On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:04:57 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
wrote:
>4077 American Casualties.
>
>85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
>$9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
>Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
>= $30,831.50 per person.
>
>
>
>Tom Watson
>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Let me rephrase - 4077 American Dead - Greater than 30 Thousand
Casualties.
85,000 + Civilian Dead - You can speak to a casualties.
In 2004 I posted the following vocabulary list for the Chimp to study:
> Gulf of Tonkin Incident.
> War Powers Resolution.
> Domino Theory.
> Escalation.
> Body Count.
> The Light At The End Of The Tunnel.
> Draft Lottery.
> Vietnamization.
> Secret Plan To End The War.
> Khmer Rouge.
> Hearts and Minds.
> Sideshow.
> Pol Pot.
> Ho Chi Minh.
> Operation Rolling Thunder.
> Khe Sanh.
> Back In The World.
> Tet.
> Deros.
> Operation Pegasus.
> Destroying The Village In Order To Save It.
> My Lai.
> Chu Lai.
> Napalm.
> Saturation Bombing.
> Agent Orange.
> Hue.
> Cambodia.
> Laos.
> William Westmoreland.
> Maxwell Taylor.
> Daniel Ellsberg.
> Kent State.
He's still a chimp and he's still a fool.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tuesday 29th April 2008 12:13 GMT
>
> A leading Scottish churchman and bioethics thinktank operator has
> warned again of the dangers attendant on genetic research, and
> recommended that there should be a law against men having children
> with female chimpanzees.
>
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/29/mackellar_strikes_again/
Doctor Moreau I presume.
Dave in Houston
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:03:59 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>>>
>>>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>>>
>>>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>>>
>>>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>>>
>>>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>>> Democrat math:
>>>>
>>>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>>> (let's get out of California)
>>>>
>>>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>>>
>>>> $13627.08 per person
>>>>
>>>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>>>
>>>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>>>
>>>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>>> debt at an even faster rate.
>>>
>>> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>>>
>>> How odd.
>>>
>> Excuse me, but you're unhinged. All of this happened since that
>> genius FDR socialized everything he could get his grimy mitts on.
>> Yes, the current Republicans are absolute fleabags for their
>> lack of fiscal restraint. That's why political hacks like Hillary
>> or snakeoil salesmen like Hussein Obama even have a remote chance
>> at being elected. But to lay this entirely at the feet of this
>> generation of Rs is horsehockey. ALL of the population and its
>> elected representatives have been happily looting the system
>> for generations. This is NOT a political issue, it is an *ethical*
>> issue in which the larger population is found constantly wanting.
>
>
> You're foaming, a la Hannity and O'Righty.
How so. I am merely pointing out that you wish to lay at the feet
of the Rs of the past 8 years what has been the norm since FDR
was in office. Hate Bush all you like, but he's hardly responsible
for the overall state of the deficit. He took what was there and
continued the trajectory.
>
> Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as equals.
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On May 14, 8:04 pm, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
Not really. More realistically, when you consider that about
134,000,000 federal income tax returns were filed, coupled with the
fact that the top 50% of earners pay just over 96% of the federal tax
bill the numbers are a whole lot worse...at least for those that pay
taxes.
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnetwww.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:36:20 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> You mean your point wasn't deaths and debt and whose math is represented?
>>
>>> Address the issues at hand and find a way of responding that would not
>>> get you flagged by Robert's, or any other rules of order.
>> Again, the issues you brought up weren't deaths and debt and whose math
>> is represented? I believe I was absolutely on point.
>>
>
>
> Let's cut to the chase on this, Doug.
>
> I hold you and everyone who voted like you responsible for each and
> every one of those 4077 American deaths.
>
> Does that clear it up for you?
Absolutely. I hold you and every one who voted for the previous
administration for the 9/11 deaths as well as all the deaths that will
occur as a result of voting in people who will not confront the
Islamo-fascist menace that is currently at war with us.
Does that clear it up for you?
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 4077 American Casualties.
I recall the twin towers claiming more than that in one day.
But lets put that into perspective, approximately 4,000,000 Americans die
yearly of natural causes.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
A fraction compared to the VietNam war.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
And it was well on its way there by the end of Clinton's rein.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
20 years ago I calculated that figure to be about 1/2 of what you came up
with.
Funny how many of us forget that the world was perfect and no one was being
killed in conflict and there was no national debt, it had a surplus before
Bush.
On May 14, 11:45 pm, evodawg <[email protected]> wrote:
> I always liked that line, every ones Wrong if every ones Right! or does it
> go the other way around. Who wrote that anyway???
>
> I think you get my point, Its one of those can we just agree to disagree.
>
> Throw all the bastards out and lets start over. Oh one other thing, I read
> somewhere that there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 million state
> and federal government employees, this does not include the Military. What
> a racket.
> This is from memory, I could be wrong. I googled it and its a hard number to
> find, wonder why?????
>
I often wonder if those figures include local government: Bedford's
two largest employee groups appear to be schoolteachers and cops. When
you add in adminstrators and custodial employees in both areas, plus
the court system and a few other odd ends, this small (in
population--65,000, 754 square miles) county probably has far more
government employees than private, especially if we include game
wardens of one stripe or another, state cops and so forth. If I
weren't so lazy, I'd dig up some figures, but I'm sure we have 1,000
teachers/admins/cops.custodial/etc., if not more.
"RF" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> WTF does any of this have to do with wood working? Keep the political
> crap off your group, it will not come of any good and has ruined many a NG
You're wasting your time railing against off topic messages, but if you're
going to do it, how about not quoting someone's entire message?
