wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:22:35 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

How is that going. The time last I looked BOTH wars are still going on
and Osama is no closer to being captured than he was on Sept 12 2001.

bush let bin laden escape. bush let him get to pakistan. unless you
think obama should start ANOTHER war, you go ahead and tell me how
obama should get him, OK?

and BOTH wars are going on because it would be criminal to abandon
iraq

At the time we were chasing Osama in Tora Bora we just had a small
contingent of CIA and special Ops people there calling in air strikes.
That was the way the plan was supposed to work. The special Ops people
were in trouble when the local war lords turned against them and there
is no guarantee 1000 or even 10,000 more troops hastily dropped in
there with no real plan, would have turned the tide up in those
mountains. It would have just sent a lot more American kids home in
body bags.

Your Iraq statement sounds like what Nixon said about Vietnam.
I suppose we could still be fighting that war too.

Well, you're certainly right, but the plan, devised by Rumsfeld et. al.,
overruled what the military recommended.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 22:53:37 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:22:35 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

How is that going. The time last I looked BOTH wars are still going on
and Osama is no closer to being captured than he was on Sept 12 2001.

bush let bin laden escape. bush let him get to pakistan. unless you
think obama should start ANOTHER war, you go ahead and tell me how
obama should get him, OK?

and BOTH wars are going on because it would be criminal to abandon
iraq

At the time we were chasing Osama in Tora Bora we just had a small
contingent of CIA and special Ops people there calling in air strikes.

bush had the option of sending in the army...locking up tora bora and
capturing bin laden

he decided the bin ladens had too much money so let osama escape

That was the way the plan was supposed to work. The special Ops people
were in trouble when the local war lords turned against them and there
is no guarantee 1000 or even 10,000 more troops hastily dropped in
there with no real plan, would have turned the tide up in those
mountains. It would have just sent a lot more American kids home in
body bags.

really? got any proof of that?

oh. none. when we DID send in the troops we destroyed the taliban govt
in a matter of weeks.

why not read the 'new republic' article on how bush let bin laden
escape?

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:46:25 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:57:25 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


bush had the option of sending in the army...locking up tora bora and
capturing bin laden


The problem was, how many troops do you think it would have taken?
We have close to 80,000 there and that region is still far from
"locked up".

hey genius...guess what? we locked up tora bora AFTER bin laden
escaped. again, i recommend you read the 'new republic' article

Moving in troops takes time and they were out of time if they actually
wanted to stop Osama from crossing the border.

wrong.


he decided the bin ladens had too much money so let osama escape

That was the way the plan was supposed to work. The special Ops people
were in trouble when the local war lords turned against them and there
is no guarantee 1000 or even 10,000 more troops hastily dropped in
there with no real plan, would have turned the tide up in those
mountains. It would have just sent a lot more American kids home in
body bags.

really? got any proof of that?

Casualties in Afghanistan:

gee. people got killed in afghanistan. wow.

you STILL haven't proved we wouldnt have captured bin laden.



oh. none.
Close to GIs 1000 dead so far. Far from none.

and MOST of these would NOT be dead if we'd captured bin laden

read the article


when we DID send in the troops we destroyed the taliban govt
in a matter of weeks.

In Tora Bora?

I didn't think so.

yep. no big deal.

bush just wanted to be incompetent in afghanistan like he is in iraq

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:19:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Those miles of boom in Maine supposedly failed inspection although
they meet ASTM standards and were considered "superior" by an
independent inspector. I suspect they failed cuz they were not made
from "free range nylon". Ya know, it's sorta like all those school
busses in katrina that couldn't be used for evac cuz they didn't have
seat belts, all them peeps died courtesy of Mayor Nagin and Dem Gov
Blanco. Way to go Dems, Keel them poor people and drive em to ruin to
put em on welfare.

Anyone want to tell Froggy who created the MMS? Under which president?
Anyone??


Who did absolutely zero to CHANGE it in the last 16 months? (hint: it
was Mr Change)
If it was so corrupt Obama should have fixed it BEFORE he started
proposing more offshore drilling. It is not a question of a long
process that wasn't finished. Fixing MMS had not even started so he
must have been happy with them.

That's not completely true Salazar was supposed to make some changes, and he
did, but I think it's reasonable to say that it takes a while to fix a
situation that's been going on for decades. I thought he was the wrong
choice to begin with. So, who created MMS under which president? Come on.
You can say it.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:09:47 -0400, wrote:



"Creating" in Washington mostly means printing new signs for an old
building. The fact is all DC regulation is done by people who used to
work in that industry and they go back when they lose their government
job. It has been that way since George Washington, not just the recent
George.
I still say if you can't do ANYTHIING in 16 months, how much can we
expect in 8 years?
Obama shot his whole wad on this health care gift to the big medicine
lobby and let the rest of the country go to hell (or stay in hell if
that is what you think Bush was).

which was one HELLUVAN accomplishment. and the 'big medicine' lobby
is not too happy with obama

so either you're bull****ting or you're lying.

I guarantee, If you ask anyone on the Gulf Coast whether they would
rather have clean beaches and their fishing job back or all the
overpriced medical insurance they can't afford they would take the
clean beach.

too bad cheney ****ed 'em isnt it?

