Got the sniffles?
 

Check it out..Dire predictions. Is someone else in the room with you?
If the pendemic reaches yourneck of the woods, either you, or they will
be dead. Out of the 100 cases discovered half have died.

Ten things you need to know form the US GOVT pendemicflu.gov

Ten things you need to know about pandemic influenza

14 October 2005

1. Pandemic influenza is different from avian influenza.

Avian influenza refers to a large group of different influenza viruses
that primarily affect birds. On rare occasions, these bird viruses can
infect other species, including pigs and humans. The vast majority of
avian influenza viruses do not infect humans. An influenza pandemic
happens when a new subtype emerges that has not previously circulated
in humans.

For this reason, avian H5N1 is a strain with pandemic potential, since
it might ultimately adapt into a strain that is contagious among
humans. Once this adaptation occurs, it will no longer be a bird
virus--it will be a human influenza virus. Influenza pandemics are
caused by new influenza viruses that have adapted to humans.

2. Influenza pandemics are recurring events.

An influenza pandemic is a rare but recurrent event. Three pandemics
occurred in the previous century: "Spanish influenza" in 1918,
"Asian influenza" in 1957, and "Hong Kong influenza" in 1968.
The 1918 pandemic killed an estimated 40-50 million people worldwide.
That pandemic, which was exceptional, is considered one of the
deadliest disease events in human history. Subsequent pandemics were
much milder, with an estimated 2 million deaths in 1957 and 1 million
deaths in 1968.

A pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus emerges and starts
spreading as easily as normal influenza - by coughing and sneezing.
Because the virus is new, the human immune system will have no
pre-existing immunity. This makes it likely that people who contract
pandemic influenza will experience more serious disease than that
caused by normal influenza.

3. The world may be on the brink of another pandemic.

Health experts have been monitoring a new and extremely severe
influenza virus - the H5N1 strain - for almost eight years. The
H5N1 strain first infected humans in Hong Kong in 1997, causing 18
cases, including six deaths. Since mid-2003, this virus has caused the
largest and most severe outbreaks in poultry on record. In December
2003, infections in people exposed to sick birds were identified.

Since then, over 100 human cases have been laboratory confirmed in four
Asian countries (Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Viet Nam), and more
than half of these people have died. Most cases have occurred in
previously healthy children and young adults. Fortunately, the virus
does not jump easily from birds to humans or spread readily and
sustainably among humans. Should H5N1 evolve to a form as contagious as
normal influenza, a pandemic could begin.

4. All countries will be affected.

Once a fully contagious virus emerges, its global spread is considered
inevitable. Countries might, through measures such as border closures
and travel restrictions, delay arrival of the virus, but cannot stop
it. The pandemics of the previous century encircled the globe in 6 to 9
months, even when most international travel was by ship. Given the
speed and volume of international air travel today, the virus could
spread more rapidly, possibly reaching all continents in less than 3
months.

5. Widespread illness will occur.

Because most people will have no immunity to the pandemic virus,
infection and illness rates are expected to be higher than during
seasonal epidemics of normal influenza. Current projections for the
next pandemic estimate that a substantial percentage of the world's
population will require some form of medical care. Few countries have
the staff, facilities, equipment, and hospital beds needed to cope with
large numbers of people who suddenly fall ill.

6. Medical supplies will be inadequate.

Supplies of vaccines and antiviral drugs - the two most important
medical interventions for reducing illness and deaths during a pandemic
- will be inadequate in all countries at the start of a pandemic and
for many months thereafter. Inadequate supplies of vaccines are of
particular concern, as vaccines are considered the first line of
defence for protecting populations. On present trends, many developing
countries will have no access to vaccines throughout the duration of a
pandemic.

7. Large numbers of deaths will occur.

Historically, the number of deaths during a pandemic has varied
greatly. Death rates are largely determined by four factors: the number
of people who become infected, the virulence of the virus, the
underlying characteristics and vulnerability of affected populations,
and the effectiveness of preventive measures. Accurate predictions of
mortality cannot be made before the pandemic virus emerges and begins
to spread. All estimates of the number of deaths are purely
speculative.

WHO has used a relatively conservative estimate - from 2 million to
7.4 million deaths - because it provides a useful and plausible
planning target. This estimate is based on the comparatively mild 1957
pandemic. Estimates based on a more virulent virus, closer to the one
seen in 1918, have been made and are much higher. However, the 1918
pandemic was considered exceptional.

8. Economic and social disruption will be great.

High rates of illness and worker absenteeism are expected, and these
will contribute to social and economic disruption. Past pandemics have
spread globally in two and sometimes three waves. Not all parts of the
world or of a single country are expected to be severely affected at
the same time. Social and economic disruptions could be temporary, but
may be amplified in today's closely interrelated and interdependent
systems of trade and commerce. Social disruption may be greatest when
rates of absenteeism impair essential services, such as power,
transportation, and communications.

