I criticize both sides, more so than nearly everyone except for Indy. I have said repeatedly, I would support Democrats if they would not make war on my demographic with every policy proposal and the accompanying rhetoric.

I just want to be left alone, allowed to earn what I need to support my family and pay for my health care and retirement.

I suppose having principles makes me somewhat predictable in other regards…seeing as how you merely spit out the party line and care nothing for free thought or independence.

You suffer from an extreme case of self delusion for you to call anyone predictable.

He is smart and capable. That is the hope everybody sees in him.

blame yourself for your problems, by the way. You control two things in your life…everybody does: effort and attitude. I did not get to where I am today by blaming “liberals” or “conservatives” for all of my economic woes. Grow up and take responsibility for not being as successful as you think America should allow you to be…or learn to live with yourself.

I’ll be a professional, and know that I’ll probably be in the second-to-highest (maybe even the highest) bracket from here on out. However, this was possible due to government-subsidized loans keeping the rates low and affordable. I have spent my entire post-secondary career in excellent state schools with tuition levels that, combined with my working through school, kept my debt level very reasonable.

So, no, it is not simply a matter of rhetoric, just some humility and an understanding that my own position in life is due to a great deal of systemic aid and a system that was tuned to my own particular talents. Lots of hard work went in there as well, but I caught a lot of breaks along the way to put me in front of people to recognize said work.

I see you have bought into the stupid rhetoric. As I estimate my taxes for next year, I see that nearly every deduction that I can take starts to run out right at the salary that my wife and I currently make. I could not take the full college tuition deduction because when I was single, I made $200 more than the maximum for 0 phase-out. While married, we make $5,000 more than the maximum phase-out on PMI deduction, and we make more than a few other tax credits and deductions as well.

Forget the fact that I worked my way through college, and paid for every last dime. The Democrats still pretty much classify me and my wife as rich, while they give refundable “tax credits” to people who have no tax burden in the first place.

I grew up in the very Demographic that the Democrats claim to help, yet they have done nothing for me but make me pay for benefits for people who are unwilling to work and make their own way.

I bought a modest house because I knew that home prices were inflated. I got a fixed rate, put money down and made sure that the worst of conditions would not break me, yet the Democrats want to help those that make less than me who decided to live a lifestyle that I could not afford.

The government now wants to allow people who do not make enough to itemize to be able to take the standard deduction and also deduct their mortgage. Without the mortgage deduction (or PMI deduction that I am ineligible for) I do not have enough deductions to merit itemizing, if I could take my mortgage interest before any deductions are applied. So, the tax burden falls further on people of my demographic to pay for the tax breaks for others.

Don’t fool yourself. The truly Rich earn most of their money in non-wage jobs, so they do not pay taxes on earned income the way most of us do. The people that are hurt most by income tax increases are the middle to upper middle class. No wonder the very rich vote and donate to Democrats in such high numbers.

Why is it that you pretty much always have to argue straw men? I did not say word one about Obama, yet you accuse me of attacking him. I am one of the few on either side who is sitting back and waiting for him to actually do something before claiming he is the greatest man in history or the second coming of Stalin. Of course, anyone with your obviosuly liberal mindset who calls himself “Goldwater Conservative” is not one who thinks words have meaning.

And where exactly are you Doug? Did you found a Fortune 500 company? Are you a CEO whose performance has nothing to do with his pay? Are you shipping jobs overseas to China? Did you seduce a bunch of physicists away from their productive work in understanding the universe to cook up ridiculously hard-to-price derivatives when your last memories of calculus were obliterated by alcohol with your B-school buddies ten years ago?

Because, I’m having a hard time sourcing these “attacks.”

The American people rarely get people they can vote for…that is essentially how our system has evolved under the two parties. Everything is adversarial at, and within, every level of our government. Don’t blame democrats. Blame the people. The system would probably work much better if we repealed a few amendments…most importantly the 17th and 22nd and section 1 of the 14th amendment. It would also help if winning elective office was more a result of a candidate’s character, tact and intelligence rather than who raises more money.

