MnMikew wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
MnMikew wrote:
And of course the Star & Sickle (Tribune) comes out with an editorial
today blaming the bridge collapse on our Republican Gov. Effing moonbats.
It'll be Bush's fault before the weekend.


Stories are beginning to surface about the history of this bridge, and
how it was never intended to be an arterial conduit in the first place.

Yup. 40 years old and weak. Not good. Even though it was built in 1967 it
will still be Bushs fault. :-)



In fact, I just got this from a friend in Iowa 10 minutes ago:




************************************************** *****************

well, it IS his fault, with hundreds of billons going to a worthless
war that should have been spent on infrastructure. But I know, it would
have just been spent on hundred-dollar blowjobs for his friends anyway . . .


-----Original Message-----
From: D. Peter Maus
To:
Sent: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 4:37 pm
Subject: Subjects Galore

wrote:
Hang in there. It could be worse. You could be in Milwaukee.
Or on a bridge in Minneapolis. . . .

Interesting stories are beginning to surface about the history of
that bridge. And how it was never intended to be a arterial structure.

I'm sure it will be Bush's fault before the weekend.

************************************************** *******************

D Peter Maus wrote:


well, it IS his fault, with hundreds of billons going to a worthless
war that should have been spent on infrastructure. But I know, it would
have just been spent on hundred-dollar blowjobs for his friends anyway .

Well, I wouldn't say it was Bush's fault.

However, given the choice of fixing our infrastructure, broken health
care system and all of our needs on the home front, I'd vote for
spending that half a trillion *here* rather than pouring it down that
bottomless **** hole...

Zeke Zzzppt wrote:
D Peter Maus wrote:


well, it IS his fault, with hundreds of billons going to a worthless
war that should have been spent on infrastructure. But I know, it
would have just been spent on hundred-dollar blowjobs for his friends
anyway .

Well, I wouldn't say it was Bush's fault.

However, given the choice of fixing our infrastructure, broken health
care system and all of our needs on the home front, I'd vote for
spending that half a trillion *here* rather than pouring it down that
bottomless **** hole...


I didn't write it. I only passed it on as an example of my earlier
assertion.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
MnMikew wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
MnMikew wrote:
And of course the Star & Sickle (Tribune) comes out with an editorial
today blaming the bridge collapse on our Republican Gov. Effing
moonbats.
It'll be Bush's fault before the weekend.


Stories are beginning to surface about the history of this bridge, and
how it was never intended to be an arterial conduit in the first place.

Yup. 40 years old and weak. Not good. Even though it was built in 1967 it
will still be Bushs fault. :-)

In fact, I just got this from a friend in Iowa 10 minutes ago:




************************************************** *****************

well, it IS his fault, with hundreds of billons going to a worthless war
that should have been spent on infrastructure. But I know, it would have
just been spent on hundred-dollar blowjobs for his friends anyway . . .

The leftys are soo predictable. I know we wasted a LOT of $$ here on a
worthless light rail system instead of infrastructure.