McCain is a kook with poor anger management who sings creepy
songs about dropping the bomb.

Not a good choice for those who may be allergic to gamma rays.
Wants to open the borders to a full-fledged Mexican invasion. Wants
to destroy America, eventually replace it with the North American
Union, and V-Chip all citizens. Wants to stay in the M.E. for a
hundred years, if we survive the bomb. Wants to continue to spend us
into bankruptcy. CFR puppet.

Obama is a vacuous, snot-nosed kid who copies other's work.

He's all bling, and no ring. Warmonger. Lawyer. Pretty Boy
Idiot. Wants to destroy America, eventually replace it with the North
American Union, and V-Chip all citizens. Wants to continue to spend
us into bankruptcy. CFR puppet.

Hillary is a dishonest, criminally corruptible bitch.

Empty talk. Self-serving liar. Warmonger. Wants to destroy
America, eventually replace it with the North American Union, and
V-Chip all citizens. Wants to continue to spend us into bankruptcy.
Hasn't a clue how to fix health care. So repulsive that even Bill
Clinton won't **** her. CFR puppet.

Huckabee is a fundamentalist nutjob who only thinks he
represents the will of God.

Megalomaniac. Warmonger. Thinks everyone should share the
blame for the mistake that is the Iraq war. Wants to continue the
killing in Iraq for the sake of "honor". Thinks God needs help with
Armageddon. Wants to destroy America, eventually replace it with the
North American Union, and V-Chip all citizens. Wants to continue to
spend us into bankruptcy. CFR puppet.


Ron Paul is the champion of the United States Constitution.

Ten term congressional representative with a verifiably
spotless, sane, and consistent voting record. Believes in small
federal government restrained by the rule of law. Understands the
importance of the individual and individual American freedoms. Wants
to immediately end the Iraq war and begin bringing the troops home.
Wants to eventually remove all unnecessary American military bases
overseas to cut spending in favor of a strong national defense. Wants
to use savings from war to create domestic jobs and rebuild American
infrastructure. Wants to abolish the illegal, unconstitutional IRS,
and replace it with nothing. Wants to abolish the private, inflation
causing Federal Reserve system, and return the control and production
of money to the federal government as provided in the Constitution.
Medical doctor. Understands first hand the problems with American
medical care system and knows how to fix it. Wants to end the failed
"war on drugs". Will never accept the North American Union or V-Chip
American citizens. Opposes the National ID Card. Is NOT a puppet of
the CFR, nor even a member of same.



I think the choice is clear. Your mileage may vary.


=-=

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we."

George W. Bush

wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:47:10 -0500, Pisano
wrote:

McCain is a kook with poor anger management who sings creepy
songs about dropping the bomb.

Not a good choice for those who may be allergic to gamma rays.
Wants to open the borders to a full-fledged Mexican invasion. Wants

SNIP

And which one of them is coming over to repair your home next week?
Obviously this must have something to do with home.repair on
alt.home.repair, or you would not be posting it here, right........
Unless of course you're a troll !!!!!!

Ron Paul, of course, he'll not only fix your home but will also deliver
your baby

mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

On Mar 1, 12:36�pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.


worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.

On Mar 1, 2:34�pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.



worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

unfortunately bin ladens group, who pulled 9 11 never had much power
in iraq till we elminated saddam.

the real problem is bin laden, who address us on tv when he cares too.

the iraq war destabilized the region, allowed irans power to grow, and
distracted us from getting bin laden.

so all that money spent didnt get single terrorist

HeyBub wrote:
wrote:

On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:

mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....


Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.


worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.


But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.

So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain.

And how much for the terrorists created - probably several times the number
killed.

On Mar 1, 3:41�pm, "Bob F" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

...

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain..

And how much for the terrorists created - probably several times the number
killed.

yeah thats the killer part, bush made it worse rather than better.

total failure as president, is there anything better today than 8
years ago?

people used to say the economy, but thats no longer the case

On Mar 1, 3:17Â*pm, " wrote:
On Mar 1, 2:34�pm, "HeyBub" wrote:





wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain.. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.

worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

unfortunately bin ladens group, who pulled 9 11 never had much power
in iraq till we elminated saddam.

the real problem is bin laden, who address us on tv when he cares too.

the iraq war destabilized the region, allowed irans power to grow, and
distracted us from getting bin laden.


