"The New Soldier" by John Kerry et al

Warning For All Overly-Sensative B-1 Crew and supporters...This is only a
joke

I don't want a president who thought that the (F-15, Patriot, B-1B, cruise
missiles, etc. ad nauseum) were *all* wastes of taxpayers' money

Damn and I would never have thought I was in agreement with Kerry on anything,
but 1 out of 4 ain't bad

Joke Over

Kerry's voting record will be his worst enemy when the election gets into full
swing.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) wrote:

Warning For All Overly-Sensative B-1 Crew and supporters...This is only a
joke

I don't want a president who thought that the (F-15, Patriot, B-1B, cruise
missiles, etc. ad nauseum) were *all* wastes of taxpayers' money

Kerry's voting record will be his worst enemy when the election gets into full
swing.


It's never been surprising how active duty types tend to support
presidents or presidential candidates who they perceive as being
friendly ($$) to the military or willing to use it at the drop of a hat.
It almost follows suit that many vets will be of the same mindset.

What I don't understand is how any vet, particularly those such as
yourself who served their country in combat, can have such a hard-on for
the person now running this country...and worse yet...or consider him a
patriot.

A true patriot would not constantly take money and services away from
people who wore a uniform for their country. The Bush II excuse for an
administration has hacked away at the VA budget since day 1. There are
some 230,000 disbaled vets having to wait over 6 months just to get
their first VA doctor visit...and yet the Bush admin is still closing 7
VA hospitals, proposed doubling the cost of prescription drugs for
disabled vets (a proposal nixed by a _Democratic_ ammendment), and
announcing it would cut health care benefits to over 163,000 disabled
veterans because the Bush admin thinks they aren't poor enough to
deserve it. I guess getting permanently disabled for your country isn't
reason enough to merit benefits from chickenhawk politicians who use our
blood to fight their little vendettas but are quick to discard us like
trash when it comes time to actually help the people who wielded the
sword.

It no longer surprises me to see presidents doing this. Bush's daddy did
it to us as well...when he made it three times harder for disabled vets
to get Ch. 31 Voc Rehab benefits (increasing the eligibility
requirements from 10% to 20%$ and then 30% disability). Nope, no
surprise at all. What does surprise me is that so many people can
consider people like him and administrations like his as "patriotic."


I guess the definition of patriotism means being willing to kick-ass
anywhere in the world. And if one isn't willing to do it themselves,
they can just go hide out in the ANG or wherever...as long as they're
still willing and eager to let others fight.




--Mike

It's never been surprising how active duty types tend to support
presidents or presidential candidates who they perceive as being
friendly ($$) to the military or willing to use it at the drop of a hat.

Boy is your last name a contridiction. It never surprises me how many ignorant
political tools exist on this ng.

First off, if your assertion above were true, the active military would have
*loved* Clinton, since he, quite literally, used the military at the drop of a
hat. Not only did most active military not love Clinton, most detested the man
and couldn't wait for him to leave office. So your initial argument is a joke
(not surprising). Secondly, is it not possible for you you to not support Bush,
but not support Kerry either? I mean, that's not the case with me (I think Bush
is the right man for the job at the current time), but there are a growing
number of registered democrats who are concerned about Kerry, his ties to
lobbyists and his tremendously left charging voting record. Are these people
supporters of Bush ? No genius, they're not.

What I don't understand is how any vet, particularly those such as
yourself who served their country in combat, can have such a hard-on for
the person now running this country...and worse yet...or consider him a
patriot.

I'm not a vet (yet) cluebag. I support Bush, and plan on voting for him next
November because he's doing exactly what no Democrat since Trueman would do.
Put the USA first, not some pretend "global community". Every nation in the
world looks out for its own interests first, yet when the US does it, its a
horrible thing. Perhaps its our current world position, I don't know, but in
the wake of 9/11, we can't afford to worry about anyone ahead of ourselves.
Something Bush will do (and has done) and something none of the current
democrats in the race (short of *maybe* Clark, who's gone) is willing to do.

A true patriot would not constantly take money and services away from
people who wore a uniform for their country.

You're kidding right? Clinton slashed veterans benifits to the bone while
people like you stood by and applauded, now your concerned? Please....

