Defeatocrats Hit New Low

[Guest Guest]

Really ??  Lets see, he lowered our taxes (Wall St. loves him). Unemployment is at an all-time low. He is going after the terrorists that attacked  the World Trade Center TWICE (something the defeatocrat Clinton was afraid to do) and has prevented any further attacks in the U.S. since 9/11. Bush will go down as one of our greatest presidents. But I can understand how you Kool-aiders would be a little fuzzy on the facts.

70533[/snapback]

I guess the one problem with a democracy is that idiots like you can acutally vote and we are suffering the effects from that right now.

[Guest a proud american]

"He's kept us safer? This is in spite of him not because of him."  Now this is a typical LoonyLeft statement. No factual basis for this, just stupid Kool-aid stuff.

  "More time on vacation" ??  You need to try harder.

70973[/snapback]

You're right it is lunacy to think he's kept us safer.

You have better odds of being hit by a meteor than you do an attack, but in your world you buy into the fear factor. So keep hiding under the bed.

[Guest You Make Me Feel Good]

I can understand your excitement over Hilliary.  Hourly wage people (like yourself) will benefit from the Ice Princess getting elected. Universal health care, free college tuition for illegal aliens, $5,000. for each baby pushed out by every unwed mother, no more wiretapping terrorists and reduced military budgets.

  I think Harry Reid will make a wonderful Secetary of Defense and Billy Boy is anxious to run the Intern Program in the White House.

  On the down side, we may get wiped off the map by the bombers that won't have to worry about their conversations being listened to. Yeah, I'm real excited too.

70694[/snapback]

Senator Clinton is as middle-of-the-road as you can possibly get. I do think universal health care is long overdue (as does a majority of America) and, no, I'm not an hourly employee. As to the other items you mention, point to me anything that supports those statements.

Let me remind you that the smoking gun memo that terrorists would strike was sent to Condoleezza Rice, not anyone in the Clinton administrati0n.

Hey Bushie, are you one of those right wingers supporting the thrice-married, cross-dressing, flip-flopping Rudy Giuliani?

[Strife767]

"He's kept us safer? This is in spite of him not because of him."  Now this is a typical LoonyLeft statement. No factual basis for this,

Wrong.

Fact: Al-Qaeda has an exponentially larger presence in Iraq now than they did before we invaded.

[Guest Loki]

Senator Clinton is as middle-of-the-road as you can possibly get.  I do think universal health care is long overdue (as does a majority of America) and, no, I'm not an hourly employee.  As to the other items you mention, point to me anything that supports those statements.

Let me remind you that the smoking gun memo that terrorists would strike was sent to Condoleezza Rice, not anyone in the Clinton administrati0n.

Hey Bushie, are you one of those right wingers supporting the thrice-married, cross-dressing, flip-flopping Rudy Giuliani?

71155[/snapback]

Okay, universal health care, how do we pay for it?? It is a great idea, but it is going to cost, and HUGE. The government wants to provide this "FOR YOU" with your money.

It is sad to run out the daily briefing to point a finger at Bush. Bush bears SOME responsibility, as does Clinton, SOME. But the blame should always go to those who murdered civilians whose only crime on that day was to show up to work. Blaming one president or the other is politically convenient, but it doesn't solve the problem.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Wrong.

Fact: Al-Qaeda has an exponentially larger presence in Iraq now than they did before we invaded.

71293[/snapback]

Did you notice that we killed 80 of them the other day?

[Strife767]

Okay, universal health care, how do we pay for it??  It is a great idea, but it is going to cost, and HUGE.  The government wants to provide this "FOR YOU" with your money.

Well, we were able to come up with nearly half a trillion bucks for this "war" without much trouble. That couldn't be any more difficult, financially speaking.

[Guest Guest]

Hmmmm......  Sounds like you're rooting against our troops, cupcake.

70974[/snapback]

When are the A**holes of the world like you going to learn that opening one's eyes to reality does not make them "against the troops"? WANKER! Excuse me, REMF WANKER!

[billydee4]

Did you notice that we killed 80 of them the other day?

71480[/snapback]

Says who?

[Strife767]

Did you notice that we killed 80 of them the other day?

71480[/snapback]

And how many times that number are there left, that were not there before Bush invaded (can't be restated enough)?

[Guest Guest]

Okay, universal health care, how do we pay for it??  It is a great idea, but it is going to cost, and HUGE.  The government wants to provide this "FOR YOU" with your money.

It is sad to run out the daily briefing to point a finger at Bush.  Bush bears SOME responsibility, as does Clinton, SOME.  But the blame should always go to those who murdered civilians whose only crime on that day was to show up to work.  Blaming one president or the other is politically convenient, but it doesn't solve the problem.

71420[/snapback]

How do we pay for medical care now? This is a distribution and allocation question, not a cost question.

Administrative costs under the current system are enormous. Insurance companies are benefitting from the bureaucracy. If we could save those costs, we would actually lower the overall costs of medical care by directing more money to actual care.

[Bern]

Did you notice that we killed 80 of them the other day?

71480[/snapback]

Assuming this is true, and that is highly debatable, eighty would not bother them.

Before Bush invaded Iraq, there were less than 200 Al Quaeda members. Now they are in the thousands - losing eighty is not a big deal to them.

They are now a serious threat to Pakistan, a nuclear nation. They now have cells in numerous African countries and are building up in Lebanon.

[Guest Keith-Marshall,Mo]

Says who?