9. Every country must be prepared.

WHO has issued a series of recommended strategic actions for responding
to the influenza pandemic threat. The actions are designed to provide
different layers of defence that reflect the complexity of the evolving
situation. Recommended actions are different for the present phase of
pandemic alert, the emergence of a pandemic virus, and the declaration
of a pandemic and its subsequent international spread.

10. WHO will alert the world when the pandemic threat increases.

WHO works closely with ministries of health and various public health
organizations to support countries' surveillance of circulating
influenza strains. A sensitive surveillance system that can detect
emerging influenza strains is essential for the rapid detection of a
pandemic virus.

Six distinct phases have been defined to facilitate pandemic
preparedness planning, with roles defined for governments, industry,
and WHO. The present situation is categorized as phase 3: a virus new
to humans is causing infections, but does not spread easily from one
person to another.

Got the sniffles?
 

In article .com,
says...
Check it out..Dire predictions. Is someone else in the room with you?
If the pendemic reaches yourneck of the woods, either you, or they will
be dead. Out of the 100 cases discovered half have died.

********. Check out the countries where these folk died. *There* is
your statistic - use it *wisely*.

--
Duncan

Got the sniffles?
 

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Check it out..Dire predictions. Is someone else in the room with you?
If the pendemic reaches yourneck of the woods, either you, or they will
be dead. Out of the 100 cases discovered half have died.

Ten things you need to know form the US GOVT pendemicflu.gov

Ten things you need to know about pandemic influenza

14 October 2005

1. Pandemic influenza is different from avian influenza.

Huh? Pandemic simply refers to an influenza epidemic with virtually no
geographic areas unaffected. It's an epidemiological term. It can apply to
any strain or substrain of influenza virus, including the so-called "bird
flu."

Max

Got the sniffles?
 

If a chicken gets bird flu, do you give it chicken soup?

Scotty


"Maxprop" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Joe" wrote in message
oups.com...
Check it out..Dire predictions. Is someone else in the room
with you?
If the pendemic reaches yourneck of the woods, either you, or
they will
be dead. Out of the 100 cases discovered half have died.

Ten things you need to know form the US GOVT pendemicflu.gov

Ten things you need to know about pandemic influenza

14 October 2005

1. Pandemic influenza is different from avian influenza.

Huh? Pandemic simply refers to an influenza epidemic with
virtually no
geographic areas unaffected. It's an epidemiological term. It
can apply to
any strain or substrain of influenza virus, including the
so-called "bird
flu."

Max

Got the sniffles?
 

Good info but much of it hype. I'm puzzled about all the talk
of pandemics lately. There's got to be some ulterior motive
government has up its sleeve. Ask yourself a couple of questions?

1) Why the scare tactics?
2) Why the concern?
3) Why the misinformation?

I think it's an attempt to get people used to the idea that
the taking away of Constitutional rights is necessary for
your own protection. It's also an attempt to make people
believe government is in control when they clearly are
not and do not understand natural selection.

It is a well-known fact that the bird flu virus, if it
mutates - and it will, make no mistake about it, to a strain
that will propagate from human to human will be rather
deadly at first but then will attenuate so it is less deadly.
It will do so not intentionally because it cannot think but
it will do so because natural selection will wipe out the
more virulent forms of the virus because the people who
are infected by that strain will die and deny that strain of
virus the ability to spread further. Remember, a living
host is the only vector the virus has. A dead host kills the
strain. It is to the virus' benefit to not kill it's host.

Interfering with natural selection with drugs and the
like only slows the natural attenuation process. It makes
the pandemic last longer and remain more deadly.

Intelligent folks know this. Is it that there are no intelligent
folks in the government or is it the government is pulling
the wool over our eyes intentionally for some ulterior
motive. I believe the latter to be the case.

Get your boats ready to sail away from a government that
wishes to take away all your rights . . .

