<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Palin confused on Social Security and stock market</title>
	<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/</link>
	<description>Grand Junction, Colorado's community Web site, discussions, forums, message boards, wiki and more.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 09:52:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: armywife2008</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15602</link>
		<dc:creator>armywife2008</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 08:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15602</guid>
		<description>Well Kitty, how about the video clip I saw of Joe Biden stating 

'Back when the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television'

Wait, he wasn't president and they didn't have television either! My grandpa was born AFTER the Second World War, and he didn't have a television until he was a teenager. 
Palin has only made as many speaking mistakes as the other 3 candidates.
And I thought John McCain was running for president? He may be 72, but his mom is in her late 90's and still traveled the country with him on the stump. Seems to be a lot of life in the McCain blood</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well Kitty, how about the video clip I saw of Joe Biden stating </p>
<p>&#8216;Back when the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on television&#8217;</p>
<p>Wait, he wasn&#8217;t president and they didn&#8217;t have television either! My grandpa was born AFTER the Second World War, and he didn&#8217;t have a television until he was a teenager.<br />
Palin has only made as many speaking mistakes as the other 3 candidates.<br />
And I thought John McCain was running for president? He may be 72, but his mom is in her late 90&#8217;s and still traveled the country with him on the stump. Seems to be a lot of life in the McCain blood</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15241</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 04:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15241</guid>
		<description>My point is that we know Saddam had WMDs in the past. You asked when he ever had them. 

rm: Chemical weapons have been considered weapons of mass destruction since the beginning of the invasion, as far as I know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My point is that we know Saddam had WMDs in the past. You asked when he ever had them. </p>
<p>rm: Chemical weapons have been considered weapons of mass destruction since the beginning of the invasion, as far as I know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rm</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15240</link>
		<dc:creator>rm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15240</guid>
		<description>Scott,

It depends on your definition of "Weapons of Mass Destruction". During desert storm, 46 SCUD missiles were launched against Saudi Arabia. I don't believe they were considered Weapons of Mass Destruction. Considering chemical weapons as WMD's is a modern construct. If you were a Cold War participant,  you would expect that a WMD would be an "H" bomb capable of killing millions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott,</p>
<p>It depends on your definition of &#8220;Weapons of Mass Destruction&#8221;. During desert storm, 46 SCUD missiles were launched against Saudi Arabia. I don&#8217;t believe they were considered Weapons of Mass Destruction. Considering chemical weapons as WMD&#8217;s is a modern construct. If you were a Cold War participant,  you would expect that a WMD would be an &#8220;H&#8221; bomb capable of killing millions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ullr</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15239</link>
		<dc:creator>Ullr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:12:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15239</guid>
		<description>tasha53 - You said, "You only trash this town up as far as I’m concerned."

But remember the old saying, "One man's trash is another woman's treasure."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>tasha53 - You said, &#8220;You only trash this town up as far as I’m concerned.&#8221;</p>
<p>But remember the old saying, &#8220;One man&#8217;s trash is another woman&#8217;s treasure.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RLaitres</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15238</link>
		<dc:creator>RLaitres</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15238</guid>
		<description>Scott:  That report is dated in 1999, years prior to the beginning of, or hint of war.  All indicators are that it was faulty.  Even the current administration now admits that it was so.  Why anyone would persist in maintaining otherwise totally befuddles me.

This war was all about oil.  Wolfowitz said as much when asked.  He stated that Iraq floated on a "sea of oil".  Former Fed Chair Greenspan said that the war was about oil.  Even, Fukuyama (Francis, I believe), another scholar said the same.  Now, it might be argued that "oil" is an interest of this country, but as a cause or rationale for war?  I don't happen to believe that it was.

You state: "I’m saying that the “no WMD” line doesn’t hold water."  The WMD line as a reason for war does not hold water at all as Saddam had none when the war started.  And, do people really believe that if he had them, when he knew that he was about to lose, he would not have used them?  Now, although Saddam may not have been the great "strategist" neither was he that dumb.  If he had such weapons, he would have used them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott:  That report is dated in 1999, years prior to the beginning of, or hint of war.  All indicators are that it was faulty.  Even the current administration now admits that it was so.  Why anyone would persist in maintaining otherwise totally befuddles me.</p>
<p>This war was all about oil.  Wolfowitz said as much when asked.  He stated that Iraq floated on a &#8220;sea of oil&#8221;.  Former Fed Chair Greenspan said that the war was about oil.  Even, Fukuyama (Francis, I believe), another scholar said the same.  Now, it might be argued that &#8220;oil&#8221; is an interest of this country, but as a cause or rationale for war?  I don&#8217;t happen to believe that it was.</p>
<p>You state: &#8220;I’m saying that the “no WMD” line doesn’t hold water.&#8221;  The WMD line as a reason for war does not hold water at all as Saddam had none when the war started.  And, do people really believe that if he had them, when he knew that he was about to lose, he would not have used them?  Now, although Saddam may not have been the great &#8220;strategist&#8221; neither was he that dumb.  If he had such weapons, he would have used them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ullr</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15237</link>
		<dc:creator>Ullr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 03:08:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15237</guid>
		<description>Irish - You said, "Ullr, you have one heck of a way of not addressing the issues!"