Tom Watson wrote:
> March 17, 2008: 7:11 AM EDT
>
> NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Today's economic condition could likely be
> seen as "the most wrenching since the end of the second world war,"
> wrote former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan in the Financial
> Times on Monday.
>
> http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/17/news/economy/greenspan/index.htm?postversion=2008031707
And the very next paragraph
"The U.S. financial crisis won't end until housing prices stabilize, but
that won't happen for months, wrote Greenspan."
Maybe context is required here to fully understand Greenspan's
comments.......I would suggest that "most wrenching" is not at all that
wrenching when it will work its way out in a few months. Possibly one may
surmise his comments were specific to the self inflicted meltdown of the
lending and borrowing sub prime crisis....I'd even suggest much of the sub
prime disaster hype was merely intended for the little guy to once again
bail out big business folly.
> By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | September 27, 2007
>
> WASHINGTON - The Army's top officer, General George Casey, told
> Congress yesterday that his branch of the military has been stretched
> so thin by the war in Iraq that it can not adequately respond to
> another conflict - one of the strongest warnings yet from a military
> leader that repeated deployments to war zones in the Middle East have
> hamstrung the military's ability to deter future aggression.
>
> http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/09/27/army_is_worn_too_thin_says_general/
Food for thought and I would suspect quite true......With the current size
of the military plopping 150,000 troops anywhere in a long term policing
action is going to strain resources of both manpower and machine. But one
might readily surmise neither military size nor budget is absolutely fixed
and under a grave threat could be subject to change or even shock..... Iraq
assets could be deployed elsewhere if the need arose.
A more cynical view might even entertain a connection between the budget
request and the Generals suggested views
"Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates asked Congress for a
record-setting $190 billion to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for
the next year - nearly $50 billion more than anticipated. Most of the money
would go to Iraq. If the request is approved, the cost of the 2003 invasion
will top $600 billion."
Nonetheless most any anticipated world wide emergency or security response
including Taiwan does not include the assets (boots on the ground) primarily
used in Iraq's police action. In fact with such a large military presence in
the Middle-East, logistically some actions would be considerably
easier...i.e. bombers would not have to fly as far, ships already stationed
etc...... I would even surmise that after the Bush military build-up that
certain hard assets including cruise missiles greatly exceed the Clinton
years (he used them up) and that with the missile defense fast track under
Bush we have a level of safety from rogue missiles never before
achieved......
> Tuesday 29th April 2008 12:13 GMT
>
> A leading Scottish churchman and bioethics thinktank operator has
> warned again of the dangers attendant on genetic research, and
> recommended that there should be a law against men having children
> with female chimpanzees.
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/29/mackellar_strikes_again/
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tis a sad day if a law is actually needed.......In spite of popular wisdom
my kids have humans on both sides....Rod
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:59:44 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>
>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>
>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>
>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>
>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>> And that's in *total*.
>>
>> Now, let's take approximately 13 Trillion for the total budget
>> and say that 50% is spent on entitlements and their associated
>> debt load (it's actually higher than that, probably closer to
>> 60%, but I won't quibble with details:
>>
>> 6.5 Trillion/303,989,787 is about $24,000/person PER YEAR. It's not
>> the war that's bankrupting us, it's entitlements. Period.
>
>
> And after eight years of a Republican Administration, you find fault
> with whom?
>
All of them ... and the mooching sheeple happily trading their freedom
for handouts.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
Charlie Self wrote:
> On May 14, 10:09 pm, "CM" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm sure everything will magically get better if/when B/O gets in? Well
>> maybe not.
>>
>> cm
>>
>> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>>> Democrat math:
>>>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>>> (let's get out of California)
>>>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>>> $13627.08 per person
>>>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>>> debt at an even faster rate.
>>> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>>> How odd.
>>> Tom Watson
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>
> ""By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen
> and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure
> in her freedom," McCain said in prepared remarks from a speech he was
> to deliver in Columbus, Ohio, on Thursday.
>
> "The Iraq war has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although
> still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and
> centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is
> spasmodic and much reduced," McCain said."
>
> From Reuters.
>
> Is it a case of tunnel vision, as in "light at the end of"?
>
> That sandbox is none of our business, and certainly is not, and has
> not been, worth the death of a single American serviceman or woman.
> It's the wrong war, in the wrong place for the wrong reasons, and
> McCain wants to continue the "What, me worry?" kid's brawl for another
> five or six years--with a long term permanent presence.
>
> Not if I can help it.
WTF does any of this have to do with wood working? Keep the political
crap off your group, it will not come of any good and has ruined many a NG
On May 14, 10:09 pm, "CM" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm sure everything will magically get better if/when B/O gets in? Well
> maybe not.
>
> cm
>
> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>Tom Watson wrote:
> >>> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> >>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> >>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> >>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> >>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
> >>> Tom Watson
> >>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> >>>www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>
> >>Democrat math:
>
> >>Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
> >>(let's get out of California)
>
> >>Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
> >>owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>
> >>$13627.08 per person
>
> >>$50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
> >>(not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>
> >>Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
> >>debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>
> >>Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
> >>debt at an even faster rate.
>
> > And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>
> > How odd.
>
> > Tom Watson
> > tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> >www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
""By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen
and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure
in her freedom," McCain said in prepared remarks from a speech he was
to deliver in Columbus, Ohio, on Thursday.
