ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

It kind of is, since we get more money with lower taxes, and the economy does better.

Obama's Irish | 02/26/08

This is the first war in American history where this has been done. Also, it's the first time where we've opted to spend billions of dollars on recruitment, rather than relying on the draft.

Yitzhak | 02/26/08

What evidence do you have that the economy actually does better when taxes are lowered? It's a nice little theory, but our current recession kind of proves it false. If you want to improve the economy long term you create jobs.

ColoradoJ | 02/26/08

It's a no brainer. When taxes are lowered, people have more money in their pockets. When people have more OF THEIR OWN MONEY in their pockets, they spend it. Then that money gets back into the economy. Economic growth doesn't come from bloated government bureaucracy.

AKMike | 02/26/08

I would agree with you, Mike, but for two things. First, you made a partisan shot at him (I personally make it a point never to insult someone purely on political alignment), and secondly, while I am gaining interest in small government, I don't believe that tax cuts for those who already make millions or billions of dollars are logical. They're going to buy that Aston-Martin whether or not you cut their tax bill by a million dollars or whatever. Some people who receive tax cuts are just that ludicrously rich.

Accidental Democrat | 02/26/08

How did FDR get us out of the Great Depression? He increased the size of the government, creating government agencies which created thousands of jobs. This actually caused great economic growth. You also have not answered my point that we are headed into a recession now, even with Bush's tax cuts. If tax cuts are the economic stimulus you suggest they are, why is this recession happening?

ColoradoJ | 02/26/08

I don't make millions of dollars, and the tax cuts are a big deal to me. People who earn considerably more than me, don't have less of a right to keep their own money than I do. Just because you earn a lot of money, doesn't mean you should carry a heavy burden to a bloated federal government.

AKMike | 02/27/08

The New Deal did not get us out of the Depression as much as WWII and the infusion of cash into the economy did. Steel mills had to open up, boats and equipment had to be built and that created jobs, which created wealth. Creating an entitlement culture where people believe the government, or even more confusing, the private corporations owe them a job, owe them wealth, and owe them more than their actual worth to the company.

AKMike | 02/27/08

As for the real burden being health care, if more people were able to keep more of their own money, they could do things like fix their situation. They could obtain health care, use the money for more schooling or better training to get a better job. You automatically lump everybody who has obtained wealth in this country as greedy. Are you "greedy" because you have a better lot in life than the homeless who are sleeping on the street right now? Are you greedy because you're going to a movie, or the theater, while people will go without food? People are not "greedy" simply because they have obtained wealth. Most of the charity in this country comes from the wealthiest people in the country, not to mention that, even with the tax cuts, they pay the vast majority of the taxes in this country. Since the poorest Americans don't pay taxes, I'm not suprised that taxes would not be their biggest financial burden. I would submit that the government is here to help all Americans, not just the ones who are not putting one penny into the federal budget. The people who are paying THOUSANDS and even MILLIONS of dollars a year, probably deserve some benefit from government as well, and they certainly deserve the money THEY EARNED more than the people who have done nothing to earn it.

AKMike | 02/27/08

First of all please provide credible sources for your Iraq statements. To my knowledge they were not shooting at our jets on a regular basis, unless we were flying in their restricted airspace, in which case they have every right to. There are Saudi's who have attempted to assasinate our president, but did we invade Saudi Arabia? Yes, Saddam did some terrible things, but you don't see us rushing into Darfur or any of the other many areas of the world with oppressive dictators. And yes, I would argue that it is some what greedy to live an ultra comfortable life while ignoring the suffering of others. Most wealthy people in this country where born into wealth, they didn't earn it, while there are others who work like crazy, but still remain below the poverty line. Many urban and rural local school districts rely on federal funding to exist. Our economy recovered before we got into WWII, evidence the thousands of New Deal jobs helped. Also, taxes were not cut during WWII, yet our economy boomed.

ColoradoJ | 02/27/08

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A07E1D91F3DF936A15751C0A96F958260 President Clinton, appearing at a news conference with President Jerry Rawlings of Ghana, accused Mr. Hussein's forces of trying to shoot down an American or British plane. He said the United States would not be deterred, however. ''They are trying, obviously, for the symbolic victory of shooting one of these planes down and perhaps trying to intimidate us from enforcing the no-fly zone, which we're still bound to do under the United Nations resolution,'' Mr. Clinton said. They were just trying to patrol the UN sanctioned "no fly zone". This was part of the "diplomacy" that we tried for TWELVE YEARS. This is only one of MANY stories. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/longroad/etc/assassination.html During the former president's visit to Kuwait to commemorate the coalition's victory over Iraq in the Gulf War, Kuwaiti authorities arrested 17 people allegedly involved in a car bomb plot to kill George H.W. Bush. Through interviews with the suspects and examinations of the bomb's circuitry and wiring, the FBI established that the plot had been directed by the Iraqi Intelligence Service. A Kuwaiti court later convicted all but one of the defendants. In retaliation, President Clinton two months later ordered the firing of 23 cruise missiles at Iraqi Intelligence Service headquarters in Baghdad. The day before the attack U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Madeleine K. Albright went before the Security Council to present evidence of the Iraqi plot. And, after the U.S. attack, Vice President Gore said the attack "was intended to be a proportionate response at the place where this plot" to assassinate Bush "was hatched and implemented." Keep your eyes and ears closed. If you didn't "hear" about it. It never happened.

AKMike | 02/28/08

Do you really think these incidences warrant a full out war? These incidents are not proof that our American homeland was under any threat. Besides, them shooting at our planes was no threat at all, we could easily have destroyed the shooters in an instant if we wanted to. We are hated throughout the middle east, we knew this long before the gulf war. Our active presence in the middle east is really asking for an attack. Sending a president into a dangerous area is quite foolish. How would we react if another nation flew their planes over our nation without our permission? We'd probably shoot at them as well.

ColoradoJ | 02/28/08

Please be by guest to tell those pilots who were dodging bullets that the bullets were never a threat to them.

AKMike | 02/28/08

My point was that they shouldn't have been flying there in the first place,

ColoradoJ | 02/28/08