Go Vilsak, his name alone deserves him the win!

by adamg on 11/09/2006 06:26:39 PM EST

It says in the story, at least the latest from Yahoo, that he balanced the budget through draconian spending cuts.

Now, like Cenk, Ken and Acroso, I agree such cuts will be necessary to balance this insane defecit.

However, unlike Vilsak, Ken and Acrsoso, I can't agree that no taxes should be raised, or even lowered simultaneosly, as Vilsak did in Iowa.

That places all of the burden on the poor and middle class,(the upper 2% got tens of thousands of dollars in savings, and don't use the services that will be cut, but the poor and middle class got a few hundred and still need said services.)

A balance needs to be found between raising taxes, on whom, by how much and what programs get cut, but how much and for whom,(means testing can also be debated, although it is believed by some to be a means of dividing the lower and middle classes,(If I don't get the service then I will join the Conservatives in saying I don't want to pay for it).

This debate will be important, but I will not agree with anyone that argues that only tax hikes, or only spending cuts are the way to go.

Thus Vilsak is out in my mind, I support Edwards.

The way of balance is the way of peace and prosperity.

Thoughts?

by adamg on 11/10/2006 10:19:47 AM EST