On Feb 18, 11:53*am, rigger wrote:
On Feb 18, 7:22*am, "Pete C." wrote:



"John R. Carroll" wrote:

"SteveB" wrote in message
...

"John R. Carroll" wrote in message
. ..

"SteveB" wrote in message
...

Yes Steve, he was.

JC

I figgered so. *But during his terms, I had several sabbaticals for
medical reasons, and my financial world was going good, so I really didn't
even get into it. *Letterman used to show some stuff that really made me
ask myself, "Did I really vote for that guy"?

But then, I looked at AlGore, and figured losing a finger was better than
losing an arm.

Yeah, there is that.

JC

I think the decision between the two "wings" more or less boils down to
whether you want to go through the wood chipper head first or feet
first...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

************************************************** ****************
"I think the decision between the two "wings" more or less boils down
to
whether you want to go through the wood chipper head first or feet
first...
************************************************** ****************
I'd agree this is generally true but I'll always wonder how many
fewer of our troops would have been killed if bush had been a
man and instituted a draft to settle the Afganistan/(and sub-
sequently, Iraq) wars, instead of allowing over 4,000 troops to
be killed one-at-a-time.

And how many thousands crippled, blinded, ............ because
he wanted to drag out the war. *And then to be shuffled into
substandard hospital facilities?

Call him what you will, I doubt Barack Obama is the kind
of person who would do that. *Dispute this as you will; I
think there IS a difference in induviduals and we're far
better off with this president than the imposter who came
before.

dennis
in nca- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Those who support Bush are just demostrating that they hate vets too.

Other wise why would they support a person that cut vet benefits and
treated returning soldiers to substandard care.

TMT