[gusopol3]

it will only be convincing when the oil production exceeds 3/03 levels.

[samtheman]

it will only be convincing when the oil production exceeds 3/03 levels

Well that's a pretty arbitrary standard. So a good economy isn't good unless one of the indicators is at some previous level. Great logic.

Has it occurred to you that one of the reason oil production might be down from 3/03 levels is there's a war going on and a combination of tighter security and attacks on facilities is what's keeping the number lower? If that's the case, it says nothing about the state of the economy, just the logistics of pumping oil in a war zone. Are you implying that the cause of the lower production is an economic slump?

[photodawg]

it will only be convincing when the oil production exceeds 3/03 levels.

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Convincing to whom. The facts stated in the article are convincing to anyone with an objective open mind. Are you saying there are not enough of these in America? I would tend to agree. That means however, that oil production could double pre war levels and still wouldn't be accepted as evidence of success. Much of America is invested in failure in Iraq. It is our duty to expand the base of Americans who are not propagandized by the leftist agenda. The facts in this article are irrefutable proof that the story we are being handed is a flagrant distortion of the truth.