"ed" wrote in message
...
This is just my opinion, but I disgree with the war in Iraq, think we were
lied to by our leaders and should have waited for the United Nations
backing.


Ed,
Not to sound confrontational...but do you have a working brain? The UN?
Sheesh.

Have you even followed along with all of the news regarding the UN
oil-for-food profiteering that took place in order to skirt UN sanctions?
Did you follow the news when it was talking about the banned weapons and
weapons materials that were being sold to Iraq by Russia, China, and France
in violation of the UN embargo?

Exactly how do you propose we could have gotten the support of Russia,
China, and France?

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:46:56 -0400, "NOYB" wrote:


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:31:03 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:


John H wrote:

On 17 Jun 2005 21:32:26 -0700, wrote:



Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers

*********

The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and are
now profiting from it is crap.

The young men and women who do their duty there
are heroic. Each one killed, wounded, or separated
on multiple extended tours from home and family is a national tragedy.

Screw the war, but honor the troops. It is possible to do both at once.
People who feel that we must despise the troops because they are forced
to serve in a bogus war as well as people who feel that we cannot
respect and value the troops without cheering for the
war itself are all wrong.


Deliberately lied? You're turning into a regular krausite!

You seem to forget:



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


D'oh. The evidence is mounting that Bush had the "intel" evidence
"cooked" to support his positions before he had it passed along to
members of Congress.

In other words, he had the "intel" changed to support his predisposition
to invade Iraq.

There is good coming out of Bush's dirty war. He's a half year into his
term and he's becoming a lame duck. Taht's good for America and good for
the world.


Duh...bull****.


You don't believe Bush is becoming a lame duck?

I don't. According to the most accurate pollster in the last 2 Presidential
elections (Rasmussen), Bush's approval rating is still at 49%. Given the
margin of error of the poll, that means that he continues to have the
support of almost the exact same number of people who voted for him last
November. Nothing has changed. He was a strong political ally to
politicians in elections all over the country in November...and will
continue to be an important ally for those who are up for reelection in
2006.

His rating now is what it was right before the election, which he won, right?


--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 21:01:05 -0400, HarryKrause wrote:

NOYB wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

John H wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:31:03 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:



John H wrote:


On 17 Jun 2005 21:32:26 -0700, wrote:




Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers

*********

The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and are
now profiting from it is crap.

The young men and women who do their duty there
are heroic. Each one killed, wounded, or separated
on multiple extended tours from home and family is a national tragedy.

Screw the war, but honor the troops. It is possible to do both at once.
People who feel that we must despise the troops because they are forced
to serve in a bogus war as well as people who feel that we cannot
respect and value the troops without cheering for the
war itself are all wrong.


Deliberately lied? You're turning into a regular krausite!

You seem to forget:



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


D'oh. The evidence is mounting that Bush had the "intel" evidence
"cooked" to support his positions before he had it passed along to
members of Congress.

In other words, he had the "intel" changed to support his predisposition
to invade Iraq.

There is good coming out of Bush's dirty war. He's a half year into his
term and he's becoming a lame duck. Taht's good for America and good for
the world.


Duh...bull****.


You don't believe Bush is becoming a lame duck?


I don't. According to the most accurate pollster in the last 2 Presidential
elections (Rasmussen), Bush's approval rating is still at 49%. Given the
margin of error of the poll, that means that he continues to have the
support of almost the exact same number of people who voted for him last
November. Nothing has changed. He was a strong political ally to
politicians in elections all over the country in November...and will
continue to be an important ally for those who are up for reelection in
2006.

Most of the legit polls have Bush far lower. I'll be delighted when the
level of support for the job he is doing drops into the high 30's. We're
not talking about his personal popularity here. Lots of people who think
Bush is a screw-up also believe he is an affable guy.

I believe I read last week that Bush is going to go around the country
to try to build up support for his Iraqi disaster. I'm sure he'll get
cheers from his base, but he won't be speaking much before those who are
not his ardent supporters. As long as the Iraqi deaths continue, Bush
will build up no more support for Iraq than he did for his plan to make
corporate America richer on the back of social security.

You'll see the impact of Bush's decline on his broader legislative
proposals and on his ability to expand his idiotic war to other
countries. *This* is where his lameduckdom will come into play; not on
every issue, of course, but on some of those issues where he might have
had a chance of further pooching the country.

Speaking of affable idiots, is Jeb on drugs? Where is he going with that
new Terri Schiavo nonsense? I used to think he was brighter than
Dubya, but no more.

I guess, in your mind, low means legit. Right?