Another populist misconception. Somehow, we managed to fight a world
war in both Europe and the Pacific. But the military and CIA isn't
capable of conducting a war in Iraq and working on gettting Bin Laden
at the same time?

You probably liked it better when Clinton was handling it. The Sudan
had Bin Laden in custody and offered to hand him over to the USA.
Clinton says he tried to get Saudi Arabia to take him, but they
refused and according to Clinton, the USA had no legal basis to bring
him here, so Clinton refused to act and Sudan sent him on his way.

Or maybe how Obama would handle it. He said he'd just bomb and send
troops to Pakistan, without their approval. I suppose you don't see
that as potentially destablilizing, in a country that has nuclear
weapons, a president who has has about 6 assasination attempts, and Al
Qaeds supporters waiting in the wings to take over?

Getting Bin Laden is important. But it's more of an intelligence
problem, than a military one. If we can figure out where he is, then
a cruise missle can dispatch him. And that cruise missle can be
launched regardless of anything to do with Iraq.



so all that money spent didnt get single terrorist-



Obviously you don't watch the news much. Over the last several
years, we've killed a bunch of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, including their top
leaders. Below are just a few from a quick search:


ABC NEWS: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in Iraq who led a
bloody insurgency of suicide bombings and kidnappings, was killed in
an airstrike Wednesday, ...
Senior al Qaeda leader killed in Iraq
Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:34:28


US Navy Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the spokesman for the
Multinational Force Iraq
A senior al-Qaeda leader in Iraq suspected of planning or conducting
attacks that included female bombers, has reportedly been killed.

Arkan Khalaf Khudayyir, also known as Karrar, a senior intelligence
officer of al-Qaeda in Iraq's network in Baquba was killed during a
raid by "Coalition Forces" in Khan Bani Sa'ad on Feb. 17, The American
Forces Press Service reported on Wednesday.


BAGHDAD (AP) €” U.S.-led forces killed a top al-Qaeda in Iraq figure
linked to kidnappings of Christian Science Monitor reporter Jill
Carroll and other Westerners, the military said Thursday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, said a rocket attack on the Green Zone
killed four Asian contractors Wednesday, the third straight day that
extremists fired rockets or mortars at the U.S.-controlled area.

The announcement of the death of al-Qaeda propagandist Muharib Abdul-
Latif al-Jubouri came after days of conflicting reports from the Iraqi
government that the top leaders of the terror group and its front
organization €” the Islamic State of Iraq €” had been killed.

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 08:56:01 -0500, Frank
frankdotlogullo@comcastperiodnet wrote:

wrote:
On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 21:47:10 -0500, Pisano
wrote:

McCain is a kook with poor anger management who sings creepy
songs about dropping the bomb.

Not a good choice for those who may be allergic to gamma rays.
Wants to open the borders to a full-fledged Mexican invasion. Wants

SNIP

And which one of them is coming over to repair your home next week?
Obviously this must have something to do with home.repair on
alt.home.repair, or you would not be posting it here, right........
Unless of course you're a troll !!!!!!


Vote for any of the others, and you may not have a home to
repair. It could end up in the hands of the Chinese.

If you don't understand this, you haven't been paying
attention.


Ron Paul, of course, he'll not only fix your home but will also deliver
your baby


WOO-HOOOO!!!

GO DR. PAUL!!!

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 06:30:13 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......


Oh yes it CAN!!!

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:36:37 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.



How dare you cheapen the value of human lives?

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 09:51:08 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress might
actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.


***DEMAND PAPER BALLOTS AND PUBLIC COUNTS***

***ABOLISH ELECTRONIC VOTING***

***ELECT RON PAUL FOR PRESIDENT***

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:34:31 -0600, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.



You have no idea who the REAL terrorists are.