Hold your breath on the fiscally conservative Democrat thing. Obama is the president elect now…not a candidate and not the junior Senator from Illinois. Give him a chance.

Perhaps if the Dem’s didn’t just try to look for the anti-Bush and istead found a reasonable fiscally conservative Democrat, we would be better off.

I voted for Bush the first time because he ran on less government and not being the policemen of the world.

The second time I did not vote for the President. A vote for Bush was a vote for the destruction of the real conservative movement. I made this point years ago as you know. The real question is had the GOP practiced what they preached would the party be in the shape it is in today? As in business sometimes you have to go backwards to go forward.

I have no knowledge of what Gore would have done as President. That is completely beside the point. I am referring to his crazy anticts since it was clear he was not going to be President, like his father promissed him when he tucked him into his bed in their Washington hotel.

Gore is completely off his rocker. Listen to his speaches, look at his global warming cult. He is clearly unstable. Perhaps it happened by being so close to his birthright, only to be beaten in such a close election by the worst Republican president since Grant, but I doubt it just suddenly developed.

Bush was a horrible President, but I blame the Democrats. I would like a choice on who to vote for, but they do nothing but engage in class warfare and attack me, who has done nothing but struggle to get where I am. They forced me to vote for someone I would have taken any reasonable opportunity to vote against.

I might like to take a shot at answering the question: “How would you like to have a proven and dangerous nutcase like Albert Gore as President today?”

It is hard to say. It never happened…and all of the b/s conservative & liberal conspiracies about what Gore would have done differently than Bush is irrelevant.

I mean no disrespect by posing a question to make a point…How do you like having a proven and dangerous nutcase like G. W. Bush as president?

I sincerely believe that the only be a few differences. Gore would not have twisted intel to start a war in Iraq and the Katrina fiasco is less likely to have happened. 9/11 would probably still have happened. Same with the dot com bubble bursting. I doubt the sub-prime mortgage would have been as deregulated as it was, but it could have. the Kyoto Protocol would have been signed onto and not lived up to.

Gore would have probably been a one-term president.

There are so many speculations it is futile to attempt to point out non-existent differences between the two. The biggest differences are intelligence. Gore is extraordinarily more intelligent than Bush and would have probably exercised greater discretion…meaning Gore can see further than 5 minutes in front of his face.

You are not making sense. I disliked GW Bush from the day he announced for President, yet I voted for him twice because he was and still is better than the boobs he ran against. I too was against pretty much every big government program he supported. Who 3J voted for in 2000 and 2004 says very little about his support of such programs.

How would you like to have a proven and dangerous nutcase like Albert Gore as President today?

Please do not confuse Three Jack with facts it stops him from saying what he feels.

Icarus has forgotten about the republican principle that guides electoral politics. If Martin were to win this time…he would have to be the blue dog dem that he is (not the liberal whack job that conservatives paint him) if he wants reelected. Plain and simple.

Three Jack…the point Konop is making is that you vote against your interests. If you do not support those programs listed above…why are you going to vote for a man that helped pass them?

Kathleen Parker is right. In the long term, the GOP needs to abandon the irrational evangelicals that have been determining the outcomes of republican primaries (like the 2000 GOP pres. primary). Their selections have lead to some of the worst congressmen in american history…Mark Foley and Paul Broun come to mind as examples that should be fresh in everyone’s minds.

Would you care to substantiate this with anything from Jim Martin’s campaign material?

“There is no monolithic view among the netroots.”

Absolutely correct. It’s a loose coalition of people who are bat-shit crazy for many varied reasons.

Finally, cotrairian implies a certain amount of counter conventional wisdom, illogic and guessing. There are a 100 reasons why it is logical for Obama to want Martin and they far outweigh the “what if’s” and suppositions launched by Icarus. The only part of the post I can agree with is, there is no reason for Obama to gamble any political capital for any campaign at this point.