OT Congrats on a couple of special days

On Jan 20, 2:53*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"P.Chisholm" wrote in message

...



Sure. Old Condi was the picture of cooperation and bipartisanship.
Remarkable number of Repubs who STILL think Iraq was and is a good
idea. Same for Rummy. The only 'hope' the Bush presidency had was
Powell and they dumped(Cheny) on him. I'm glad he voted with his feet.

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

The first half of the 'bailout' is MISSING. NO accountability. Great
job by Sec Paulsen. Another wealthy guy asleep on watch.

Psst - the money is controlled by CONGRESS. Try to keep up here Peter. You
ought to know better than that.

No, it was approved by congress, it was administered by Treasury. You
need to do some research on how the Gov't operates(or doesn't). Next
thing you will say is that the military is commanded by the JCS.

This administration was a disaster, with a capital *'I' (for Iraq).
Bush, good ole boy he was, was duped by chenyrummy and Co.

Frankly I'm shocked that you couldn't tell that Bush stepped into the middle
of a growing world threat and stopped it cold.

Iraq wasn't a 'world threat'. If you think that you are as clueless as
most neocons in the US. Our 4000+ dead and trillions of $ should have
gone to Afganistan and at least one terrorist would be dead now
instead of making videos.

On Jan 20, 2:08 pm, William Asher wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:
"Bill C" wrote in message
..
.

Complete disaster on just about every front, except for their few
chosen friends would pretty well sum up the legacy.

It's too bad that you never bothered to actually study the problem.
Perhaps you could go back to listening to NPR for your clear-eyed view
of the world around you.

I'm hoping that I'm totaly wrong, and Obama will be one of the
greatest Presidents in US history and wildly successful for eight
years. Anyone hoping for a disaster is a complete dickhead and
unfortunately they are out there, just as they were for Bush.

The Democrats SCREAMED that Reagan added to much money to the National
Debt. Now they almost cheered that Bush ****ed away 5 times that
amount and they ARE cheering that Obama intends to spend TWICE Bush's
amount. Hey, maybe you think that simply adds onto an IOU like the
rest of the dopes here instead of our currency being devalued.

Bush was sworn to uphold, and defend the Constitution and failed
pretty miserably, I hope Obama does better, but I have real
reservations on how that'll work out, as you know.

What part of the Constitution was it that he failed to uphold?

Just a note to Kurgan. We can only hope that Bush serves as an
everlasting bad example and that ****'s NOT repeated. Still hoping
they put a bunch of those scumbags in Leavenworth where they belong.

I wonder what you've been looking at for the last eight years.

All over the world, people are reading this and thinking: "420 friendly."

--
Bill Asher

I'm thinking DSM-IV 301.50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes)

"P.Chisholm" wrote in message
...
On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Remember that I'm a Vietnam vet. I don't like war or rumors of war. However,
what should have been stunningly clear to everyone was that Hussein was
going to get a nuclear weapon sooner than later. The UN was about to back
out of Iraq and Saddam was going to end up giving WMD to terrorists simply
to maintain his "leadership" role in the middle east.

You don't have to believe any of that because it wasn't allowed to happen.

The first half of the 'bailout' is MISSING. NO accountability. Great
job by Sec Paulsen. Another wealthy guy asleep on watch.

Psst - the money is controlled by CONGRESS. Try to keep up here Peter.
You
ought to know better than that.

No, it was approved by congress, it was administered by Treasury.

Can you please read up on how the government works? Treasury had no
authority to hand out money. They only did what was in the plan they
submitted to Congress.

Iraq wasn't a 'world threat'. If you think that you are as clueless as
most neocons in the US. Our 4000+ dead and trillions of $ should have
gone to Afganistan and at least one terrorist would be dead now
instead of making videos.

What is great is that you have such a world view despite knowing nothing
about this subject a few years ago.

In article ,
wrote:

On Jan 20, 2:08 pm, William Asher wrote:
Tom Kunich wrote:
"Bill C" wrote in message
..
.

