drmiller I am a former Nuclear Weapons Officer. The explosives in question are NOT WMD. If fact most gas is not really a WMD becasuse to create mass casualities requires high concerntrations. They have a very limited area. The true WMD is Bio and Nuclear.
I am not sure what data you are looking at but the Leading Economic Indicators are down, The consumer confidence is down and the jobless claims are up. We have added 5 Million new workers since Bush took office and have less jobs than in 2001. In addition Average weekly wages are down. The Bush people do not acknowledge the issues that impact thr average person. Not enough jobs, higher energy costs, higer health care and prescription drug cos
drmiler \ Two more- Leading Economic Indicators fell 0.3 in Aug and 0.1 in Sept. Look at www.globalindicators.org/us/latestreleases/ Consumer Confidence declined in Aug, Sept and October www.conference-board.org/economics/consumerconfidence.cfn The economy is not better except for the very wealthy and that is the truth. We have not provided jobs for the 5 million new workers that entered the work forc
These were reported by the AP. The 20,000 increase in the jobless claims was on the Web at 9:35 am today on earthlink.net. The other data was reported in the paper by AP last week
drmiller & Myrrander You do not believe the U S Depatment of Labor and the U S Department of Commerce? They are the source of the info. They are also part of the Bush administration. The issue about the weapons was on Fox News this morning. I told you about the deficit projected at $10 trillion by 2008 in an earlier Blog which came from OMB which is part of the Office of the President. I do not know what you will believe. If y
First, the explosives in question are not WMD. They are conventional weapons which did not in any way pose a danger to the United States prior to the Iraq War even in the hands of Saddam. China, Russia, Iran, et al all have such weapons. We did not attack them. When we deposed Saddam, we failed to establish control in Iraq to prevent the explosives that were all over the country from falling into the hands of the terrorists and these expolsiv
Myrrander I have done just that. Bush still should be removed from office for allowing our enimies to use the explosives in Iraq to Kill Our Troops! It is not the failure of our brave troops it is a Bush failure to provide the force levels needed to secure Iraq properly!
Senator John Kerry must have been a very good boy. Santa just keeps the gifts comming. The statement that a group in Iraq has the missing weapons and that they have been using them in Iraq, the 20,000 increased jobless claims, the third month that Connsumer Confidence and fourth month the Leader Economic Indicators have been down documenent how the Bush policies are
itgirl I was as unable to obtain the link in the guardian from the URL you gave.
You missed the point of my Blog. I said the missing 380 Tons was the LAST revelation. The fact remains Bush did not send the number of troops needed to control Iraq after the fall of Saddam. We know the terrorists have been using the available explosives in Iraq to kill our troops. We know that outside terrorists have come into the country. We know that we have not been able to control the areas where the Saddam factions were strong and they have b
You tell the families that their sons and daughters were not killed by the explosives we did not secure in Iraq. You tell them we prevented the terrorists commig into Iraq from outside that killed their soldiers. You tell them we are in control of the hot spots in Iraq where their family members are being killed. It is not I that loose, it is them who have lost - BIG TIME! That is neither Right or Left it is a fact!
The sign on the desk of Bush is "The Buck never stops here" He did not send the number of troops needed to maintain security in Iraq including the amo dumps. Our military have paid the price in blood for the failure of Bush in Iraq!
The failure to provide security in Iraq has added to American Casualties and injuries. Bush has not provided the troop levels required to secure the borders and prevent outside terrorists from comming into Iraq. He has not secured the explosives from getting into terrorists hands which are being used to kill and injure American military members or to control the popul
The real problem with George W. is his policies and what they have and will do to this country. My book, Four More For George W? documents the Bush policies. Look at what readers are saying about this book by going to www.amazon.com.
drmiler: Is that the same oath Lt George W. Bush took when he was in the Air National Guard? Gen Franks could have retired if he wanted to stick to his guns. That does not change the fact the error Bush made about the troop levels have allowed the termoil in Iraq and has resulted in American Deaths that would not have happened if we had controlled the situation in Iraq properly with the forces required. Even if you buy into going in
I am just responding to the news of the day. It was Bush 41 that was just complaining about a movien that was out this summer. Everything in my Blog is true even though the Bushies do not like it. My election closing include the disaster in Iraq, The price of oil, the stock market, the trade deficit, Federal Deficit, Lack of Social Security Solution and the beat goes on. My election is the Bush Record.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is over the top in some areas however, much of the material is factual and Bush 41 or others storming that Michael Moore is "this or that" does not change these facts. Bush 41 did use his influence and his friends to get George W. into the National Guard and out of the Guard early with an Honorable Discharge that George W. did not earn! The
You must have been watching a different set of debates. Bush did not win anything. Edwards and Cheney were very close and give the "Great resume " of Cheney, I think Cheney lost. If Bush wins on November 2, 2004, The loosers will be the vast majority of the people in the United States of America!
drmiler Here is why Franks supports Bush: Franks told Bush it required 300,000- 400,000 troops to fight the Iraq War. He must have at some time caved into Bush given the fact he fought the war with less then half the troops he needed. Rather than stand his ground like the Army CoS, he compermised what he knew was needed. Now we have a mess. If he now says, Bush was wrong, then the question of why did you agree to this? To agree to
Franks is one person and the events in Iraq are many. Tell the famlies of the dead and injured that we have control in Iraq. We allowed terrorists to come into Iraq from other countries because we could not control the borders. We did not stop terrorists from using the explosives in the Amo dumps. We did not control the areas that opposed the war and the 400,000 former Saddam military. All that took place because we did not have the level of forces ne
The results tell the story. We do not have control in Iraq and Americans have died because we did not have the troops needed to maintain control. That is because Bush did not lsiten to the people who knew what was required including Gen Franks.
Bush is destroying the ability to meet our needs in the future by the debt. We must pay for what is important enough to spend. The $7.5 Trillion Debt is heading to $10 Trillion per the Bush budget projection by FY2008. We simply can not spend at the current rate and have the loss in revenue by cutting tax the way Bush has done. His idea of making the Tax cuts pernanent will be that last straw. We will be looking at annual interest of between $450 and 5
I do not know why Franks support Bush but he did tell the Pres that we neded 300,000-400,000 troops. Most of the 4 star military do not support Bush and the way he conducted the war or his refusal to enlarge the size of the Army. In the 2000 campaign Bush said the Army as at leat 40,000 too small and when he got into office did nothing to correct the problem he identified. Some Commander-in-Chief!
I never said the tax cuts that help the middle income families are not good for the economy. Look at my earlier response. The tax cuts that we can not afford and that do not stimulate demand are the tax rate cuts for the top two brackets, the cut in dividends and the elimination of the estate tax. Only the top 2 or 3 % benefit from thoes tax cuts and are the only things Kerry wants to eliminate.
The president impacts the economic growth by his (her) fiscal and tax policies. The choice Bush and the conservatives make is to cut taxes for the waelthy with the idea that they will take that added money and invest in the economy and create growth. That does happen but not to the extent needed to both replace the lost revenue from the tax cuts and pay for the added spending needed for security. The more powerful way to impact economic gr
JoeUser Forums