Who were you calling 'stupid' earlier?

Better stick with dick comparisons and high speed boat trips on 'your' boat,
Harry.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

John H wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:31:03 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:



John H wrote:


On 17 Jun 2005 21:32:26 -0700, wrote:




Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers

*********

The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and
are
now profiting from it is crap.

The young men and women who do their duty there
are heroic. Each one killed, wounded, or separated
on multiple extended tours from home and family is a national
tragedy.

Screw the war, but honor the troops. It is possible to do both at
once.
People who feel that we must despise the troops because they are
forced
to serve in a bogus war as well as people who feel that we cannot
respect and value the troops without cheering for the
war itself are all wrong.


Deliberately lied? You're turning into a regular krausite!

You seem to forget:



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


D'oh. The evidence is mounting that Bush had the "intel" evidence
"cooked" to support his positions before he had it passed along to
members of Congress.

In other words, he had the "intel" changed to support his
predisposition to invade Iraq.

There is good coming out of Bush's dirty war. He's a half year into his
term and he's becoming a lame duck. Taht's good for America and good
for the world.


Duh...bull****.


You don't believe Bush is becoming a lame duck?


I don't. According to the most accurate pollster in the last 2
Presidential elections (Rasmussen), Bush's approval rating is still at
49%. Given the margin of error of the poll, that means that he continues
to have the support of almost the exact same number of people who voted
for him last November. Nothing has changed. He was a strong political
ally to politicians in elections all over the country in November...and
will continue to be an important ally for those who are up for reelection
in 2006.

Most of the legit polls have Bush far lower.

There are very few "legit" pollsters left...with most of them having been
bent over and fully exposed as partisan hacks in the 2004 erroneous "early
call" of the election.

Rasmussen's numbers, however, were within a tenth of a percent of the final
outcome.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
John H wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:46:56 -0400, "NOYB" wrote:


"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

John H wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:31:03 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:



John H wrote:


On 17 Jun 2005 21:32:26 -0700, wrote:




Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and
women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers

*********

The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and
are
now profiting from it is crap.

The young men and women who do their duty there
are heroic. Each one killed, wounded, or separated
on multiple extended tours from home and family is a national
tragedy.

Screw the war, but honor the troops. It is possible to do both at
once.
People who feel that we must despise the troops because they are
forced
to serve in a bogus war as well as people who feel that we cannot
respect and value the troops without cheering for the
war itself are all wrong.


Deliberately lied? You're turning into a regular krausite!

You seem to forget:



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and
a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


D'oh. The evidence is mounting that Bush had the "intel" evidence
"cooked" to support his positions before he had it passed along to
members of Congress.

In other words, he had the "intel" changed to support his
predisposition to invade Iraq.

There is good coming out of Bush's dirty war. He's a half year into
his term and he's becoming a lame duck. Taht's good for America and
good for the world.


Duh...bull****.


You don't believe Bush is becoming a lame duck?

I don't. According to the most accurate pollster in the last 2
Presidential elections (Rasmussen), Bush's approval rating is still at
49%. Given the margin of error of the poll, that means that he continues
to have the support of almost the exact same number of people who voted
for him last November. Nothing has changed. He was a strong political
ally to politicians in elections all over the country in November...and
will continue to be an important ally for those who are up for reelection
in 2006.


His rating now is what it was right before the election, which he won,
right?



Most legit polls show a five to seven point drop in Bush's job
favorability rating since just before the election. Then, he was about
49%. Now, he is around 42%.

According to Rasmussen:
Bush's approval rating was 52% on election day. It's at 49% now...and has
bounced around between 48 and 51% in the last week. Given the margin of
error, he's statistically where he was at when he won the general election
with 62 million votes last November.

I don't know where you're getting 42% from? Zogby? Gallup has it at 47%
and Washington Post/ABC has it at 48%.

As the midterm election nears, and that approval rating hovers near the same
number it was at in 11/04, the Republican candidates will fall into line
when they begin to remember that those numbers were good enough for Bush to
beat his opponent by 3 million votes...*and* coat-tail other Republicans
into a larger majority in the House and Senate.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
JimH wrote:
Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers


Chuck Gould responded:
The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and are
now profiting from it is crap



Ergo, Chuck Gould is a piece of ****.




Your logic is not compelling. Chuck made no comment here about the troops.
He commented on the political leadership of this country - the Bush
misadministration - and those corporations making money off the war.

Of the people, by the people and for the people. We are the government in
any and all of its forms. The government is selected from the people by the
people. A majority of the people have a different opinion than you.

