DescentBB

As certain politico's would have you believe, we need to elect the new Messiah, Lord Barack Hussein Obama,
to be the President of America just to get other countries to \"respect\" us. Curious tho, this statement from the Financial Times:

\"Against sterling, the US currency notched up its 11th consecutive day of gains – its longest uninterrupted rise in more than 35 years – as markets became increasingly convinced that the US was best-placed to weather the global downturn.\"

So when it looks like the proverbial ★■◆● may hit the fan, just look to where all those hate filled foreigners want to put their money.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc97963e-6aa9 ... fd18c.html

11th consecutive day of gains, Casualties in Iraq at an all time low, Gas prices beginning to drop...

And an election coming up!

I love coincidences.

pssst. casualties have Been at an all time low in Iraq for some time... Media just doesn't want to report it. It'll make Bush look good. >_>

I haven't even heard of any casualties in Iraq, I never hear about any deaths from Iraq anymore.

Dakatsu wrote:I haven't even heard of any casualties in Iraq, I never hear about any deaths from Iraq anymore.

Because to report on the number you have to contrast it to something which would require reporting that they have decreased remarkably....

The media has never really covered casualties. Off the top of my head I can only name two dead soldiers whom I remember due to media reporting, Michael Murphy and Pat Tillman. And they had to have pretty amazing stories to make it into the press. How many can you name?

I have no doubt that if the media ever did cover casualties it would significantly help the democrates. Saying the media isn't now covering the casualties in some effort to hurt Bush is conservative spin. If they wanted to hurt Bush, they would just have to tell us their life stories. All 4000 of them.

They would just have to take Paris and Britney off for a few minutes for one of these guys.

The number of casualties are clearly out there. They have been reported on at MSNBC, CNN, Fixed news. Who here, who watches the news, has not heard that the surge has reduced casualties?

huh? oh come on Goob. That's all that's been on for the last couple of years. the First ting out of an anchor's mouth is the number of casualties that day or week / month (if they couldn't say someone was killed that day). Geez you'd think they were dropping in droves from some kinda bomb.

The fact is that the forces there have been quite successful in pushing back the insurgents. Not 100%, but enough to drastically cut down on the amount attacks and deaths. A WHOLE lot better than we did in Nam. of course, we weren't technically fighting a \"war\" there and that Did make a difference.

Gooberman wrote:11th consecutive day of gains, Casualties in Iraq at an all time low, Gas prices beginning to drop...

And an election coming up!

I love coincidences.

Someone once told me that the consequences of the actions a president makes do not fully manifest until the next president begins his term. That would mean that what we contributed to Bill Clinton was actually the result of Bush Sr., and what we blame Dubya for is actually Clinton's fault. It makes sense to me, but then again a lot of things do that other people would willingly throw me in a sanitarium for thinking.

actually MD, you're closer to the truth than you know. ; )

I feel sorry for Bush's successor.

11th consecutive day of gains, Casualties in Iraq at an all time low, Gas prices beginning to drop...

And an election coming up!

I love coincidences.

What a cynic! Mind you a real cynic would note that the unrest in the Balkans is generally considered to help one of the candidates who might be considered to be \"better at war\" than the other.
But you would have to be a really cynical to go there.