[Dane]

It is incredible that come this fall, Americans may have to vote for a Democrat to get a President who will curb federal spending and shrink the federal deficit. Yes, the Democrats promise the moon, but this President promises Mars

Huh, Kerry and the demos were proposing a $800 billion drug plan.

Wonder why the Union-Leader left that fact out. Oh that's right the facts get in the way of the Union-Leader's fantasy world. Nevermind.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Yep a Democrat will curb spending. Cut military, cut military, and cut military.

9/11 will look like a field trip to the petting ZOO.

No I'm not a Bushbot, but he still has my vote in November.

CG

[sirchtruth]

No conservative should agree with Bush's spending spree, however, compared to any Dem I'll take it.

Most of you complaining, are the querulous Libet. who endlesslessly whine about everything and are more selfishly prickish and immature than many Dems I know...

[DM1]

Great abandon Bush and have Kerry Elected. Anyone who says Terrorism is "exagerated" should give you some insight as to how he will defend America. Kerry is a loony lefty who can pretend to be a centrist. He is a typical limousine liberal who is very very dangerous

[RJCogburn]

The Union Leader gets it.

It is sad that it has come to this with GWB. If the Union Leader is writing this....well, the newspaper may be a bit tamer than when Bill Loeb was alive, but it is no less conservative, and never one to back away.

GWB has major fencemending to do to carry NH in November, IMO. I voted for him last time with great excitement. It is a major disappointment.

[angkor]

Bill Clinton and the Rats hijacked "fiscal restraint" in 1995/96 from Newt Gingrich and the Contract For America. It was a brazen seizure of credit for something entirely enacted by a Republican Congress.

Ever since then, the Rats have posed as fiscal conservatives, which they aren't.

[templar]

Conservatives predicted that the $400 billion price tag on the President's Medicare prescription drug bill was underestimated. ... Conservatives predicted that the federal deficit would increase dramatically without spending cuts.

It's time the Republicans got these fanatics out of their ranks. They are impeding Republican progress and contributing nothing to the future of our nation. Their time has passed.

[KantianBurke]

There is precious little that Americans truly need the federal government to do. This President claimed to understand that. But his actions show that either he doesn't understand, or he was lying.

Either the President is incompetent or he lied. Which is it?

[Lee_Atwater]

The writer(s) of this editorial know little about political history. GOP deficit hawkery sent the party into the abyss from about 1930 to 1978.

No President has lost an election over deficits (especially one who reduces tax rates). Following this op-ed's theory the GOP would have lost Presidential elections in 1984 and 1988 -- and won in 1964 and 1976. In 1992 GHWB lost an election after raising taxes to reduce deficits.

Austerity platforms lose elections.

It doesn't matter what you or I think about deficits; deficits do not matter electorally.

[Savage Beast]

Anybody who thinks that a Democrat President will curb federal spending and shrink the federal deficit is nuts--and is believing Democrat propaganda.

It was not just the Republicans who had a near-death experience in the Florida recount wars; the entire United States did. And if the Democrats should succeed, America will experience the permanent version.

The 2004 election will be the most important election since 1860--and possibly the most important election in American history. This is not hyperbole.

President Bush must be re-elected! A glimpse at the alternatives will explain why.

[Pagey]

Americans may have to vote for a Democrat to get a President who will curb federal spending and shrink the federal deficit.


What? That is an entirely farcical sentence. This quote is from a Stephen Moore speech at Hillsdale college in 1997 and he really nails it.Our elected officials have abused the Constitution and gone much too far to receive their piece of the pie. Link to the speech follows:




...In a famous incident in 1854, President Franklin Pierce courageously vetoed an extremely popular bill intended to help the mentally ill saying: "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity." To approve such spending, he argued, "would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded." Grover Cleveland, the king of the veto, rejected hundreds of congressional spending bills during his two terms as president in the late 1800s, because, as he often wrote: "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution..."

"...Were Jefferson, Madison, Crockett, Pierce, and Cleveland merely hardhearted and uncaring penny pinchers, as their critics have often charged? Were they unsympathetic toward fire victims, the mentally ill, widows, or impoverished refugees? Of course not. They were honor bound to uphold the Constitution. They perceived - we now know correctly - that once the government genie was out of the bottle, it would be impossible to get it back in".

http://www.libertyhaven.com/politicsandcurrentevents/constitutionscourtsandlaw/unconstitutional.shtml