71519[/snapback]

Good point, there is an excellent book by a man named Phillip J. Caputo called "Officer of the Dead". When he was a Second Lieutentant in VietNam he was in charge of the daily death counts for both american and enemy forces. It's been a good 20yrs when I read the book in college but what he effectively said was that he was ordered that for every dead American soldier he was to report an inflated number of enemy forces dead. Seems like it was 3 or possibly 5 to 1. Either way my point is that I wouldn't trust those numbers any further than I could throw a tank.

[Bern]

Well, we were able to come up with nearly half a trillion bucks for this "war" without much trouble. That couldn't be any more difficult, financially speaking.

71511[/snapback]

The war money is borrowed. With interest, a trillion.

For those of you who need a math refresher, that is 3,300 dollars for every man, woman and and child. A family of four has a war debt of 13,200. That is the current total. It increases by 500 million (1 billion with interest) every day. Later, taxes will have to be significantly increased to pay for this. Or do some of you think the tooth fairy will pay for this? There is no free ride.

Priorities. You pour your resources into war and the military or you can take care of your people and infrastructure.

I have relatives who live in Holland, where they take care of people. They are less stressed, retire earlier, don't worry about health costs, live longer and are healthier.

[Guest Patriot]

Well, we were able to come up with nearly half a trillion bucks for this "war" without much trouble. That couldn't be any more difficult, financially speaking.

71511[/snapback]

"war" ?? 9/11 doesn't qualify as the opening salvo of a war ??

[Guest Loki]

How do we pay for medical care now? This is a distribution and allocation question, not a cost question.

Administrative costs under the current system are enormous. Insurance companies are benefitting from the bureaucracy. If we could save those costs, we would actually lower the overall costs of medical care by directing more money to actual care.

71601[/snapback]

Please tell me that you don't expect the federal government to regulate this system efficiently. That would be naive.

[Guest Loki]

The war money is borrowed. With interest, a trillion.

For those of you who need a math refresher, that is 3,300 dollars for every man, woman and and child. A family of four has a war debt of 13,200. That is the current total. It increases by 500 million (1 billion with interest) every day. Later, taxes will have to be significantly increased to pay for this. Or do some of you think the tooth fairy will pay for this? There is no free ride.

Priorities. You pour your resources into war and the military or you can take care of your people and infrastructure.

I have relatives who live in Holland, where they take care of people. They are less stressed, retire earlier, don't worry about health costs, live longer and are healthier.

71676[/snapback]

I would remind you that the preamble to the constitution reads: " . . . PROVIDE for the common defense, PROMOTE the general welfare . . . "

The citizenry needs to be protected first and foremost. People will disagree with what makes us safer etc., but this is the governments primary responsibility. This of course includes protecting our own BORDERS.

[Guest Guest]

Please tell me that you don't expect the federal government to regulate this system efficiently.  That would be naive.

71710[/snapback]

It's also naive to think that the current system is efficient. The difference is that private insurers have incentives to run up administrative costs. The question is: which is worse?

[Guest Guest]

"war" ??  9/11 doesn't qualify as the opening salvo of a war ??

71682[/snapback]

Iraq didn't attack us, doofus.

[Guest Here's how you pay for it]

Okay, universal health care, how do we pay for it??  It is a great idea, but it is going to cost, and HUGE.  The government wants to provide this "FOR YOU" with your money.

It is sad to run out the daily briefing to point a finger at Bush.  Bush bears SOME responsibility, as does Clinton, SOME.  But the blame should always go to those who murdered civilians whose only crime on that day was to show up to work.  Blaming one president or the other is politically convenient, but it doesn't solve the problem.

71420[/snapback]

Stop the war. What are we up to already, $400 billion?

[Guest Guest]

Please tell me that you don't expect the federal government to regulate this system efficiently.  That would be naive.

71710[/snapback]

Social security is run efficiently.

You know why mail costs 41 cents a letter? Because the government set up the mail system. Go to a FedEx or UPS office and tell them you want to send a FedEx or UPS letter for 41 cents. You will be laughed out of the office.

Who do you think created the National Interstate Higway system in the 50's?

[Guest Patriot]

Iraq didn't attack us, doofus.

71878[/snapback]

Read the following carefully, I've tried to use small words; We are at war with

"Global Terrorism". "Global Terrorism" is not the name of a country, it is a

worldwide net of terrorists that are committed to the defeat of the western

world. That's why there have been terrorist attacks in the U.S., Spain, England,

France, Africa, etc., etc. After 9/11, we knew we had to "drain the swamp" and

Iraq was a good starting point because of Saddam's record of terrorism.

I applaud Bush for his courage to take the fight to the terrorists, he has kept

us safe for 6 years and Rudy will continue to keep us on the offensive after he

becomes president. Semper Fi. ( And "Guest", you keep hiding under your bed,

the Patriots of the U.S. will protect your candy ass).

[Strife767]

Stop the war.  What are we up to already, $400 billion?

71910[/snapback]

$465 billion plus.

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/Cost-of-...t-of-War-3.html

[WilliamK]

"war" ??  9/11 doesn't qualify as the opening salvo of a war ??

Iraq didn't attack us, doofus.

71878[/snapback]

Yeah, right. Next thing you know, you kool-aid drinking defeatocrats will be telling us that the Chinese didn't attack Pearl Harbor.

[Guest Loki]

Social security is run efficiently.

You know why mail costs 41 cents a letter? Because the government set up the mail system. Go to a FedEx or UPS office and tell them you want to send a FedEx or UPS letter for 41 cents. You will be laughed out of the office.

Who do you think created the National Interstate Higway system in the 50's?

71933[/snapback]

Social Security is run efficiently!! That's not naive, it goes way beyond that. The system will be bankrupt if something isn't done soon.