I'm guessing I know what post you are referring to.

 

I believe Gerrymandering is a major reason for voter apathy.

"... in 2002, only four challengers were able to defeat incumbent members of Congress, the lowest number in modern American history,... This is due in part both to the high likelihood of incumbents to be the ones orchestrating a gerrymander as well as the relative ease of renomination for incumbents in subsequent elections, including incumbents among the minority. This shows another commonly cited effect of gerrymandering: a deleterious effect on the principle of democratic accountability. No longer fearing removal from office with their renomination and electoral success secured due to uncompetitive elections, incumbent politicians have a greatly reduced incentive to govern based on the interests of their constituents, even when these interests reflect an issue that enjoys majority support across the electorate as a whole."

What does your Congressional district look like?
Mine looks like somebody had the Runs and came up thirty feet short of the toilet.

 

What is this?

An ink blot used by a psych major?

Nope

Its Maryland's 3rd Congressional district.

Gerrymandering? Where..who...nuh uh...not us.

 

I thought that the eight Maryland districts were very evenly divided? Who would come up with such a crazy looking redistricting?

 

On the subject of elections.
Here we have the following elections this year.

1: Local First Nations (North American Indians to you politically incorrect people)
2: School Board
3: Territorial Government
4: Federal

Now that is really confusing the issues, EH??

 

What does your congressional district look like?

That one looks pretty normal to me.
Notice the two little white dots surrounded by black, near the middle on the right side.

Those white areas are either Gated communities with golf courses or
they're slums.

 

Most but not all I would pin on Kerry. This list isn't of hypotheticals, is it? There are many subjective terms that don't make it a fair comparison. It's your opinion that the US is "emboiled" and that it's a "no win" situation. Your opinion may turn out to be accurate, but then it may not. I, and many people around me have prospered financially. Small buisness seems to be doing pretty good from where I'm looking at it. Iran and N. Korea aren't new issues. Just easy ones to hype. I've seen in several places that say at best the warrantless wire taps are boardering illegal. I do have concerns about abuse of power but think that perhaps that could be more vigorously persued at a later date and keep the current focus at keeping terrorists from killing us.

I dissagree that Kerry couldn't be much worst than Bush. If I agreed with that I probably wouldn't have voted for Bush.

 

It's all about money, the only difference between either party or candidate is the politics of the people writing the checks. I seriously doubt anyone on this forum could cut a check big enough to garner any national influence, probably not any state favors either although you might make a local politicians A list, therefore "we the people" are basically stuck choosing between the best that money can buy from either side and hoping the table scraps we get are enough to cover our butts.

 

If I grant you the "subjective" items and remove them would you vote for the person pushing the rest?

Bush is a sell out or a liar...whichever it is makes me sick.

 

We'll have educated voters the day we have educated politicians.

 

Yep he did increase the budget and the deficit. But after years of neglect and overuse the military needed to replenish itself. I personally guarded new aircraft that were cannibalized to fly other aircraft out of a hurricane, during the Klinton years. As far as the deficit goes
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061006/...budget_deficit
There are similar articles in many different publications, unfortunately you have to go the the third page of a search to find them. I find a $250 billion deficit acceptable, when considering the challenges we are facing. Fighting two wars, replenishing the military, bringing the economy out of a recession. $250 billion is not that bad. Those tax cuts go us out of the recession, and are now paying dividends through increased tax revenue.

Yes, I know Kilnton had us at a surplus of $79 billion. When you consider how he achieved those numbers it is easy to understand that it was not sustainable. He failed to fund the basic necessities of the military. After Bush took over they had the largest pay raises in many years. They were also given the tools to actually do the job.

 

I have absolutely no gripes with putting money in the military.

I have a problem spending billions to export a western ideal of government into a country that obviously isn't prepared for it.

250 billion dollar decificit is unacceptable to me.

If I'm correct I don't believe Clinton ever had a surplus, it was projected based on continued unrealistic growth.

When the Bush administration keeps spending like a drunken liberal on social programs he is the cause of a huge decificit.

When will we get a true conservative in the white house...

 

Not sure one with the cahones to stay conservative exists. Too much pressure on them to spend, once they get in the office.

 

Get me elected to office and you will have a REAL conservative in office. First thing I will do is stop ANY funding to social programs, no welfare, no nothing...

NO money for education BUT I will give that money back to taxpayers so they can choose where to put their kids in school at. NO reason for the federal government to tax people for education.

NO government funds to ANY school including colleges...

I will cut taxes by 60% and the other 40% will ALL go to the military giving them a HUGE raise and MORE equipment.

NO money for farmers they DON'T need it.
NO money for businesses they DON'T need it.
NO money for the poor they DON'T need it. If they had got an education they wouldn't be so stupid as to need someone else to care for them.

What ever it takes to get the 40% of federal money will be figured out by a percentage. If that percentage is for example 18% EVERY American will pay 18% including those earning min. wage, after all any one earning min. wage is a kid, or someone to stupid to advance themselves and thus don't need ANY extra money...

Responsibility people...

 

Hey, that is the same policy they have in North Korea.

Burt, what did you do to your hair?