"The Iraq war has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although
still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and
centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is
spasmodic and much reduced," McCain said."
From Reuters.
Is it a case of tunnel vision, as in "light at the end of"?
That sandbox is none of our business, and certainly is not, and has
not been, worth the death of a single American serviceman or woman.
It's the wrong war, in the wrong place for the wrong reasons, and
McCain wants to continue the "What, me worry?" kid's brawl for another
five or six years--with a long term permanent presence.
Not if I can help it.
On May 14, 9:54 pm, Doug Winterburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tom Watson wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:36:20 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> You mean your point wasn't deaths and debt and whose math is represented?
>
> >>> Address the issues at hand and find a way of responding that would not
> >>> get you flagged by Robert's, or any other rules of order.
> >> Again, the issues you brought up weren't deaths and debt and whose math
> >> is represented? I believe I was absolutely on point.
>
> > Let's cut to the chase on this, Doug.
>
> > I hold you and everyone who voted like you responsible for each and
> > every one of those 4077 American deaths.
>
> > Does that clear it up for you?
>
> Absolutely. I hold you and every one who voted for the previous
> administration
Which, after bin Laden was iimplicated in the bombings of the
Khobar towers and the East African Embassies, made several
attempts to kill or capture bin Laden, whihc the Republicans
characterized as "wagging the dog".
As opposed say, to the present administration who, after
bin Laden was implicated in the bombing of the Cole, took
his name off their list of international 'terrorsits' and disbanded
the program tasked with hunting him down.
> for the 9/11 deaths as well as all the deaths that will
> occur as a result of voting in people who will not confront the
> Islamo-fascist menace that is currently at war with us.
>
> Does that clear it up for you?
The present administration ignored the islamofascist
menace until September 11, 2001. Then it was only
though the efforts of Powell and Tenet that the administration
was convinced to confront it. Despite Powell's best efforts,
the adminsitration soon lost interest in the matter, and
turned it's attention to Iraq instead.
--
FF
On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:54:04 -0700, Doug Winterburn
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Absolutely. I hold you and every one who voted for the previous
>administration for the 9/11 deaths as well as all the deaths that will
>occur as a result of voting in people who will not confront the
>Islamo-fascist menace that is currently at war with us.
>
>Does that clear it up for you?
You're pissing on your shoes.
Do a logic analysis on sentence two. ( I would suggest subject,
predicate and object as a minimal structure).
You idiots who voted for the Chimp again in 2004 are responsible for
the irresponsible prosecution of a conflict that was begun under a
false premise and continued out of pure stupidity.
You helped many young Americans die and you have helped to bankrupt
the treasury.
You have done more fiduciary damage in the intervening four years than
than any previous administration.
My greatest argument is about the loss of American youth in this
senseless conflict.
When I vote in November, it will be to end it.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:23:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ... and the liberal elitist comes out. Poke 'em hard enough and the mask
>comes off. The rest of us who hold different viewpoints are just ignorant
>hicks clinging to our God, our guns, and our pickup trucks.
And you derived that, how?
Was there something in the language?
You appear to be as clear a thinker as your homeboys on Faux News.
Argue the facts, not the attitude.
Or, expect to be disrespected.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:05:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>>
>>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>>
>>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>>
>>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>>
>>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>> Democrat math:
>>>
>>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>> (let's get out of California)
>>>
>>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>>
>>> $13627.08 per person
>>>
>>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>>
>>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>>
>>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>> debt at an even faster rate.
>>
>>
>> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>>
>> How odd.
>>
>>
>The California deaths have been occuring during all administrations -
>it's a California thing. The intragovernmental debt was a FDR creation
>and has been added to by democrats and continued since. Unfortunately,
>the current administration added a nice chunk with the medicare drug
>benefit, all with the approval of a majority of democrats in congress.
>Bush did try to reign in the addition of trillions of additional SS debt
>with a start at privatization, but the democrats would have none of it.
You are no longer, nor are you ever, when it suits you, on point.
Address the issues at hand and find a way of responding that would not
get you flagged by Robert's, or any other rules of order.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 22:41:54 -0400, "Lee K" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>
>>
>>For the record:
>>
>>Figures from the Congressional Research Service, the total military deaths
>>under each of the two administrations are as follows:
>> Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths
>>
>> George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths
>>
>
>
> For the record - you are a fucking idiot.
>
> Do you have any idea what CRS is and does?
>
> Perforce of this and your previous racist post about Obama, you are
> shitcanned.
>
> Nice meeting you.
>
Well, I tried to think like you, but I just can't get my head up my ass.
As for the 'racist' comment: why is it OK for you to repeatedly refer to
GWB as a chimp, and someone creates a T-shirt of Obummer and it's suddenly
racist? Highly selective, aren't we?
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:23:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> ... and the liberal elitist comes out. Poke 'em hard enough and the
>> mask
>>comes off. The rest of us who hold different viewpoints are just ignorant
>>hicks clinging to our God, our guns, and our pickup trucks.
>
>
> And you derived that, how?
>
> Was there something in the language?
Oh, maybe the comment "Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as
equals."
>
> You appear to be as clear a thinker as your homeboys on Faux News.
>
> Argue the facts, not the attitude.
>
> Or, expect to be disrespected.
>
Again, the only thing wrong with Tim's arguments is that they don't match
your world-view. Or do you think that only your arguments come across as
cogent and well-reasoned?
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:31:49 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
> As for me, I'm done with this, I've got better things to do with my time.
Time to change your sig?