Complete disaster on just about every front, except for their few
chosen friends would pretty well sum up the legacy.

It's too bad that you never bothered to actually study the problem.
Perhaps you could go back to listening to NPR for your clear-eyed view
of the world around you.

I'm hoping that I'm totaly wrong, and Obama will be one of the
greatest Presidents in US history and wildly successful for eight
years. Anyone hoping for a disaster is a complete dickhead and
unfortunately they are out there, just as they were for Bush.

The Democrats SCREAMED that Reagan added to much money to the National
Debt. Now they almost cheered that Bush ****ed away 5 times that
amount and they ARE cheering that Obama intends to spend TWICE Bush's
amount. Hey, maybe you think that simply adds onto an IOU like the
rest of the dopes here instead of our currency being devalued.

Bush was sworn to uphold, and defend the Constitution and failed
pretty miserably, I hope Obama does better, but I have real
reservations on how that'll work out, as you know.

What part of the Constitution was it that he failed to uphold?

Just a note to Kurgan. We can only hope that Bush serves as an
everlasting bad example and that ****'s NOT repeated. Still hoping
they put a bunch of those scumbags in Leavenworth where they belong.

I wonder what you've been looking at for the last eight years.

All over the world, people are reading this and thinking: "420 friendly."

--
Bill Asher

I'm thinking DSM-IV 301.50 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes)

That's just for starters. Throw in a bit of 301.81 and 301.7, some V71.01, a pinch
of 780.9 and 312.34 and you've got TK in a nut (so to speak) shell.

--
tanx,
Howard

Caught playing safe
It's a bored game

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

"P.Chisholm" wrote in message
...
On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Peter, please think before writing. Truman took the US into Korea. He was
treated EXACTLY the way Bush has been treated but the press in those days at
least tried to be neutral.

On Jan 20, 4:42*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"P.Chisholm" wrote in message

...

On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Remember that I'm a Vietnam vet. I don't like war or rumors of war. However,
what should have been stunningly clear to everyone was that Hussein was
going to get a nuclear weapon sooner than later. The UN was about to back
out of Iraq and Saddam was going to end up giving WMD to terrorists simply
to maintain his "leadership" role in the middle east.

Poppycock. He was under control, much like Kaddafi was and is. Much
like Syria is now.

You don't have to believe any of that because it wasn't allowed to happen..

How convienent.

The first half of the 'bailout' is MISSING. NO accountability. Great
job by Sec Paulsen. Another wealthy guy asleep on watch.

Psst - the money is controlled by CONGRESS. Try to keep up here Peter..
You
ought to know better than that.

No, it was approved by congress, it was administered by Treasury.

Can you please read up on how the government works? Treasury had no
authority to hand out money. They only did what was in the plan they
submitted to Congress.

Correct young man. They administered the bailout money. You really
think 535 independent souls that can't agree on anything could
administer the handout of the $?

Iraq wasn't a 'world threat'. If you think that you are as clueless as
most neocons in the US. Our 4000+ dead and trillions of $ should have
gone to Afganistan and at least one terrorist would be dead now
instead of making videos.

What is great is that you have such a world view despite knowing nothing
about this subject a few years ago.

The same world you seem to 'view'. Have fun the next 4 years. Can't
wait for the bleeting. I know what the 'threat' was after 9/11 and it
was NOT Iraq.

On Jan 20, 11:19*am, Donald Munro wrote:
Paul G. wrote:
I'm going to get one of my greatest wishes in about an hour when the twin
turds Bush and Cheney get flushed. *

Are you drinking Texan tequila or Belgian beer at your bye-bye bush party ?

I *am* going to an Inauguration party in a couple of hours. I'm
bringing a plastic baseball bat, a bunch of flip flop sandals, a "bop
bag", pictures of Bush and Cheney to attach to the bop bag, and a
"pretzel toss" set up. That one has a picture of Bush with his mouth
wide open, we'll be attempting to toss pretzels thru the mouth hole.
Someone else is bringing a dart board. We really need a shotgun to do
justice to Cheney, but the host doesn't want any holes in his walls...

