Opinion of Gore

[??????????]

True, the IRS isn't exaclty fair and perfect. But that is besides the point. When you get sick and need Medicare, maybe then you will realize why it must be expanded and improved, people shoudl never have to choose between food and medicine.

NCLB increases standards but doesn't increase funding. Brilliant! Many states, including Texas, have made passing scores lower, so students will pass and the state won't be penalized. NCLB is like the tax cuts, help the well-off, hurt the needy.  

If we had National Health Care that was not completely free but 80/20 that would be the best. ( I may have to bump my national Healthcare idea again ). A completely free system would bankrupt this country because to many leeches would be taking advantage of it. Again, the tax cuts helped my but I'm not rich!

80/20 Health Care would not be terrible.

Akno, will you read my thread if I bump it?

Click here to read my idea. We had a good discussion.

http://www.uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=1;action=display;threadid=1461

[Akno21]

Ok, I read your idea and posted something there.

[??????????]

Ok, I read your idea and posted something there.

Lets go have a civil debate over there.

[ATFFL]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

[Akno21]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

[??????????]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

You gave your reason in that first post that he quoted. So do it for your country? ha

[ATFFL]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

And thus, the great failing of liberalism is perpetuated.  

[Akno21]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

And thus, the great failing of liberalism is perpetuated.  

What is that supposed to mean?

[??????????]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

And thus, the great failing of liberalism is perpetuated.  

What is that supposed to mean?

Trusting the government with your money instead of yourself. Liberalism is a failure plain and simple.

[ATFFL]

I would happily give back my $600 tax cut in order to ensure that education was fully funded, college tution prices didn't skyrocket, gasoline prices didn't skyrocket, and that every elderly person was covered well under Medicare.

In the words of JFK "It is not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."

Contact the IRS, it will accept money as an effective donation to the US treasury.

I never said I would just give them money for no reason.

And thus, the great failing of liberalism is perpetuated.  

What is that supposed to mean?

The attitude that giving money is great, for other people.  If the government is such a good steward of your money, if they can make better use of it than you, if you want them to take more of my money, you should give your money to them without being forced to.

If you truly believe taxes need to be higher, impose that tax on yourself.

[Akno21]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

[??????????]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

[Fritz]

The person I am dating is a Republican.  In the conversation we had last night, he said the one thing us Democrats need to do is get Al Gore to shut up, or at least Kerry needs to keep as much distance from Gore as he can.

 Democrats, do you agree?

[Akno21]

The person I am dating is a Republican.  In the conversation we had last night, he said the one thing us Democrats need to do is get Al Gore to shut up, or at least Kerry needs to keep as much distance from Gore as he can.

 Democrats, do you agree?

Use him only in specific areas where he may be an asset. Personally, I think we should send him up to Alaska on a long-term mission to make Alaskans care about their environment and thus vote Democratic. If he succeeds, great. If not, well its Alaska, not New York City so whatever he says won't be televised over and over and over again so he looks like a complete fool.

[Akno21]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

What governmental programs should we cut then? If we cut taxes, we cut government aid.

[??????????]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

What governmental programs should we cut then? If we cut taxes, we cut government aid.

Welfare for starts. We should cut government aid. Leave it up to the states to take care of their respective citizens. Plus foreign aid pretty much needs to be completely eliminated.

[Akno21]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

What governmental programs should we cut then? If we cut taxes, we cut government aid.

Welfare for starts. We should cut government aid. Leave it up to the states to take care of their respective citizens. Plus foreign aid pretty much needs to be completely eliminated.

If we increase the amount of aid given by states, then state taxes will have to go up. So you are against the promised $400 Million to help fight AIDS in Africa?

[??????????]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

What governmental programs should we cut then? If we cut taxes, we cut government aid.

Welfare for starts. We should cut government aid. Leave it up to the states to take care of their respective citizens. Plus foreign aid pretty much needs to be completely eliminated.

If we increase the amount of aid given by states, then state taxes will have to go up. So you are against the promised $400 Million to help fight AIDS in Africa?

No the states would take care of the aid with no federal involvement. Second question, pretty much, yes. Make the UN pay their fair share for once! Most of those nations are deadbeats on their dues.

[Akno21]

I would only want taxes back to the Clinton levels, before the Bush tax cuts. The government needs enough income to provide education, health care, social security, etc. Personally, I wouldn't mind a system where you wouldn't have to pay certain taxes, in return you could not be publically educated, recieve federal healthcare, social security, be allowed in the Smithsonians or other national parks/facilities, etc.

Socialist. The problem with the government is that TOO much money is coming in. Taxes still need to be cut.

What governmental programs should we cut then? If we cut taxes, we cut government aid.

Welfare for starts. We should cut government aid. Leave it up to the states to take care of their respective citizens. Plus foreign aid pretty much needs to be completely eliminated.

If we increase the amount of aid given by states, then state taxes will have to go up. So you are against the promised $400 Million to help fight AIDS in Africa?

No the states would take care of the aid with no federal involvement. Second question, pretty much, yes. Make the UN pay their fair share for once! Most of those nations are deadbeats on their dues.

Wouldn't sales tax need to go up for the states to take care of aid?

How would we conduct the war on terror if we severly cut taxes?
Iraq alone will cost more than $100 billion

[Nym90]

Overall opinion is about the same...he's finally speaking his mind, which is good, he was too robotic and programmed in his run for President. Although overall I liked him better then than I do now, so, it's a push.

[dazzleman]

Overall opinion is about the same...he's finally speaking his mind, which is good, he was too robotic and programmed in his run for President. Although overall I liked him better then than I do now, so, it's a push.

The problem with Al Gore speaking his mind is that he appears to have lost his mind.  If that's the case, he'd be far better off shutting up.

It proves in a way how inauthentic a person he always was.  He has gone from a conservative southern Democrat to a hard-left populist.  People don't normally have such a radical change in political views sincerely at his age.

[ncjake]

Less

[ijohn57s]

The guy had a 19% favorable rating (17% among independents) when he ducked out of sight in Dec 2002!

Looks like he's positioning himself for another run in 2008 if Kerry loses.  It would be fun to watch Hillary, Gore and Edwards go at each other in 2008!

Especially if Howard Dean decided to give it another go.