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>
>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>
>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>
>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>
>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>> Democrat math:
>>
>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>> (let's get out of California)
>>
>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>
>> $13627.08 per person
>>
>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>
>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>
>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>> debt at an even faster rate.
>
>
> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>
> How odd.
>
>
The California deaths have been occuring during all administrations -
it's a California thing. The intragovernmental debt was a FDR creation
and has been added to by democrats and continued since. Unfortunately,
the current administration added a nice chunk with the medicare drug
benefit, all with the approval of a majority of democrats in congress.
Bush did try to reign in the addition of trillions of additional SS debt
with a start at privatization, but the democrats would have none of it.
Lew Hodgett wrote:
> "Doug Winterburn" wrote:
>
>> and you will be responsible for the results if your candidate does
>> as he says he will.
>
> That will certainly represent a change from the present situation.
>
> Lew
>
>
Yup, 9/11 will look like a small skirmish. The Islamo killers will
trumpet their victory and press their advantage. Start growing your
beard and stock up on a few birkas for SWMBO.
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
snip
> The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
> Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
>
> The country is in an economic crisis,
As compared to?
We have record home ownership rates and a healthy 5.1% unemployment rate and
record tax revenue.
Where's the crisis? Is your objective criteria based on a historical basis,
a world comparison or a 24 hr news cycle crying for attention but bereft of
perspective?
>the military is beyond fully
> engaged and the politicos are desperately trying not to have to
> reinstitute a draft to cover the problem.
A country with 300,000,000 with only 150,000 in Iraq is actually stressed?
We are nowhere close to needing a draft and without something far more
substantial we will not .....a few paltry billion in raises, bonuses or
benefits would more than suffice any current recruiting shortfall. And the
military would much rather keep its current professionalism vs the morass or
the fruit of the Vietnam draft.
>
> If we had to do something about Taiwan right now, what would we do?
Rockets, missiles, subs, aircraft carriers, airplanes & ships as well as the
missile defense so well developed under Bush.....all vastly superior in
numbers and abilities to anyone world wide. If we did do something with
Taiwan you would expect "boots on the ground".....what conceivable scenario
would even considers such a outcome?
> The Chimp has run us into the ground and monkeys like you have given
> him the mandate to do it.
> I very much look forward to changing that in November.
> Tom Watson
For someone apparently desiring intelligent argument.... use of "chimp"
might indicate someone not quite able to participate. Rod
Of course there have never been significant casualties or incurred dept from
the Dems...... Well I could be wrong about that.
cm
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
I'm sure everything will magically get better if/when B/O gets in? Well
maybe not.
cm
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Tom Watson wrote:
>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>
>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>
>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>
>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>
>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>
>>Democrat math:
>>
>>Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>(let's get out of California)
>>
>>Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>
>>$13627.08 per person
>>
>>$50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>(not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>
>>Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>
>>Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>debt at an even faster rate.
>
>
> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>
> How odd.
>
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom Watson wrote:
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Democrat math:
Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
(let's get out of California)
Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
$13627.08 per person
$50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
(not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
debt including what Iraq might contribute.
Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
debt at an even faster rate.
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
For the record:
Figures from the Congressional Research Service, the total military deaths
under each of the two administrations are as follows:
Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths
George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:01:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Tom Watson wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:23:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> ... and the liberal elitist comes out. Poke 'em hard enough and the
>>>> mask
>>>>comes off. The rest of us who hold different viewpoints are just
>>>>ignorant hicks clinging to our God, our guns, and our pickup trucks.
>>>
>>>
>>> And you derived that, how?
>>>
>>> Was there something in the language?
>>
>> Oh, maybe the comment "Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as
>>equals."
>>
>>>
>>> You appear to be as clear a thinker as your homeboys on Faux News.
>>>
>>> Argue the facts, not the attitude.
>>>
>>> Or, expect to be disrespected.
>>>
>>
>> Again, the only thing wrong with Tim's arguments is that they don't
>> match
>>your world-view. Or do you think that only your arguments come across as
>>cogent and well-reasoned?
>
>
> Would you like to argue the points?
>
That was what was happening before the two comments above, "clean up your
argumentation ... " and "you appear to be as clear thinker as ..."
> Or, would you like to argue about the arguing of the points?
>
I don't know, it looks like that's the approach you've taken
> The problem that I have with many second tier Republicans is that they
> argue incoherently.
>
Nope, no elitism there. Uh-uh, nosiree
> The best of the apologists are having a problem right now.
>
> I understand that, when you can not argue the point, you point at the
> arguer.
>
> It is a shabby debating tactic and long discredited.
>
Pot, meet kettle
> The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
> Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
>
Yeah, there's a real high-level debating point
> The country is in an economic crisis, the military is beyond fully
> engaged and the politicos are desperately trying not to have to
> reinstitute a draft to cover the problem.
>
Pretty dim view there. Soup-line America. Do you have any idea how much
better we have it than our grandparents? Military fully engaged? You
realize part of that is the Clinton administration's plan to use Guard and
Reserves as the bulk of our military components?
Ask the military and they *don't* want draftees.
> If we had to do something about Taiwan right now, what would we do?
>
> The Chimp has run us into the ground and monkeys like you have given
> him the mandate to do it.
>
Yep, very erudite argumentation there.
> I very much look forward to changing that in November.
>
As I said before, you've already won regardless of who wins. So start
smiling.
As for me, I'm done with this, I've got better things to do with my time.
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough
I always liked that line, every ones Wrong if every ones Right! or does it
go the other way around. Who wrote that anyway???
