<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2>In a message dated 3/5/2003 10:16:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, dhenwood@panix.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Subj:<B>Re: The War Party's Fucked. </B><BR>
Date:3/5/2003 10:16:06 AM Pacific Standard Time<BR>
From:<A HREF="mailto:dhenwood@panix.com">dhenwood@panix.com</A><BR>
Reply-to:<A HREF="mailto:lbo-talk@lists.panix.com">lbo-talk@lists.panix.com</A><BR>
To:<A HREF="mailto:lbo-talk@lists.panix.com">lbo-talk@lists.panix.com</A><BR>
<I>Sent from the Internet </I><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mike larkin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>http://www.antiwar.com/justin/justincol.html<BR>
<BR>
Well yeah. But we were watching the late rerun of the Brit Hume show <BR>
on Fox News last night, and I said to Liza, "I spend the day reading <BR>
email and websites and think, maybe there won't be a war after all. <BR>
And now I'm watching Fox and it seems inevitable." Ok, that's Fox. <BR>
But then the front page of the NY Times this morning says that Powell <BR>
is optimistic they'll win the SC vote. Maybe he's using the same vote <BR>
counting methodology that served him so well with Turkey. But really <BR>
- would Powell say this if the Capitol Hill Blue story were right? <BR>
Why would he act so sure less than a week away from the SC vote?<BR>
<BR>
Doug<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>