CN


"Joe" wrote in message oups.com...
| Check it out..Dire predictions. Is someone else in the room with you?
| If the pendemic reaches yourneck of the woods, either you, or they will
| be dead. Out of the 100 cases discovered half have died.
|
| Ten things you need to know form the US GOVT pendemicflu.gov
|
| Ten things you need to know about pandemic influenza
|
| 14 October 2005
|
| 1. Pandemic influenza is different from avian influenza.
|
| Avian influenza refers to a large group of different influenza viruses
| that primarily affect birds. On rare occasions, these bird viruses can
| infect other species, including pigs and humans. The vast majority of
| avian influenza viruses do not infect humans. An influenza pandemic
| happens when a new subtype emerges that has not previously circulated
| in humans.
|
| For this reason, avian H5N1 is a strain with pandemic potential, since
| it might ultimately adapt into a strain that is contagious among
| humans. Once this adaptation occurs, it will no longer be a bird
| virus--it will be a human influenza virus. Influenza pandemics are
| caused by new influenza viruses that have adapted to humans.
|
| 2. Influenza pandemics are recurring events.
|
| An influenza pandemic is a rare but recurrent event. Three pandemics
| occurred in the previous century: "Spanish influenza" in 1918,
| "Asian influenza" in 1957, and "Hong Kong influenza" in 1968.
| The 1918 pandemic killed an estimated 40-50 million people worldwide.
| That pandemic, which was exceptional, is considered one of the
| deadliest disease events in human history. Subsequent pandemics were
| much milder, with an estimated 2 million deaths in 1957 and 1 million
| deaths in 1968.
|
| A pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus emerges and starts
| spreading as easily as normal influenza - by coughing and sneezing.
| Because the virus is new, the human immune system will have no
| pre-existing immunity. This makes it likely that people who contract
| pandemic influenza will experience more serious disease than that
| caused by normal influenza.
|
| 3. The world may be on the brink of another pandemic.
|
| Health experts have been monitoring a new and extremely severe
| influenza virus - the H5N1 strain - for almost eight years. The
| H5N1 strain first infected humans in Hong Kong in 1997, causing 18
| cases, including six deaths. Since mid-2003, this virus has caused the
| largest and most severe outbreaks in poultry on record. In December
| 2003, infections in people exposed to sick birds were identified.
|
| Since then, over 100 human cases have been laboratory confirmed in four
| Asian countries (Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Viet Nam), and more
| than half of these people have died. Most cases have occurred in
| previously healthy children and young adults. Fortunately, the virus
| does not jump easily from birds to humans or spread readily and
| sustainably among humans. Should H5N1 evolve to a form as contagious as
| normal influenza, a pandemic could begin.
|
| 4. All countries will be affected.
|
| Once a fully contagious virus emerges, its global spread is considered
| inevitable. Countries might, through measures such as border closures
| and travel restrictions, delay arrival of the virus, but cannot stop
| it. The pandemics of the previous century encircled the globe in 6 to 9
| months, even when most international travel was by ship. Given the
| speed and volume of international air travel today, the virus could
| spread more rapidly, possibly reaching all continents in less than 3
| months.
|
| 5. Widespread illness will occur.
|
| Because most people will have no immunity to the pandemic virus,
| infection and illness rates are expected to be higher than during
| seasonal epidemics of normal influenza. Current projections for the
| next pandemic estimate that a substantial percentage of the world's
| population will require some form of medical care. Few countries have
| the staff, facilities, equipment, and hospital beds needed to cope with
| large numbers of people who suddenly fall ill.
|
| 6. Medical supplies will be inadequate.
|
| Supplies of vaccines and antiviral drugs - the two most important
| medical interventions for reducing illness and deaths during a pandemic
| - will be inadequate in all countries at the start of a pandemic and
| for many months thereafter. Inadequate supplies of vaccines are of
| particular concern, as vaccines are considered the first line of
| defence for protecting populations. On present trends, many developing
| countries will have no access to vaccines throughout the duration of a
| pandemic.
|
| 7. Large numbers of deaths will occur.
|
| Historically, the number of deaths during a pandemic has varied
| greatly. Death rates are largely determined by four factors: the number
| of people who become infected, the virulence of the virus, the
| underlying characteristics and vulnerability of affected populations,
| and the effectiveness of preventive measures. Accurate predictions of
| mortality cannot be made before the pandemic virus emerges and begins
| to spread. All estimates of the number of deaths are purely
| speculative.
|
| WHO has used a relatively conservative estimate - from 2 million to
| 7.4 million deaths - because it provides a useful and plausible
| planning target. This estimate is based on the comparatively mild 1957
| pandemic. Estimates based on a more virulent virus, closer to the one
| seen in 1918, have been made and are much higher. However, the 1918
| pandemic was considered exceptional.
|
| 8. Economic and social disruption will be great.
|
| High rates of illness and worker absenteeism are expected, and these
| will contribute to social and economic disruption. Past pandemics have
| spread globally in two and sometimes three waves. Not all parts of the
| world or of a single country are expected to be severely affected at
| the same time. Social and economic disruptions could be temporary, but
| may be amplified in today's closely interrelated and interdependent
| systems of trade and commerce. Social disruption may be greatest when
| rates of absenteeism impair essential services, such as power,
| transportation, and communications.
|
| 9. Every country must be prepared.
|
| WHO has issued a series of recommended strategic actions for responding
| to the influenza pandemic threat. The actions are designed to provide
| different layers of defence that reflect the complexity of the evolving
| situation. Recommended actions are different for the present phase of
| pandemic alert, the emergence of a pandemic virus, and the declaration
| of a pandemic and its subsequent international spread.
|
| 10. WHO will alert the world when the pandemic threat increases.
|
| WHO works closely with ministries of health and various public health
| organizations to support countries' surveillance of circulating
| influenza strains. A sensitive surveillance system that can detect
| emerging influenza strains is essential for the rapid detection of a
| pandemic virus.
|
| Six distinct phases have been defined to facilitate pandemic
| preparedness planning, with roles defined for governments, industry,
| and WHO. The present situation is categorized as phase 3: a virus new
| to humans is causing infections, but does not spread easily from one
| person to another.
|

