Reminder-Ohio CD-2 election on Tuesday (Hackett needs to be made an example of)

[antiRepublicrat]

Tough choice. A pro-gun liberal Dem who's fought for his country vs. an ethics-challenged incumbent Republcian. Too bad "none of the above" isn't an option.

[eleni121]

What a creep. What hole did he slime out of?

[eraser2005]

Certainly a better one than Brinkman, DeWine, or McEwen slithered out of.

[conservative_2001]

Excuse me while I put my flak jacket on first.... But I think that there actually do need to be some tax hikes put in place.

Many of your fellow RINO's feel exactly the same way.

The federal budget has gone from an $80 billion surplus in 2000 to a $567 billion dollar deficit in 2004.

Actually according to the OMB the FY2004 deficit was $412 billion, but don't let the facts get in the way.

2005 is still looking to turn in a $500 billion deficit.

Wrong again. The original projection for 2005 was at $426 billion, and due to better than expected revenues the White House now projects this year's deficit to be $333 billion. Morgan Stanley project $335 billion. You're off again by over $150 billion.

If you eliminated all nondefense, non homeland security discretionary spending, you'd still have a $150 billion deficit for 2004.

Once again, your numbers are inaccurate. Discretionary spending for FY2004 is due to be $908 billion. All defense and Homeland Security spending comes out to $499 billion. That leaves $409 billion in discretionary spending. Take that out of the budget, and using Morgan Stanley's $335 billion deficit, that would leave you with a surplus of $74 billion, not a deficit of $150 billion.

Any more liberal arguments I can shoot down? If you're going to come to Free Republican and argue for tax increases, at least have the courtesy of basing your argument on the actual numbers.