We're Californians living in the wine country, so we'll be drinking
wine. But your question reminds me of a joke one of my Oregon in-laws
told me...

Three cowboys- one each from Texas, California, and Oregon meet on the
trail and set up camp one evening.

After dinner the Texan takes a sip from a bottle of Lone Star beer,
then throws the bottle into the air and blasts it with his 6 shooter.
The Oregonian says "Why'd you do that?" to which the Texan replies
"We've got plenty of beer in Texas!"

The Californian opens a bottle of Cabernet, takes a sip, throws the
bottle in the air and blasts it with his 6 shooter, saying "We've got
plenty of wine in California!"

The Oregonian thinks about this for a minute, then opens a bottle of
Weinhards beer, takes a sip, pulls his 6 shooter and shoots the
Californian. The Texan is shocked. He screams "Why the HELL did you do
that?!"

The Oregonian calmly explains: "We have a bottle bill, so I have to
recycle the bottle, but we've got PLENTY of Californians in Oregon."
-Paul

On Jan 20, 3:42*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"P.Chisholm" wrote in message

...

On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Remember that I'm a Vietnam vet. I don't like war or rumors of war. However,
what should have been stunningly clear to everyone was that Hussein was
going to get a nuclear weapon sooner than later.

I'm a Vietnam Era vet. What was obvious to me was that Saddam was no
where near to getting nuclear weapons. The expensive/hard part of
making a nuke is getting the fissile material, which requires a huge
facility to either make the plutonium or to extract the uranium
isotope. You need a reactor or thousands of centrifuges. You can't
hide those because of the heat produced or the power consumed.

Anyone who knows anything about making nuclear weapons knows this, and
knows that while Saddam was no threat, Iran was and is. Iran has
uranium mines, at least one working reactor, and thousands of
centrifuges. They will get the bomb because the Iraq fiasco has tied
up our troops.

What is stunningly clear is that like your hero Bush, you're an idiot.
-Paul

On Jan 20, 5:20*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"P.Chisholm" wrote in message

...

On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Peter, please think before writing. Truman took the US into Korea. He was
treated EXACTLY the way Bush has been treated but the press in those days at
least tried to be neutral.

North Korea invaded the South. It was in all the papers. Neither you
nor I know how Truman was treated, since you and I were either
probably not born or really young(I was 1). Think before writing
huh..that's funny when you write crap like we will all realize,
somehow, what a great president Bush was. The first thing Truman did
was end the war in the pacific. Next he observed a treaty we had with
South Korea. The third thing he did was recognize the threat from the
Soviet Union. Even Roosevelt had about 10% of the people say we
shouldn't enter WWII after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor. There are
idiots everywhere, in every era.

Iraq was a mistake, just like VietNam was. History will say so. 4
years won't have us all building Bush statues.

On Jan 20, 5:20*pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:
"P.Chisholm" wrote in message

...

On Jan 20, 2:53 pm, "Tom Kunich" cyclintom@yahoo. com wrote:

My guess is that you're going to have an entirely different opinion of
Bush
and his time in office by the end of 2012. Let's remember that they
called
Harry Truman every name in the book until history showed that he was
right
most of the time.

I doubt it. Iraq really ****es me off, as a former military guy.
Truman ended the war with Japan. Different opinion in 4 years', fat
chance.

Peter, please think before writing. Truman took the US into Korea. He was
treated EXACTLY the way Bush has been treated but the press in those days at
least tried to be neutral.

"These negotiations ended when the North Korean Army invaded the South
on June 25, 1950. Under the aegis of the United Nations, nations
allied with the United States intervened on behalf of South Korea.
After rapid advances in a South Korean counterattack, communist-allied
Chinese forces intervened on behalf of North Korea, shifting the
balance of the war and ultimately leading to an armistice that
approximately restored the original boundaries between North and South
Korea."

Just in case you may have 'forgotten'.