The point is that when the budget is passed by Congress and signed by the President each year, that is what the country will spend - Like it or not and Bush and the Congressional leadership follow that process every year. It is the next step they do not accomplish-- Passing taxes that pay for what THEY HAVE CHOOSEN TO SPEND. That can not continue-- Either cut the spending or increase the taxes. That is what I as a Moderate want the government to do. NO MORE CHARGE AND SPEND.

I always laugh when he calls himself a moderate.

That is what I am. I do not support NEW spending programs, except help for things like Katrina. I want a balanced Budget. I do not support Nation Building. The notion that the conservatives are fiscal conservatives is NUTS. No true fiscal conservative would follow the CHARGE AND SPEND policy the Bush and the GOP are following.

Col, you support every radical liberal idea out there. You are no moderate.

What radical ideas do I support? Balancing the Budget? Protecting our borders? Reducing the Trade deficit? Funding Social Security and Medicare? Rebuilding our infastructure? Please list the Radical Ideas you claim I support.

You believe Bush was appointed. Which I have already proved you wrong.

You give every democrat a pass, but go beyond yourself to blame Bush and conservatives for everything.

You use class warfare.

You use the moveon.org and DNC talking points daily.

I can go on and on, but I'm sure you will start bringing up the deficit agian.

I know if the votes in Palm Beach County had been counted as the voters voted, Bush would not have won Florida in 2000 He won the 2004 election.

I have said many times the Democrats need to come up with more specific policies. I have listed specific new policies in my blogs. That does not change the fact it is the Bush policies that are being enacted and that are not solving our problems.

Class warfare is seeing how Katrina has shown how the poor live in America while the wealthy are a wash in money.

I do not use the DNC or moveon.on as sources for my material. I did not use them in my book.


You did not answer which of the policies I included in my previous Blog and which I support are Radical.

"We are NOT talking about Britian..."

"What works for your country does not mean it'll work here."

Wasn't aware that it was a 'BRITS KEEP OUT' thread.

Island Dog You have not shown which of my ideas are radical.
You made a statement now back it up!
Balanced Budget
Stop Nation Building
Protect our Borders
Reduce trade deficit
Fund Social Sceurity and Medicare
Rebuild Infastructure

Which is a radical idea?

"We are NOT talking about Britain..." "What works for your country does not mean it'll work here." Wasn't aware that it was a 'BRITS KEEP OUT' thread.

Never said it was, now did I? But you can not use what works in England and think that it will work here in America. It just ain't happening. So unless Britian is planning on instituting a 15% flat tax then we're talking about the US.

know if the votes in Palm Beach County had been counted as the voters voted, Bush would not have won Florida in 2000 He won the 2004 election.

Col I have already showed you how those votes were counted, and Bush still won. You lost that arguement.

I have said many times the Democrats need to come up with more specific policies. I have listed specific new policies in my blogs. That does not change the fact it is the Bush policies that are being enacted and that are not solving our problems.

Col, you give democrats a pass and blame everything on Repbulicans. Where was your "outrage" and blogs about Sandy Berger, who committed a real crime? But you find the time to write 10 articles about Rush and Rove and pretty much found them guilty before being tried.

Class warfare is seeing how Katrina has shown how the poor live in America while the wealthy are a wash in money.

You use class warfare in every post about the economy.

sland Dog You have not shown which of my ideas are radical. You made a statement now back it up! Balanced Budget Stop Nation Building Protect our Borders Reduce trade deficit Fund Social Sceurity and Medicare Rebuild Infastructure Which is a radical idea?

Your ideas behind them are radical.

You claim Bush is a dictator. That is moveon.org rhetoric #1.
You advocate a socialist healthcare system.
You want to punish people for being successful.
You want to abandon the people of Iraq.
You think Rove is guilty without trial, but terrorists deserve lawyers.

No the 3,500 votes that were double punched because of the confusion in the ballot design were NEVER COUNTED. Those 3,500 voters did not have their choice counted in the election of 2000 because of a confusing ballot. Had it not been for that confusion, Gore would have had another 3,500 votes an Bush would have lost Florida.

What socialist health care system are you talking about? All I pointed out is that over 1 million people have lost their coverage since 2001and 45 Million Americans have NO health coverage.

Bush is the one that said after the election of 2000 that it would be easier to govern if it were a dictatorship so long as he was the dictator. He does have the approach that to not support him is unamerican. He insists that Congress pass his policies and and confirm the people he wants. The Iraq war was a error from the start and we need to cut our losses. The majority of Americans feel the war was an error. Are you saying the majority of Americans have a radical opinion abouit this war?

It was Bush that said ANYONE INVOLVED WITH OUTING MRS WILSON would be fired until Rove was the one identified. Why is he still on the job?

