I agree with you, we need to balance our budget and some hard decisions are in order to make that happen. However, I don't think McCain is going to be the man to balance the budget.

I agree with you, we need to balance our budget and some hard decisions are in order to make that happen. However, I don't think McCain is going to be the man to balance the budget.

We aren't responsible for everything that goes wrong in Iraq and for the actions and decisions and feelings of everyone in Iraq under every conceivable situation at all times.

Actually, WE ARE!!! specially the idiots who put GWB in the White House.

It's a sad day when we make Saddam look good.

We aren't responsible for everything that goes wrong in Iraq and for the actions and decisions and feelings of everyone in Iraq under every conceivable situation at all times.

Actually, WE ARE!!! specially the idiots who put GWB in the White House.

It's a sad day when we make Saddam look good.

I doubt that you will find much in the way of support for the war but every post I have made here is open to see in the disqus icon next to my name.

I assume you are confusing me for a conservative because I reject Obama and his legislate and regulate mentality. Im still trying to see where he has advocated balancing the budget.

‘We’re not going to be able to dig ourselves out’’ of Bush-era deficits in the next year or two, said Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, one of six Democratic rivals sharing a debate stage for the final time before Iowa’s leadoff Jan. 3 caucuses.

Perhaps not, but thats not very comforting and certainly leaves the road wide open to nearly anything in the future.

Everyone has their key components that flip their switch. Mine is a balanced budget, fiscal responsibility and now paying down the debt.

I advocate pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, trimming the military to the toon of about 100 billion per year and asking for budget cuts of 5 percent across the board. In addition I would favor some small tax increases as well as a small 5 percent national sales tax exclusively to pay down the debt.

We have a 3 trillion dollar budget I think in all that we can cut spending enough to balance the budget.

I doubt that you will find much in the way of support for the war but every post I have made here is open to see in the disqus icon next to my name.

I assume you are confusing me for a conservative because I reject Obama and his legislate and regulate mentality. Im still trying to see where he has advocated balancing the budget.

‘We’re not going to be able to dig ourselves out’’ of Bush-era deficits in the next year or two, said Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, one of six Democratic rivals sharing a debate stage for the final time before Iowa’s leadoff Jan. 3 caucuses.

Perhaps not, but thats not very comforting and certainly leaves the road wide open to nearly anything in the future.

Everyone has their key components that flip their switch. Mine is a balanced budget, fiscal responsibility and now paying down the debt.

I advocate pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan, trimming the military to the toon of about 100 billion per year and asking for budget cuts of 5 percent across the board. In addition I would favor some small tax increases as well as a small 5 percent national sales tax exclusively to pay down the debt.

We have a 3 trillion dollar budget I think in all that we can cut spending enough to balance the budget.

“Nobody has said we should stay there forever. We all want most or all of our troops out and we know we have to get out; we simply shouldn't be stupid and beg for as much disaster as possible as well as appear cowardly and weak…”

Well, I guess 100 years (McCain) isn't technically “forever”, but longer than most people's life times. Whoever said anything about forever or even withdrawing in a “stupid” or “cowardly” way? That's right, it was the Republicans who branded ANYONE who asked about exit strategies as a “coward” or my favorite “Surrender Monkey”. Don't play dumb now, you may not give me the credit DLS, but I know you're smarter than that.

“As you apparently neglected to observe this, I was admitting defeat for McCain before Super Tuesday.”

No I didn't. I said, “…if I remember right, you were backing another in the [Republican] primary…” Clearer for you now? I know you never liked McCain because he was too liberal for you and that you've been whining about the Republicans loosing for over a year now. That's why I asked if it was really a psy-op. Again, it was a sarcastic remark.

“I'm not advocating chemical use on the frontier zone of Afghanistan …”

Really? You didn't say that? Well, let's read what you said again: “As for Afghanistan, I'd prefer we go in there and exterminate as many Talebs as we can, including those in Pakistan and their accomplices (even members of the ISI — eff 'em — that frontier zone and the criminals there even merit putting chemicals on the place as well as using nukes to wipe out cave complexes)…”

You're right, you said chemicals AND nukes. The sad thing here DLS, is that we're more in agreement than disagreement on the issue. Finishing off the Taliban, AQ and even helping rebuild Afghanistan was my main reasons for NOT starting the Iraq war. There is plenty of “Outrage! [tm]” waged by both sides. I'm sorry if you seem to only see it coming from one side.

Neocon: “…You just become convinced that because I use the Neocon tag and Oppose most everything Obama stands for that Im a war mongering Neocon. I am a democrat turned libertarian who is opposed to these wars and PRO balance the budget and pay down the debt.”

I didn't mean any insult to you Neocon. I was in support of going after AQ and the Taliban in Afghanistan but was always against the Iraq war.

I was in amazement that now two of the conservatives that post here are now talking about leaving Iraq and Afghanistan when -as stated above- any previous talk of such was an instant accusation of being a coward, or “soft on terrorism”, “surrender money”, etc.

I wonder if Joe kept any of the old comment threats prior to moving to the newer site design. If so we could have a little data mining party.