Here's a hint:

They've been scaring you with invisible boogy men for years -

Right in your own living rooms.



And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.


worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 12:17:51 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Mar 1, 2:34?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.



worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

unfortunately bin ladens group, who pulled 9 11 never had much power
in iraq till we elminated saddam.

the real problem is bin laden, who address us on tv when he cares too.

the iraq war destabilized the region, allowed irans power to grow, and
distracted us from getting bin laden.

so all that money spent didnt get single terrorist


Who are the real terrorists?


Here's another clue:

Olbermann Vote Ron Paul Save America:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw37BsEw55E

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 20:40:40 GMT, Robert Allison
wrote:

HeyBub wrote:
wrote:

On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:

mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....


Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.


worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.


But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.

So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/debt-and-taxes/


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/inflation-tax/


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/?tag=Taxes


And, in general:


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 12:41:32 -0800, "Bob F"
wrote:


"HeyBub" wrote in message
...

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain.

And how much for the terrorists created - probably several times the number
killed.


Who are the real terrorists?


The Official "We're In A Lot Of Trouble" Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vcPD9bVWZc

HeyBub wrote:
wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.

I want to see the look on his face when he's told this is all being paid
for by the Bush tax cuts.

--
If they could invoke Dubya,
I can certainly call a jerk Hussein.

Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

--
If they could invoke Dubya,
I can certainly call a jerk Hussein.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:20:37 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

On Mar 1, 3:41?pm, "Bob F" wrote:
"HeyBub" wrote in message

...

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain.

And how much for the terrorists created - probably several times the number
killed.

yeah thats the killer part, bush made it worse rather than better.

total failure as president, is there anything better today than 8
years ago?

people used to say the economy, but thats no longer the case


Google my posts in this and other groups to gain a full and
clearer picture of what we are actually dealing with.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:11:54 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Mar 1, 3:17*pm, " wrote:
On Mar 1, 2:34?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:





wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.

worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

unfortunately bin ladens group, who pulled 9 11 never had much power
in iraq till we elminated saddam.

the real problem is bin laden, who address us on tv when he cares too.

the iraq war destabilized the region, allowed irans power to grow, and
distracted us from getting bin laden.


Another populist misconception. Somehow, we managed to fight a world
war in both Europe and the Pacific. But the military and CIA isn't
capable of conducting a war in Iraq and working on gettting Bin Laden
at the same time?



The Bin Laden family are friends and allies of the Bush
family.

Do some serious research.

Bin Laden was a CIA operative, trained in America.


You probably liked it better when Clinton was handling it. The Sudan
had Bin Laden in custody and offered to hand him over to the USA.
Clinton says he tried to get Saudi Arabia to take him, but they
refused and according to Clinton, the USA had no legal basis to bring
him here, so Clinton refused to act and Sudan sent him on his way.

Or maybe how Obama would handle it. He said he'd just bomb and send
troops to Pakistan, without their approval. I suppose you don't see
that as potentially destablilizing, in a country that has nuclear
weapons, a president who has has about 6 assasination attempts, and Al
Qaeds supporters waiting in the wings to take over?

Getting Bin Laden is important. But it's more of an intelligence
problem, than a military one. If we can figure out where he is, then
a cruise missle can dispatch him. And that cruise missle can be
launched regardless of anything to do with Iraq.



so all that money spent didnt get single terrorist-



Obviously you don't watch the news much. Over the last several
years, we've killed a bunch of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, including their top
leaders. Below are just a few from a quick search:


ABC NEWS: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in Iraq who led a
bloody insurgency of suicide bombings and kidnappings, was killed in
an airstrike Wednesday, ...
Senior al Qaeda leader killed in Iraq
Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:34:28


US Navy Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the spokesman for the
Multinational Force Iraq
A senior al-Qaeda leader in Iraq suspected of planning or conducting
attacks that included female bombers, has reportedly been killed.

Arkan Khalaf Khudayyir, also known as Karrar, a senior intelligence
officer of al-Qaeda in Iraq's network in Baquba was killed during a
raid by "Coalition Forces" in Khan Bani Sa'ad on Feb. 17, The American
Forces Press Service reported on Wednesday.


