JimH wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

JimH wrote:


"Jim," wrote in message
...


JimH wrote:



"JimH" wrote in message
...



"Jim," wrote in message
...



JimH wrote:




"Jim," wrote in message
. ..




JimH wrote:




"Jim," wrote in message
.. .





Garth Almgren wrote:





Around 2/26/2005 12:49 PM, Snafu wrote:






Yeah, "Jim,", we told you Bush is doing a better job than
Herbert Hoover
did, and this proves it!


Well, at least people aren't forced into living in Bushvilles...
yet.



I'm so embarrassed -- I went to look at a (GASP) power boat (hangs
head in shame) today. Came back to 100+ messages so I skimmed
headers and killfiled a bunch.

If anyone has anything important for me - please repost.


NP Jim,.

Here you go:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Jim,....remind me again what you were saying about the state of the
US
economy?



Here, this might help:



======================================== =======

Saturday, February 26, 2005

Jeannine Aversa

Associated Press

Washington- The economy clocked in at a 3.8 percent pace in the
final
quarter of 2004 - faster than initially thought - and is now
cruising at
that speed or better. That could be good news for jobless people
hoping for
companies to increase hiring.

In the newest reading on the economy's fitness, the gross domestic
product
exceeded a previous estimate of a 3.1 percent annual growth rate
for the
October- to-December quarter, the Commerce Department reported
Friday. GDP
measures the value of all goods and services produced within the
United
States.

The improvement reflected more robust spending by businesses on
capital
equipment and on inventories of goods. The trade deficit also was
less of a
drag on fourth-quarter growth than initially thought.

Although economic growth in the final quarter of last year was a
bit slower
than the third quarters' 4 percent, the performance was still
solid.

"We are now at a comfortable cruising altitude," said Lynn Reaser,
chief
economist at Banc of America Capital Management. "What is
significant is
that all parts of the economy were pulling their own weight."

In other news, sales of previously owned homes slipped 0.1 percent
in
January from the previous month to a seasonally adjusted annual
rate of 6.80
million units, the National Association of Realtors reported. Even
with the
dip, sales remained healthy, analysts said.

Also Friday, Bloomberg News reported that 7 million fewer
previously owned
single-family houses were sold in the last 16 years than the
National
Association of Realtors initially estimated, according to the
group's
revised figures.

Resales since 1989 were 10 percent lower per year on average than
previously
estimated, the association said in Washington on Friday.

The Realtors issued the revisions after comparing its estimates
with results

from the 2000 Census. Single-family home resales last year were

still

a

record 5.96 million compared with a previous estimate of 6.68
million, the
group said.

On Wall Street, the GDP report lifted stocks. The Dow Jones
industrials rose
92.81 points to 10,841.60, the best close since Dec. 28. For the
week, the
Dow rose 0.52 percent.

For the current January-to- March quarter, the economy is expected
to grow
at a rate of around 4 percent, some economists project.

Analysts are hoping that with the economy moving ahead at a good
pace,
companies will feel more inclined to step up hiring in upcoming
months.
Economists predict the nation's payrolls will expand by a sizable
225,000 in
February, which would be up from January's 146,000 gain. The
government
releases the February employment report next week.

"With decent momentum entering the New Year, we should soon be
generating
the kind of job growth that will make the expansion feel like good
times,"
said Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial
Services.






Bill Cheney == name sounds familiar..... wonder if he's related to
dick?




So that is the extent of your comment on this article?

What a great rebuttal Jim,.

No need for rebuttal, let's talk when the DOW tops 11,700 (high under
the Clinton administration)

You are changing the subject. The Dow is not a sole indicator of a
good economy.

Heck, it was below 3,000 for decades, even in the glory years of the
economy.

Besides, the 11,700 mark was based on dot com companies with no
assets....and bust they went.



BTW: Why do you insist on changing the target? ??? Stick to a point.
If you want to explore other avenues, finish the first point first.

Here is what you are sounding like:

==============

We should negotiate with Iraq.

OK, the negotiations failed so we should put economic sanctions on them.

OK, those failed so we should negotiate with them again.

OK, well at least the UN put sanctions on them. We should give them
another chance.

OK, they did not abide by them...we should give them more than 8 years
to abide to the sanctions.

OH NO....you are invading Iraq? The invasion will take years.
Thousands upon thousands of US troops will die.

OK, so it took a couple of days with few US military casualties....but
you will never be able to take Baghdad.

OK, so you took the city. The civilians will resist you.

OK, so the citizens rejoice in your coming...but you will never find
Sadam.

OK, you found Sadam, so what about the future of Iraq? Will it ever see
free elections?

OK, so you have a plan for the elections with an interim governenment.
But an election will never happen.

OK, so you put an election date of January 30th. It will not happen.

OK, so it looks like the election will happen. But there will be
thousands killed in the process.

OK, the election happened and only a few hundred died.....well you will
insert next whine

;-)

Gee, and *I* read your article as being about the economy. But I agree
with you -- Iraq is a mess -- thanks to Bush


How so? Please be specific.

See above -- we had no justification to invade Iraq -- The president was
either lied to (but he reappointed the liars), or he himself lied.

Where are the WMD?


How does that make Iraq a mess?


What is our exit plan?



I am sure it is classified. Ask GWB. But how does that make Iraq a mess?


How long will we stay? -- Yep spout away "as long as it takes", but will
my grandchildren be fighting there? (oldest 7)


How does that make Iraq a mess?


What have *WE* as in US citizens gained from the invasion?


You don't see what is happening in the Middle East? Take your blinders off
Jim,. Regardless, how does that make Iraq a mess?



What about Osama? (I remember Bush saying "dead or alive") He's doing
better now than 1500 American soldiers


How does that make Iraq a mess?


What about Afghanistan? Iran?


How does that make Iraq a mess?



Well in the strict definition of the word mess -- Iraq is a mess because
the US bombed most of the infrastructure all to hell.

In the mode I intended it, Iraq is a mess because we have accomplished
little, at a loss of 1500 lives, Billions of Dollars, infinite loss of
respect from both the countries of the middle east, and out former
allies in Europe.

As for Osama -- he was declared to be our primary target following 9/11.
It's been well over 3 years and we haven't got him -- probably because
of the distraction of Iraq.

Do *YOU* think Iraq is a well ordered, well run place you might like to
vacation to?