The other Donald wrote:

"Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:3F904138.B8FD113E@backpacker.com...

The other Donald wrote:

"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in

news:Xns9417718777E4Ctimsomecallme@216.168.3.44...

"Bush told his senior aides Tuesday that he 'didn't want to see

stories' quoting unnamed administration officials in the media
anymore, and that if he did, there would be consequences, said a
senior administration official who asked that his name not be

<blinks in disbelief...>

This ain't a joke story, is it?

"On Monday, reacting to reports of internal conflict among his top

advisers,

the President told one regional broadcaster: 'The person who's in

is

me.'

"Bush's attempt to assert himself extends beyond the executive

Late

Tuesday, in a brief, brusque arm-twisting session with nine

the

President made it clear that he was not there to answer questions or

debate

the merits of his $87 billion Iraq and Afghanistan aid package. He

demanded

that the aid to Iraq be in the form of grants, not loans, as some of

senators have urged."

"Give me $87b or I'll tell my daddy!!"

Monkey boy is in for a rude awakening.

You people are seriously disturbed.

I know. Thanks for noticing. It's pride in a job well done that is

from our youth these days.

If we put all sorts of strings on
and demand repayment of the 87 billion dollars to Iraq,

You just showed your ignorance and illiteracy in your non-sequitur rant.

First: "We've" never stated agreement or disagreement with "loan" vs
"grant."

I was responding to this:

#begin quote
"Give me $87b or I'll tell my daddy!!"

Monkey boy is in for a rude awakening.

#end quote

You can tell that because my response came right after that quoted text.

Patriotboy, the original poster, found humor in the "unnamed
sources stating Bush's anger and threats directed at unnamed sources

quoted in the paper." I'm sorry that you were too far to the right to

the irony.

I found it revolting that it wasn't enough that Bush has fucked up the
Executive Branch of the government, now he's DEMANDING the Legislative
Branch to do his bidding. For those of you that are wallowing too deep

Bush 2's crotch while you're blowing him, these are the very reasons for

Separation of Powers. I guess you missed that one in your government

Bush is leading and that is what he is supposed to do.

What's next? Will he send a directive to the Supreme Court and DEMAND a
court decision on a pending case?

we will ruin the
efforts to show that we are doing this because we care about the Iraqi
people and want them to have better lives.

Spare me the sanctimonious *****. DUH-bya couldn't give a ***** less

the people of Iraq. It was WMD's, remember? (feigned indignance with
high-school girl 'accent' : "OH! that is SO last week...!")

No, it was the total weight of reasons for dealing with Iraq, not any
one thing.

Also, they can't possibly
repay it

The ***** "they" can't. Three letters for you: O-I-L.

They don't have the infrastructure....

and demanding the money back will
prevent them from getting started on the right foot.

Shrub went for the oil, and don't delude yourself into believing

else.

Yet he wants to have the 87 billion dollars as aid and not a loan.

Now that American oil companies are managing "the Iraqi peoples oil
for them" I would bet that paying back this $87 billion would put a

crimp in Haliburton's profit margin.

If they played their cards right, Haliburton could hire Bush's old

Lay, Skilling and Fastow to see to it that all of the "repayment" money

somehow used to offset expenses against some ***** dummy corporation.

and will therefore be in debt bondage right from the start
making the new government much less stable.

I guess you're right. It's the least we can do for illegally attacking a
sovereign nation and blowing their ***** up.

Did Clinton illegally attack the Balkans?

--

#begin quote
There is also a tense called the timeless present or habitual present.
She writes about penguins.
The frog has a moist skin.
Polar bears live in the Arctic.
He works for the government.
She reads the Woman's Weekly.
Compare:

She reads the Woman's Weekly (regularly). This sentence is in the
habitual present tense.
#pause quote

Notice how the sentence they use as an example is terribly close to the
one I repeatedly gave you and you didn't understand correctly: "I don't
read the New York Times."


#restart quote
She is reading the Woman's Weekly (right now). This sentence is in the
present tense, progressive aspect, to be explained below.

The habitual present is common when the language is conveying
information, such as in reports, descriptions, and expositions. It is a
verb form often encountered in school reading and writing.
In everyday speech, the habitual or timeless present is often used to
refer to an action planned for the future.
#end quote

Bush is leading

and that is what he is supposed to do.

Spare me the sanctimonious *****. DUH-bya couldn't give a ***** less about
the people of Iraq. It was WMD's, remember? (feigned indignance with
high-school girl 'accent' : "OH! that is SO last week...!")

No, it was the total weight of reasons for dealing with Iraq, not any
one thing.

Also, they can't possibly
repay it

The ***** "they" can't. Three letters for you: O-I-L.

They don't have the infrastructure

and demanding the money back will
prevent them from getting started on the right foot.

