8 years before now, and lots of
that money was committed as if the gobs of extra money was a permanent
source. Bosnia was and is a disaster. Still an ongoing disaster, and was
a European problem. Did not concern us. Somalia. He refused the heavy
tanks, etc that were requested. Black Hawk down was a disaster because of
no heavy armor. Why didn't Clinton authorize gays in the military,
instead of pushing under the rug? Man up Clinton. Make a ruling. Just
like Truman ruled the military was desegregated. Make the ruling. As to
gays destroying the military. Seems to work ok in the UK and some other
European countries. Clinton was extremely lucky on the financial front.
It was already starting to crash, before the election. And Gore
accelerated the meltdown with his election claims. Clinton should have
fired Greenspan or at least had looked at the overheated market. But
Clintons choice of advisors was lacking a lot of knowledge. Barrack is
listening to some polls on the healthcare. Those who think they should
have free healthcare. Same ones who thought he was going to pay their
mortgage and put gas in the tank. Too many problems just now to tackle
healthcare. Man Up. Tell the country we need health care, and we will
take a year or two and get it correct. Not a 1000 page bill no one is
allowed to read, or have 15 minutes to look at it and vote. Direct the
justice Department to prosecute any body who was in charge of Naked Shorts
and uncovered short sales on Wall Street, and force them to return all
profits and 10x punitive damages. Including Paulson's buddies. Fire the
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac officials, not give them a $2 mega buck signing
bonus. He is listening the polls (slanted polls) and doing leadership
that way. He is not stupid, he is also not an Einstein, but he is naive
as hell.



You might want to trim your rants or at least break them up into
intelligible paragraphs. Too much jumble for me to even try to respond to
without wasting lots of time. Believe what you want. It's a free country
(expecting another rant any second.....).


He presented you with a lot of food for thought and you complain that he
didn't make a neat little finger sandwich out of it.
If I were him I'd let you go hungry rather than trying to spoon feed you.

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:58:08 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:24:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 15:30:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
m...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:49:44 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:1ai1e5phkh2kracoqs1nk0oi9v46n3j6lo@4ax. com...
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 14:01:22 -0700, jps wrote:

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:08:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:b561e5h8vdu25gp5p170bvvdh61i7sn9p4@4 ax.com...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:28:55 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:fumud51a1t69p69popunial2ellms0ovh9 @4ax.com...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 11:38:18 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
news:iqptd5hu679nglvuhk4dvbjsciar6tkr ...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21 ...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon,
since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any
kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a
different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be
in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference,
nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in
mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


Possibly, unless the local gov't has/gets some credibility and
takes
action.
Who used the word "crusade" about fighting over there? I don't
think
it
was
Obama.

I've no idea who said 'crusade'. This is the first I've seen it
used
in this context.

George W. Bush did.

'Bama said this was a war of necessity. I would think that means
we
should win it, not cut and run like we did in Vietnam. If we do
that,
then you liberals will say, "We lost".

And, please show how or when we've "cut and run" if you're able.
Keep
trying
the attack "you liberals" if you think that'll give your argument
merit.

We cut and ran from Vietnam. What would you have called it?

I use the term 'you liberals', because you liberals are so quick to
say the military 'lost' the Vietnam war.


Losing. The US lost the war. If you don't understand that simple
statement
of fact, there's not much else I can add.

No one that I know says "the military" lost the war in Vietnam. The
war in Vietnam wasn't winnable, just like in Afghanistan.

I guess you've really never met Harry, so you 'could' say you don't
know him. He's said it multiple times, and you've never mentioned a
differing opinion.

The United States did lose the war in Vietnam.

Bull****. The US cut and run.

?? I think you need to make your complaint to Richard M. Nixon for that
one.
We lost. Nixon ended the war, and we would have lost even more of our
soldiers if we would have stayed... for no reason whatsoever.

What's the definition of losing? Do you fight 'til the last man, 'til
the last bomb, plane, ship?

What's the difference between cutting and running and losing?

Maybe we just haven't parsed the terms to their essence?