BAGHDAD (AP) — U.S.-led forces killed a top al-Qaeda in Iraq figure
linked to kidnappings of Christian Science Monitor reporter Jill
Carroll and other Westerners, the military said Thursday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, said a rocket attack on the Green Zone
killed four Asian contractors Wednesday, the third straight day that
extremists fired rockets or mortars at the U.S.-controlled area.

The announcement of the death of al-Qaeda propagandist Muharib Abdul-
Latif al-Jubouri came after days of conflicting reports from the Iraqi
government that the top leaders of the terror group and its front
organization — the Islamic State of Iraq — had been killed.

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 17:43:37 -0600, clifto wrote:

Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/debt-and-taxes/


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/inflation-tax/


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/?tag=Taxes


And, in general:


http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/


See also:


"Money As Debt":

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74362583451279

clifto wrote:

Robert Allison wrote:

So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?


Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.


Oh, yeah. How is that working right now? You do know that the
Bush estimate for reaching a balanced budget is 12 years right?
And that is based on having an annual increase in GDP of 3%,
right? And the last quarter the GDP increase was only .6%. Right?

The CBO estimates that for every .1% decrease in GDP the
projected growth in revenues falls by 287 billion dollars. So
what is the math look like on that right now? What if it
continues for just 1 year?

--
Robert Allison
Rimshot, Inc.
Georgetown, TX

In article
,
wrote:



Another populist misconception. Somehow, we managed to fight a world
war in both Europe and the Pacific. But the military and CIA isn't
capable of conducting a war in Iraq and working on gettting Bin Laden
at the same time?
The CIA's problem is largely that they ain't the OSS any more
(Thanks Frank Church).

On Mar 1, 6:11Â*pm, wrote:
On Mar 1, 3:17Â*pm, " wrote:





On Mar 1, 2:34�pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:
On Mar 1, 12:36?pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
wrote:
mc cain who protected and supported bush.... need i say more

Obama a fresh face who with a democratically controlled congress
might actually get something accomplished.......

it cant be worse than bush whos war wasted so many lives and
money.......

If you look at lives per dollar, it was a bargain.

how do you figure that? immediate and legacy costs of this war, is in
the trillions. being its all borrowed money somehow it will have to be
paid.....

Anything less than $1 billion per terrorist killed, I consider a bargain. If
we could get them all to line up single file, one cheap bullet would do the
job. I don't hold much hope for that technique.

And, thanks to inflation, money borrowed now will be paid in cheaper
dollars.

Plus, it's not all borrowed money. The deficit - the amount we have to
borrow - is only in the few hundred billion range, whereas the cost of the
war is much greater. We're not talking about a lot of money here and it's
mostly being accommodated by current revenues.

worse its made our dollar worth less, increasing our cost to buy stuff
internationally, like oil.

But it makes the stuff we produce cheaper to the rest of the world, so they
buy more of it.

It averages out.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

unfortunately bin ladens group, who pulled 9 11 never had much power
in iraq till we elminated saddam.

the real problem is bin laden, who address us on tv when he cares too.

the iraq war destabilized the region, allowed irans power to grow, and
distracted us from getting bin laden.

Another populist misconception. Â* Somehow, we managed to fight a world
war in both Europe and the Pacific. Â* But the military and CIA isn't
capable of conducting a war in Iraq and working on gettting Bin Laden
at the same time?

You probably liked it better when Clinton was handling it. Â* The Sudan
had Bin Â*Laden in custody and offered to hand him over to the USA.
Clinton says he tried to get Saudi Arabia to take him, but they
refused and according to Clinton, the USA had no legal basis to bring
him here, so Clinton refused to act and Sudan sent him on his way.

Or maybe how Obama would handle it. Â*He said he'd just bomb and send
troops to Pakistan, without their approval. Â*I suppose you don't see
that as potentially destablilizing, in a country that has nuclear
weapons, a president who has has about 6 assasination attempts, and Al
Qaeds supporters waiting in the wings to take over?