I think you get my point, Its one of those can we just agree to disagree.
Throw all the bastards out and lets start over. Oh one other thing, I read
somewhere that there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 million state
and federal government employees, this does not include the Military. What
a racket.
This is from memory, I could be wrong. I googled it and its a hard number to
find, wonder why?????
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:pvLWj.10571$lj.7384@trnddc01...
> "Tom Watson" wrote:
>
>> He's still a chimp and he's still a fool.
>
> How dare you denegrade the chimp?
>
> BTW, let's not forget the organ grinder.
Would that be Uncle Dick?
Dave in Houston
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:54:04 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Absolutely. I hold you and every one who voted for the previous
>> administration for the 9/11 deaths as well as all the deaths that will
>> occur as a result of voting in people who will not confront the
>> Islamo-fascist menace that is currently at war with us.
>>
>> Does that clear it up for you?
>
>
> You're pissing on your shoes.
>
> Do a logic analysis on sentence two. ( I would suggest subject,
> predicate and object as a minimal structure).
>
> You idiots who voted for the Chimp again in 2004 are responsible for
> the irresponsible prosecution of a conflict that was begun under a
> false premise and continued out of pure stupidity.
>
> You helped many young Americans die and you have helped to bankrupt
> the treasury.
>
> You have done more fiduciary damage in the intervening four years than
> than any previous administration.
>
> My greatest argument is about the loss of American youth in this
> senseless conflict.
>
> When I vote in November, it will be to end it.
and you will be responsible for the results if your candidate does as he
says he will.
On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:36:20 -0700, Doug Winterburn
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>You mean your point wasn't deaths and debt and whose math is represented?
>
>>
>> Address the issues at hand and find a way of responding that would not
>> get you flagged by Robert's, or any other rules of order.
>
>Again, the issues you brought up weren't deaths and debt and whose math
>is represented? I believe I was absolutely on point.
>
Let's cut to the chase on this, Doug.
I hold you and everyone who voted like you responsible for each and
every one of those 4077 American deaths.
Does that clear it up for you?
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:03:59 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>>
>>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>>
>>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>>
>>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>>
>>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tom Watson
>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>> Democrat math:
>>>
>>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>> (let's get out of California)
>>>
>>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>>
>>> $13627.08 per person
>>>
>>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>>
>>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>>
>>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>> debt at an even faster rate.
>>
>>
>> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>>
>> How odd.
>>
>
>Excuse me, but you're unhinged. All of this happened since that
>genius FDR socialized everything he could get his grimy mitts on.
>Yes, the current Republicans are absolute fleabags for their
>lack of fiscal restraint. That's why political hacks like Hillary
>or snakeoil salesmen like Hussein Obama even have a remote chance
>at being elected. But to lay this entirely at the feet of this
>generation of Rs is horsehockey. ALL of the population and its
>elected representatives have been happily looting the system
>for generations. This is NOT a political issue, it is an *ethical*
>issue in which the larger population is found constantly wanting.
You're foaming, a la Hannity and O'Righty.
Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as equals.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 21:13:25 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
.
>
>How so. I am merely pointing out that you wish to lay at the feet
>of the Rs of the past 8 years what has been the norm since FDR
>was in office. Hate Bush all you like, but he's hardly responsible
>for the overall state of the deficit. He took what was there and
>continued the trajectory.
>>
Although I have often doubted your political sanity, I have only now
had reason to doubt your math skills.
Let's run the numbers on this deficit thing and see how it comes out.
I'll even let you do the initial math - albeit with some reservation
as to your ability to interpret wisely.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom,
Just wondering if you think the war should be ended or redirected to better
fight terrorism?
Sincerely, (this time)
cm
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:59:44 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson wrote:
>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>
>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>
>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>
>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>
>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Watson
>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>
>And that's in *total*.
>
>Now, let's take approximately 13 Trillion for the total budget
>and say that 50% is spent on entitlements and their associated
>debt load (it's actually higher than that, probably closer to
>60%, but I won't quibble with details:
>
>6.5 Trillion/303,989,787 is about $24,000/person PER YEAR. It's not
> the war that's bankrupting us, it's entitlements. Period.
And after eight years of a Republican Administration, you find fault
with whom?
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 21:11:20 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
<[email protected]> wrote:
>All of them ... and the mooching sheeple happily trading their freedom
>for handouts.
But these self same sheeple elected your man and thus more thoroughly
inebriated him so that he continued his course.
Will you make the argument that he was not given the mandate that he
so vociferously claimed at the completion of the 2004 election?
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 21:11:20 -0500, Tim Daneliuk
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> All of them ... and the mooching sheeple happily trading their freedom
>> for handouts.
>
>
> But these self same sheeple elected your man and thus more thoroughly
> inebriated him so that he continued his course.
They also elected every single, um, *elected* official. Singling
out Bush as the Bad Guy here is just cheap political theater.
The simple reality is that all of the politicos, of all stripes,
and their mooching constituents have been part of this problem
for decades. If you want to argue root cause, blame FDR who
had utter contempt for the doctrine of enumerated powers.
>
> Will you make the argument that he was not given the mandate that he
> so vociferously claimed at the completion of the 2004 election?
That was just political rhetoric and you know it. With an almost
perfect split in the popular vote, I don't see how one could
claim this to be anything resembling a mandate.
My points here - in summary - go like this:
1) Blaming our current fiscal situation predominantly on the war is
disingenuous, as it is not the dominant term in the spending and
borrowing equations.