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

Get your boats ready to sail away from a government that
wishes to take away all your rights . . .

CN


I say cut some holes below the gunwhales, poke some cannons through and
prepare for a broadside to get your government back!

Arrrgh!

Gilligan

"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice!"

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
Get your boats ready to sail away from a government that
wishes to take away all your rights . . .

Heh... weren't you all Pro-Bush a few years ago???

CM

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt.Mooron" wrote in message news:BfLbf.90210$y_1.39225@edtnps89...
|
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
| Get your boats ready to sail away from a government that
| wishes to take away all your rights . . .
|
| Heh... weren't you all Pro-Bush a few years ago???
|
| CM
|


Bush sold out. He's not slowed govt. growth like he promised.

Instead, he signed onto legislation creating the largest new entitlement
program in history. I'm talking about the prescription drug program.

He has yet to veto ANY big govt. spending plan. He's just a Democrat
in sheep's clothing. The only good he's done is keep the Democrats
from taxing the crap out of us. Where's Barry Goldwater when we
really need him.

CN

Got the sniffles?
 

"Scotty" wrote in message
...
If a chicken gets bird flu, do you give it chicken soup?

Only if it's Jewish.

Max

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt.Mooron" wrote in message
news:BfLbf.90210$y_1.39225@edtnps89...

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
Get your boats ready to sail away from a government that
wishes to take away all your rights . . .

Heh... weren't you all Pro-Bush a few years ago???

A lot of us were. But the jerk is behaving more and more like a democrat
every day. In fact, I can't recall any democrat president short of FDR who
spent more taxpayer dollars than this guy.

Max

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote
Bush sold out.

Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for so long.
There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
Scout

Got the sniffles?
 

"Scout" wrote in message ...
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| Bush sold out.
|
| Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for so long.
| There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| Scout
|


What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
into office a true conservative.

Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
a success.

CN

Got the sniffles?
 

Capt. Neal® wrote:
.... no matter how
much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
into office a true conservative.


Why didn't you do that in 1999, when a true conservative *was* running?
In fact, he beat G.W. Bush Jr in some of the early primaries.

Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
office.

That depends on your point of view.

If you genuinely feel that the U.S. better off with
1- a shakier economy
2- higher national debt
3- a large number of countries that hate us
4- greater terrorist threat (see #3 above)
5- an over-stretched military
6- Middle East gov'ts that openly support anti-US terrorism within reach
of developing nuclear weapons (see #3 & #4 above)
7- porous borders that allow almost anybody thru, including a large
influx of sub-minimum wage workers to support top-heavy corporations
8- an economic elite who earn 1,000X what a productive worker earns
8a- who are able to divert tremendous amounts of wealth into their
own pockets
8b- and are immune to prosecution
8c- chosen for their support of certain political sub-groups rather
than any merit
9- Federally mandated institutions which favor a given political party,
inculding tax-payer funded partisan propaganda
10- gutted education
11- an expanded Federal gov't which sucks up tremendous amounts of the
national wealth, yet can produce scanty positive results for citizens.
12- diminished rights for citizens

Then yeah, we're better off with anybody but a Democrat.

... If for no other reason than the President has gotten
the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
a success.


Like what?

Actually, Scout is overlooking President Bush's tremendous success at
seizing control of the gov't apparatus & the national media. They have
produced few results that benefit the country as a whole, but they have
hammered opposition and funneled tremendous amounts of money (we're
talking tens of billions) into the "right" pockets, where it will
finance whacko fascist partisan campaigns for the forseeable future.
They have been a BIG success at the things *they* wanted to accomplish!

DSK

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Scout" wrote in message
...
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| Bush sold out.
|
| Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for so
long.
| There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| Scout
|


What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
into office a true conservative.

Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
a success.

Why do you believe that anyone who does not like Bush is a liberal?
Scout

Got the sniffles?
 