I guess getting permanently disabled for your country isn't
reason enough to merit benefits from chickenhawk politicians who use our
blood to fight their little vendettas

By "little vendettas" I'm assuming you mean Iraq, but somehow I think you
supported Clinton when he crafted US national policy on Iraq to be regime
change. What, its OK to write down, but not do it? Hypocrit.

It no longer surprises me to see presidents doing this. Bush's daddy did
it to us as well.

Forget about your boy Billy Jeff?

I guess the definition of patriotism means being willing to kick-ass
anywhere in the world. And if one isn't willing to do it themselves,
they can just go hide out in the ANG or wherever...as long as they're
still willing and eager to let others fight.

At least he didn't run to Europe and protest the war from there. Seems you give
Billy Jeff a lot of latitude but Bush none. Gee, I wonder why that is? Stop
looking at parties and l think for yourself.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) wrote:

It's never been surprising how active duty types tend to support
presidents or presidential candidates who they perceive as being
friendly ($$) to the military or willing to use it at the drop of a hat.

Boy is your last name a contridiction. It never surprises me how many
ignorant
political tools exist on this ng.

Pot, kettle, black. 'nuff said.


Not only did most active military not love Clinton, most detested the
man
and couldn't wait for him to leave office.


And you know this since you're the self-appointed spokesman for the
active duty military...right?


So your initial argument is a joke
(not surprising). Secondly, is it not possible for you you to not support
Bush,
but not support Kerry either?

Interesting syntax. It's possible to support both, neither, or either
or. I happen to support Mr. Kerry and know he will make a fine president
when we elect him in.


I mean, that's not the case with me (I think
Bush
is the right man for the job at the current time),


What job is that? Sacrificing American lives under false pretenses?
Caring more about spending countless millions of dollars in failed
nation building while ignoring the losss of 2.2 million jobs at home?
What exactly is he right for?



but there are a growing
number of registered democrats who are concerned about Kerry, his ties to
lobbyists and his tremendously left charging voting record. Are these people
supporters of Bush ? No genius, they're not.


And you know this, because in addition to being the supreme spokesman
for active duty military, you are also a political pollster very much in
tune with what a "growing number of Democrats" are concerned
with...right? Even so, I could care less about party labels any more,
because they mean so little. I vote on the issues, and who I think will
best address them. As a disabled veteran, I put a lot of importance on
how a candidate treats his country's vets. Bush has done more to gut VA
benefits than any president since his daddy. How you, a combat vet, can
defend that with a straight face is beyond me.


What I don't understand is how any vet, particularly those such as
yourself who served their country in combat, can have such a hard-on for
the person now running this country...and worse yet...or consider him a
patriot.

I'm not a vet (yet) cluebag.


Fair enough, my mistake...and it certainly helps explain your
viewpoint...although name-calling is not necessary.


I support Bush, and plan on voting for him next
November

Good for you. My vote cancels yours out. ; )


because he's doing exactly what no Democrat since Trueman would do.
Put the USA first, not some pretend "global community".


Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first? Or is your definition of putting the USA first
only apply when it comes to using military force?



Every nation in the
world looks out for its own interests first, yet when the US does it, its a
horrible thing.

Who said that?

Perhaps its our current world position, I don't know, but in
the wake of 9/11, we can't afford to worry about anyone ahead of ourselves.


Yes, indeed....9/11 is the answer to everything.


Something Bush will do (and has done) and something none of the current
democrats in the race (short of *maybe* Clark, who's gone) is willing to do.

A true patriot would not constantly take money and services away from
people who wore a uniform for their country.

You're kidding right? Clinton slashed veterans benifits to the bone while
people like you stood by and applauded, now your concerned? Please....

Which benefits did he slash? (citations please). Secondly, I have never
applauded any cut to VA benefits...no matter who is making the cutting.
However, George Bush has slashed more VA funding than any president in
recent history.


I guess getting permanently disabled for your country isn't
reason enough to merit benefits from chickenhawk politicians who use our
blood to fight their little vendettas

By "little vendettas" I'm assuming you mean Iraq, but somehow I think you
supported Clinton when he crafted US national policy on Iraq to be regime
change. What, its OK to write down, but not do it? Hypocrit.

Keywords he "I think"

You think wrong, so please take your straw man out of the picture.


It no longer surprises me to see presidents doing this. Bush's daddy did
it to us as well.

Forget about your boy Billy Jeff?


Who said anything about who "my boy" is?