If there's one thing George W. Bush taught us is that when you're in control you don't have to address the issues, and as of November 5th, WE will be in control.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Irish - You said, &#8220;Ullr, you have one heck of a way of not addressing the issues!&#8221;</p>
<p>If there&#8217;s one thing George W. Bush taught us is that when you&#8217;re in control you don&#8217;t have to address the issues, and as of November 5th, WE will be in control.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15236</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 02:42:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15236</guid>
		<description>RLaitres,

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/wmdiraq.pdf

Page five of this link details ten known instances of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. It also details their programs up to and after the first gulf war. 

And I'm not denying that the invasion of Iraq was not a war of choice. I'm saying that the "no WMD" line doesn't hold water.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>RLaitres,</p>
<p><a href="http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/wmdiraq.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/wmdiraq.pdf</a></p>
<p>Page five of this link details ten known instances of Iraq&#8217;s use of chemical weapons. It also details their programs up to and after the first gulf war. </p>
<p>And I&#8217;m not denying that the invasion of Iraq was not a war of choice. I&#8217;m saying that the &#8220;no WMD&#8221; line doesn&#8217;t hold water.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RLaitres</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15234</link>
		<dc:creator>RLaitres</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 01:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15234</guid>
		<description>Scott stated: "Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction."

Really?  At which point did he have such weapons, as US forces and weapons teams did not find any.  Even prior to the beginning of the war, the UN inspectors told the Security Council that Saddam had no such weapons, not once, but several times.  In addition to which, just before the conflict began, Saddam stated that anyone could look for such weapons wherever and whenever they wished. 

Scott then speculates: "Lots of trucks went into Syria in the weeks before the invasion. I’m sure they were carrying medical supplies."

And that is all it is, speculation.  And, it does not make sense.  Does Scott believe that, after Iran not returning the planes Saddam flew there prior to the first Gulf War, that even Saddam would have turned over such weapons to another neighbor?

Sorry, but the arguments and conclusions do not make sense.  The verdict that the latest "invasion" of Iraq was a "war of choice" by the current administration is in, and from all quarters.  Those who cannot accept it do not have to, and it is their choice.  All that is required is to ignore the facts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott stated: &#8220;Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction.&#8221;</p>
<p>Really?  At which point did he have such weapons, as US forces and weapons teams did not find any.  Even prior to the beginning of the war, the UN inspectors told the Security Council that Saddam had no such weapons, not once, but several times.  In addition to which, just before the conflict began, Saddam stated that anyone could look for such weapons wherever and whenever they wished. </p>
<p>Scott then speculates: &#8220;Lots of trucks went into Syria in the weeks before the invasion. I’m sure they were carrying medical supplies.&#8221;</p>
<p>And that is all it is, speculation.  And, it does not make sense.  Does Scott believe that, after Iran not returning the planes Saddam flew there prior to the first Gulf War, that even Saddam would have turned over such weapons to another neighbor?</p>
<p>Sorry, but the arguments and conclusions do not make sense.  The verdict that the latest &#8220;invasion&#8221; of Iraq was a &#8220;war of choice&#8221; by the current administration is in, and from all quarters.  Those who cannot accept it do not have to, and it is their choice.  All that is required is to ignore the facts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15232</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 01:35:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15232</guid>
		<description>#1 is flat wrong.

Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction. We know this because he USED them. Against Iran and against Kurds in his own country. The weapons were there.

We did not invade Iraq just because of the WMDs, there were many other reasons. A big one would be the fact that Saddam violated every single stipulation of the cease-fire from Gulf War I. Or how about our patrols of the no-fly zones being fired upon nearly every day for ten years?

Since the invasion, the evidence suggests that Saddam was dismantling his WMD program while maintaining the illusion that he still had them available. Lots of trucks went into Syria in the weeks before the invasion. I'm sure they were carrying medical supplies.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#1 is flat wrong.</p>
<p>Saddam HAD weapons of mass destruction. We know this because he USED them. Against Iran and against Kurds in his own country. The weapons were there.</p>
<p>We did not invade Iraq just because of the WMDs, there were many other reasons. A big one would be the fact that Saddam violated every single stipulation of the cease-fire from Gulf War I. Or how about our patrols of the no-fly zones being fired upon nearly every day for ten years?</p>
<p>Since the invasion, the evidence suggests that Saddam was dismantling his WMD program while maintaining the illusion that he still had them available. Lots of trucks went into Syria in the weeks before the invasion. I&#8217;m sure they were carrying medical supplies.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tasha53</title>
		<link>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15230</link>
		<dc:creator>tasha53</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:48:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://community.gjsentinel.com/2008/10/28/palin-confused-on-social-security-and-stock-market/#comment-15230</guid>
		<description>Irish,

ullr, is just like Obama.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Irish,</p>
<p>ullr, is just like Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
