On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 17:35:30 -0400, DSK wrote:


That's funny, they reduced the deficit under Clinton *and* had NO
terrorist attacks on US soil... and put many more *real* terrorists
behind bars for life than Bush has done... after due process, too. Icing
on the cake.

Clinton - a real winner as far as terrorism goes.

Is making Social Security more fiscally sound "impossible"?

No, Bush has started the job.

Is an energy-independent America "impossible"

In the near term? Yes. If we build a lot of nuclear plants? Maybe.
If we owned Iraq and Saudi Arabia? Probably.

Would it have been impossible to put together a *real* coalition to
invade Iraq, like say for example the one that President George Bush Sr
put together?

Ah yes, we missed the liberals icons, France, Germany, and Russia.

Is it "impossible" to increase manufacturing jobs?

Bush has increased manufacturing jobs where he could - M1 Tanks, Bradleys,
Humvees, M16s, etc. He couldn't increase the production of automobiles,
textiles, etc. like Kerry could have.
Is it "impossible" to gain the respect of, and cooperation with, other
nations?

See above.

Is influencing North Korea to not build "nookular" weapons totally
impossible, when it had been done for years before President Bush Jr
took office?

You mean while they were going nuclear under Clinton's reign?
Is it "impossible" to protect the environment?


Lastly, you made my point.

My point was that we should have elected Kerry!

Actually, you made mine. Most of Bush & Cheney's policy's have been a
total failure if you look at the good of the country overall, and if you
look at successful policies of the past.

Of course, it's a lot easier to call names and then say doing all these
things is "impossible."

Please show me where I called you a name.

.... We should have elected Kerry

I agree. Actually, we did elect Gore, but unfortunately he didn't get
tot ake office and even you agree that the country is the poorer for it.

... He would have worked miracles, like getting
folks out of wheel chairs.


If that were true, maybe the Pope would have endorsed Kerry.

Maybe not true, but Edwards said he would do it!

DSK

To prevent you going in to your name-calling, put-down routine, we'll stop now.


--
John H

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction
... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real
...."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003