It's very tired to see right-wing syncophants to George Bush try to
paint anybody who doesn't support them or their incompetent president as
somehow equaling the support for somebody else.


I guess the definition of patriotism means being willing to kick-ass
anywhere in the world. And if one isn't willing to do it themselves,
they can just go hide out in the ANG or wherever...as long as they're
still willing and eager to let others fight.


At least he didn't run to Europe and protest the war from there. Seems you
give
Billy Jeff a lot of latitude but Bush none.

There you go creating your straw men again. When did I say I gave
Clinton any latitude for anything? The last I checked, Bill Clinton is
not running for president.


Gee, I wonder why that is? Stop
looking at parties and l think for yourself.


I don't look at parties and don't belong to one...therfore have no
choice but to think for myself. You, however, would do well to heed your
own advice.



--Mike

Not only did most active military not love Clinton, most detested the
man
and couldn't wait for him to leave office.


And you know this since you're the self-appointed spokesman for the
active duty military...right?

During the Clinton administration I was at 3 bases, in 5 different commands
working with 3 uniquely different weapons systems and *everywhere* I went there
was nothing but disdain for Clinton. Am I spokesman? Obviously not, but I'd say
in my "travels", I hit nearly 75% of the USAF demographics and knew of *one*
person, Uno (interestingly enough a fellow B-52 pilot) who supported Clinton.
Every other person I met hated the man. I'd say that's a fair sampling of the
USAF. Additionally I spent a month at sea with guys & gals from the 3 other
services just prior to ALLIED FORCE, my experience was no different than the
USAF, complete disdain.

It's possible to support both, neither, or either
or.

So you admit you were a fool (albeit a lucky one) when you jumped to the
conclusion that I support Bush just because I don't support Kerry? Good,
progress.

I happen to support Mr. Kerry and know he will make a fine president
when we elect him in.

I'll bet he doesn't carry 10 states. He's got *a lot* of dirt on him and unlike
the friendly confines of the Democratic party, the Republicans are just waiting
to unload on him.

I mean, that's not the case with me (I think
Bush
is the right man for the job at the current time),


What job is that?

POTUS

Sacrificing American lives under false pretenses?

What proof do you have he's done this? Ahh, I thought not...

Caring more about spending countless millions of dollars in failed
nation building while ignoring the losss of 2.2 million jobs at home?

Bush didn't sign, or bless NAFTA, that was the Democrats, if you've got a gripe
take it up with them. Jobs began leaving this country in mid-99 when NAFTA took
hold. Blaming Bush for NAFTA is ridiculous.

What exactly is he right for?

The economy and the War On Terror. What exactly would Kerry be good for? Maybe,
if elected, Kerry can some how manage to find a lonely rich country for the US
to marry and fix our econmy that way, hell its worked for him....*twice*.

And you know this, because in addition to being the supreme spokesman
for active duty military, you are also a political pollster very much in
tune with what a "growing number of Democrats"

No genius, I can read. Just pick up a newspaper or a news magazine. As Kerry's
momentum builds, more and more Democrats are becoming publically concerned.
Hell, there's even a Democratic Senator from Georgia whose come out and said
that he'd vote for Bush before he voted for Kerry.

Even so, I could care less about party labels any more,
because they mean so little.

Sure you do.

I vote on the issues, and who I think will
best address them.

Sure you do.

As a disabled veteran, I put a lot of importance on
how a candidate treats his country's vets.

No candidate is ever going to say, publically, if he's going to cut VA
benefits. Clinton didn't, what makes you think Kerry will be any better?
Because he said so? ROFLMAO.........

Bush has done more to gut VA
benefits than any president since his daddy.

Wrong. Clinton, under the great HMO scam, completely changed the way vets
receive health care. Our hospital at Barksdale went from a bustling place (lots
of retired vets in and around Shreveport) to a ghost town over night. I used to
drive on base past the protestors *every day*. Some pretty interesting signs.
What's even more interesting is these horrible cuts that you claim Bush made
have not had nearly the impact, no protestors and the vets that eventually
managed to stiff arm their way back into the hospital, are still there.

How you, a combat vet, can
defend that with a straight face is beyond me.

I don't defend any cuts, but I'm well aware of the fiscal reality of today and
without being in the cabnit meeting where the discussion took place only gives
you half the story. You must realize that people in my generation are going to
be less sympathetic, not because we're mean, but because we've got better
chances of winning the lottery than ever seeing a dime of the thousands we're
putting into SS, so hearing older people complain about a *reduction* in their
benefits makes us (who will only have our self initiated benefits) a little
unsympathetic.

