I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you like it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you never will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political conversation you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of Clinton's 1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had not yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

JimH wrote:

I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you like
it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you never
will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political conversation
you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of Clinton's
1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had not
yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and
tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

911 has nothing to do with it. There was, during Clinton's term, just
as much a chance that THAT could happen, as there is now. What IS
different, is that BushCo has succeeded in dividing the U.S. into a
lone entity, essentially ****ing off the rest of the world.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you like
it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you never
will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political conversation
you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of Clinton's
1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had not
yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and
tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

911 has nothing to do with it. There was, during Clinton's term, just
as much a chance that THAT could happen, as there is now.

You obviously cannot discuss the facts and therefore there is no reason to
continue this discussion with you.

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you like
it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you never
will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political conversation
you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of Clinton's
1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had not
yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and
tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

911 has nothing to do with it. There was, during Clinton's term, just
as much a chance that THAT could happen, as there is now.

You obviously cannot discuss the facts and therefore there is no reason to
continue this discussion with you.

Asslicker is too busy trying to figure out what that whoooshing sound he
keeps hearing over his head.

P.Fritz wrote:
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you
like
it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you
never
will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL
interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political
conversation
you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of
Clinton's
1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had
not
yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and
tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

911 has nothing to do with it. There was, during Clinton's term,
just
as much a chance that THAT could happen, as there is now.

You obviously cannot discuss the facts and therefore there is no
reason to
continue this discussion with you.

Asslicker is too busy trying to figure out what that whoooshing sound
he
keeps hearing over his head.

Paul, I see that you still can't act like an adult, and must resort to
petty childish name calling in lieu of actually debating a subject.
How's the child rearing coming along? Has alt.support.parenting gotten
you on track yet, so that you can actually perform the function of
parent, or do you still need help? It's pretty pathetic that people
like you breed, and then don't have the very basic skills required to
raise what they've spawned.

JimH wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

JimH wrote:

I really don't understand why this inauguration is bother you
like
it
is.
Get over it already.

I've listed the reasons above. If you don't understand, you
never
will.
I love the "get over it already" comment. Hell, you STILL
interject
something about Clinton in just about ANY political conversation
you
get involved in here. One could say the same to you.


You are right. I should not have brought up the cost of Clinton's
1997
inaugural event and compared it the this recent one. 9-11 had not
yet
happened in January 1997 and thus no need for high security and
tremendous
security costs. Therefore it is not fair to compare the two.

Sorry. My mistake.

911 has nothing to do with it. There was, during Clinton's term,
just
as much a chance that THAT could happen, as there is now.

You obviously cannot discuss the facts and therefore there is no
reason to
continue this discussion with you.

I told you all of the "facts". Perhaps they didn't hit your gray
matter.