Shrub went for the oil, and don't delude yourself into believing anything
else.

Yet he wants to have the 87 billion dollars as aid and not a loan.

Did Clinton illegally attack the Balkans?

Eric da Red wrote:

In article <3F904138.B8FD113E@backpacker.com>,
Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion in lieu of the frontal attack ) <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote:

You people are seriously disturbed. If we put all sorts of strings on
and demand repayment of the 87 billion dollars to Iraq, we will ruin the
efforts to show that we are doing this because we care about the Iraqi
people and want them to have better lives.

Bulldozing date orchards pretty much settled that issue.

I thought it was established that the clearing of those areas was
because they were being used for cover by the people who have been
attacking our troops.

Also, they can't possibly
repay it and will therefore be in debt bondage right from the start
making the new government much less stable.

Judging from the revised rules regarding bankruptcy recently passed
by Congress, the US government is not opposed to debt bondage.

Are you suddenly in favor of forgiving debts incurred by governments
of poor countries?

I recall commenting on whether or not we should forgive debts to poor
countries. My view is generally that it should be considered on a case
by case basis.

Since the US is the largest debtor nation, it doesn't
seem like it should be doing all the forgiving though.

In alt.radio.talk.dr-laura article <bmpgg2$2tt$1@drizzle.com> Eric da Red <bergamot@drizzle.com> wrote:

: Judging from the revised rules regarding bankruptcy recently passed
: by Congress, the US government is not opposed to debt bondage.

I thought this was still in conference, and not yet ready for prime time.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 08:43:54 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:21:28 -0700, "Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion
in lieu of the frontal attack )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>, Message ID:
<3F904138.B8FD113E@backpacker.com> wrote in alt.atheism;

The other Donald wrote:

"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9417718777E4Ctimsomecallme@216.168.3.44...

"Bush told his senior aides Tuesday that he 'didn't want to see any
stories' quoting unnamed administration officials in the media
anymore, and that if he did, there would be consequences, said a
senior administration official who asked that his name not be used."

<blinks in disbelief...>

This ain't a joke story, is it?

"On Monday, reacting to reports of internal conflict among his top
advisers,
the President told one regional broadcaster: 'The person who's in charge
is
me.'

"Bush's attempt to assert himself extends beyond the executive branch.
Late
Tuesday, in a brief, brusque arm-twisting session with nine senators, the
President made it clear that he was not there to answer questions or
debate
the merits of his $87 billion Iraq and Afghanistan aid package. He
demanded
that the aid to Iraq be in the form of grants, not loans, as some of the
senators have urged."

"Give me $87b or I'll tell my daddy!!"

Monkey boy is in for a rude awakening.

You people are seriously disturbed. If we put all sorts of strings on
and demand repayment of the 87 billion dollars to Iraq, we will ruin the
efforts to show that we are doing this because we care about the Iraqi
people and want them to have better lives. Also, they can't possibly
repay it and will therefore be in debt bondage right from the start
making the new government much less stable.

Shrub doesn't give a damn about the Iraqi people.

He doesn't give a damn about the American people, either. So, he's
batting a 1,000.

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 08:43:54 -0700, stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:21:28 -0700, "Bill Bonde ( the oblique allusion
in lieu of the frontal attack )" <stderr2@backpacker.com>, Message ID:
<3F904138.B8FD113E@backpacker.com> wrote in alt.atheism;

The other Donald wrote:

"Patriotboy is Fair and Balanced" <tim@somecallme.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9417718777E4Ctimsomecallme@216.168.3.44...

"Bush told his senior aides Tuesday that he 'didn't want to see any
stories' quoting unnamed administration officials in the media
anymore, and that if he did, there would be consequences, said a
senior administration official who asked that his name not be used."

<blinks in disbelief...>

This ain't a joke story, is it?

"On Monday, reacting to reports of internal conflict among his top advisers,
the President told one regional broadcaster: 'The person who's in charge is
me.'

"Bush's attempt to assert himself extends beyond the executive branch. Late
Tuesday, in a brief, brusque arm-twisting session with nine senators, the
President made it clear that he was not there to answer questions or debate
the merits of his $87 billion Iraq and Afghanistan aid package. He demanded
that the aid to Iraq be in the form of grants, not loans, as some of the
senators have urged."

"Give me $87b or I'll tell my daddy!!"

Monkey boy is in for a rude awakening.

You people are seriously disturbed. If we put all sorts of strings on
and demand repayment of the 87 billion dollars to Iraq, we will ruin the
efforts to show that we are doing this because we care about the Iraqi
people and want them to have better lives. Also, they can't possibly
repay it and will therefore be in debt bondage right from the start
making the new government much less stable.

Shrub doesn't give a damn about the Iraqi people.

He doesn't give a damn about the American people, either. So, he's
batting a 1,000.