2) Blaming our current fiscal situation predominantly on Bush is
disingenuous, as the roots and trajectory of the problem long
predate him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
Now lets have a little fun with the vocabulary list.
I've entered a few and I'm sure that you can continue the list.
The analogous entities that I've entered are in parentheses.
Thank you for playing.
> Gulf of Tonkin Incident. (WMD)
> War Powers Resolution. (Homeland Security)
> Domino Theory. (War On Terror)
> Escalation. (Surge)
> Body Count.
> The Light At The End Of The Tunnel.
> Draft Lottery.
> Vietnamization.
> Secret Plan To End The War.
> Khmer Rouge.
> Hearts and Minds.
> Sideshow.
> Pol Pot.
> Ho Chi Minh.
> Operation Rolling Thunder.
> Khe Sanh.
> Back In The World.
> Tet.
> Deros.
> Operation Pegasus.
> Destroying The Village In Order To Save It.
> My Lai.
> Chu Lai.
> Napalm.
> Saturation Bombing.
> Agent Orange.
> Hue.
> Cambodia.
> Laos.
> William Westmoreland.
> Maxwell Taylor.
> Daniel Ellsberg.
> Kent State.
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:24:45 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:04:57 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>4077 American Casualties.
>>
>>85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>
>>$9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>
>>Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>
>>= $30,831.50 per person.
>>
>>
>>
>>Tom Watson
>>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>
>
>Let me rephrase - 4077 American Dead - Greater than 30 Thousand
>Casualties.
>
>85,000 + Civilian Dead - You can speak to a casualties.
>
>In 2004 I posted the following vocabulary list for the Chimp to study:
>
>> Gulf of Tonkin Incident.
>> War Powers Resolution.
>> Domino Theory.
>> Escalation.
>> Body Count.
>> The Light At The End Of The Tunnel.
>> Draft Lottery.
>> Vietnamization.
>> Secret Plan To End The War.
>> Khmer Rouge.
>> Hearts and Minds.
>> Sideshow.
>> Pol Pot.
>> Ho Chi Minh.
>> Operation Rolling Thunder.
>> Khe Sanh.
>> Back In The World.
>> Tet.
>> Deros.
>> Operation Pegasus.
>> Destroying The Village In Order To Save It.
>> My Lai.
>> Chu Lai.
>> Napalm.
>> Saturation Bombing.
>> Agent Orange.
>> Hue.
>> Cambodia.
>> Laos.
>> William Westmoreland.
>> Maxwell Taylor.
>> Daniel Ellsberg.
>> Kent State.
>
>
>He's still a chimp and he's still a fool.
>
>
>
>
>Tom Watson
>tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Thu, 15 May 2008 04:20:39 -0700, "Rod & Betty Jo"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>snip
>> The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
>> Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
>>
>> The country is in an economic crisis,
>
>As compared to?
>We have record home ownership rates and a healthy 5.1% unemployment rate and
>record tax revenue.
>
>Where's the crisis? Is your objective criteria based on a historical basis,
>a world comparison or a 24 hr news cycle crying for attention but bereft of
>perspective?
>
>>the military is beyond fully
>> engaged and the politicos are desperately trying not to have to
>> reinstitute a draft to cover the problem.
>
>A country with 300,000,000 with only 150,000 in Iraq is actually stressed?
>We are nowhere close to needing a draft and without something far more
>substantial we will not .....a few paltry billion in raises, bonuses or
>benefits would more than suffice any current recruiting shortfall. And the
>military would much rather keep its current professionalism vs the morass or
>the fruit of the Vietnam draft.
>
>>
>> If we had to do something about Taiwan right now, what would we do?
>
>Rockets, missiles, subs, aircraft carriers, airplanes & ships as well as the
>missile defense so well developed under Bush.....all vastly superior in
>numbers and abilities to anyone world wide. If we did do something with
>Taiwan you would expect "boots on the ground".....what conceivable scenario
>would even considers such a outcome?
>
>> The Chimp has run us into the ground and monkeys like you have given
>> him the mandate to do it.
>> I very much look forward to changing that in November.
> > Tom Watson
>
>For someone apparently desiring intelligent argument.... use of "chimp"
>might indicate someone not quite able to participate. Rod
>
>
March 17, 2008: 7:11 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Today's economic condition could likely be
seen as "the most wrenching since the end of the second world war,"
wrote former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan in the Financial
Times on Monday.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/17/news/economy/greenspan/index.htm?postversion=2008031707
By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | September 27, 2007
WASHINGTON - The Army's top officer, General George Casey, told
Congress yesterday that his branch of the military has been stretched
so thin by the war in Iraq that it can not adequately respond to
another conflict - one of the strongest warnings yet from a military
leader that repeated deployments to war zones in the Middle East have
hamstrung the military's ability to deter future aggression.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/09/27/army_is_worn_too_thin_says_general/
Tuesday 29th April 2008 12:13 GMT
A leading Scottish churchman and bioethics thinktank operator has
warned again of the dangers attendant on genetic research, and
recommended that there should be a law against men having children
with female chimpanzees.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/29/mackellar_strikes_again/
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 22:41:54 -0400, "Lee K" <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>
>
>For the record:
>
>Figures from the Congressional Research Service, the total military deaths
>under each of the two administrations are as follows:
> Bill Clinton (1993 - 2000) ............. 7,500 deaths
>
> George W. Bush (2001 - 2006) .... 8,792 deaths
>
For the record - you are a fucking idiot.
Do you have any idea what CRS is and does?
