John H wrote:

No, I was referring specifically to, "...Bush ordered men under his
control into combat so that his father's and his Vice President's
companies could roll up tremendous profits."

Yep, it is pretty terrible for a President to do that. I don't understand why so
many people are willing to make excuses for him.

Oh wait, you mean you don't think it's true?

Let's see... Did G.W. Bush take a lot of advice & instruction from a group of
military-industrialist chickenhawks, appoint a bunch of same to his cabinet, and
didn't many of the people in this group urge war on Iraq clear back in the mid
1990s? Yes.

Does the Bush family hold a very large stake in said military industrial complex?
Yes.

Have the other reasons for going to war in Iraq (weapons of mass destruction,
Iraqi support for Al-Queda, etc etc) proven to have any truth or merit? No.

Did the Bush Administration listen to any advice and/or intel about *not* going
to war in Iraq? Did they seriously consider any option other than war? No.

Is the United States any better off now that we have removed Saddam Hussein?
Arguable point, but the reasons for saying 'yes' (other than blind loyalty to
BushCo) are rather unclear.

Has the military-industrial complex, specifically including Carlyle and
Halliburton, profited from Gulf War 2? Yes indeed, big time.

Conclusion?


If their were an iota of truth in the
accusation, Clark, Dean, Kerry, et al (especially Sharpton) would have
already used it.

In rather non specific terms, it's already being said. As further specific info
comes to light, you'll see it in glorious Technicolor. Remember that a few short
weeks ago, all the Bush cheerleaders were saying "Oh no, Halliburton didn't
overcharge the Army for any fuel, what rubbish, they would never do such a thing"
etc etc.

But there is no fact so glaringly obvious that the head-in-the-sand crowd won't
ignore it. There is no misdeed so foul that the
responsibility-morality-and-accountability crowd won't instantly forgive and
forget... as long as BushCo is the offender.

Iraq is arguably better off without Saddam Hussein and his psychopath sons in
charge, but the US is only facing an increasingly hostile world, very definitely
including the Arab world, and racked up a huge debt.

John H wrote:


Sounds like 'hate talk' to me.

Why, because it makes your fair-haired boy look bad? Observing facts and drawing
logical conclusions is not "hate." I would say that President Bush must really
hate the United States since he is making such a determined effort to ruin it.

DSK

Doug Kanter wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 21:33:38 -0500, DSK wrote:

NOYB wrote:
As a Lieutenant, Kerry had the authority to use info supplied to him by
military intel in order to make on the spot decisions that may have
risked
the life of the men under his control. Not much different from Bush,
eh?

No, not much different, except that Bush ordered men under his control
into combat so that his father's and his Vice President's companies
could roll up tremendous profits. And he deliberately mis stated his
reasons and the backing intel for it.

Did Lt Kerry make a dime off his Viet Nam service?

Yeah, they're pretty much the same all right.

DSK

I don't believe you really believe what you just said.

John H

If you're referring to his "pretty much the same" comment, he was being
sarcastic, John. I think you've missed obvious sarcasm before. We're gonna
have to agree on some sort of little symbol, just for you. :-)


John needs a tad of reprogramming.

--
Email sent to is never read.

NOYB wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Whoa. Hold on a minute. I thought you claimed to be a lifelong
Republican
who just changed his stripes because you didn't like Bush? Your true
colors
are showing here.

Your bad memory (or your penchant for telling outright lies) is showing
here.

When did I ever claim to be a Republican at all, much less "lifelong?" I
am a
conservative... an old fashioned ie *real* conservative. I have
occasionally
voted Republican though.

Oh no. Now you've gone and done it. You've pointed out that there are
conservatives who are not necessarily Republicans.

Only the uniformed ones. How else can you be conservative on the issues,
but support the party that promotes the exact opposite principles?


The Republican Party's principals these days consist mainly of promoting
right-wing Christian religious extremism. The party has no principles.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:


Oh no. Now you've gone and done it. You've pointed out that there are
conservatives who are not necessarily Republicans. You'd better offer
NOYB a
chair and smelling salts.

NOBBY is either a knee-jerk fascist, or a far left winger pretending to be
one
(is anybody that good an actor?). Not surprising either way, his knowledge
has
some serious gaps.

