> It's to do with peacetime vs. wartime; not Clinton vs. Bush. It's
> comparing training exercise accidents to real war casualties.

If it really isn't about Clinton vs Bush, then why not compare numbers
of deaths under Reagan (17201 twice as many as Bush 2...hrmmmm) or
Bush the first (6223 only 2/3 of Bush 2 in 2/3 the time!) to Bush 2:
Electric Bugaloo?

So really, can I take your claim of "not Clinton vs. Bush" seriously?

> I'm not in the mood to play with you today,

Then I guess you made the opening statement "More died before the war"
by accident? You were simply hoping everyone would just trust your
numbers?

and now that your numbers have been shown to be skewed you're going to
back out of the ring?

okay. see you later Sam... next time I'll be sure to ask if you're
ready to play when you make a supposition like the above.

> go sit in the corner with Dana.

you're giving me a time out for being right? cool.

> ;P

:-o

-- 
will

"If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable."
- Carrie Fisher

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Create robust enterprise, web RIAs.
Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJP

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:235513
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to