GARY FONG LOVES THE 20D !

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 23:55:07 GMT, Unclaimed Mysteries
the_letter_k_and_the_numeral_4_doh@unclaimedmyste ries.net wrote:

smb wrote in part:

But any chance you guys get to put the blame on Bush for something,
go for it! It makes you feel better, so it must be good therapy for
you. :-)


Uh, no thank you. I'll pass on taking any advice from dittohead
supporters of this Republican organized crime gang masquerading as
elected officials.



Typical liberal quip... meaningless name-calling and finger pointing
when you can't offer anything of substance.




C.

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:07:07 -0700, "William Graham"
wrote:


"Unclaimed Mysteries"
the_letter_k_and_the_numeral_4_doh@unclaimedmyst eries.net wrote in message
thlink.net...
smb wrote in part:

But any chance you guys get to put the blame on Bush for something,
go for it! It makes you feel better, so it must be good therapy for
you. :-)


Uh, no thank you. I'll pass on taking any advice from dittohead
supporters of this Republican organized crime gang masquerading as elected
officials.



C.

I have to believe that Bush is not going to leave Iraq to perish in their
own religious civil war.....If he does, it will be because he has to, forced
to do so by the Democrats, and he will go down kicking and screaming,
knowing that it will leave the Middle East a miserable and dangerous place
for another 30 years at least. Personally, I have come to believe that we
would be justified in staying in Iraq for another 10 years or more, even at
the cost of 1000 American lives a year.....The alternative is a million or
more Iraqi deaths, even if we somehow manage to keep Syria and Iran away
from Israel's throat. Democrats have such a short memory and attention
span.....Especially when the man in office isn't a Democrat.......



Let's not forget that this "civil war" was started by al quaida's
bombing of Shia holy sites and is fueled by them playing each group
against the other. Their goal is a taliban-style rule in Iraq with
eventual domination of the entire Middle East and beyond. The libs
scream "War, war, how terrible, let's get out of there" but don't
understand that this war was forced on us by a some very evil people
who would love nothing better than to come over here and kill every
one of us. Anyone who doesn't see the connection between what is
going on in Iraq and the overall threat of radical Islam is just not
paying attention. This war was started against us in Iran back in the
Carter years... and these people have made it very clear that their
goal is to subject the world to their radical beliefs. We are still
"The Great Satan" to them simply because we exist and because we have
the freedom to believe what we want and the freedom to criticize our
own leaders.

Here, this is very good.. a parody of famous speech from a different
era, but this nails it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyUX6wV1lBQ

Very clever! But there is more truth here than the libs want to
admit.


Steve

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:11:55 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

smb wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:21:50 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:

smb wrote:

He's not my boy, but he's a sight better than any of the alternatives
that were running at the time! It's a shame that he turned out to be
not the conservative that he was elected to be.
Elect Hillary or Obama or Edwards and you can guarantee your
disposable income will shrink, so buy those toys now while you can,
and thank Mr. Bush for making it possible while it lasts.
Just 'cause you can't see it on your books, does not mean that the debit
column assigned to you via Bush deficit spending is not real.

Surely you aren't so naive as to think that any president is
responsible for that. Go back to your high school government classes
and you'll recall that spending is controlled by Congress, not the
Executive Branch.

Right, the Republican US president has no influence at all on the (up
until recently) Republican dominated Congress. Sure Wilbur.

As almost every Bush era law has passed within the presidential veto
margin, he hasn't done much to prevent Republican overspending or
Republican tax-cutting. And of course it's the executive that tables
budgets for little side adventures like Iraq.

That's why the US Fed debt has grown $3T under Bush. Face the facts.

Yes, the fact is that wars cost lots of money. You may not agree with
or understand the reason for the war, but that's the way it is.

The other fact is that tax cuts generate MORE revenue for the
government. Tax increases ALWAYS slow the economy and eventually
result in less money coming in. It works this way every time. You
may not understand the math, but facts are facts, fact them.

The only reason that the liberals run on a platform of raising taxes
is that it gets them votes from their base, most of whom don't
understand basic economics and think raising taxes is a way to get the
"rich" to pay their "fair share." Most of them don't understand that
the "rich" are already paying more than their fair share.

Steve

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 19:38:56 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

William Graham wrote:

It's all the Democrats have....They sure haven't accomplished
anything else since they took control of congress......