In the rural South that I grew up in, there were no Republicans. Yet it
was a
very conservative and old fashioned environment. When I got a little
older, and
the South switched almost overnight, it was because of the Republicans
flaunting
an inhuman level of bigotry and racism... a policy that Bush is adept
with...
and which accounts for most of the blue collar Republicans out there IMHO.
The
Democratic Party disavowed attitudes like Lester Maddox's while the
Republicans
embraced them.

So bigotry and racism are the issues that separate the blue collar
Republicans from the blue collar Democrats? You're a piece of work.

If you take away the "race card", Democrats would lose 1/3 of their talking
points. If you take away "class warfare", they'd lose another 1/3. The
remaining 1/3 would be gone if the abortion issue didn't exist.

Don't they have any other issues to run on? I mean, seriously, think about
the issues they run on:

increased taxes for the rich
affirmative action for minorities
full marriage rights for gays
abortion on demand
filibuster judges who might overrule Roe v. Wade


Anything I left out? If so, I bet you there's a race/sex/class warfare card
played on it.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Whoa. Hold on a minute. I thought you claimed to be a lifelong
Republican
who just changed his stripes because you didn't like Bush? Your
true
colors
are showing here.

Your bad memory (or your penchant for telling outright lies) is
showing
here.

When did I ever claim to be a Republican at all, much less
"lifelong?" I
am a
conservative... an old fashioned ie *real* conservative. I have
occasionally
voted Republican though.

Oh no. Now you've gone and done it. You've pointed out that there are
conservatives who are not necessarily Republicans.

Only the uniformed ones. How else can you be conservative on the
issues,
but support the party that promotes the exact opposite principles?


The Republican Party's principals

Shouldn't that be "principles"? ;-)

these days consist mainly of promoting
right-wing Christian religious extremism. The party has no principles.

Democratic Party principles consist mainly of promoting same-sex marriage,
labor strikes, and the release of convicted child molestors...while they're
trying to take away our guns, and turn us into another socialistic country
in the model of France. The party has principles...but they're some pretty
damn scary ones.

Boats dummies, boats!

NOBBY wrote:

The non-U.S. economies depend more on us than we do them.

If you're talking about exporting US industries abroad to take advantage of
reduced envronmental controls and cheap labor, then yes.

But to write off the whole issue of the balance of payments and of currency
valuation, you're living in a dream world. Besides, how would Wal-Mart stay in
business if they couldn't bully their foreign suppliers?



... We're making it
clear that to do business with us economically, countries must be on board
with us as we fight the war on terror.

"We" aren't doing anything of the kind. Statements like this are so ridiculous
you'd have to be a leftist whacko trying to discredit Bush to say it.


But hey, Republicans are supposed to be so great at foreign policy, I
guess this
is just a sample...

Republicans have a spine.

You mean Republicans have stock options.... with regard to fortitude,
Republicans as a group seem to average out the same as other people... not
counting all the prominent Republican chickenhawks, that is....

DSK

Didn't you say you don't have a gun??

NOYB wrote in message
link.net...

snip
...while they're trying to take away our guns, and turn us into another
socialistic country
in the model of France. The party has principles...but they're some
pretty
damn scary ones.

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

Whoa. Hold on a minute. I thought you claimed to be a lifelong
Republican
who just changed his stripes because you didn't like Bush? Your
true
colors
are showing here.

Your bad memory (or your penchant for telling outright lies) is
showing
here.

When did I ever claim to be a Republican at all, much less
"lifelong?" I
am a
conservative... an old fashioned ie *real* conservative. I have
occasionally
voted Republican though.

Oh no. Now you've gone and done it. You've pointed out that there are
conservatives who are not necessarily Republicans.

Only the uniformed ones. How else can you be conservative on the
issues,
but support the party that promotes the exact opposite principles?


The Republican Party's principals

Shouldn't that be "principles"? ;-)

these days consist mainly of promoting
right-wing Christian religious extremism. The party has no principles.

Democratic Party principles consist mainly of promoting same-sex marriage,
labor strikes, and the release of convicted child molestors...while they're
trying to take away our guns, and turn us into another socialistic country
in the model of France. The party has principles...but they're some pretty
damn scary ones.



Nope. The GOP's principals have no principles. The GOP's principals are
out supporting right-wing Christian religious extremism.

--
Email sent to is never read.

"Don White" wrote in message
...
Didn't you say you don't have a gun??

Correct. I don't own a gun. I was speaking rhetorically.