Looking for a mid-size domestic car recommendation

Bush said Iraq would only cost a billion dollars and oil would pay for it.
The US will be paying for it for decades to come.

 

Baloney. The lowest estimates I heard were many billions of dollars and
I never heard it said that oil would pay for all of it. Better get back
on your meds as you are hallucinating.


Matt

 

Reconstruction costs were supposed to be $1.7 billion:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6338-2004Mar18?language=printer

Current estimates are about $200 billion.

 

Pennsylvania was the first state to deregulate the electric
utilities. Deregulation there has been a resounding success.
The rates in PA dropped and have stayed down for more than six or
seven years. Republican Tom Ridge was the Governor and the
legislature was run
by Republicans, not Democrats. Perhaps that is why California
had problems.



mike hunt

 

Americans have always been willing to spend what ever it takes to
defend ourselves. Look at the horrendous cost of supplying our
allies in WW II. For that matter look what it cost to us stay in
Europe to help defend it for the past 60 years. It is always
been to our advantage to fight our adversaries before they can
get to us. It would appear Bush has been proven right when he
said he would not wait for permission from the UN to defend the
US. From recent events in Spain, Indonesia and this week in
Russia they may now want to be more helpful in enforcing the Bush
doctrine, to hunt down and kill the terrorist of the world, no
matter who or where they are, and those that harbor them.



mike hunt

 

I don't see anywhere that President Bush made any such statement about
reconstruction costs. Also, try to learn to bottom post as that is the
convention for usenet.


Matt

 

The bottom post convention was invented in the early days of the internet
long before convenient tree threaded displays. I, and about half the world
prefers top posts but unlike you bottom posters, we do not claim it is a
standard. There IS NO standard. Check the date of the standard document
you think you are relying on. It is prehistoric.

 

I believe the Bush doctrine actually says to attack any leader who tried to
kill my daddy. The Rumsfeld doctrine says to attack the country with
targets. The intelligent doctrine would have been to get the guy who did
9/11.

 

Before you climb upon a high horse and proclaim the US's WWII
benevolent nature you should recall America's position pre & post
WWII.

The US leadership was smart enough to allow the Axis to weaken the
Superpower UK before stepping in to the aid of England & Russia to
prevent an Axis win. Keep in mind the US was "neutral" at the start
of the war till Dec 11 1941. (funny date that, in hindsight).

Your fore bearers knew the cost of war and were wise to use other
people's wars to their own advantage. Pre-WWII America could not have
hoped to conquer the might of England. Post WWII? Well, I think we
all know how it ended.

War is an expensive game, best left for the foolish. I believe
(perhaps wrongly) that though subterfuge and small regional conflicts
the US could have maintained middle east instability and low oil
prices. I do not believe that this Iraqi position is tenable or that
this was the best way to capture Osama Bin Laudin & Co. <sp>

We're still trying to capture him right???????????

 

Spoken like a true Democrat with blinders on.

 

It is a standard/convention and has existed for a long time because it
makes sense. We still read things from top to bottom and it is hard
when reading top to bottom gives you reverse chronology. This is simply
common sense, independent of any convention.

Matt

 

Thanks for another good laugh, keep 'em coming


mike hunt

 

Suit yourself. It is not a standard and a PIA because you have to scroll
down to the bottom of every message to see what was added. It made sense
before the tree displays existed but it is stupid now. But you can post any
way you like.

 

I don't call people "commies".

They are. That's the part you're missing. Maybe you don't deal with
right wingers much.

No, I'm not. I'm referencing someone else's use of it. I have never
called anyone a "commie".

Are you an American? If not you might not understand the reference.

 

True. That part of it is not funny at all. For the older folks it
shows how they can fall for propaganda. For the younger folks it shows
how ignorance can be propagated from one generation to another.

 

Yes - but only an idiot hands a bullet to someone who has a gun to their
head, which is in effect what the California people and legislators did.
Point being that you only give dirtbags like the Enron folks the power
to screw you over when you, by your own action, stiffle supply and end
up paying the price that the competition-void market that you created
will bear. It's a law of economics in a free society.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

As the late Senator Dirksen said: "A billion here...billion
there...pretty soon you're talking real money!" 8^)

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

Don't deal with them much? I *am* one. Never use the term, never hear
it more than once every, Oh, say, 5 years, and then only by liberals who
*think* they are parodying right wingers. You're fantasizing.

Yep - American, born in 1951. And yes - I know all about McCarthy. I
even remember seeing the footage of Bobby Kennedy sitting at McCarthy's
ear during the hearings before all that footage was purged from the
globe. Gee - i wonder where it all went? How do you like them apples!

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
adddress with the letter 'x')

 

Nope. I can produce numbers of references to the use of that term by
radical right wingers. Just because you don't use it or the people
around you don't use it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Perhaps you
make it a point to only surround yourself with more intelligent
people. I tend to get down in the pits where the more unhinged and
psychotic elements of your party tend to congregate. In fact, off the
top of my head I can think of one particular poster in a group or two
who even goes for the double whammy of "pinko commie".

I'm not sure what apples you are referring to. Why would I care which
of your Republicrats were doing what with whom?

 

How about 25,000

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=pinko+commie&btnG=Search&meta=