Diesel,
We have already debunked that whole "tax and spend liberal" canard in this forum. What we in fact have in the White House is a cut tax, borrow and spend republican. FACTS? Look at the size of the deficit from Reagan onward, but especially under your hero, Georgie boy. The deficit is at RECORD levels in a republican controlled House, Senate and White House. THOSE ARE FACTS! If you can show me some secret report where the deficit is lower then when Bush took office (not 3 times BIGGER) I will shut up. If not, then take your head out of your ass and admit your statement lacks any basis in FACT and that you are wrong.
Who was the last president to run a surplus for three years in a row and actually make a stab at paying down the national debt? CLINTON, THAT'S RIGHT I SAID CLINTON. I'll take the fiscally responsible Democrats over those drunken sailor Republicans (John McCain's words) any day.
Hope that clears it up for you.

How much of your kids future are you going to let them steal before you cry foul? Your president has sent government debt out of sight. I simply want government that pays its way responsibily. The prescription drug bill, passed by Republicans, is a damn disaster. Don't give me that tax and spend BS, your borrow and spend BS is ten times worse. I give the dems more credit for being honest enough to pay for what they do - on top of that, we are not having the debates we need to have as a people on these programs the Repubs have pushed thru because its all being put on the card. If your taxes got raised to pay for the obscene Republican Highway Bill or latest corporate tax break, you'd be screaming bloody murder. Instead you get a bribe in the form of a tax cut.

Its is simply bad government to give out tax cuts before lowering spending. You guys talk out of one side of your mouth while screwing us with debt. You want a tax cut? Why has not one, I said not one, spending reduction or departmental elimination bill been even INTRODUCED never mind passed, in the last three years of total government control by the Republicans? I used to vote for Republicans when they actually worked to cut spending. These guys are a bunch of liars.

anybody who doubts that Fox news is nothing more than a 24 hr commercial for the Republican Party needs to look at their web site right now. They are headlining a Bush campaign swing in Sprindfield Ill, complete with Video play and gushing headlines, a campaign swing as the top news story for chrissakes. Over in the top right corner, in little teeny -tiny print is the top headline "Deficit hits record 420$ Billion". What a shameless sham operation they have become.

First, LK, Bush is NOT my hero. I am a Libertarian. I don't need to be schooled in how the Republicans have sold out to corporations, run deficits, etc.... I'm already fully aware of this.

My wholesale issue is this: The government consumes what is approaching three TRILLION dollars of what is all of our combined incomes annually. Now, Bush's tax cuts were a TINY step in the right direction. Following this with a spending free for all, was not SOLEY a Republican effort either. BOTH parties went wild. THIS is where the MAJORITY of that tax surplus went - into the pig's trough. We'd still be running them even without the tax cut. Kerry has made this admission already.

So, Kerry will do what every Democrat seems to like to to, in order to "balance" the budget - raise taxes, supposedly "only" on the wealthy. Great, so let's just penalize hard work, and the resulting successes that come with it. I have a better idea, how about we CUT spending. Yes, this means that welfare momma is going to have to go to work. Yes, this means that we won't be the worlds savior from all of their ills. They will just have to quit expecting those handouts, and start fixing their own problems.

Kerry is NOT the solution to the problem here. The problem is GOVERNMENT itself. It's high time to yank ALL these pigs from the trough, and send them to the slaughterhouse.

There is a neighbour to the north of us. Their government consumes 65% of their middle class citizens incomes. Guess what, they STILL cannot balance their budgets. Our government consumes roughly 1/3 of our incomes now. Sorry folks, but I'm NOT interested in imitating Canada, or ANY European country in the tax burdens of their citizens.

If hell ever freezes over, and either party comes up with a candidate that will quit treating us like a huge purse, and quit cramming a bunch of BS welfare programs down our throats, I'll sign on. Untill then, the Libertarians will be getting my vote.

See my post to LK1

We actually agree on a lot here. I'll just go back to what I have said before - we have a system of checks and balances that probably works best when the voters impose a few checks of their own. The dreaded "gridlock" is actually the best government we can hope for, and spending has only been reduced when we have it.

I have always liked the idea of a dem President, who will most likely veto any attempts to impose the agenda of the far right religous fundies, who I despise, and who will work more for international cooperation, which whether one likes it or not is what we need to live in this world - and a Republican House - to which the President could propose all the spending and big government programs he wishes, and they will promptly ignore him.

The Senate could be of either party, but we badly need to return the senate to what is supposed to be, a thoughtful college of our wisest men, who put the brakes on both the house and president. The Repubs in the Senate have become too radical right and the Dems are full of old time machine politicos who want nothing more than to hold on to power. We need to kick all of their asses out, because they have done a piss poor job of being wise men. Certainly each state can each find two smarter men then the bozos we have now. Our new senator, John Coryn, is absolutely obsessed with the Religous Right Agenda to the point all he can talk about is gays. Surely the wise men of the Senate have something better to do than spend each work day worrying about whether men like to cornhole each other.

My socialist program is better than your socialist program.

My vote wont be decided on the non-issue of party differences on domestic issues (though gun control is an issue that helped me decide about the previous election).

My vote will decided on international affairs. That is which foreign gov will provide me with the best wh... NO not that! I mean relations between states during a time of war.

Fox is loved by conservatives. For real objective news see TomRatherJenningsMoyers.

Oh yeah, now there's some objectivity.

Better still watch C-SPAN, read several newspapers and just watch the news and opinion shows for entertainment.

B

I was truly impressed by Kerry's call to elevate the tone of the campaign. Then he ruined it by attacking the President!
I guess "elevating the tone" means YOU don't criticise ME.

As for those of you who think the major media is not biased, look at all the editorial comments that make into news articles. I rather doubt that anyone is/ can be truly objective. But when your bias mateches mine, then we must be objective. However, the press does tend to vote democrat 70-90% of the time( various poles).

I actually think the leftist media bias was bad for the country at one time, back before cable and Internet, when the only choice was the 3 networks. But now we are awash in media, left, right, its everywhere. Since I like to read and examine ideas, I love the current enviroment - you can literally get on your computer and design your own media sample. You can block out the left, block out the right, or you can put together a kalioscope ranging from Moonies to Commies. I love it.

I personally don't consider left wing or right wing bias as "bad" - its just a component of what I am reading. "Consider the source" is always good advice.

I don't think you are going to see much positive campaigning. An unfortunate rule of politics is that if your opponent says something nasty, you have to say something nasty back or the undecideds are going to take your silence as confirmation of the smear. Both these guys are way beyond that point. This is going to be the nastiest campaign in US history. Its really the reaon rank-and-file democrat insiders wanted Kerry to get the nomination. Kerry is actually a very brave guy who does not shy away from a fight, and after Dukakis and Gore, they want someone who can get just as nasty as Bush. They probably are going to get their wish.

Kirk,
Shame on you! With all your historical knowledge, forecasting this as the nastiest election in our history. We'd have to go some to be more bitter than than many of the cartoons I've seen about Lincoln. THAT was a race extreme in its partisanship!

Actually, we've already surpassed that. One of the things some of the nastiest dems are doing right now are these Bush "chimp" websites, where he is compared to a chimpanzee the way Lincoln was compared to a gorilla. Luckily, they are not getting much press, and I think they are just as despicable as these "Swift Boat Captains" and their supporters.

Lets see, this is August1; the Election is the first week of....November. That means 3 months more of Silly season. Oh boy!