Neal is a liberal?

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Scout" wrote in message
. ..
"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Scout" wrote in message
...
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| Bush sold out.
|
| Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for so
long.
| There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| Scout
|


What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
into office a true conservative.

Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
a success.

Why do you believe that anyone who does not like Bush is a liberal?
Scout

Got the sniffles?
 

Ignorant liberal talking points every one of which is easy to debunk . . .

Read on if you can stand being debunked so badly.


"DSK" wrote in message ...
| Capt. Neal® wrote:
| .... no matter how
| much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
| for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
| into office a true conservative.
|
|
| Why didn't you do that in 1999, when a true conservative *was* running?
| In fact, he beat G.W. Bush Jr in some of the early primaries.
|
| Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
| office.
|
| That depends on your point of view.
|
| If you genuinely feel that the U.S. better off with
| 1- a shakier economy

Fact: The economy is strong and getting stronger and this is
due to the Bush administration tax cuts.

| 2- higher national debt

Pray tell when in the last fifty years has the national debt
NOT gotten higher in a given four period election cycle?

| 3- a large number of countries that hate us

Who gives a flying **** other than a liberal weenie?

| 4- greater terrorist threat (see #3 above)

Oh? A greater terrorist threat? Is that why we have not
been attacked by terrorists in this country since Sept. 11?
You liberals are so warped by hatred that you don't even
live in the real world anymore.

| 5- an over-stretched military

Bwahahahahahah. Funny how the 'overstretched" military is
kicking ass every place they operate. But, then again you libs
seem to think the purpose of the military is to deliver meals
on wheels.


| 6- Middle East gov'ts that openly support anti-US terrorism within reach
| of developing nuclear weapons (see #3 & #4 above)

Isreal will wipe out any threat once it becomes real.
You forgot China and North Korea to whom your man Clinton sold
nuclear secrets. China is the greater threat by far.


| 7- porous borders that allow almost anybody thru, including a large
| influx of sub-minimum wage workers to support top-heavy corporations

I don't hear you libs doing anything about the borders. In fact it's
you libs who demand free heath care and drivers licenses for illegals.

| 8- an economic elite who earn 1,000X what a productive worker earns
| 8a- who are able to divert tremendous amounts of wealth into their
| own pockets
| 8b- and are immune to prosecution
| 8c- chosen for their support of certain political sub-groups rather
| than any merit

Now you show your true bent - liberalism bordering on communist.
You libs hate free enterprise because you can't compete because
you live with an inferiority complex.

| 9- Federally mandated institutions which favor a given political party,
| inculding tax-payer funded partisan propaganda

Seems to me it was a Democrat who wrote the election reform legislation
which violates free speech and it also seems to me it is the Democrats
who usurp union dues to support the Democrat party leaving Republican
dues payers no representation for their money.

| 10- gutted education

Bwahahahahahahahah. You lose again. It's the President who pushed
and got passed the no child left behind legislation. Funny how the liberal
teachers unions hate it because it grades not only failing students but
failing schools and teachers. It puts to rest that giving ever more greater
amounts of money to education is the answer. Turns out the answer is
accountability and now that educators are being held accountable they
claim "gutted education" Bwahahahahahahha!


| 11- an expanded Federal gov't which sucks up tremendous amounts of the
| national wealth, yet can produce scanty positive results for citizens.

And it would be far worse if the Democrats hadn't lost so many elections
in the past eight or so years. Be glad congress, and the presidency are both
controlled by Republicans. Rejoice that the Supreme Court is soon to have
a Republican majority.

| 12- diminished rights for citizens

I haven't noted that my rights have been diminished as yet. Which one
of your rights have been diminished?

|
| Then yeah, we're better off with anybody but a Democrat.

As I have debunked each and every one of your fallacious points
I still claim and have backed up with facts the FACT that we
are better off with a Republican controlled country.
|
| ... If for no other reason than the President has gotten
| the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
| a success.
|
|
| Like what?
|
| Actually, Scout is overlooking President Bush's tremendous success at
| seizing control of the gov't apparatus & the national media.

The national or legacy media have shot themselves in their collective
feet by turning into the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party. They
used to claim they were unbiased but now they have given up that
pretense and work openly for a liberal agenda. They are becoming just
another ignorant, strident and not-taken-seriously fringe group of the
leftists and share the same disdain as moveon.org and the wackos who
hang out there.


|They have
| produced few results that benefit the country as a whole, but they have
| hammered opposition and funneled tremendous amounts of money (we're
| talking tens of billions) into the "right" pockets, where it will
| finance whacko fascist partisan campaigns for the forseeable future.
| They have been a BIG success at the things *they* wanted to accomplish!

