Posted on 02/07/2005 7:56:15 AM PST by SmithL
Those without facts or with weak arguments usually stoop to name calling.
If you can refute my points please do.
Otherwise, go flame someone else.
Proof....... You were whining along with Jesse Jackson that "all the votes should be counted in Ohio."
I can find the link to that thread if you wish, but that's all the proof anyone around here needs.........especially someone who lives in Ohio, and knows the complete idiocy of your claims that there was voter fraud from the Republicans here that hurt John Kerry.
You outted yourself, and you can't cover it up with your "I'm a conservative concerned with fiscal responsibility" phoniness....
So I guess accuracy and honesty in our voting system is not important to you?
I'm sure you would advocate getting to the bottom of the "vote fraud" in Washington State and Wisconsin for example, but because the totals favored you in Ohio, you can't be bothered.
Suit yourself.
Continue making up whatever claims you wish, my position on the pathetic way Ohio ran the election and counted the votes stands on its own merit.
It is you who continues to reference jesse jackass, not I.
My point remains the same. 100% accuracy in voting and counting of the vote, anything less is an open invitation for fraud.
"Why the hell is he messing with veterans benefits?"
I'm a retired veteran with a minor service-connected disability. I deserve medical care for that specific disability. But NO WAY do I deserve the VA routine medical services I've been offered.
The VA shouldn't be funded to take care of veterans' non-service-connected health ailments.
Why not?
If I agree with someone, I agree with them. Don't much care what you think his political position is.
Eliminate the following:
The Department of Energy
The Department of Agriculture
The Department of Education
The EPA
The Department of Transportation
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Kill all boondoggle projects such as the bridge to nowhere in Alaska. All other departments to get increases only in line with inflation, with the exception of Defence.
Regards, Ivan
Unfortunately, there is no reduction in a 3.5% increase.
Liberals........the new 'fiscal conservatives.' LOL!
Unfortunately, the reverse seems to be the more common trend: "Conservatives........the new fiscal liberals".
Add the IRS, BATFE, and the DEA to that list and you'd REALLY be able to save some money...
The Ohio election is not the subject of this thread (I only brought it up as proof that you are not a conservative), so I won't pursue it any farther than this, but if you believe that our election was 'pathetic' then you are at odds with our Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, who is one of the most conservative, intelligent, and honorable men I know, and you are in agreement with Jesse Jackson.
All your whinings and protestations to the contrary do not change the facts. And those facts call into question anything you may say on this forum in pretense of being a conservative.
I agree that conservatives have been spending too much of our money.........but that is what makes me somewhat pleased that this budget is beginning to reverse the trend.
Kill and EAT... kill and eat. Get it right, dude.
I am sorry, I dont see it. Where is the fiscal responsibility. We are bringing in 2.1 trill and spending over 2.5. Am I missing something? Are the numbers reversed?
So, where are these cuts? I don't see them.
2.57 trillion comes out to about $9000 dollars per person, taking away children probably puts it around $15,000 that goes to the Federal government. This isn't counting state or county taxes that we all pay too. This is pure tyranny. And all these press reports like the WP editorial worrying about the 'poor' etc..
The best way to help the poor is to increase economic growth and thats done by getting government off our back.
I'd like to use a weight loss analogy. If your current consumption of calories results in weight gain, a "maintenance" diet won't work. You must first get back to an ideal weight before going on maintenance. The question is whether the federal budget is at an ideal weight.(At this point the picture of Ted Kennedy in a bathing suit that has appeared in many recent posts comes to mind.)
If you look at recent budget spending figures you will find that the spending restraint of the mid 90's led to the surplus.
Once that surplus was achieved Washington went on an eating binge(both parties). Spending increases went from ~3% to around ~9%.
So much for being the party of fiscal conservatism
Bump this to all the way to Washington, DC for crying out loud. Two thirds of what the Fed Gov does should be and could be cut. Send those social programs back to the states.
Cutting vet benefits is a bad thing. Especially medical care for vets.
Its also the largest budget ever, so much for this Ap writers sanity
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.