You have not pointed out which of the major policies I support, as stated above, is radical? The truth is that the major issues I have stated are not radical but Bush has not effectively delt with ANY of them.

No the 3,500 votes that were double punched because of the confusion in the ballot design were NEVER COUNTED. Those 3,500 voters did not have their choice counted in the election of 2000 because of a confusing ballot. Had it not been for that confusion, Gore would have had another 3,500 votes an Bush would have lost Florida

You are amazing col. I showed you the media recount counted those votes, Bush still won. Anyways col, you have no proof those votes were for Gore. That's only your speculation. You are wrong.

Bush is the one that said after the election of 2000 that it would be easier to govern if it were a dictatorship so long as he was the dictator.

Col, you have called Bush a dictator. You can spin it all you want, you are following the left wing rhetoric.

It was Bush that said ANYONE INVOLVED WITH OUTING MRS WILSON would be fired until Rove was the one identified. Why is he still on the job?

Rove wasn't the one who "outed" Plame. Ever wonder why the medai doesn't cover that story anymore, col? Because there was nothing there.

I have said Bush acts like a dictator and he did make the statements about it would be easier to govern if we had a dictatorship and that he would be the dictator.

The 3,500 votes in Palm Beach County were from a VERY Democratic Jewish area. They interviewed a smple these voters and they were NOT voting for Bush. They said they were confused and punched the independent candidate and then punched a second time for Gore. None of the 3,500 votes, that WERE NEVER COUNTED, were for Bush.

Cooper testified it was ROVE that was the FIRST person to tell him that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent. Rove did out her.

You still have not told me which of the major policies I support are radical. You are fill of BS and just change the subject when you can not defend your statements-- Just like Bush

I have said Bush acts like a dictator and he did make the statements about it would be easier to govern if we had a dictatorship and that he would be the dictator.

You have said Bush is a dictator. I have called you on it before. That is left wing rhetoric.

The 3,500 votes in Palm Beach County were from a VERY Democratic Jewish area. They interviewed a smple these voters and they were NOT voting for Bush. They said they were confused and punched the independent candidate and then punched a second time for Gore. None of the 3,500 votes, that WERE NEVER COUNTED, were for Bush.

Col, here in Florida we have a thing called "Dixiecrats". Those are counties that are mostly registered democrats, but they typically vote Republican. So you have no evidence that those votes were for Gore. And I have already proved to you those votes were counted. Can't you just admit you were wrong?

Cooper testified it was ROVE that was the FIRST person to tell him that Wilson's wife was a CIA agent. Rove did out her.

And the lead investigator said Rove is not the target of the investigation.

You still have not told me which of the major policies I support are radical. You are fill of BS and just change the subject when you can not defend your statements-- Just like Bush

Col, I never said you support radical policies. I said you are a radical liberal. You can't admit you were wrong when proved with facts col. I'm surprised you haven't started talking about the deficit like you usually do when proved wrong.

If I do not support radical policies, then how am I a radical Liberal?

You are DEAD WRONG about the 3,500 ballots that were double punched. BUSH DID NOT HAVE HIS NAME PUNCHED ON THOSE BALLOTS. They were intended for Gore. I live in Florida and know the truth of the 2000 election. Bush won in Florida because of the confusion in Palm Beach not because he was the choice of the majority that voted in Florida. If Palm Beach had used the same ballot used in the othe 66 counties in Florida, Bush would not have been declared the winner in Florida in 2000.

If I do not support radical policies, then how am I a radical Liberal?

Radical idea, radical statements. You are a liberal, not a moderate.

You are DEAD WRONG about the 3,500 ballots that were double punched. BUSH DID NOT HAVE HIS NAME PUNCHED ON THOSE BALLOTS. They were intended for Gore.

You don't know who they were intended for. They could have been for Buchanen, or anybody else. This is your assumption col. You lost.

I live in Florida and know the truth of the 2000 election. Bush won in Florida because of the confusion in Palm Beach not because he was the choice of the majority that voted in Florida. If Palm Beach had used the same ballot used in the othe 66 counties in Florida, Bush would not have been declared the winner in Florida in 2000.

Pure BS col. I live in Florida and you if you aren't familiar with dixiecrats then you are really out there. There was no confusion with the ballots col, just stupid people. Why did kindergarten kids fill the ballots out correctly and not these people? Bush won Florida col, the recount shows. You lost.

Jewish Democtats were not voting for Buchanen. If they had intended to vote for Buchanen, they would not have double punched the ballot . There fisrt punch would have been correct. You just will not admit when you are wrong-- JUST LIKE BUSH!