YOu are totally clueless if you think the right controls the legacy media.
Bwahahahaha. How delusional can a person be? About as delusional as
Dan Rather with his forged memos which he knew were forged yet he
still claimed them as fact! Is it any wonder why you libs are out of power
and out of respect?

CN

Got the sniffles?
 

"Scout" wrote in message . ..
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Scout" wrote in message
| ...
| | "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| | Bush sold out.
| |
| | Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for so
| long.
| | There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| | Scout
| |
|
|
| What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
| much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
| for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
| into office a true conservative.
|
| Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
| office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
| the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
| a success.
|
| Why do you believe that anyone who does not like Bush is a liberal?
| Scout
|


Because, as a general rule, it's true. There are a minor amount
of exceptions but I'd rather talk as a general rule. Minor exceptions
are of little or no import.

CN

Got the sniffles?
 

Capt. Neal® wrote:
Ignorant liberal talking points every one of which is easy to debunk . . .


I suppose that's true if you believe the trashy propaganda from places
like Rush Limbaugh. OTOH if youo actually read a newspaper from time to
time, you wonder when the grown-ups are going to come home.

| If you genuinely feel that the U.S. better off with
| 1- a shakier economy

Fact: The economy is strong and getting stronger and this is
due to the Bush administration tax cuts.

Really? Then why did it take so long? The tax cuts were enacted almost 5
years ago.

The fact is that relative to the growth of the deficit, the economy is
either shrinking or growing at far far below historic levels.


| 2- higher national debt

Pray tell when in the last fifty years has the national debt
NOT gotten higher in a given four period election cycle?

Umm, during the Clinton years.

And you might want to check the *rate* of growth of the deficit. And you
might also want to check the definition of "conservative" with regarad
to fiscal policy.


| 3- a large number of countries that hate us

Who gives a flying **** other than a liberal weenie?

People that travel to other countries? Maybe by sailboat?


| 4- greater terrorist threat (see #3 above)

Oh? A greater terrorist threat? Is that why we have not
been attacked by terrorists in this country since Sept. 11?

I guess that's why the State Dept quit issuing it's terrorist report...

| 5- an over-stretched military

Bwahahahahahah. Funny how the 'overstretched" military is
kicking ass every place they operate.

Like Louisiana?

... But, then again you libs
seem to think the purpose of the military is to deliver meals
on wheels.


No, I think the military's purpose is to appear so fierce as to make it
unnecessary to fight.

However, since we are facing real threats from several places and cannot
credibly produce any realistic threat of force, I suggest that the
occupation of Iraq (which is contributing nothing to U.S. security) is
bit of drain on our national defense resources.

Did the Pentagon announce that they could invade Iran easily and strip
them of their nuclear facilities any time they are ordered to? No, they
said we do not have any realistic way we can attack Iran's nuclear
potential. Did the Army say, "Sure, let's move right over from Iraq to
Syria. Just give the word"?

And did the Army announce that recruiting is going so well that they are
sending guys home early?





| 6- Middle East gov'ts that openly support anti-US terrorism within reach
| of developing nuclear weapons (see #3 & #4 above)

Isreal will wipe out any threat once it becomes real.

Actually, you might want to check into reality here. Israel has said
that it has no plans to try and attack Iran and believes that it would
be too difficult to destroy enough of their facilities to make it worth
the risk.


You forgot China and North Korea to whom your man Clinton sold
nuclear secrets.

Still peddling that fantasy? When did this supposedly happen? Don't
forget the one about him peddling cocaine to schoolkids, too.


| 7- porous borders that allow almost anybody thru, including a large
| influx of sub-minimum wage workers to support top-heavy corporations

I don't hear you libs doing anything about the borders.

Funny thing, there is not a liberal President so it's not "the libs" job.



| 8- an economic elite who earn 1,000X what a productive worker earns
| 8a- who are able to divert tremendous amounts of wealth into their
| own pockets
| 8b- and are immune to prosecution
| 8c- chosen for their support of certain political sub-groups rather
| than any merit

Now you show your true bent - liberalism bordering on communist.

???

You think it's a good idea for corporations like Enron to jerk the rug
out from under thousands of hard-working men & women, then have the
corporate officers walk away with millions because they handed out big
bucks in political donations to the right hands?



| 9- Federally mandated institutions which favor a given political party,
| inculding tax-payer funded partisan propaganda

Seems to me it was a Democrat who wrote the election reform legislation
which violates free speech

???

McCain is a Democrat now?


| 10- gutted education

Bwahahahahahahahah. You lose again. It's the President who pushed
and got passed the no child left behind legislation.

You mean the "no teacher left unpunished" act? It is basically a
political chainsaw aimed at the teachers unions, and hs done very little
to improve education.

