White House Projects 2005 Deficit at $427 Billion

[Reverend Blair]

RE: White House Projects

Bush caused both the war and much of the internal dissent with his insane policies, tibear. I wouldn't if the US economy completely fails over this.

 

[tibear]

I agree with you that Bush's policies have generated alot of feeling on both sides. However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over. I think both sides of the political finse are fanning the flames when it comes to internal bickering.

 

[tibear]

I agree with you that Bush's policies have generated alot of feeling on both sides. However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over. I think both sides of the political finse are fanning the flames when it comes to internal bickering.

 

[tibear]

I agree with you that Bush's policies have generated alot of feeling on both sides. However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over. I think both sides of the political finse are fanning the flames when it comes to internal bickering.

 

[no1important]

I guess he is also using the money from not fixing Hubble to pay for the Occupation of Iraq.

 

[no1important]

I guess he is also using the money from not fixing Hubble to pay for the Occupation of Iraq.

 

[no1important]

I guess he is also using the money from not fixing Hubble to pay for the Occupation of Iraq.

 

[Paranoid Dot Calm]

Hey!

I keep thinking about how hopeless the economic situation for the U.S. would be if it had not invaded Iraq.

At least right now, the US has a possibility of "secured" access to oil. If America invests the billions now and succeeds militarily, it may stem the loss of confidence within the US economy.

If they fail in Iraq, oil will begin to be sold for Euro currency and not the US greenback.

I see that CNN has changed the motto from "The War In Iraq" and to "The New Iraq".

I watched an interview with Scott Taylor and Vicki Gabberau the other day.
He was talking about torturing prisoners and human rights abuses within Iraq.
He mentioned that when Moslosevic was charged at the Haque, it was said that he was responsible for all the violations of human rights because he was President. They have found no direct evidence linking Moslosevic to any particular crime, but that he should of known and acted to prevent it.
However; when abuse happens with the US occupation in Iraq, Bush or Rumsfeld are not brought to the Hague because Bush said he did not know of the abuses. That it was a bunch of "rogues" within the military. Well .... Moslosevic said the same thing and he is now on trial for his life.
In fact, Tenant of the CIA and Tommy Franks got the medal of Freedom.

Scott Taylor also explained that after the election in Iraq, the newly elected people have no legal right to ask the US to leave because there is no "Law" within Iraq. That is why these elections are being held .... to write a constitution and to write the "Law".
Thus; the US set it up that way.
That too is why Saddam is not going to trial yet. There is no "Law" because the US threw every institution of government out during Bremer's tenure.

It was a very good interview.
I like the way Scott Taylor expresses his views .... very passionate and with lots of sarcasm.
His writings can be found here:
http://www.espritdecorps.ca

Calm

 

[Paranoid Dot Calm]

Hey!

I keep thinking about how hopeless the economic situation for the U.S. would be if it had not invaded Iraq.

At least right now, the US has a possibility of "secured" access to oil. If America invests the billions now and succeeds militarily, it may stem the loss of confidence within the US economy.

If they fail in Iraq, oil will begin to be sold for Euro currency and not the US greenback.

I see that CNN has changed the motto from "The War In Iraq" and to "The New Iraq".

I watched an interview with Scott Taylor and Vicki Gabberau the other day.
He was talking about torturing prisoners and human rights abuses within Iraq.
He mentioned that when Moslosevic was charged at the Haque, it was said that he was responsible for all the violations of human rights because he was President. They have found no direct evidence linking Moslosevic to any particular crime, but that he should of known and acted to prevent it.
However; when abuse happens with the US occupation in Iraq, Bush or Rumsfeld are not brought to the Hague because Bush said he did not know of the abuses. That it was a bunch of "rogues" within the military. Well .... Moslosevic said the same thing and he is now on trial for his life.
In fact, Tenant of the CIA and Tommy Franks got the medal of Freedom.

Scott Taylor also explained that after the election in Iraq, the newly elected people have no legal right to ask the US to leave because there is no "Law" within Iraq. That is why these elections are being held .... to write a constitution and to write the "Law".
Thus; the US set it up that way.
That too is why Saddam is not going to trial yet. There is no "Law" because the US threw every institution of government out during Bremer's tenure.

It was a very good interview.
I like the way Scott Taylor expresses his views .... very passionate and with lots of sarcasm.
His writings can be found here:
http://www.espritdecorps.ca

Calm

 

[Paranoid Dot Calm]

Hey!

