In article ,
Dave wrote:
On 6 Oct 2004 15:03:19 -0700, (Jonathan Ganz)
said:

Yep. And, if you use the projected costs for next year, the $200B is
true.

Again, you've proved my point. Edwards wasn't talking about projected costs.
His words were "We're _at_ $200 billion and counting." Given the Dems'
history of misleading it's hard to imagine just what they are now including
in that $200 billion that might be spent by some indefinite date in the
future. Prolly still including money for Afghanistan, but who knows?

Again, you can't read and won't listen. "Proposed" includes so
far. For example, so far, "the estimate is $200 to fix your car."
Yeah, who knows. Certainly not the Bush administration. They don't
have a plan.

We do know that if Kerry had had his way the number would be $87 billion
lower, and the troops would be without supplies. Of course I'm talking about
the time he voted not to spend the $87 billion, not the time right before
that when he voted to spend it, saying it would be irresponsible not to.

BushCo are the ones who decided not to send them with the right
equipment. Their families had to send them body armor and metal plates
for their Humvees.

Keep lying Dave. You need the practice!



--
Jonathan Ganz (j gan z @ $ail no w.c=o=m)
http://www.sailnow.com
"If there's no wind, row."