And why is a "conservative" trumpeting about having the Federal gov't
interfere with local schools?




| 11- an expanded Federal gov't which sucks up tremendous amounts of the
| national wealth, yet can produce scanty positive results for citizens.

And it would be far worse if the Democrats hadn't lost so many elections
in the past eight or so years.

Actually, the national finances were looking better and better up until
the Bush Administration got their hands on the checkbook.

President Bush has never vetoed a spending bill.



| 12- diminished rights for citizens

I haven't noted that my rights have been diminished as yet.

That's because you haven't been paying attention.



As I have debunked each and every one of your fallacious points

Really?

OK if you say so.

DSK

Got the sniffles?
 

"DSK" wrote in message ...
| Capt. Neal® wrote:
| Ignorant liberal talking points every one of which is easy to debunk . . .
|
|
| I suppose that's true if you believe the trashy propaganda from places
| like Rush Limbaugh. OTOH if youo actually read a newspaper from time to
| time, you wonder when the grown-ups are going to come home.
|
| | If you genuinely feel that the U.S. better off with
| | 1- a shakier economy
|
| Fact: The economy is strong and getting stronger and this is
| due to the Bush administration tax cuts.
|
| Really? Then why did it take so long? The tax cuts were enacted almost 5
| years ago.

It took a while to get out of the recession that started during the last
year Clinton was in office.


|
| The fact is that relative to the growth of the deficit, the economy is
| either shrinking or growing at far far below historic levels.

Twist the stats all you want but I like to believe the sustained growth
of 3.5 to 4 percent with historically low unemployment rates even with
all the hurricanes we've had.

|
|
| | 2- higher national debt
|
| Pray tell when in the last fifty years has the national debt
| NOT gotten higher in a given four period election cycle?
|
| Umm, during the Clinton years.

The deficit was lower but the debt kept growing. Typical liberal
who doesn't know the difference.

|
| And you might want to check the *rate* of growth of the deficit. And you
| might also want to check the definition of "conservative" with regarad
| to fiscal policy.
|
|
| | 3- a large number of countries that hate us
|
| Who gives a flying **** other than a liberal weenie?
|
| People that travel to other countries? Maybe by sailboat?

It is of no consequence. The average citizen of any country
doesn't think of politics when a sailor comes into port. If
you'd do anything other than trawler around the Intracoastal
you'd know as much.


|
|
| | 4- greater terrorist threat (see #3 above)
|
| Oh? A greater terrorist threat? Is that why we have not
| been attacked by terrorists in this country since Sept. 11?
|
| I guess that's why the State Dept quit issuing it's terrorist report...

Huh??? Is a report an attack?

|
| | 5- an over-stretched military
|
| Bwahahahahahah. Funny how the 'overstretched" military is
| kicking ass every place they operate.
|
| Like Louisiana?

If you weren't such a liberal you'd know the military is not
a meals on wheels organization.


|
| ... But, then again you libs
| seem to think the purpose of the military is to deliver meals
| on wheels.
|
|
| No, I think the military's purpose is to appear so fierce as to make it
| unnecessary to fight.

Even a grizzly bear can be attacked by a wolverine. A wolverine can
kill a grizzly cub. Live in the real world for once.

|
| However, since we are facing real threats from several places and cannot
| credibly produce any realistic threat of force, I suggest that the
| occupation of Iraq (which is contributing nothing to U.S. security) is
| bit of drain on our national defense resources.
|
| Did the Pentagon announce that they could invade Iran easily and strip
| them of their nuclear facilities any time they are ordered to? No, they
| said we do not have any realistic way we can attack Iran's nuclear
| potential. Did the Army say, "Sure, let's move right over from Iraq to
| Syria. Just give the word"?
|
| And did the Army announce that recruiting is going so well that they are
| sending guys home early?

Recruiting is going well. Check out the recent stats. You've not heard how
they are meeting and exceeding quotas lately have you? Could it be because
the liberal media won't report positive news about the military?

|
|
|
|
|
| | 6- Middle East gov'ts that openly support anti-US terrorism within reach
| | of developing nuclear weapons (see #3 & #4 above)
|
| Isreal will wipe out any threat once it becomes real.
|
| Actually, you might want to check into reality here. Israel has said
| that it has no plans to try and attack Iran and believes that it would
| be too difficult to destroy enough of their facilities to make it worth
| the risk.

And, you believe them? Isreal is about fourth or fifth leading nuclear
power with delivery capability all over the middle east.

|
|
| You forgot China and North Korea to whom your man Clinton sold
| nuclear secrets.
|
| Still peddling that fantasy? When did this supposedly happen? Don't
| forget the one about him peddling cocaine to schoolkids, too.

