With Democrats like this...

Gold - I imagine George Washington won pretty handily.

If you look back you will see that I did not say it happened before - I said if Bush was to face John F. Kerry in an election tomorrow - Bush would win by a 2-1 margin.

Now you can go ahead an say my beliefs are wrong but they are my beliefs.

 

I said since 1876. You are lecturing us on history and you have no idea what you are talking about. You might believe the sun moves around the earth, but that doesn't mean it's correct.

To say that Bush would beat Kerry by a 2-to-1 margin if the election were held next month is ridiculous, and when you start by saying something like that anything else you say has no credibility.

 

No, what I came back with was a complete answer to the question you asked. Now you've gone off the deep end and proved your overwhelming ignorance by jumping up and down and spouting nonsense because you don't like the answer.

Fact: GWB has violated the Constitution of the United States on at least five occasions, and done so knowingly on at least three occasions.

What we're talking about here is the basic principles of law enforcement and government checks -- warrants and legal representation. You don't get more basic than those two. And our president has attempted to remove these very important cogs from the system. That you're not horrified by such behavior is astounding and more than a little telling.

You act, in one breath, as if "the government" is an entity that we should trust with no questions asked, and then in the next breath, you criticize half the political world for being untrustworthy. Can't have it both ways.

I, for one, don't so much mind that there's a system in place that ensures the men and women of law enforcement have adequate reasons for opening my mail, listening to my phone conversations or viewing my email. I also have no problem with a system that mandates every person detained by law enforcement has a right to legal counsel. In fact, both of these are about as American as you can get and have helped make this country what it is today.

And by the way, ObL says hey.

 

Yes - you said 1876 - a date picked out of thin air by you. I never mentioned a date. Why are you intent on having me defend something I never said?

Last April the professional "pollsters" at the Vegas Casinos had the Chargers as 11 to 1 shots for the Super Bowl. Now they are 2-1 favorites. Do you know anyone out there still pining for John Kerry? That's neither here nor there (just wanted to toss it in). My opinion is that Bush would beat Kerry 2-1.

Its also my opinion that Buck plays with GI Joe dolls in his spare time.

 

Other than possibly Patton dying in a jeep crash while late to a golf game, I don't seem to recall a lot of out American boys dying of attacks from German or Japanese insurgents from 1945 through '49.

Perhaps you could fill me in, evil one.

 

OK - Ace since you asked nicely - I'll respond.

In occupied Germany after the war there were a number of military deaths and there was an increased level of violence (but back then reporters called it crime - much of the "crime" coming from "displaced" persons who were forced into Germany during the war to work as slave labor). Anyway - just like today and for the history of the military in this country - if a soldier died and it wasn't due to combat action - then that death would be classified as other or accidental. Thousands of soldiers died every year - including many soldiers in occupied Germany and Japan.

Accidental military deaths over the years have decreased due to better security, better medical care, better training and many other reasons.

However - did you know that the average number of military deaths for all the years of the 80's was over 2,000 per year? And the 80's were a time of relative peace and great technological change. I don't have numbers for total military deaths for 2005 and 2006 but I can say that the total number of military deaths from 2001 to 2004 never topped 2,000 even though we are in a war against terror and we have active operations ongoing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Though I don't have full military deaths for 2005 and 2006 - I believe that the number of US military deaths in Iraq in 2005 was 846 and this year I believe it was 816 (a number that was lower than 2005 even though things are being reported as getting worse in Iraq).

Now every military death is a tragedy but you would think that a soldier would prefer dying trying to accomplish something instead of dying in an accident. Based upon the re-enlistment rates of the military serving in Iraq - they seem to believe in the mission at hand and seem willing to risk their lives to make it happen.

 

I could go along with it being a normal number of military deaths if we actually were accomplishing anything in Iraq. It just seems to be getting worse and worse.

 

We agree to disagree.

See how easy and simple that is?

Always a pleasure Ace

 

I also have to admit I'm a little turned on by Nancy Pelosi and her whip. Is that bad?

 

You just wish it were Bella Abzug.

 

dooley always comes along with a hurtful truth.

 

I bet she knows how to use her tongue. She would have to work for my vote