James M <ozone@snip.net> wrote in message news:3e42fdc2@snipnews.snip.net...
>
> Vaughn L.Porter <vaughnp@pcez.com> wrote in message
> news:v43u8d1i5jra7e@corp.supernews.com...
> > James M <ozone@snip.net> wrote in message
> > news:3e41b01b$1@snipnews.snip.net...
> > > > > > I see you don't support the administration's efforts to make
Iraq
> > > comply
> > > > > with the post-Gulf War ceasefire agreement. Care to
> > > > > > elaborate why?
> > > > > >
> > > > > One word : OIL!
> > > >
> > > > Well, that certainly is quite vague. Baby oil? Olive oil? What about
> > oil??
> > > O_o
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sickle584th
> > > >
> > > >
> > >  I think its about a number of things. #1 Unseating Sadam Hussain for
a
> > more
> > > U.S. freindly government would probly help our supply of cheap oil..
> >
> > Absolutly. After all, if we had a non-OPEC petroleum source, the
> > upper-classes could drive those monster SUVs without worry. Hell, who'd
> care
> > about emmisions and fuel economy then (beside the
> > "Fringe" environmentalists)?
>
> Oh! don't even get me started my Slow Ugly Vehicle spchele!
>
>

No problem.

> >
> >
> > > #2
> > > George W. Bush wants to be re-elected in a few years and needs
something
> > > positive to point to when his campagn begins.
> >
> > Like it would matter. He's going to be a single-termer, regardless of
what
> > he does.
>
> That dependes on what kinda loser the democrats pick. Some conspericy nuts
> say the secret government picks the canadates so the know which party will
> win. I'm begining to agree with them.
>

Which 'secret government' are you refering to, the Trilateral Commision, the
Freemasons, that bunch from "The X-Files"? There's so many!


> > > #3 George and the Republican
> > > party need a large distraction to take Joe Averages attention away
from
> > the
> > > way they are setting up all their rich friends to get much richer.
> >
> > No kidding!
>
> The worse part is his rich friends win no matter how things turn out.
>

Again, no kidding!

> >
> > > #4 Even a
> > > brief conflict justifies hundereds of millions of dollars in millitary
> > > spending,a trick which has been used to booster a lagging econemy in
> times
> > > past.
> >
> > Well, so far, war concernes seem to be making things worse instead of
> > better. Seems every time Iraq becomes the main topic in the news, the
> market
> > goes south.
>
> Historicly that is common for the short term. After the production lines
> start cranking out batches of cruise missles at $10 million a pop things
> tended to get better. Wait and see, maybe the core has rotted away too
badly
> to paint over it this time.
>

Well, the tech industry should staballize here eventually: after all, so
much of our way of life depends on electronics. I just hope they don't all
decide to move all manufacturing oversees.

> >
> > > #5 lastly, as the last member of the Reagan dynasty President Bush is
> > > dead set on getting his name in the history books for something major
> > almost
> > > regardless of the cost.
> >
> > Oh, he'll go in the history books, just not how he's going to want to be
> > remembered.
>
> what do you expect they'll say?
>

I've already seen an article in "Harper's Magazine" describing Dubya as
"...the worst President in history...", I'd say something along those lines.

> >
> > >     Just my opinion, Take it with a grain of salt and wash back with
> > > tequila.
> > >
> > Personnaly, I'd say you're right on target. Don't blame you for the
> > ta-kill-ya, though; seems like life's bad enough to drive us all to
drink.
> >
> >                            Vaughn L.Porter
> >                             And that's the way it is.
> >
>
> I used to be republican, still registed as such but rarely vote for any.
The
> democrats have nice goals without the backbone to make them happen.
>  DAM YOU TO HELL Ross Perot! He was our best chance to break the
status-qou
> till he dropped out, even if was nuts.
>     If any Brits are reading, how does your goverment funtion with all
those
> different parties? Does it seem to work better than having two fighting
> against each other instead of getting  things done?
>
>

I'm not so sure the Brits have it any better than we do. Anyone wanna take a
shot at this?

                          Vaughn L.Porter
                           Of course, that's just my opinion,
                            I could be wrong.