Other than getting 3,000+ US soldiers killed for nothing what has Bush done
for us? The "cheap" oil we are trying to steal from Iraq doesn't seem to be
that cheap to us at the pumps. I guess just as long as Exxon shows
quarterly profits in the billions squandering the lives of 3,000+ of someone
else's kids are a real bargain?

Ah, the "no blood for oil" slogan raises its head again.... Keep
reading the liberal blogs and you'll find all sorts of things to
justify Bush bashing to yourself.

Since when were were trying to steal cheap oil from Iraq? That has
been a liberal fantasy from day one. You just don't want to face the
real reason for this war, and it isn't to make the price at the pump
lower, nor does it have anything to do with Haliburton. Go ahead
and get fitted for that burka, you may need it sooner than you think.



Meanwhile, the economy is booming in spite of an expensive war and
record government spending... tax revenues to the governnment are
way up in spite of tax cuts "for the rich" (duh) ... There hasn't
been another terrorist attack on our soil since 2001...


Haven't you heard? - There was never any terrorist threat to begin
with.....Those 3000 people who died on 9/11 were just imaginary
people.......

Bush had prior intelligence on hand and knew 9/11 was going to happen. He
didn't wan't to prevent it and then capitalized on the situation for
personal gain.

Straight from conspiracy central. I'm impressed that you have the
courage to say you actually believe this in public.

Oh yes, FDR also knew Pearl Harbor was going to happen. He didn't
want to prevent it and then capitalized on the situation for personal
gain. How lame.


Steve

smb wrote:

Yes, the fact is that wars cost lots of money. You may not agree with
or understand the reason for the war, but that's the way it is.

LOL There was _no_ reason to go into Iraq and the rationales have all
proven to be at best wishful thinking and at worse political
manipulations of the worst kind.

Since you're a stranger to the truth, I'll stop "debating" this with you.

And -do- read the ingredients next time you drink the kool-aid.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 20:23:15 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

William Graham wrote:

I have to believe that Bush is not going to leave Iraq to perish in
their own religious civil war.....If he does, it will be because he
has to, forced to do so by the Democrats, and he will go down kicking
and screaming, knowing that it will leave the Middle East a miserable
and dangerous place for another 30 years at least. Personally, I have
come to believe that we would be justified in staying in Iraq for
another 10 years or more, even at the cost of 1000 American lives a
year.....The alternative is a million or more Iraqi deaths, even if
we somehow manage to keep Syria and Iran away from Israel's throat.
Democrats have such a short memory and attention span.....Especially
when the man in office isn't a Democrat.......

Like I said, "It's always fine when it's someone else's kids doing the
dieing" for this noble cause. William, do you have any grandchildren? If
you do why do you send their asses over their to die for the cause. Oh,
wait, that wouldn't be fair because it directly affects you. This may sound
cold, but I really don't give a flying **** about Israel, Iraq, Iran, or any
other uncivilized **** ant country in the Middle East. For all I care they
can wipe each other off the face of the earth. I don't think my son or any
one else's son's life is worth squandering to play coach to a bunch of
animals that would strap explosives to a child to kill others.




Rita,

The point you miss is that it isn't about those countries you don't
care about. It's about this country. They have already killed
thousands of us over here and around the world. They have stated
their clear intent to keep doing it. Pulling out of Iraq will make it
easier for them to do so. Right now Iraq is the main front... why do
you think Al Quada has sent so many foreign fighters of their own into
that country to stir up religious strife and to directly fight our
troops? Why do you think Iran and Syria are supplying them with
weapons to kill our boys and girls? Wake up. Parents of WWII era
kids didn't want to send their children to the fight either, but it
had to be done.

Before you say that Bush caused it by invading Iraq, it would be good
for you to remember that this war actually started during the Carter
administration when Islamic radicals took over out embassy in Iran,
and we didn't do anything except wring our hands and make a half-assed
failed rescue attempt. We have been attacked many times since then.
Now we are bringing the fight to those people instead of just waiting
for the next shoe to fall over here.