We should never have
been there in the first place, just like Iraq.

We had a good reason to be in Iraq.

?? Really? What was the reason? WMDs? Saddam was training jihadists?

He had a Winnebago, some balsa wood drones and a lot of oil.

Plus, he slandered our CIC's daddy.

We should have attacked Afghanistan with schools and hospitals. We'd
have won that war already.


Agreed, and we should have built the schools and hospitals as soon as
the Russians left.

We funded the bin laden crowd to get the Russians to leave. So, your
statement makes no sense.

That would be par for his course.


I was thinking A Hole in one. Sorry, bad pun.

Maybe the A-hole but never the one. His index is 23, which means on
his best day he'd shoot 1.5 strokes over par each hole. That means
his game is nearly as excruciating to him as he is to us.

That's beyond duffer. Doofus perhaps. He'd be a good twosome with
Disney's Goofy. Would probably get along very well with Walt as well.


I don't know much about golf, unless you're talking minature golf. lol

All you need to know is that it likely frustrates the **** out of
Herring. At least you know he's getting his.

There is a true statement. Yesterday I hit two 8's while racking up my
95 strokes at Old Hickory. Very frustrating, when I know I can shoot
in the 80's.

But, it's the exercise I'm in it for. five miles, or thereabouts,
yesterday, on one of the most beautiful of the courses in Northern
Virginia.

You should try it.

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 23:22:50 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Tosk" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 06:51:17 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:42:40 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 20:44:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
news:4brsd59fogd9kvvfkee3793an2p21bcaib@4a x.com...
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 13:32:48 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Politicians lost their will. I agree. That would be Nixon,
since
LBJ
escalated. Thus, we lost the war. Facts not bull**** of any
kind.

Just like the Crusade we are on now,
That war was not going to be won.


Neither conflict is currently a crusade. That's from a different
administration. It's unclear what the outcome is going to be in
either
place.

I bet your average Iraqi or Afghani can't tell the difference, nor
can
the GIs who are getting blown up by road side bombs or in mountain
ambushes.

This is a war of necessity.

It is necessary that we *win* this war.

So saith the messiah.

What happens if he decides to leave? Will we have *lost*?


This is the messiah of change and he has demonstrated it is easy to
change his mind on things. A couple CNN polls seems to do the
trick.
I think we are going to declare victory, cut and run ... at least I
hope so.


What's wrong with changing your mind about something? If you can't
do
that, you shouldn't be in charge.

--
Nom=de=Plume


There is no problem with his changing his mind. Unless it is because
a
CNN poll says he should change his stance. We did not hire him to
be
an arbitrator of popularity. He needs to learn the "Buck Stops Here"
part of the Presidency.

I agree. What makes you think he's being an arbiter of popularity?

--
Nom=de=Plume


He is being like Clinton. Following the polls. CNN, etc poll says
people
prefer this, then O seems to follow along. Clinton should have made
the
hard decisions instead of the popular decisions and he would have gone
in
to the books as one of the great Presidents.

And, you know this because? Which polls do you think he's following?
Perhaps
you're talking about the "public option" that 70ish % of the population
supports? Yup, he's following the polls!

Scrrrrreeeeeech.. Hold on there. Some polls have been taken out of
context by the minority media, but 70% of the people do not want "the
public option". 70% may want some kind of reform and the minority media
has fudged the polls, but to be sure, 70% do not want "the public
option" They did have a poll that came out last week but it was
illegitimate with them polling 30% less republicans, but that's what
they call "news", fair and balanced.. snerk Please look beyond the 8
second sound bite...


Which hard decisions didn't Clinton make? Ummm... let's see.. Bosnia,
Somalia, gay in the military, a balanced budget, a surplus....

During his worst nightmare aka Monica he retained high public support. I
guess he was just following the polls.

Here's one from Rasmussen, which doesn't exactly have a liberal bias:

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 57% oppose
the plan if it doesn't include a government-run health insurance plan to
compete with private insurers.

Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...T2009101902502

SurveyUSA (#2):

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/Poll...8-62b9d1ba8693

Have a nice day!