Perforce of this and your previous racist post about Obama, you are
shitcanned.
Nice meeting you.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:59:44 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
> 6.5 Trillion/303,989,787 is about $24,000/person PER YEAR. It's not
> the war that's bankrupting us, it's entitlements. Period.
At least until recently, Social Security was running a surplus. It's hard
to blame the deficit on that.
And we spend more on health care and get less than most other
industrialized nations. When health care became a profit center our
system was doomed.
I do realize that neither of these facts will make the slightest
difference to you, Tim.
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:55:00 -0700, Doug Winterburn wrote:
>> At least until recently, Social Security was running a surplus. It's hard
>> to blame the deficit on that.
>
> You apparently haven't studied up on how trust funds work. Every excess
> (surplus) social security dollar is exchanged to the general fund of the
> US for a non-negotiable bond - IOU. The surplus is counted as revenue
> by the federal government but the IOU is not counted as an expense.
> However the IOU is added to the national debt - trust funds currently
> accounting for over $4 trillion of the debt.
Yes, I'm aware of all that. The fact remains that money was/is collected
from us for the purpose of Social Security. The fact that the crooks in
Washington have spent (stolen?) it on other things is a reflection on
their honesty and our indifference, but it does not negate the fact that
the money was collected.
Another way of looking at it accounting-wise is that the SS funds are
being used to mask the true size of the debt. It's all sleight of hand.
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 18:05:36 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>>>
>>>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>>>
>>>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>>>
>>>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>>>
>>>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Tom Watson
>>>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>>>> Democrat math:
>>>>
>>>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>>>> (let's get out of California)
>>>>
>>>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>>>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>>>
>>>> $13627.08 per person
>>>>
>>>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>>>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>>>
>>>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>>>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>>>
>>>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>>>> debt at an even faster rate.
>>>
>>> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>>>
>>> How odd.
>>>
>>>
>> The California deaths have been occuring during all administrations -
>> it's a California thing. The intragovernmental debt was a FDR creation
>> and has been added to by democrats and continued since. Unfortunately,
>> the current administration added a nice chunk with the medicare drug
>> benefit, all with the approval of a majority of democrats in congress.
>> Bush did try to reign in the addition of trillions of additional SS debt
>> with a start at privatization, but the democrats would have none of it.
>
>
> You are no longer, nor are you ever, when it suits you, on point.
You mean your point wasn't deaths and debt and whose math is represented?
>
> Address the issues at hand and find a way of responding that would not
> get you flagged by Robert's, or any other rules of order.
Again, the issues you brought up weren't deaths and debt and whose math
is represented? I believe I was absolutely on point.
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:59:44 -0500, Tim Daneliuk wrote:
>
>> 6.5 Trillion/303,989,787 is about $24,000/person PER YEAR. It's not
>> the war that's bankrupting us, it's entitlements. Period.
>
> At least until recently, Social Security was running a surplus. It's hard
> to blame the deficit on that.
You apparently haven't studied up on how trust funds work. Every excess
(surplus) social security dollar is exchanged to the general fund of the
US for a non-negotiable bond - IOU. The surplus is counted as revenue
by the federal government but the IOU is not counted as an expense.
However the IOU is added to the national debt - trust funds currently
accounting for over $4 trillion of the debt. The only thing the trust
funds accomplish is the masking of about $400 billion of deficit per
year. There is no negotiable asset in any of the 150 or so trust funds.
When these funds are no longer running a "surplus", there will be
nothing for the federal government to do to pay back these IOU's without
1) raising taxes, 2) reducing benefits, 3) cut other programs, 4) borrow
more public debt, or 5) default on the IOUs.
Anyone who buys the notion that there is plenty of money in the trust
funds to keep them going when current collections are running a deficit
hasn't looked at the facts.
Social Security is currently taking in more than it spends on recipients
and will continue doing so for another decade or so. Every dollar of
surplus adds another dollar plus interest to the debt. When that
changes and there isn't enough to pay current obligations, trust fund or
not, the above 5 options are the same.
It's been the law since FDR implemented this ponzi scheme.
Now if those surpluses had been invested in things like Exxon-Mobil,
those nasaty large corporations earnings would be paying instead of your
and my kids/grandkids taxes - and at a better return.
>
> And we spend more on health care and get less than most other
> industrialized nations. When health care became a profit center our
> system was doomed.
>
> I do realize that neither of these facts will make the slightest
> difference to you, Tim.
>
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
> Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
No? The alternative was Kerry. No further arguments necessary.
BTW, Here's a picture of your chimp:
http://tinyurl.com/4d2k2v
Tom Watson wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Tom Watson wrote:
>>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>>
>>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>>
>>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>>
>>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>>
>>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Watson
>>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>> Democrat math:
>>
>> Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>> (let's get out of California)
>>
>> Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>> owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>>
>> $13627.08 per person
>>
>> $50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>> (not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>>
>> Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>> debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>>
>> Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>> debt at an even faster rate.
>
>
> And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
>
> How odd.
>
Excuse me, but you're unhinged. All of this happened since that
genius FDR socialized everything he could get his grimy mitts on.
Yes, the current Republicans are absolute fleabags for their
lack of fiscal restraint. That's why political hacks like Hillary
or snakeoil salesmen like Hussein Obama even have a remote chance
at being elected. But to lay this entirely at the feet of this
generation of Rs is horsehockey. ALL of the population and its
elected representatives have been happily looting the system
for generations. This is NOT a political issue, it is an *ethical*
issue in which the larger population is found constantly wanting.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On Wed, 14 May 2008 17:45:39 -0700, Doug Winterburn
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson wrote:
>> 4077 American Casualties.