I support Bush, and plan on voting for him next
November

Good for you. My vote cancels yours out. ; )


I doubt it, unless you're a resident of North Dakota.

Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first?

Bush is playing the hand dealt to him. What's he supposed to do, prohibit
corporations from hiring overseas labor? The Democrats slamed Bush's father for
not immediately signing NAFTA, now hold this Bush responsible for the
results...priceless.

Or is your definition of putting the USA first
only apply when it comes to using military force?

That's but one of many ways. If that was meant as an insult, you missed the
mark.

Every nation in the
world looks out for its own interests first, yet when the US does it, its a
horrible thing.

Who said that?


The French and German governments and their people, most of Asia (except China
who seem to appreciate and understand our position...ain't that a kicker),
Canada and half of South America.

Perhaps its our current world position, I don't know, but in
the wake of 9/11, we can't afford to worry about anyone ahead of ourselves.


Yes, indeed....9/11 is the answer to everything.


Its not the "answer" to anything, but it sure is a question and your boy Kerry
seems to think it was no big deal and that'll never happen again and we can all
go back to our lives like it was 9/10/01. This view point scares the hell out
of me.

You're kidding right? Clinton slashed veterans benifits to the bone while
people like you stood by and applauded, now your concerned? Please....

Which benefits did he slash?

The only specific one I can remember (after having a discussion outside the
Flight Medicine clinic with an old B-17 pilot) is that Billary said that if you
were a vet over 65, you could no longer be seen at military facilities and
instead must be seen by a civilian MD using your Medicare.

Secondly, I have never
applauded any cut to VA benefits...no matter who is making the cutting.

Well, you do a great job of defending Billy Jeff and he pretty much cancelled
vet benefits for anyone over 65.

However, George Bush has slashed more VA funding than any president in
recent history.

I find that hard to believe.

By "little vendettas" I'm assuming you mean Iraq, but somehow I think you
supported Clinton when he crafted US national policy on Iraq to be regime
change. What, its OK to write down, but not do it? Hypocrit.

Keywords he "I think"

So you're saying you were against Clinton when he drafted, and passed through
congress the proposed US National Security position that layed out US policy on
Iraq was regime change? If you were against it, congrats, you were in the
miniscule minority.

It's very tired to see right-wing syncophants to George Bush try to
paint anybody who doesn't support them or their incompetent president as
somehow equaling the support for somebody else.

Please, you where your DNC ticket on your sleeve. You complain about both Bushs
without facing what Clinton did. You cast stones at Bush's policies without
admitting many are inherited. You're not difficult to read.

P.S. I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat, I think for myself. So far I've
voted exclusively for the Republicans since I've been of voting age because all
the DNC could offer me was Dukakis, Clinton and Gore. If Clinton hadn't been
such a terrible CinC I may have voted for him over Dole in '92, but I couldn't
get past what Clinton was doing to the military. I've voted 3 times for Byron
Dorgan. I'm not a real big fan, but for the most part he seems to be able
balance his support for the people in North Dakota with the overall good of the
country fairly well.

When did I say I gave
Clinton any latitude for anything?

Well, you never complained about his slashing of vet benefits, just both Bush
presidents, that tells me your not treating him the same.

I don't look at parties

Riiiight..........

You, however, would do well to heed your
own advice.

I do.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first?

It's not high-tech. What jobs are being lost, are jobs that Americans
don't want to do, and those jobs enrich our trading partners.

If we have all the jobs, who are we going to export to?

I drive by the VA every day, and pick up men who want to work for
a days wage. I never get any disabled volunteers. Standing on the
corner are 70 year old Mexicans, Chinese, and Cambodians. The
one-arm Vets just sneer at us. I picture them going back to the TV
set and sofa. Meanwhile my truck load of workers will each make
$80 tax free as long as I can keep the developers from pricing me
out of business with their zoning buddies... Never, in 30 years, has
a Vet come down the steps to work. Welfare whores I call them.

This will probably be my last year, as a group of lawyers have formed
a committee (sponsored by the city commissioners) to move the farm
zoning lines about 10 miles east of my farm. They say the tractor noises
and farm animals are a nuisance to the surrounding developments, which
even I could never afford.