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:23:53 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Obama shot his whole wad on this health care gift to the big medicine
lobby and let the rest of the country go to hell (or stay in hell if
that is what you think Bush was).

which was one HELLUVAN accomplishment. and the 'big medicine' lobby
is not too happy with obama

so either you're bull****ting or you're lying.


Let's see what the hall open season has to offer, then you decide how
great this "free" health care plan is working. The insurance company
is already hiking the rates for the families who want to take
advantage of the preexisting condition and those who want to put
their 20 somethings on the policy.
The big medicine people will do just fine. They are going to sell more
government paid for drugs and doctors/hospitals will get more
patients. I still have not seen anything to control the cost, They
just increased availability

There's no "free healthcare plan" as you well know. It's a capitalistic
system. Again, enough of the crazy misinformation.

If they're "hiking the rates," then it must not be free. You've got yours,
but you're unwilling to let anyone else in? That's what it sounds like.

On 6/18/10 12:22 AM, nom=de=plume wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:23:53 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Obama shot his whole wad on this health care gift to the big medicine
lobby and let the rest of the country go to hell (or stay in hell if
that is what you think Bush was).

which was one HELLUVAN accomplishment. and the 'big medicine' lobby
is not too happy with obama

so either you're bull****ting or you're lying.


Let's see what the hall open season has to offer, then you decide how
great this "free" health care plan is working. The insurance company
is already hiking the rates for the families who want to take
advantage of the preexisting condition and those who want to put
their 20 somethings on the policy.
The big medicine people will do just fine. They are going to sell more
government paid for drugs and doctors/hospitals will get more
patients. I still have not seen anything to control the cost, They
just increased availability

There's no "free healthcare plan" as you well know. It's a capitalistic
system. Again, enough of the crazy misinformation.

If they're "hiking the rates," then it must not be free. You've got
yours, but you're unwilling to let anyone else in? That's what it sounds
like.





The key to understanding gfretwell is to realize that no matter the
issue or politician, what he mostly sees is the downside or the moral
equivalence of everyone and everything. In his eyes, Jonas Salk and Dick
Cheney are no better than each other. :)

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:22:29 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:23:53 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Obama shot his whole wad on this health care gift to the big medicine
lobby and let the rest of the country go to hell (or stay in hell if
that is what you think Bush was).

which was one HELLUVAN accomplishment. and the 'big medicine' lobby
is not too happy with obama

so either you're bull****ting or you're lying.


Let's see what the hall open season has to offer, then you decide how
great this "free" health care plan is working. The insurance company
is already hiking the rates for the families who want to take
advantage of the preexisting condition and those who want to put
their 20 somethings on the policy.
The big medicine people will do just fine. They are going to sell more
government paid for drugs and doctors/hospitals will get more
patients. I still have not seen anything to control the cost, They
just increased availability

There's no "free healthcare plan" as you well know. It's a capitalistic
system. Again, enough of the crazy misinformation.

If they're "hiking the rates," then it must not be free. You've got yours,
but you're unwilling to let anyone else in? That's what it sounds like.


They are hiking the rates because their liabilities have been
increased
They are making insurance companies take on more risk (or in the case
of preexisting conditions a known liability) so the premiums will get
raised to cover that. Insurance companies are just bookies. They don't
care what the bet is, as long as they can lay it off and they still
collect the vig.
Remember, this bill was written by UHC lobbyists.

So far, none of this has happened. Costs will go down over time and save us
billions in the next decade alone. And, we not done with the legislation.

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:02:48 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:23:53 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Obama shot his whole wad on this health care gift to the big medicine
lobby and let the rest of the country go to hell (or stay in hell if
that is what you think Bush was).

which was one HELLUVAN accomplishment. and the 'big medicine' lobby
is not too happy with obama

so either you're bull****ting or you're lying.


Let's see what the hall open season has to offer, then you decide how
great this "free" health care plan is working. The insurance company
is already hiking the rates for the families who want to take
advantage of the preexisting condition and those who want to put
their 20 somethings on the policy.

you're right. it would be cheaper to let 'em die. WTF...why not?

The big medicine people will do just fine. They are going to sell more
government paid for drugs and doctors/hospitals will get more
patients. I still have not seen anything to control the cost, They
just increased availability

let's balance the budget on the backs of the sick and dying. why not?

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:49:51 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 19 Jun 2010 20:00:00 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


you're right. it would be cheaper to let 'em die. WTF...why not?

The poor have always had Medicaid, all Obamacare did was ratchet up
what was "poor".

correct. because medicare does not cover the WORKING poor. you just
want them to die...typical right winger.



The big medicine people will do just fine. They are going to sell more
government paid for drugs and doctors/hospitals will get more
patients. I still have not seen anything to control the cost, They
just increased availability

let's balance the budget on the backs of the sick and dying. why not?

If we crash the economy, how do you think the poor will be doing?

bush ALREADY TRASHED THE ECONOMY!!!

i know it's news to the right wing but we're in a DEPRESSSION caused
by 30 years of milton friedman right wing economics.

killing the poor is not gonna solve the problem