I keep thinking about how hopeless the economic situation for the U.S. would be if it had not invaded Iraq.

At least right now, the US has a possibility of "secured" access to oil. If America invests the billions now and succeeds militarily, it may stem the loss of confidence within the US economy.

If they fail in Iraq, oil will begin to be sold for Euro currency and not the US greenback.

I see that CNN has changed the motto from "The War In Iraq" and to "The New Iraq".

I watched an interview with Scott Taylor and Vicki Gabberau the other day.
He was talking about torturing prisoners and human rights abuses within Iraq.
He mentioned that when Moslosevic was charged at the Haque, it was said that he was responsible for all the violations of human rights because he was President. They have found no direct evidence linking Moslosevic to any particular crime, but that he should of known and acted to prevent it.
However; when abuse happens with the US occupation in Iraq, Bush or Rumsfeld are not brought to the Hague because Bush said he did not know of the abuses. That it was a bunch of "rogues" within the military. Well .... Moslosevic said the same thing and he is now on trial for his life.
In fact, Tenant of the CIA and Tommy Franks got the medal of Freedom.

Scott Taylor also explained that after the election in Iraq, the newly elected people have no legal right to ask the US to leave because there is no "Law" within Iraq. That is why these elections are being held .... to write a constitution and to write the "Law".
Thus; the US set it up that way.
That too is why Saddam is not going to trial yet. There is no "Law" because the US threw every institution of government out during Bremer's tenure.

It was a very good interview.
I like the way Scott Taylor expresses his views .... very passionate and with lots of sarcasm.
His writings can be found here:
http://www.espritdecorps.ca

Calm

 

[Reverend Blair]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

 

[Reverend Blair]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

 

[Reverend Blair]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

 

[tibear]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

I agree with you when it comes to anyone who isn't American. Canadians have the right to criticize, object, hate, etc any American policy it wants.

However, the American detractors of Bush should recognize the election for what it was. They don't have to love Bush and every move he makes but they have to respect the fact that he did win over 50% and in a democracy that means the people are behind him AND his policies. As politicians like to say on election night, the people have spoken and they are never wrong.

 

[tibear]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

I agree with you when it comes to anyone who isn't American. Canadians have the right to criticize, object, hate, etc any American policy it wants.

However, the American detractors of Bush should recognize the election for what it was. They don't have to love Bush and every move he makes but they have to respect the fact that he did win over 50% and in a democracy that means the people are behind him AND his policies. As politicians like to say on election night, the people have spoken and they are never wrong.

 

[tibear]

However, we must respect the fact that over 50% of the American public did vote him into office last November. Something that the Bush detractors can't seem to get over

That's valid only for policies that have no effect outside the US border. That means his illegal wars, his trade policies, his aid policies, his constant violation of international agreements, and his brutal subsidy regime of things like corporate agribusiness are open season.

We didn't get to vote against the little freak, but his policies very much affect us.

I agree with you when it comes to anyone who isn't American. Canadians have the right to criticize, object, hate, etc any American policy it wants.

However, the American detractors of Bush should recognize the election for what it was. They don't have to love Bush and every move he makes but they have to respect the fact that he did win over 50% and in a democracy that means the people are behind him AND his policies. As politicians like to say on election night, the people have spoken and they are never wrong.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: White House Projects

There are still questions as to the honesty of the election, but it is clear that Bush does not represent half of the American people at all. People who are completely disenfranchised from voting seem to loathe Bush more than they did Kerry.

Does he have a mandate to do anything? Not really. His win, despite his insistence that he gained political equity, was a slim one and those who did not vote for him are clearly against him.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: White House Projects

There are still questions as to the honesty of the election, but it is clear that Bush does not represent half of the American people at all. People who are completely disenfranchised from voting seem to loathe Bush more than they did Kerry.

Does he have a mandate to do anything? Not really. His win, despite his insistence that he gained political equity, was a slim one and those who did not vote for him are clearly against him.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: White House Projects

There are still questions as to the honesty of the election, but it is clear that Bush does not represent half of the American people at all. People who are completely disenfranchised from voting seem to loathe Bush more than they did Kerry.

Does he have a mandate to do anything? Not really. His win, despite his insistence that he gained political equity, was a slim one and those who did not vote for him are clearly against him.