It's a well known fact. Easily researched. Just google "Clinton Chinese
Nuclear Secrets".

|
|
| | 7- porous borders that allow almost anybody thru, including a large
| | influx of sub-minimum wage workers to support top-heavy corporations
|
| I don't hear you libs doing anything about the borders.
|
| Funny thing, there is not a liberal President so it's not "the libs" job.

And Clinton closed the borders? Bwahahahahahahhah! He even let
the 9-11 terrorist in to have free reign. Google "Able Danger".

|
|
|
| | 8- an economic elite who earn 1,000X what a productive worker earns
| | 8a- who are able to divert tremendous amounts of wealth into their
| | own pockets
| | 8b- and are immune to prosecution
| | 8c- chosen for their support of certain political sub-groups rather
| | than any merit
|
| Now you show your true bent - liberalism bordering on communist.
|
| ???
|
| You think it's a good idea for corporations like Enron to jerk the rug
| out from under thousands of hard-working men & women, then have the
| corporate officers walk away with millions because they handed out big
| bucks in political donations to the right hands?

I believe in capitalism. It's what's made this country great. You are
a communist. Forgive me if I think a great system is better than communism.

|
|
|
| | 9- Federally mandated institutions which favor a given political party,
| | inculding tax-payer funded partisan propaganda
|
| Seems to me it was a Democrat who wrote the election reform legislation
| which violates free speech
|
| ???
|
| McCain is a Democrat now?

Yes, much of the time he is.


|
|
| | 10- gutted education
|
| Bwahahahahahahahah. You lose again. It's the President who pushed
| and got passed the no child left behind legislation.
|
| You mean the "no teacher left unpunished" act? It is basically a
| political chainsaw aimed at the teachers unions, and hs done very little
| to improve education.
|
| And why is a "conservative" trumpeting about having the Federal gov't
| interfere with local schools?
|
|
|
|
| | 11- an expanded Federal gov't which sucks up tremendous amounts of the
| | national wealth, yet can produce scanty positive results for citizens.
|
| And it would be far worse if the Democrats hadn't lost so many elections
| in the past eight or so years.
|
| Actually, the national finances were looking better and better up until
| the Bush Administration got their hands on the checkbook.
|
| President Bush has never vetoed a spending bill.

And Democrats have never failed to bloat one . . .


|
|
|
| | 12- diminished rights for citizens
|
| I haven't noted that my rights have been diminished as yet.
|
| That's because you haven't been paying attention.
|
|
|
| As I have debunked each and every one of your fallacious points
|
| Really?
|
| OK if you say so.
|

Happy that you've come to your senses.

CN

Got the sniffles?
 

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 14:23:22 -0500, =?Windows-1252?Q?Capt._Neal=AE?=
wrote:


Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in office. If
for no other reason than the President has gotten the Supreme Court back
on the right track he can be considered a success.

If the Supreme Court has gotten off track, you have no one to blame but
Republicans. They have appointed 7 of the 9 Justices.

Got the sniffles?
 

Doug,
You're a scholar and a gentleman.
Scout

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Scout" wrote in message
. ..
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Scout" wrote in message
| ...
| | "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| | Bush sold out.
| |
| | Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for
so
| long.
| | There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| | Scout
| |
|
|
| What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
| much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
| for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
| into office a true conservative.
|
| Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
| office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
| the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
| a success.
|
| Why do you believe that anyone who does not like Bush is a liberal?
| Scout
|


Because, as a general rule, it's true. There are a minor amount
of exceptions but I'd rather talk as a general rule. Minor exceptions
are of little or no import.

One could argue that through minor exceptions, the universe is slowly,
patiently, painstakingly, reshaped.
Scout

Got the sniffles?
 

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Scout" wrote in message
. ..
| "Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Scout" wrote in message
| ...
| | "Capt. Neal®" wrote
| | Bush sold out.
| |
| | Too bad he's had the unwavering support of so many neanderthals for
so
| long.
| | There's not much left that he hasn't f'd up royally.
| | Scout
| |
|
|
| What you liberals don't seem to understand is no matter how
| much a Republican screws up conservatives will NEVER vote
| for a Democrat. We will just endeavor to nominate and put
| into office a true conservative.
|
| Bush's failings are in no way as bad as having a Democrat in
| office. If for no other reason than the President has gotten
| the Supreme Court back on the right track he can be considered
| a success.
|
| Why do you believe that anyone who does not like Bush is a liberal?
| Scout
|


Because, as a general rule, it's true. There are a minor amount
of exceptions but I'd rather talk as a general rule. Minor exceptions
are of little or no import.

In the bigger scope of things (i.e., 7 billion + people), those who
support(ed) Bush are the minor exceptions!
Scout