David Fritzinger <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in
news:dfritzinnospam-A9A288.08381320072004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com:

In article <Xns952BD66DC31B6ZAP@system.alaska.xm>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

dfritzin@hotmail.com (David Fritzinger) wrote in
news:b82925bb.0407191652.2e9b9924@posting.google.com:

Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote in message
news:<3f1d743424d2eb638fdf81a3da988190@news.bubbanews.com>...

David Fritzinger <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in

In article <f862972e8d5ec39af4861ee215bbd172@news.bubbanews.com>,
Xomicron <xomicron@wp.pl> wrote:

David Fritzinger <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in

m:

Kerry said go to the UN, which Bush tried to do. Kerry said get
Nato involved, which Bush tried to do.

Obviously Kerry's ideas didn't work.

If he had followed them at the beginning, they might have. As it
is, Bush screwed things up too badly for it to matter much. The
only hope of saving Iraq is to get Bush out.

Kerry has yet to state how he will do a better job.

For one, he doesn't carry the baggage Bush does. Remember, Bush
managed to destroy all the good will that we had from the tragedy of
9/11 by acting like a cowboy and fighting a pre-emptive,

What good is gathering intelligence on terrorism and rogue regimes if
you can't do anything about them preemptively.

Kerry himself admitted he supports preemption.

Only with good intelligence, which we surely did not have in Iraq. And,
Kerry wouldn't have gone into Iraq,

Sure he would have. He voted for the war.

which is proving to be a real quagmire.

Based on what?

Let's look at the facts:

Re-enlistment is up not down.

The vast majority of the soldiers over there believe that they are doing
the right thing.

The vast majority of the soldiers coming home from Iraq (including ones
critical of how things are being handled) are appalled by how the media is
presenting what is going on over there.

The media is hesitant to report positive news from Iraq.

The majority of "some of the finest military minds in the history of
this country" were predicting 10,000 plus deaths on our side before the
war. They were wrong then, they are wrong now.

Saddam had terrorist connections and most importantly, broke the ceasefire
he signed at the end of the first Gulf War.

The vast majority of Iraq is peaceful. The violence going on over there
is not representative of the Iraqi population.

Many on the left and in the press want the US to lose in Iraq.

All in all, while mistakes were made as they are in every war, Iraq has
been a great success.

Face it, Bush is a total disaster, in every way you can think of.

Only to the left, because they don't want him to get the credit for his
successes.

If you can find some successes, I would be glad to listen. However, Iraq
is a mess.

No, it isn't. Terror attacks have dropped dramatically, especially since
the handover of power.

The economy is not good,

According to economic reports it is the best economy in 20 years.

since any new jobs being created are low wage jobs.

Oh brother. You kooks are never happy.

"Bush's economy hasn't created new jobs." "If it has created new jobs,

aren't well-paying jobs." "If they are well-paying jobs, there is still
income inequality in America."

He didn't go after OBL, like he should have,

but instead went on a wild goose chase in
Iraq. Then, once there, he didn't do anything right,

The entire country was occupied in a period of a few weeks. The invasion
was a success.

but instead believed Chalabi when he said the Iraqis
would welcome us with flowers,

They practically did.

and Iraqi oil revenue would pay for the
reconstruction.

I'm not sure Bush ever said that.

His tax breaks are mainly for the rich,

*Everyone* received a tax cut.

who don't need them, while he is screwing the poor.

Yeah Bush is really screwing the poor by not making them pay any taxes.

He isn't bothering
to fund the No Child Left Behind, so that isn't working either. His
environmental policies are a disaster.

Disaster based on what?

David Fritzinger <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in
news:dfritzinnospam-A9A288.08381320072004@orngca-news04.socal.rr.com:

which is proving to be a real quagmire.

Based on what?

Let's look at the facts:

Re-enlistment is up not down.

The vast majority of the soldiers over there believe that they are doing
the right thing.

The vast majority of the soldiers coming home from Iraq (including ones
critical of how things are being handled) are appalled by how the media is
presenting what is going on over there.

The media is hesitant to report positive news from Iraq.

The majority of "some of the finest military minds in the history of
this country" were predicting 10,000 plus deaths on our side before the
war. They were wrong then, they are wrong now.

Saddam had terrorist connections and most importantly, broke the ceasefire
he signed at the end of the first Gulf War.

The vast majority of Iraq is peaceful. The violence going on over there
is not representative of the Iraqi population.

Many on the left and in the press want the US to lose in Iraq.

All in all, while mistakes were made as they are in every war, Iraq has
been a great success.

The economy is not good,

According to economic reports it is the best economy in 20 years.

He didn't go after OBL, like he should have,

but instead went on a wild goose chase in
Iraq. Then, once there, he didn't do anything right,

The entire country was occupied in a period of a few weeks. The invasion
was a success.

but instead believed Chalabi when he said the Iraqis
would welcome us with flowers,

They practically did.

and Iraqi oil revenue would pay for the
reconstruction.

I'm not sure Bush ever said that.

His tax breaks are mainly for the rich,

*Everyone* received a tax cut.

He isn't bothering
to fund the No Child Left Behind, so that isn't working either. His
environmental policies are a disaster.

Disaster based on what?

David Fritzinger wrote:

Can't he do anything right?

He has a pretty good golf swing. No doubt developed during many days of
goofing off on vacation.

You won't notice any difference in how this country is run anyway, no
matter which party or who is in office. Seems like every time a new man
is put in office it is the same old business as usual. Looks like they
all get their marching orders from someone else we don't know about.

forge wrote:

In article <6PKdndpTpb8leJzc4p2dnA@bresnan.com>,
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:

Well, Hillary wants Bush to stay in one more term. Then in 2008
she'll run.

Yes, that tinfoil hat does bring out the color of your eyes.

You wait and see. I hope we'll all be around in 2008.

Hillary probably will run in '08, whether Kerry is running for
reelection or not. It wouldn't be the first time someone's tried to
get nominated over the incumbent.

For the record, I'd vote for a reasonable, non-Bushite Republican
before I'd vote for Hillary. But if Cheney or Hastert or any of
those other mean, moneygrubbing cocksuckers runs, looks like it's
Hil & Bill for me!!

You won't notice any difference in how this country is run anyway, no
matter which party or who is in office. Seems like every time a new
man is put in office it is the same old business as usual. Looks
like they all get their marching orders from someone else we don't
know about.