On Aug 29, 10:43*am, "Lu Powell" wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message

t...

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:

Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.

To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion. *Some of us consider
it all wasted.

I agree that it was all wasted. However, that does not justify what Obama
and the Congress is doing with regard to UAW.

and all the goodies...trillions...bush passed out to his rich buddies,
paid for by the middle class? why do you righties hate the middle
class so much?

wf3h wrote:
On Aug 29, 10:43 am, "Lu Powell" wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message

t...

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:
Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.
To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion. Some of us consider
it all wasted.
I agree that it was all wasted. However, that does not justify what Obama
and the Congress is doing with regard to UAW.

and all the goodies...trillions...bush passed out to his rich buddies,
paid for by the middle class? why do you righties hate the middle
class so much?


Maybe the righties have been deluded into believing the "rich buddies"
earned the right to defraud and steal from the middle class?

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:42:32 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:


Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.

To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion.

True enough. But that was over how many years? We just spent that and
more on bailing out Unions, GM, Chrysler, ACORN and just 13% of $780
Billion in one year was spent on things that were actually important.

One year compared to...um...8?

Some of us consider it all wasted.

Some of us believe that the recent "stimulus" package is a complete
waste and, frankly, have been proven in general, right.

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:42:32 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:


Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.
To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion.

True enough. But that was over how many years? We just spent that and
more on bailing out Unions, GM, Chrysler, ACORN and just 13% of $780
Billion in one year was spent on things that were actually important.

One year compared to...um...8?

Some of us consider it all wasted.

Some of us believe that the recent "stimulus" package is a complete
waste and, frankly, have been proven in general, right.

You forget "pesky" facts like the stock markets are rebounding quite
well, Ford has had a good quarter, GM is coming back, houses starts in
many markets are up, etc.

In article ,
says...

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:42:32 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:


Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.
To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion.

True enough. But that was over how many years? We just spent that and
more on bailing out Unions, GM, Chrysler, ACORN and just 13% of $780
Billion in one year was spent on things that were actually important.

One year compared to...um...8?

Some of us consider it all wasted.

Some of us believe that the recent "stimulus" package is a complete
waste and, frankly, have been proven in general, right.

You forget "pesky" facts like the stock markets are rebounding quite
well, Ford has had a good quarter, GM is coming back, houses starts in
many markets are up, etc.

Most economists figured it would start to pick up about now anyway,
without porkulous...

--
Wafa free since 2009

NotNow wrote:
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:42:32 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H. wrote:


Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.
To date, the War in Iraq has cost us @ $700 billion.

True enough. But that was over how many years? We just spent that and
more on bailing out Unions, GM, Chrysler, ACORN and just 13% of $780
Billion in one year was spent on things that were actually important.

One year compared to...um...8?

Some of us consider it all wasted.

Some of us believe that the recent "stimulus" package is a complete
waste and, frankly, have been proven in general, right.

You forget "pesky" facts like the stock markets are rebounding quite
well, Ford has had a good quarter, GM is coming back, houses starts in
many markets are up, etc.

What is the average length of a recession? How much is the average
stimulus package in the average recession excluding this most recent
$787 billion stimulus package?

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:31:17 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being
considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep
bubbling out of the massive legislation.

The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell
out to prop up the United Auto Workers’ retiree health insurance
program. …

In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they’ll
have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire — and most
won’t — to chip in to maintain the UAW’s coverage, which even after
the union’s givebacks is still better than what the average American
worker receives."


http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...-care-benefits

This is very important people. Union health plans will be exempt from
the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers
while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in
“exchanges”. Instead of having the union pay for their own plans,
taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.

And let's not forget that Federal/State employees and of course our
Congress Critters will also be exempt from Obamacare.

Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.

That's hardly fair, poking fun at the liberal's favorite red herring
argument.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:51:54 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:31:17 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being
considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep
bubbling out of the massive legislation.

The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell
out to prop up the United Auto Workers’ retiree health insurance
program. …

In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they’ll
have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire — and most
won’t — to chip in to maintain the UAW’s coverage, which even after
the union’s givebacks is still better than what the average American
worker receives."


http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...-care-benefits

This is very important people. Union health plans will be exempt from
the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers
while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in
“exchanges”. Instead of having the union pay for their own plans,
taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.

And let's not forget that Federal/State employees and of course our
Congress Critters will also be exempt from Obamacare.

Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.

That's hardly fair, poking fun at the liberal's favorite red herring
argument.

So far, the one responder didn't get it.
--
John H

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those
who are willing to work and give to those who would not."
Thomas Jefferson

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 10:06:07 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:51:54 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:55:34 -0400, John H.
wrote:

On Sat, 29 Aug 2009 08:31:17 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being
considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep
bubbling out of the massive legislation.

The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell
out to prop up the United Auto Workers’ retiree health insurance
program. …

In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they’ll
have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire — and most
won’t — to chip in to maintain the UAW’s coverage, which even after
the union’s givebacks is still better than what the average American
worker receives."


http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...-care-benefits

This is very important people. Union health plans will be exempt from
the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers
while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in
“exchanges”. Instead of having the union pay for their own plans,
taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.

And let's not forget that Federal/State employees and of course our
Congress Critters will also be exempt from Obamacare.

Obscene, but Bush wasted $78 billion in Iraq.

That's hardly fair, poking fun at the liberal's favorite red herring
argument.

So far, the one responder didn't get it.

No doubt. He/she responded as though it went straight to the
point.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
"One reason the public so distrusts the health care plan being
considered by Congress is that so many troublesome details keep
bubbling out of the massive legislation.

The latest example is the $10 billion taxpayers will be asked to shell
out to prop up the United Auto Workers’ retiree health insurance
program. …

In effect, it would ask every taxpayer, regardless of whether they’ll
have health insurance coverage themselves after they retire — and most
won’t — to chip in to maintain the UAW’s coverage, which even after
the union’s givebacks is still better than what the average American
worker receives."


http://www.detnews.com/article/20090...-care-benefits

This is very important people. Union health plans will be exempt from
the limitations of ObamaCare, allowing unions to operate as insurers
while forcing everyone else into government-approved plans in
“exchanges”. Instead of having the union pay for their own plans,
taxpayers will subsidize them, while getting less themselves.

And let's not forget that Federal/State employees and of course our
Congress Critters will also be exempt from Obamacare.

With the amount of money the health care industry is paying to defeat
"Obamacare," it's interesting that you attempt to turn the tables, but
that's how it works.

We pay more and get less, and we should keep it that way!

Wanna argue about what we get for what we pay? Look up life expectancy
in different systems and get back to me.