Jewish Democtats were not voting for Buchanen. If they had intended to vote for Buchanen, they would not have double punched the ballot . There fisrt punch would have been correct. You just will not admit when you are wrong-- JUST LIKE BUSH!

moot point! Makes "absolutely" NO difference to anything!

Jewish Democtats were not voting for Buchanen. If they had intended to vote for Buchanen, they would not have double punched the ballot . There fisrt punch would have been correct. You just will not admit when you are wrong-- JUST LIKE BUSH!

Oh so now you know everything col. Col, you haven't shown how I was wrong. I posted how the media recount, counted the votes you keep obsessing on. They also did a recount according to what Gore wanted. Both recounts Bush won. You are wrong col. Get over it.

Now you are in a corner, you come up with these assumptions. Well since you want to operate on assumpations. I remember on election night when the media called Florida early for Gore, how the local news were interviewing Republicans who walked out of the voting lines because of this early call. They just left because they already thought Gore won and voting would be pointless. Let's speculate how many across the entire state did that.

drmiler

The difference in counting thise 3,500 ballots in 2000 would have been President Gore NOT President Bush.

Island Dog

The recount DID NOT INCLUDE those 3,500 votes because they were double punched. My point, had those people requested a new ballot when that discovered that voted for Buchanen and punched the new ballot correctly for Gore, which was their choice, Bush would have lost Floroda by about 3,000 votes.

drmiler The difference in counting thise 3,500 ballots in 2000 would have been President Gore NOT President Bush.

And this would make a difference "right now"? That was then, this is now. For God's sake just get over it. Like I said "MOOT POINT"!

Personaly I'm REALLY glad Gore didn't make it! He's a puss!

Personaly I'm REALLY glad Gore didn't make it! He's a puss!

Don't blame Gore for the results. Gore did accept his loss. That's one difference between Gore and the "moderates" in this forum.

The recount DID NOT INCLUDE those 3,500 votes because they were double punched. My point, had those people requested a new ballot when that discovered that voted for Buchanen and punched the new ballot correctly for Gore, which was their choice, Bush would have lost Floroda by about 3,000 votes.

Yes they were included col. I showed you that already.

And as usual, you are assuming what people "might" have done. You don't know.

Get over it col, you lost.

ok, first of all if you make 20,000 dollars a year you don't pay income taxes. Also, you have to remember that the government makes more money from tax revenue on purchases than any where else.

Secondly, do you understand that if you tax the rich less they buy more thing, invest more money, which in turns creates jobs that pay more money to individuals and thus grant them the ability to move into higher income levels. It amazes me that people think that this does not work. The reason that the 90's were so good was that trickle down economics works. There is no doubt the theory generated more wealth and more jobs for over twenty five years than any other economic idea since the socialist policies of Roosevelt.

Also, you must remember that I want to be rich some day and there fore I do not want to work all my life to make more money only to have it stolen from me and given to individuals who fail to take advantage of all the opportunities our society provides.

Now, secondly, I am not infavor of 15% but ten percent and only on your income from your job. All taxes on gambling winnings, inheritance, income through investment, these taxes need to be abolished.

A balanced budget, geuss what, it will never happen. Although washington talks about wanting a balanced budget and scaring the public with the idea of a deficit. The deficit is not a bad thing first of all. Secondly, the government would take what ever they could and create more programs to buy votes. The politicians continually use our hard earned money to buy votes by creating programs. This issue in regards to illegal immigrants is pure vote buying. Also, mexican or hispanics tend to vote republican and there are roughly 20 million of them. They are mostly located in roughly three states. That is a lot of votes in local and state elections. You figure it out.

The tax system needs to be stopped it robs all people not just the rich. In todays economy anyone making less than thirty or forty thousand dollars a year should not be taxed at all. None, no money should come out of there checks at all. Also, any money made by investment should not be taxed what so ever. This would creates millions of jobs and put so much money in the economy that whether or not their is a deficit hard working men and women would be able to make a life.

Lastly, all government programs that are not meeting stringent goals should be stopped and handed over to the private sector. The reason, the government has never ever done anything better, faster or cheaper than the private sector.

Also, social security is a joke. The government had all the money it needed for social security and it spent the surplus money on programs to buy votes. How do you like that. Plus, how can you say to a person hey I am going to give you three percent on your money when the stock market each year has averaged 12% since 1945. That is 12 cents on the dollar in stead of 3. Your asking me to accept that. I will not nor should any one else. As far as I am concerned that is stealing jsut as much as if you came into my house.

Lastly, money is property and the contitution of the united states clearly says that you cannot tax property, yet we are so dumb we let the government call money something else and then tax the crap out of our cars, and property. This needs to stop.