I am voting for him because I think the government has swung too far to the right, and moderation is good. DD
Damn, DaDa, I'm impressed! Hell, I don't care how many miles we are from Podunk any longer... we've reached Oz, baby.
This country has sunk so low under Bush that anyone democratic replacing him would be a savior. But why is he a douche bag? Because he's from the north? I don't get it...
I swing back and forth, I think it is good for the country. I am pretty much a social moderate, and a fiscal conservative. But, I hate Ashcroft, Rumsfeld, and Cheney. Bush...well, I think he believes he is doing the right thing, and history may prove he is....but.... I still think that we have gone too far, and time to swing back to the middle. DD
By dogging waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy left? I don't think so. If anything, Bush is probably the most middle-of-the-road Republican ever. While a foreign policy hawk, he has: A. raised steel tarriffs B. expanded the scope of the Federal govt. with that stupid prescription drug entitlement. C. allowed spending to skyrocket by no vetoing anything crossing his desk D. Signing the bloated farm and education bills, in which we piss more of our money down the proverbial drain for no apparent benefit. E. Came up with that godawful amnesty program that will only increase the flow of the present day illegal invasion from Mexico. We desperately need to hold people accountable for breaking our immigration laws. But Bush is not willing to do that. Might cost him some political points with Hispanics, who are more likely to vote Democrat anyhow. And after all that, the left still hates so irrationally?
I wouldn't call him middle of the road. Dubya's politics is like a shotgun shell full of scattershot. He is all over the road. Dubya's politics are like Michael Moore's moviemaking: He takes a ton of sh*t, throws it against the wall, and looks to see what sticks. He is not a by-the-book conservative. Conservatives don't spend the kind of money he is spending. Hell, Liberals don't spend the kind of money he is spending either!
Actually, if you know anything about Texas and Californian economics, you will realize how important of an economic function they are to the border states. The American citizens live too well off welfare to give that up and do crappy jobs, and the illegal laborers, many who can't get wellfare are more than willing. Illegal immigrants and the cheap labor they provide definitely makes economy in the two states go and I'm sure most businesses don't want those to go away. On the sidenote though, the fact that illegal immigrants were able to sue for back pay in Cali? not cool at all.
????? Have you never heard of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996? Most able bodied people are on TANF, Temporary Aid to Needy Families. You are required to work under this program. If you can't find a job, you have to search for one. If you still can't get a job, you and your case worker figure out how to make you more employable, IE training programs (you have to have some kind of part time work while you train too). You can only recieve money for 5 years under the program too. Welfare is not a picnic, people aren't on it because they are lazy.
I'm not saying you're wrong. Just a general comment. This vote seems like one for the future state of America, not just the present. The state of the country is one you can easily argue about. Ask whether you're happy with the status quo... but also ask: Do you like the direction the current administration is taking us? Do you think Kerry/Edwards would take us in a better direction? Would that be better? By the way, Chance, I haven't been in Houston but heard there was a 610 format change (for Rich and Charlie, at least). What happened?