"D. Strang" wrote:

Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first?

It's not high-tech. What jobs are being lost, are jobs that Americans
don't want to do, and those jobs enrich our trading partners.

If we have all the jobs, who are we going to export to?

I drive by the VA every day, and pick up men who want to work for
a days wage. I never get any disabled volunteers. Standing on the
corner are 70 year old Mexicans, Chinese, and Cambodians. The
one-arm Vets just sneer at us. I picture them going back to the TV
set and sofa. Meanwhile my truck load of workers will each make
$80 tax free as long as I can keep the developers from pricing me
out of business with their zoning buddies... Never, in 30 years, has
a Vet come down the steps to work. Welfare whores I call them.

This will probably be my last year, as a group of lawyers have formed
a committee (sponsored by the city commissioners) to move the farm
zoning lines about 10 miles east of my farm. They say the tractor noises
and farm animals are a nuisance to the surrounding developments, which
even I could never afford.

Tax free? No FICA and no income tax? Paid in small bills?

This sounds great! Which IRS section allows such a good deal?

Bob McKellar

In article 60gYb.130$Ru5.40@okepread03,
"D. Strang" wrote:

Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first?

It's not high-tech. What jobs are being lost, are jobs that Americans
don't want to do, and those jobs enrich our trading partners.


So all those Americans working in the tech support call centers like
Dell's, HP's, SBC, etc. really didn't want their jobs when they were
fired. Nope, they just volunteered to sacrifice their and their familes'
income, so that some Indian in Bangalore working for 1/4 - 1/5 the wages
could have a good life.

Take off your blinders. These days, the chances are that your credit
apps, health insurance, phone records, etc. are being seen and handled
off-shore.



If we have all the jobs, who are we going to export to?


If we give away all our jobs, how are we going to buy anything?




I drive by the VA every day, and pick up men who want to work for
a days wage. I never get any disabled volunteers. Standing on the
corner are 70 year old Mexicans, Chinese, and Cambodians. The
one-arm Vets just sneer at us. I picture them going back to the TV
set and sofa. Meanwhile my truck load of workers will each make
$80 tax free as long as I can keep the developers from pricing me
out of business with their zoning buddies... Never, in 30 years, has
a Vet come down the steps to work. Welfare whores I call them.


I see. So you are perfectly willing to violate the law and hire people
under the table, because you can work them for peanuts? My guess is you
don't ask them for work papers right...and you are knowingly hire
illegal aliens...while casting names on your country's disabled vets.

You, sir, are a sorry excuse for an American.


--Mike

"D. Strang" wrote in message
news:60gYb.130$Ru5.40@okepread03...
Is Bush's open support for the continued off-shoring of American
high-tech jobs to 2nd and 3rd world countries and example of Bush
putting the USA first?

It's not high-tech. What jobs are being lost, are jobs that Americans
don't want to do, and those jobs enrich our trading partners.

Like the 5000 software develpment positions that IBM is moving to India and
China?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3717418/

Or *all* of Levi Strauss's plants in the US?

Naaa...those guys and gals didn't really want those jobs.

If we have all the jobs, who are we going to export to?

If we have no more jobs, what can we buy?

Pete

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) wrote:

Not only did most active military not love Clinton, most detested the
man
and couldn't wait for him to leave office.


And you know this since you're the self-appointed spokesman for the
active duty military...right?

During the Clinton administration I was at 3 bases, in 5 different commands
working with 3 uniquely different weapons systems and *everywhere* I went
there
was nothing but disdain for Clinton. Am I spokesman? Obviously not, but I'd
say
in my "travels", I hit nearly 75% of the USAF demographics and knew of *one*
person, Uno (interestingly enough a fellow B-52 pilot) who supported Clinton.
Every other person I met hated the man. I'd say that's a fair sampling of the
USAF. Additionally I spent a month at sea with guys & gals from the 3 other
services just prior to ALLIED FORCE, my experience was no different than the
USAF, complete disdain.

It's possible to support both, neither, or either
or.

So you admit you were a fool (albeit a lucky one) when you jumped to the
conclusion that I support Bush just because I don't support Kerry? Good,
progress.


Nope. You have constantly worn your political beliefs on your sleeve in
this n.g. No need for anybody to jump to conclusions.


I happen to support Mr. Kerry and know he will make a fine president
when we elect him in.