Steve







Rita

On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:49:41 -0700, "William Graham"
wrote:


"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
William Graham wrote:

I have to believe that Bush is not going to leave Iraq to perish in
their own religious civil war.....If he does, it will be because he
has to, forced to do so by the Democrats, and he will go down kicking
and screaming, knowing that it will leave the Middle East a miserable
and dangerous place for another 30 years at least. Personally, I have
come to believe that we would be justified in staying in Iraq for
another 10 years or more, even at the cost of 1000 American lives a
year.....The alternative is a million or more Iraqi deaths, even if
we somehow manage to keep Syria and Iran away from Israel's throat.
Democrats have such a short memory and attention span.....Especially
when the man in office isn't a Democrat.......

Like I said, "It's always fine when it's someone else's kids doing the
dieing" for this noble cause. William, do you have any grandchildren? If
you do why do you send their asses over their to die for the cause. Oh,
wait, that wouldn't be fair because it directly affects you. This may
sound
cold, but I really don't give a flying **** about Israel, Iraq, Iran, or
any
other uncivilized **** ant country in the Middle East. For all I care
they
can wipe each other off the face of the earth. I don't think my son or
any
one else's son's life is worth squandering to play coach to a bunch of
animals that would strap explosives to a child to kill others.

Play coach? - Maybe the Democrats are playing coach. but I think we are
trying to kill them off. We are now waking up the mainstream Muslims to the
idea that they should be killed off, too......Who knows? - Maybe there is
some hope for this world yet.

Pacifists have always screamed the same message during every war in the
past. It's the youth, and not the leaders who are dying. I'm sorry about
that, but if it weren't for our penchant for going to war, we wouldn't be
here right now....So which wars would you like to take back? (Other than
Iraq, of course) Korea? - Vietnam?...Bosnia?...WW-I?....II?
.....1812?.....Civil or Revolutionary? Mankind has been invading and killing
each other off for thousands of years....But without wars, we would not have
freedom and independence. I love to go out on my rear deck at night and
breath the clean night air and take in the freedom all around me. I spent 4
years in the service, and I might well have died there too, but even if I
had, it would have been better to be dead than to be a slave of some jackass
like Kim Jung Ill, or Saddam Hussein, or Adolf. You get what you pay for,
and freedom comes at a rather high price. - It always has in the past, and I
believe that it very probably always will in the future. But come a year
from this November, you will be able to elect the pacifists, if that is your
choice......


The ironic thing about our great country is that we give the right to
the people change or destroy the things that made us great in the
first place.

I'm also a veteran, and I know that the price of freedom is not just a
right-wing slogan. If the pacifists had their way in WWII, we
wouldn't be arguing today about whether Nikons are better than Canons.
We would likely be slave labor in their factories making them.

Steve

smb wrote:

The point you miss is that it isn't about those countries you don't
care about. It's about this country. They have already killed
thousands of us over here and around the world.

Cars (well drivers), smoking, guns, poor medical coverage all kill a LOT
MORE Americans each year than ME terrorists have killed in total over
the past 20 years worldwide.

Meanwhile, gas guzzler makers (Ford, GM, Chrylser) are laying off
workers in droves while the big US oil co's are making record profits
channeling US dollars to the ME to fill those same gas guzzlers. In the
meantime, smarter, leaner co's (Toyota, Honda...) are taking over the US
auto market...

You really DO NEED to step back and see what the hell is really happening.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

smb wrote:

I'm also a veteran, and I know that the price of freedom is not just a
right-wing slogan. If the pacifists had their way in WWII, we
wouldn't be arguing today about whether Nikons are better than Canons.
We would likely be slave labor in their factories making them.

You ignoramus! The Pacificts DID have their way in WW II which resulted
in the US and Brits not attacking the Soviet Union.

The ONLY US General with the balls to tell the Sovs where to head in was
MacArthur who DENIED Russian post war occupation of Japan. That would
have led to a "North Japan" and a "South Japan" with unfathomable
consequences to the Japanese (indeed world) economy.

Go get a book, you could really use one.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

On 7/28/07 10:35 AM, in article ,
"Alan Browne" wrote:

smb wrote:

Besides, if more of your democrat friends get elected next time, you
won't have any money left to buy those new lenses and gadgets! :-)


Hmm. Clinton balanced the budget and halted debt growth.

Bush increased the 6T total debt at that time and will have increased it
to 9T by Sept 2007. eg: a 50% increase in less than 8 years over a debt
that took over 40 years to accumulate.
Stick to your own politics, eh? You guys have one of the most screwed up
Socialist p.o.s. Govt. in the Wewstern Hemisphere, besides Chavez's little
circus.