“Nobody has said we should stay there forever. We all want most or all of our troops out and we know we have to get out; we simply shouldn't be stupid and beg for as much disaster as possible as well as appear cowardly and weak…”

Well, I guess 100 years (McCain) isn't technically “forever”, but longer than most people's life times. Whoever said anything about forever or even withdrawing in a “stupid” or “cowardly” way? That's right, it was the Republicans who branded ANYONE who asked about exit strategies as a “coward” or my favorite “Surrender Monkey”. Don't play dumb now, you may not give me the credit DLS, but I know you're smarter than that.

“As you apparently neglected to observe this, I was admitting defeat for McCain before Super Tuesday.”

No I didn't. I said, “…if I remember right, you were backing another in the [Republican] primary…” Clearer for you now? I know you never liked McCain because he was too liberal for you and that you've been whining about the Republicans loosing for over a year now. That's why I asked if it was really a psy-op. Again, it was a sarcastic remark.

“I'm not advocating chemical use on the frontier zone of Afghanistan …”

Really? You didn't say that? Well, let's read what you said again: “As for Afghanistan, I'd prefer we go in there and exterminate as many Talebs as we can, including those in Pakistan and their accomplices (even members of the ISI — eff 'em — that frontier zone and the criminals there even merit putting chemicals on the place as well as using nukes to wipe out cave complexes)…”

You're right, you said chemicals AND nukes. The sad thing here DLS, is that we're more in agreement than disagreement on the issue. Finishing off the Taliban, AQ and even helping rebuild Afghanistan was my main reasons for NOT starting the Iraq war. There is plenty of “Outrage! [tm]” waged by both sides. I'm sorry if you seem to only see it coming from one side.

Neocon: “…You just become convinced that because I use the Neocon tag and Oppose most everything Obama stands for that Im a war mongering Neocon. I am a democrat turned libertarian who is opposed to these wars and PRO balance the budget and pay down the debt.”

I didn't mean any insult to you Neocon. I was in support of going after AQ and the Taliban in Afghanistan but was always against the Iraq war.

I was in amazement that now two of the conservatives that post here are now talking about leaving Iraq and Afghanistan when -as stated above- any previous talk of such was an instant accusation of being a coward, or “soft on terrorism”, “surrender money”, etc.

I wonder if Joe kept any of the old comment threats prior to moving to the newer site design. If so we could have a little data mining party.

I'll accept higher taxes if they're for a truly good purpose and we impose overdue sanity with spending by Washington. (We're going to get hit with higher taxes no matter what as part of saving Social Security and Medicare.)

I'll accept higher taxes if they're for a truly good purpose and we impose overdue sanity with spending by Washington. (We're going to get hit with higher taxes no matter what as part of saving Social Security and Medicare.)

Im a fiscal ultraconservative. I believe that a strong nation lies in its hefty bank account and not its ability to borrow.

Im a fiscal ultraconservative. I believe that a strong nation lies in its hefty bank account and not its ability to borrow.

As you apparently neglected to observe this, I was admitting defeat for McCain before Super Tuesday. Before Super Tuesday I was saying we all had to get used to saying “President Clinton” but since then it has changed to “President Obama.” FYI.

“if GWB had any balls he would start bombing right away”

Taliban positions? Yes, though we'd want to grasp some military rationale for this and other actions and by itself it might be seen as being as bizarre as the diplomatic overture to Iran the administration is now making.

Of course, that might be a diversion prior to bombing Iran, but I doubt it, and if that happened, I'd not be among the idiots screaming outrage but want to know why.

As you apparently neglected to observe this, I was admitting defeat for McCain before Super Tuesday. Before Super Tuesday I was saying we all had to get used to saying “President Clinton” but since then it has changed to “President Obama.” FYI.

“if GWB had any balls he would start bombing right away”

Taliban positions? Yes, though we'd want to grasp some military rationale for this and other actions and by itself it might be seen as being as bizarre as the diplomatic overture to Iran the administration is now making.

Of course, that might be a diversion prior to bombing Iran, but I doubt it, and if that happened, I'd not be among the idiots screaming outrage but want to know why.

1. We do need to wipe out the Taliban.

2. We can be safely suspicious, or cynical, and know that the first part of this would be removal of our troops from Iraq; Obama might not continue the plan (keep his promise) by re-deploying them all (or any of them!) in Afghanistan once they're out of Iraq. I could easily see him bringing some of the first troops directly home for PR reasons.

1. We do need to wipe out the Taliban.

2. We can be safely suspicious, or cynical, and know that the first part of this would be removal of our troops from Iraq; Obama might not continue the plan (keep his promise) by re-deploying them all (or any of them!) in Afghanistan once they're out of Iraq. I could easily see him bringing some of the first troops directly home for PR reasons.

I wonder if so many ignorant people will think about this and then try to think for a change before demanding an explicit, announced-to-the-entire-world-including-the-terrorists troop withdrawal “time table” (schedule). [sigh]

I wonder if so many ignorant people will think about this and then try to think for a change before demanding an explicit, announced-to-the-entire-world-including-the-terrorists troop withdrawal “time table” (schedule). [sigh]