Getting Bin Laden is important. Â* But it's more of an intelligence
problem, than a military one. Â* If we can figure out where he is, then
a cruise missle can dispatch him. Â*And that cruise missle can be
launched regardless of anything to do with Iraq.



so all that money spent didnt get single terrorist-

Obviously you don't watch the news much. Â* Over the last several
years, we've killed a bunch of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, including their top
leaders. Â* Â*Below are just a few from a quick search:

ABC NEWS: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in Iraq who led a
bloody insurgency of suicide bombings and kidnappings, was killed in
an airstrike Wednesday, ...
Senior al Qaeda leader killed in Iraq
Thu, 21 Feb 2008 06:34:28

US Navy Rear Adm. Gregory J. Smith, the spokesman for the
Multinational Force Iraq
A senior al-Qaeda leader in Iraq suspected of planning or conducting
attacks that included female bombers, has reportedly been killed.

Arkan Khalaf Khudayyir, also known as Karrar, a senior intelligence
officer of al-Qaeda in Iraq's network in Baquba was killed during a
raid by "Coalition Forces" in Khan Bani Sa'ad on Feb. 17, The American
Forces Press Service reported on Wednesday.

BAGHDAD (AP) €” U.S.-led forces killed a top al-Qaeda in Iraq figure
linked to kidnappings of Christian Science Monitor reporter Jill
Carroll and other Westerners, the military said Thursday.
The U.S. Embassy, meanwhile, said a rocket attack on the Green Zone
killed four Asian contractors Wednesday, the third straight day that
extremists fired rockets or mortars at the U.S.-controlled area.

The announcement of the death of al-Qaeda propagandist Muharib Abdul-
Latif al-Jubouri came after days of conflicting reports from the Iraqi
government that the top leaders of the terror group and its front
organization €” the Islamic State of Iraq €” had been killed..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

hey if its really as important as WW2 sell it to the public and start
the draft.

as obama correctly noted al qaeda in iraq didnt exist till we attacked
iraq.

bush should of never taken out saddam, since he was a stabilizing
influence in the region

Robert Allison wrote:
clifto wrote:
Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

Oh, yeah. How is that working right now?

Actually, quite well.

--
If they could invoke Dubya,
I can certainly call a jerk Hussein.

So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

Oh, yeah. �How is that working right now?

Actually, quite well.

yeah its making our dollars worth less internationally so oil
specifically gasoline costs even more. yep the wonders of deficit
spending

wrote in message
...


Or maybe how Obama would handle it. He said he'd just bomb and send
troops to Pakistan, without their approval. I suppose you don't see
that as potentially destablilizing, in a country that has nuclear
weapons, a president who has has about 6 assasination attempts, and Al
Qaeds supporters waiting in the wings to take over?

So did you have a problem with Bush doing just that last week? At least, they
claimed they killed the #3 man.

"clifto" wrote in message
...
Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

LOL!!

"clifto" wrote in message
...
Robert Allison wrote:
clifto wrote:
Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

Oh, yeah. How is that working right now?

Actually, quite well.

Only for those with very active imaginations.

In article ,
"Bob F" wrote:

"clifto" wrote in message
...
Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

LOL!!

It worked every time. Especially if you factor in what the Joint
Committee on Taxation's scoring system said was going to happen.

Kurt Ullman wrote:
"Bob F" wrote:
"clifto" wrote in message
...
Robert Allison wrote:
So you won't mind if we raise taxes so that we can pay that off,
now, so we don't have to leave it to our kids?

Au contrai we need tax cuts to increase tax revenues.

LOL!!

It worked every time. Especially if you factor in what the Joint
Committee on Taxation's scoring system said was going to happen.

Tax cuts only raise revenues when the cuts reduce taxes that are already
too high... like the current situation. It's possible to conceive of a tax
cut that reduced revenues, although not in our country in any time after
the income tax was imposed.

--
"The symbolism of a major American presidential candidate with the middle name
of Hussein, who went to elementary school in Indonesia, certainly speaks to
Muslims abroad." -- Tamara Cofman Wittes, Brookings senior fellow