The Choice in 2004 is simple

Democrats will take a lot of your money and waste most of it, putting some of
it in the pockets of people who really need it.

Republicans will take less of your money and put all of it in the pockets of
their supporters who don't really need it at all.

Pick your poison

Socko Van Puppet

People make these decisions so hard, but all it really boils down to is do
you want a democracy (republic) or a socialist government.

A socialist government believes that people aren't able to make correct
decisions concerning their money and in a redistribution of wealth. Isn't
this exactly what the democrats do? Personally I've never believed in
punishing someone for being successful, I thought this is what this country
was all about?

On the other hand the Republicans basically give the big business a free
ride. The logic here is that if they can keep more of their money then they
can expand, hire more people who pay taxes, etc. To me this is a much
better way to do business. However, I think the time has come that these
businesses should only get breaks if they reinvest in this country. Sending
our jobs to other country's does not put any tax money back in the economy
and the average tax payer has to pick up the load.

Both are flawed, but the irony is that everything could be easily fixed with
a flat consumption tax. Noting could be more fair then this, but then the
government would lose that tax stronghold they have on the people and thus,
lessen their ability to control.

There, I'll get off my soapbox now.
"Socko Van Puppet" wrote in message
...
The Choice in 2004 is simple

Democrats will take a lot of your money and waste most of it, putting some
of
it in the pockets of people who really need it.

Republicans will take less of your money and put all of it in the pockets
of
their supporters who don't really need it at all.

Pick your poison

Socko Van Puppet

Jack Dotson said:

A socialist government believes that people aren't able to make correct
decisions concerning their money and in a redistribution of wealth. Isn't
this exactly what the democrats do?

Your definition of socialism is wrong, and no, that's not what
Democrats (note correct capitalization) do.

Both are flawed, but the irony is that everything could be easily fixed with
a flat consumption tax.

Now yer talkin.

Noting could be more fair then this, but then the
government would lose that tax stronghold they have on the people and thus,
lessen their ability to control.

This is a specious viewpoint. There is no single, monolithic
objective of "control" shared by everybody in "the government". The
system that's in place now enables legislators and cabinet
secretaries (but seldom Federal judges, thank god) to leverage their
powers (mainly of taxation) in order to receive a piece of the pie
from those who benefit. For most of that select group of individuals
-- who number fewer than 600 -- feathering their own nests is the
main agenda. Some of them actually believe in the principles they
espouse in the campaign, and others simply adopt rhetoric that
pleases their electorates.