The war is crap, and so are Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Halliburton, and
all the other warmongering corporations who see Iraq as a "moneymaker"
during its time of dissolution. These, of course, are many of the same
individuals and corporations who made money off Iraq before Saddam was
deposed.

You really don't have any idea about what the war on terrorism is and why we
moved from Saudi Arabia to Iraq.

Stick to something you are good at: Spewing garbage for your union
overlords.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

John H wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jun 2005 08:31:03 -0400, HarryKrause
wrote:



John H wrote:


On 17 Jun 2005 21:32:26 -0700, wrote:




Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers

*********

The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and
are
now profiting from it is crap.

The young men and women who do their duty there
are heroic. Each one killed, wounded, or separated
on multiple extended tours from home and family is a national
tragedy.

Screw the war, but honor the troops. It is possible to do both at
once.
People who feel that we must despise the troops because they are
forced
to serve in a bogus war as well as people who feel that we cannot
respect and value the troops without cheering for the
war itself are all wrong.


Deliberately lied? You're turning into a regular krausite!

You seem to forget:



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction
and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


D'oh. The evidence is mounting that Bush had the "intel" evidence
"cooked" to support his positions before he had it passed along to
members of Congress.

In other words, he had the "intel" changed to support his
predisposition to invade Iraq.

There is good coming out of Bush's dirty war. He's a half year into his
term and he's becoming a lame duck. Taht's good for America and good
for the world.


Duh...bull****.


You don't believe Bush is becoming a lame duck?


I don't. According to the most accurate pollster in the last 2
Presidential elections (Rasmussen), Bush's approval rating is still at
49%. Given the margin of error of the poll, that means that he continues
to have the support of almost the exact same number of people who voted
for him last November. Nothing has changed. He was a strong political
ally to politicians in elections all over the country in November...and
will continue to be an important ally for those who are up for reelection
in 2006.

Most of the legit polls have Bush far lower. I'll be delighted when the
level of support for the job he is doing drops into the high 30's. We're
not talking about his personal popularity here. Lots of people who think
Bush is a screw-up also believe he is an affable guy.

Legitimate vs. Accurate? I'll take accurate everytime!

I believe I read last week that Bush is going to go around the country to
try to build up support for his Iraqi disaster. I'm sure he'll get cheers
from his base, but he won't be speaking much before those who are not his
ardent supporters. As long as the Iraqi deaths continue, Bush will build
up no more support for Iraq than he did for his plan to make corporate
America richer on the back of social security.

There were 23,000 men that died an Antitem in one day 143 years ago.

You'll see the impact of Bush's decline on his broader legislative
proposals and on his ability to expand his idiotic war to other countries.
*This* is where his lameduckdom will come into play; not on every issue,
of course, but on some of those issues where he might have had a chance of
further pooching the country.

Speaking of affable idiots, is Jeb on drugs? Where is he going with that
new Terri Schiavo nonsense? I used to think he was brighter than Dubya,
but no more.










--
If it is Bad for Bush,
It is Good for the United States.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:
"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:

JimH wrote:
Despite your feelings about the war please keep all our men and women
serving in our Armed Forces in your prayers


Chuck Gould responded:
The war, along with the people who deliberately lied us into it and are
now profiting from it is crap



Ergo, Chuck Gould is a piece of ****.




Your logic is not compelling. Chuck made no comment here about the
troops. He commented on the political leadership of this country - the
Bush misadministration - and those corporations making money off the war.


Of the people, by the people and for the people. We are the government in
any and all of its forms. The government is selected from the people by
the people. A majority of the people have a different opinion than you.

A majority of the people believe Bush's war in Iraq is a horrendous
disaster.

Do you have a verifiable source or are you re-typing the survey results.

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
Bert Robbins wrote:

Legitimate vs. Accurate? I'll take accurate everytime!


I believe I read last week that Bush is going to go around the country to
try to build up support for his Iraqi disaster. I'm sure he'll get cheers
from his base, but he won't be speaking much before those who are not his
ardent supporters. As long as the Iraqi deaths continue, Bush will build
up no more support for Iraq than he did for his plan to make corporate
America richer on the back of social security.


There were 23,000 men that died an Antitem in one day 143 years ago.


What do you care? Your military service was stateside. Did you even get a
blister on your thumb?

Please remind me of the uniformed military service your served in?

NOYB wrote:

He burned the originals to protect the source? LOL! You would think a
"reporter" in the UK would follow the news from around the globe and see
what happened to a very famous (now notoriuous) news anchor from CBS who
tried to run the same scam.

I wonder why the British government has not disputed their authenticity.