> 1815 more died during six years of Bush, which included a war, than > during the first six years of Clinton.
wow. so just what exactly does that prove? more accidents under clinton? WTF does that prove, and why does it matter? how about if we do an analysis of those wounded in action? 25,549 as of May 19, 2007 (cite - http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/oif-wounded-total.pdf) How do the numbers compare there? - I found Bush's you find Clinton's since you're so good at the "Clinton did it too" argument. how about those? And of those, how many are surviving wounds that would have killed them even a decade ago? You want to nit pick on only 1815 "more" deaths? how about 25,000 more wounded? Answer me that. -- will "If my life weren't funny, it would just be true; and that would just be unacceptable." - Carrie Fisher ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| ColdFusion MX7 by Adobe® Dyncamically transform webcontent into Adobe PDF with new ColdFusion MX7. Free Trial. http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion?sdid=RVJV Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:235486 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