I'll bet he doesn't carry 10 states. He's got *a lot* of dirt on him and
unlike
the friendly confines of the Democratic party, the Republicans are just
waiting
to unload on him.


Sigh. That comment is very typical of you and the Republican party. You
can't stand on your candidate's record so your prime strategy is dirt.
Take your best shots. I shall be here to remind you of your comments in
eight months when Kerry is elected president.


I mean, that's not the case with me (I think
Bush
is the right man for the job at the current time),


What job is that?

POTUS

2.2 million unemployed people might disagree.


Sacrificing American lives under false pretenses?

What proof do you have he's done this? Ahh, I thought not...


It's will be a waste of time to hash that out now, but I think the
evidence is very clear that we were misled. We'll agree to disagree.


Caring more about spending countless millions of dollars in failed
nation building while ignoring the losss of 2.2 million jobs at home?

Bush didn't sign, or bless NAFTA, that was the Democrats, if you've got a
gripe
take it up with them. Jobs began leaving this country in mid-99 when NAFTA
took
hold. Blaming Bush for NAFTA is ridiculous.


The jobs I'm talking about are the white collar jobs at places like
Dell, HP, Cisco, Sun, SBC, Wells Fargo, etc. etc. Those jobs have gone
to places like India, Phillippines, and other countries with people
having English skills, but who can be hired cheaply. These are jobs that
have moved and continue to move out of the country starting only about
two years ago.



What exactly is he right for?

The economy

One of the worst economies with the highest sustained unemployment rates
in at least the last two decades.

and the War On Terror.


I attribute a professional military.....and not their chickenhawk CEO
for that.


What exactly would Kerry be good for?


Taking care of things at home and not starting unnecessary wars, for
starters.


And you know this, because in addition to being the supreme spokesman
for active duty military, you are also a political pollster very much in
tune with what a "growing number of Democrats"

No genius, I can read. Just pick up a newspaper or a news magazine. As
Kerry's
momentum builds, more and more Democrats are becoming publically concerned.
Hell, there's even a Democratic Senator from Georgia whose come out and said
that he'd vote for Bush before he voted for Kerry.

Their numbers are so insignificant to even warrant mention.



Even so, I could care less about party labels any more,
because they mean so little.

Sure you do.

That's right. I am independent.


I vote on the issues, and who I think will
best address them.

Sure you do.

That's right. That's why I twice voted for Pete Wilson for California
governor (one time of which Feinstein challenged him and lost).

As a disabled veteran, I put a lot of importance on
how a candidate treats his country's vets.

No candidate is ever going to say, publically, if he's going to cut VA
benefits. Clinton didn't, what makes you think Kerry will be any better?
Because he said so? ROFLMAO.........


I think his record on veterans issues is quite clear in his established
champion of vet causes. I invite you to seek commentary from your
nearest Disabled American Veterans (www.dav.org) chapter and ask them
about the state of VA funding today.



...
Every nation in the
world looks out for its own interests first, yet when the US does it, its
a
horrible thing.

Who said that?


The French and German governments and their people,

Are their governments people participating in this thread?


most of Asia (except
China
who seem to appreciate and understand our position...ain't that a kicker),


No China doesn't want to bite the hand that feeds it. We're their
biggest trading partner...although the trade ballance is heavily slanted
in their favor. They're not going to ruin a good thing and risk losing
hard currency they can use to builld up their country (including their
military) with.


Perhaps its our current world position, I don't know, but in
the wake of 9/11, we can't afford to worry about anyone ahead of
ourselves.


Yes, indeed....9/11 is the answer to everything.


Its not the "answer" to anything, but it sure is a question and your boy
Kerry
seems to think it was no big deal and that'll never happen again and we can
all
go back to our lives like it was 9/10/01. This view point scares the hell out
of me.

It might be scary if there was a grain of truth in it.


It's very tired to see right-wing syncophants to George Bush try to
paint anybody who doesn't support them or their incompetent president as
somehow equaling the support for somebody else.

Please, you where your DNC ticket on your sleeve. You complain about both
Bushs
without facing what Clinton did.


Because the topic area here is the upcoming presidential election of
which Mr. Bush will most lieky face off against Mr. Kerry. Clinton is
not in the election and has nothing to do with. Bush's father has only
been mentioned as a side-note and is not particularly relevant.



I don't look at parties

Riiiight..........

That must be why I voted for Pete Wilson.



--Mike