>>
>> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>>
>> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>>
>> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>>
>> = $30,831.50 per person.
>>
>>
>>
>> Tom Watson
>> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
>> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
>
>Democrat math:
>
>Annual murder rate in California = 2500 or 12500 since invasion of Iraq
>(let's get out of California)
>
>Of the above $9+ trillion of debt, $4,142,493,919,287.64 is the debt
>owed to the 150 or so trust funds including social security.
>
>$13627.08 per person
>
>$50 trillion of unfunded social program debt to follow in next 4 decades
>(not counting what ever nationalized health care will add).
>
>Annual social program debt (intragovernmental debt) now exceeds public
>debt including what Iraq might contribute.
>
>Democrat solution to shore up SS: increase FICA withholding to increase
>debt at an even faster rate.
And all of this ocurred during a Republican Administration.
How odd.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
Larry Blanchard wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:55:00 -0700, Doug Winterburn wrote:
>
>>> At least until recently, Social Security was running a surplus. It's hard
>>> to blame the deficit on that.
>> You apparently haven't studied up on how trust funds work. Every excess
>> (surplus) social security dollar is exchanged to the general fund of the
>> US for a non-negotiable bond - IOU. The surplus is counted as revenue
>> by the federal government but the IOU is not counted as an expense.
>> However the IOU is added to the national debt - trust funds currently
>> accounting for over $4 trillion of the debt.
>
> Yes, I'm aware of all that. The fact remains that money was/is collected
> from us for the purpose of Social Security. The fact that the crooks in
> Washington have spent (stolen?) it on other things is a reflection on
> their honesty and our indifference, but it does not negate the fact that
> the money was collected.
It has been the law since the inception of SS by FDR - any surplus
collections must be used to buy government bonds (debt). The liberal
"fix" to shore up SS is to raise the withholding rate so there is an
even larger surplus and consequent larger debt as well as masking even
more of the annual deficit.
>
> Another way of looking at it accounting-wise is that the SS funds are
> being used to mask the true size of the debt. It's all sleight of hand.
>
It masks the annual deficit, but does count in the debt. That is how
the last administration achieved a budget surplus while the debt
continued to increase.
The most amazing part of it is politicians act like there are some real
assets in the trust funds that can be drawn on when the funds run a deficit.
Tom Watson wrote:
> 4077 American Casualties.
>
> 85,000 + Civilian Casualties.
>
> $9,372,462,330,025.07 Dollars on the National Debt.
>
> Divided by 303,989,787 (estimated current population of the USA.)
>
> = $30,831.50 per person.
>
>
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
And that's in *total*.
Now, let's take approximately 13 Trillion for the total budget
and say that 50% is spent on entitlements and their associated
debt load (it's actually higher than that, probably closer to
60%, but I won't quibble with details:
6.5 Trillion/303,989,787 is about $24,000/person PER YEAR. It's not
the war that's bankrupting us, it's entitlements. Period.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk [email protected]
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/
On Wed, 14 May 2008 20:01:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Tom Watson wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 14 May 2008 19:23:15 -0700, Mark & Juanita
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> ... and the liberal elitist comes out. Poke 'em hard enough and the
>>> mask
>>>comes off. The rest of us who hold different viewpoints are just ignorant
>>>hicks clinging to our God, our guns, and our pickup trucks.
>>
>>
>> And you derived that, how?
>>
>> Was there something in the language?
>
> Oh, maybe the comment "Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as
>equals."
>
>>
>> You appear to be as clear a thinker as your homeboys on Faux News.
>>
>> Argue the facts, not the attitude.
>>
>> Or, expect to be disrespected.
>>
>
> Again, the only thing wrong with Tim's arguments is that they don't match
>your world-view. Or do you think that only your arguments come across as
>cogent and well-reasoned?
Would you like to argue the points?
Or, would you like to argue about the arguing of the points?
The problem that I have with many second tier Republicans is that they
argue incoherently.
The best of the apologists are having a problem right now.
I understand that, when you can not argue the point, you point at the
arguer.
It is a shabby debating tactic and long discredited.
The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
The country is in an economic crisis, the military is beyond fully
engaged and the politicos are desperately trying not to have to
reinstitute a draft to cover the problem.
If we had to do something about Taiwan right now, what would we do?
The Chimp has run us into the ground and monkeys like you have given
him the mandate to do it.
I very much look forward to changing that in November.
Tom Watson
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
"Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> He's still a chimp and he's still a fool.
>
Here's a picture of the chimp:
http://tinyurl.com/4d2k2v
Lee K wrote:
>
> "Tom Watson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> The fact is that the Republicans and those who helped to elect the
>> Chimp again in 2004 have no good arguments as to why they did so.
>
> No? The alternative was Kerry. No further arguments necessary.
>
> BTW, Here's a picture of your chimp:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/4d2k2v
Think Rush Limbaugh started this parody.
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Running Mandriva release 2008.0 free-i586 using KDE on i586
Tom Watson wrote:
... snip
> You're foaming, a la Hannity and O'Righty.
>
> Clean up your argumentation and we can talk as equals.
>
... and the liberal elitist comes out. Poke 'em hard enough and the mask
comes off. The rest of us who hold different viewpoints are just ignorant
hicks clinging to our God, our guns, and our pickup trucks.
>
> Tom Watson
> tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet
> www.home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough