On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:16:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
.. .

"John H." wrote in message
news
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:37:30 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

You took that oath, at least according to your stories. How did it
feel,
promising to defend something you were ignorant about? What did you
*think* you were defending? "The country"? That's just a piece of land,
like any other. What about the principles which you so easily dismiss
as
trash?

"think" ?? John was in the army, an an officer to boot.


And Donnie can offer nothing to the discussion *but* insults.

Donnie, save gas and hush.

You consider being called an officer in the army an insult...?
What would the American Legion think of you?



This is getting confusing, but I'm 100% sure that's the goal to begin with.
Muddy the facts, avoid logic, keep the masses scared. Very much like a
certain malformed shrub that'll be going to seed in 2008.


Doug, on my screen, this post of yours shows up right between one by Don
White and JimH. Is that fitting company or what?

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:16:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
. ..

"John H." wrote in message
news On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:37:30 -0300, "Don White"

wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

You took that oath, at least according to your stories. How did it
feel,
promising to defend something you were ignorant about? What did you
*think* you were defending? "The country"? That's just a piece of
land,
like any other. What about the principles which you so easily dismiss
as
trash?

"think" ?? John was in the army, an an officer to boot.


And Donnie can offer nothing to the discussion *but* insults.

Donnie, save gas and hush.

You consider being called an officer in the army an insult...?
What would the American Legion think of you?



This is getting confusing, but I'm 100% sure that's the goal to begin
with.
Muddy the facts, avoid logic, keep the masses scared. Very much like a
certain malformed shrub that'll be going to seed in 2008.


Doug, on my screen, this post of yours shows up right between one by Don
White and JimH. Is that fitting company or what?

You gonna ask Doug what colour his eyes are now??

"John H." wrote in message
...


Donnie, please remember that light travels faster than sound. That's why
some people appear bright until you hear them speak.


Better stick to your 'day job' as a sheriff.
This philosophy stuff doesn't suit you.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:19:21 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:


"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:16:57 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Don White" wrote in message
.. .

"John H." wrote in message
news On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 19:37:30 -0300, "Don White"

wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

You took that oath, at least according to your stories. How did it
feel,
promising to defend something you were ignorant about? What did you
*think* you were defending? "The country"? That's just a piece of
land,
like any other. What about the principles which you so easily dismiss
as
trash?

"think" ?? John was in the army, an an officer to boot.


And Donnie can offer nothing to the discussion *but* insults.

Donnie, save gas and hush.

You consider being called an officer in the army an insult...?
What would the American Legion think of you?



This is getting confusing, but I'm 100% sure that's the goal to begin
with.
Muddy the facts, avoid logic, keep the masses scared. Very much like a
certain malformed shrub that'll be going to seed in 2008.


Doug, on my screen, this post of yours shows up right between one by Don
White and JimH. Is that fitting company or what?

You gonna ask Doug what colour his eyes are now??


Donnie, please remember that light travels faster than sound. That's why
some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

On Jun 1, 8:44 am, "NOYB" wrote:
This is the problem with having liberal activist judges on the bench:http://www.boattest.com/nmma.aspx

I wouldn't worry too much, the 9th Circuit Court is the most over
ruled court in the country. Just about every one of their off the wall
rulings is tossed out.

Your article is old news (2 years old to be precise). The money for Iraq
may not have been in the original budget submitted, but we're now 2/3 of the
way through the 2007 fiscal year, and the Iraq supplemental funding *is* in
the numbers recently released by the CBO.

And according to the CBO, the deficit is half of what it was expected to
be...EVEN *WITH* THE IRAQ SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING NOW ADDED IN.

Get it?

Or would you like to post another 2 year old story?




"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message k.net, NOYB
sprach forth the following:


"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...
In message k.net,
NOYB sprach forth the following:


"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
message ...
In message , John H.
sprach forth the following:

Spending your money your way is the greatest civil
right you've got!

And W's budgets, unfunded mandates, unfunded liabilities and
off-budget wars have left you with far LESS money.

The war is not "off-budget". Bush's 2008 budget according to the CBO
includes $142 billion for Iraq, Afghanistan, and the war on
terrorism.

So the emergency supplementals from 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007
don't count? Nor the unfunded mandates? Nor the unfunded
liabilities?

How much novacaine does it take you to get through a day?

Dentistry hasn't used novacaine for over a decade.

Maybe you should start.

And the annual deficit figures that CBO publishes *includes* the
supplementals.


US: Off-budget Accounting for Iraq
The Roanoke Times
June 18th, 2005

The 2006 budget submitted to Congress in February didn't contain one penny
for combat in Iraq or Afghanistan. Bush insisted it would be impossible to
know how much would be needed, so instead of including anything in the
regular budget, he plans to continue the tradition of coming to Congress
for emergency supplemental appropriations when war funds get low.

With two full years of experience waging war in Iraq, President George W.
Bush should have some idea of how much it will cost to continue the fight
next year.

But when he submitted his 2006 budget to Congress in February, it didn't
contain one penny for combat in Iraq or Afghanistan. Sunny optimist that
he
is, Bush wasn't operating on the assumption that the mission would
actually
be accomplished by then.

Instead, Bush insisted it would be impossible to know how much would be
needed, so instead of including anything in the regular budget, he plans
to
continue the tradition of coming to Congress for emergency supplemental
appropriations when war funds get low.

Coincidentally, that approach has the side effect of making the federal
budget deficit appear smaller than it actually is. Far smaller,
considering
that spending in Iraq has averaged more than $5 billion a month.

Shortly after he submitted his 2006 budget, Bush went to Congress to ask
for $82 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (most of which was
for
Iraq).

So far, Bush has asked for, and received, about $350 billion for combat
and
reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even in a federal budget
measured in the trillions of dollars, that's a substantial amount to keep
off the budget.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On 14 Jun 2007 19:56:24 GMT, Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute penned the
following well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

In message news forth the following:

Does this look familiar?

Not to any federal officeholder of the past 40 years not named "Ron Paul".


"I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and
defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the
same;"

Tom, are you off your meds again? Are you having those sweats and
finding yourself overwhelmed with those fits of anger? It that why you
come here to troll and start the usual between JohnH, JoeSpareBedroom,
NOYB, Don White, et al?

NOYB is a physician. Rather than try to elicit some angry political
response from him, you would be much better served by talking to him
about any merits or contraindications regarding Paxil and Lorazepam.


Dentist...not physician. But I do hold a DEA license to prescribe
lorazepam. Paxil would be a hard-sell to the Board of Dentistry if I
started prescribing that routinely. I can't see how it falls within the
practice of dentistry.