>>> ....ehem, and that's one way of looking at it, i however, see her statement to be simply an expanded perspective, not an overgeneralization, misrepresenting a subject

Of course not - she was simply mentioning a "curiosity" and making no specific, direct claim of applicability. Thats why I simply made an observation, not a direct claim of mis-application.

Hey ‘searchinforwine’,

71% have said within 2 weeks of war start that they supported the initiative. That's back in 2003.

Now it is 71% in favor of removing troops from Iraq. July 19 2007 (Gallup).
‘… Iraq is over insofar as the American public has decided that most U.S. troops should leave. In a Gallup poll earlier this month, 71% favored "removing all U.S. troops from Iraq by April 1 of next year, except for a limited number that would be involved in counter-terrorism efforts.’ ( http://snuffysmithsblog.blogspot.com/2007/07/iraq-hasnt-even-begun.html ).

Facts for your 71% supporting war in Iraq from polls done in July 2007 would be greatly appreciated.


As for the ‘New York Times’ article, it basically points to recent developments that could spell a better outcome than outright shameful defeat in Iraq:

***************************************************************
‘… As two analysts who have harshly criticized the Bush administration’s miserable handling of Iraq, we were surprised by the gains we saw and the potential to produce not necessarily “victory” but a sustainable stability that both we and the Iraqis could live with.’

They go on to conclude …:

‘… In the end, the situation in Iraq remains grave.
In particular, we still face huge hurdles on the political front. Iraqi politicians of all stripes continue to dawdle and maneuver for position against one another when major steps towards reconciliation — or at least accommodation — are needed.

This cannot continue indefinitely. Otherwise, once we begin to downsize, important communities may not feel committed to the status quo, and Iraqi security forces may splinter along ethnic and religious lines.

How much longer should American troops keep fighting and dying to build a new Iraq while Iraqi leaders fail to do their part? And how much longer can we wear down our forces in this mission? These haunting questions underscore the reality that the surge cannot go on forever. But there is enough good happening on the battlefields of Iraq today that Congress should plan on sustaining the effort at least into 2008.’
**************************************************************


I figure the point you’ll eventually make out of this charade like message ‘SEARCHIN’,
... is a full personal admission that these evil liberal NYT communists, could teach FOX and all its FOX news forced fed republican congregation, a lesson or two on objective reporting of the news.

But hey, I digress, I’m sure you have those poll numbers, and if not you'll help forget with that good conservative wine of yours.

Here'S to you 'searchin' !!!

Geez Knox this is getting scarey. you go listen to a couple hours of Al Frankin and I am headed off to tune in Rush

Believe it or not...

Al Franken is too boring to listen to....

I think Rush is full of s***, but he does understand it's entertainment first and foremost. I listen to a tape of Franken at night when I'm having trouble sleeping. Better than Nyquil.

Hey Knox, if you went to the site you would see that the poll I put out there is a PDF. It gives the following information about how the poll was conducted, all the questions asked, and who was asked:

Interviews with 1,029 adult Americans conducted by telephone
by Opinion Research Corporation on June 22-24, 2007. The
margin of sampling error for results based on the total sample
is plus or minus 3 percentage.

Opinion Research Corporation, founded in 1938, is widely known and respected for its independent, nonpartisan polls.

All Polls are not biased, and I would never post the results of one I wasn't sure of its accurracy and scientic methods.




Whats up Voil? Glad to see you posting.....

Missed out on some of your great posts Fanta.

Thought I'd check up on you, just to see if you still had the old MAGIC !!!

After a quick read, you won't be surprised if I tell you I'm finding you have it in spades!!!

:)

waving to voil!!! hey shugar!!!! good seeing you!

I should think that, given the fact that Iraq is dusted with thousands of tons of "depleted" uranium from both invasions,
causing massive spikes in cancer and birth defects and it's tendency to sink 6ft. into the sand and stay lethal for FOUR AND A HALF BILLION YEARS, we'd only be to happy to leave, as one only need inhale a single tiny particle to do the damage.
Not to mention Gulf War Illness - Many thousands are sick or dying from the '91 invasion. How conveniant that the govt.
claims it somehow missplaced 750,000 medical records...

I should think that, given the fact that Iraq is dusted with thousands of tons of "depleted" uranium from both invasions,
causing massive spikes in cancer and birth defects and it's tendency to sink 6ft. into the sand and stay lethal for FOUR AND A HALF BILLION YEARS, we'd only be to happy to leave, as one only need inhale a single tiny particle to do the damage.
Not to mention Gulf War Illness - Many thousands are sick or dying from the '91 invasion. How conveniant that the govt.
claims it somehow missplaced 750,000 medical records...civil war..
Yes, I think we can all pat ourselves on the back for being so kind with our humanitarian nation building aid - I'm sure the Iraqis couldnt be more greatful to us and will surely ask us back to visit again, real soon.

Using depleted uranium in warfare this way is an issue worth contesting, but overstating the case undermines one's credibility. Not that I think you are doing so - I think your sources have.

Hey, even our guys are getting it - it's used in tank armour and
crews sitting over it have gotten rectal cancer.

war is not healthy for children and other living things...........

'Hello Barbie, how are you Barbie' !!!

Doesn't that sound like a familiar old song, ...or almost?!?!?