No, I voted for Kerry to split the power so our policies would move toward the center. If the Republican party held an outlook like the old GOP, I would have voted Republican as I did most of my life.I do not agree with the social, tax or economic agenda of the conservative right or the liberal left. Both do not represent policy that is best for the majority of Americans in the long run.

I do not agree with the social, tax or economic agenda of the conservative right or the liberal left.

Your calls in prior blog entries to raise taxes seem to show you do agree with the liberal left in the tax agenda area. You might say your own words betray you.

Meanwhile, when you say this:

Both do not represent policy that is best for the majority of Americans in the long run.

you seem to have done a very poor job (as evidenced by multiple comments above, and in prior responses) of showing the balance you claim to have. You can argue that is because our government is too one sided currently, but the sides aren't that unevenly split. There is a large enough minority in the Senate to filibuster bad policy. The same in the House. Neither side can run roughshod over the other, and I too am most pleased when we have government that works in that manner, typically governing from the center, where neither extreme is able to dominate.

Again, your articles and blog entries have portrayed you as someone that is far too willing to bash the right, most especially ready to bash President Bush (at every possible opportunity. You might find the irony in noting that the subject line/headline for this article is perhaps your least objectionable article in memory).

If you perhaps displayed some of that same disdain for people like Nancy Pelosi (articles in sources such as the Washington Times noted today that she's been caught doing politcal favors for contributors to her favored PAC), Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd and others, then others might be able to see you as a moderate, rather than a shrill liberal crying for higher taxes without demanding cuts in spending and waste.

It's your blog, and you're welcome to do as you please, but you will most likely find your audience getting smaller and smaller until you consider the advise you've been getting lately. Just my $.02

"and that makes you insanely jealous since you are just as incompetent (if not more so) as W., and you've never been successful, right?

More blather from you."
Now that was the most insane ridiculous argument rebuttal I've come by. It's almost as if you are speaking about two men who are the president of the most powerful nation in the world. You use Bush's obvious-to-you-incompetence as an argument? Saying someone is just as incompetent acknowledges their incompetence in your mind. And how can anyone defend that?

The reason I focus on Bush and the conservatives is because they are in power. It is their policies that are pushing this county into debt watching as we lose our industries and jobs. I believe that the tax cuts to the middle income Americans were a good thing because it helps stimulate demand. My opposition is to the tax cuts for the ultra wealthy is because we cannot afford them and have far more important needs than granting tax cuts to people that do not need more money. When George Bush began his tax cut business in 2001, the two richest men in the world Bill Gates and Warren Buffett wrote letters to the president explaining to him the wealthy did not need additional money from tax cuts and there were far are more important things our nation needed then to give the wealthy more money. These two people understood the broader perspective not of the greed of the the wealthy who support Bush. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill as well as Alan Greenspan advised the president to link the tax cuts to the available surplus to pay for them. Both these men warned Bush of getting into another spiral of deficit spending. Bush did not listen and we now are in an ever increasing spiral of debt. We have created a structural deficit where the revenue generated from the current tax structure will not pay for our spending and the difference is so great that no combinations of spending cuts and loop hole plugging can balance the budget. Without tax increases there is no chance to balance the budget!.

Without a split in the power between the liberals and conservatives we are moving in a very dangerous direction. No respectable conservative would have that kind debt that the United States policy is producing. A true conservative would have a balanced budget and reserve to deal with with unforeseen needs. Today a CNN poll shows 0nly a 41 % approval of his handling of the economy and Social Security. Only 34% approved of his handling of the Shiavo issue.

Hey, I know let's have no US dignitaries attend the funeral and let the world see as complete uncaring asses!!

Get over yourself, come on please, if a Foreign diplomat high up the chain of command like the Pope dies than it is only logical, proper, and a part of diplomatic protocol to send someone from your country as diplomatic representative to attend the funeral, right?

Seriously, quit making mountains out of mole hills.

It would be downright rude and hurt the public image if the United States did not attend regardless of whether the nation likes the Pope or not because it is called...what is the word I am searching when you act nice with proper etiquette to other dignitaries...could it be...

DIPOLMACY!!!

- Grim X

At the present time we are enacting legislation and following policies that appeal to the conservative right and ignore a moderate and liberal points of view

Liberal points of view are ignored because Americans don't want them. When will you guys figure that out?

Island Dog.

The truth is that the majority do not want policies that are to the right or left. They want policies that are more in the center. That is my basic problem with the current power balance- There is no balance. It is all what the conservatives want and the hell with anyone that does not share their ideas!

Island Dog. The truth is that the majority do not want policies that are to the right or left. They want policies that are more in the center. That is my basic problem with the current power balance- There is no balance. It is all what the conservatives want and the hell with anyone that does not share their ideas!

And liberal policies fall where on that left-right scale? And if the majority do not want left or right policies then "why" did you claim that liberal policies are being ignored? Which BTW is what prompted Island Dogs responce.

drmiler:

Stop Job Loss, Balance budget, Fund Social Security WITHOUT changing the structure, Health care, border security, lack of support for Iraq War, greater funding for education, opposition to many of the Bush tax cuts and an energy policy the reduces our dependence of foreign oil ( which is a lot more then drilling in Alaska i.e. higher mileage for cars, SUV's etc).

All these are centrest. There are NO NEW social programs just fully funding existing ONES that most people want continued.

drmiler: Stop Job Loss, Balance budget, Fund Social Security WITHOUT changing the structure, Health care, border security, lack of support for Iraq War, greater funding for education, opposition to many of the Bush tax cuts and an energy policy the reduces our dependence of foreign oil ( which is a lot more then drilling in Alaska i.e. higher mileage for cars, SUV's etc). All these are centrest. There are NO NEW social programs just fully funding existing ONES that most people want continued.

This is NOT what I asked! Is it? Shall I reiterate?

And liberal policies fall where on that left-right scale? And if the majority do not want left or right policies then "why" did you claim that liberal policies are being ignored? Which BTW is what prompted Island Dogs responce.

WHERE do you see me asking about centrist policies? Now can you answer the question? Or is that too much to ask?

First, all of the issues I listed are supported by the liberals which are being ignored by Bush. The liberals also want universal health as the BIG new entitlement to cover 46 Million that do not have health coverage. It is not true that many of the liberal policies are not wanted by Americans. What is true is that no conservatives want them and since they control Congress and The WhiteHouse, what liberals and moderates want are ignored. The proof of what I am saying shows up is polls about specific programs like , healtrh care, deficit, border security, Social Security etc.

It is not true that many of the liberal policies are not wanted by Americans

This is where your wrong! There are "different" versions of these policies out there. Most Americans do NOT want the liberal version! They would however fall all over the moderate version of the same plan.

It is all what the conservatives want and the hell with anyone that does not share their ideas!

That is just too funny. Because liberals are so open minded about their ideas right?

First, all of the issues I listed are supported by the liberals which are being ignored by Bush. The liberals also want universal health as the BIG new entitlement to cover 46 Million that do not have health coverage. It is not true that many of the liberal policies are not wanted by Americans. What is true is that no conservatives want them and since they control Congress and The WhiteHouse, what liberals and moderates want are ignored. The proof of what I am saying shows up is polls about specific programs like , healtrh care, deficit, border security, Social Security etc.

Americans do not want a socialist healthcare system that liberals so much want. You still don't get it do you. Why do you think Kerry lost? Because he's a liberal that supports liberal ideas. You guys still don't understand that your politics and ideas are not appealling to Americans anymore. Remember, you guys lost.