Who didn't? Clinton. He left a surplus.

Get this LEFT versus RIGHT nonsense out of your head.

Clinton? He did sh*t. He just happened to be there when the internet boom took off. (And he happened to get out just in time before it came crashing down in 2001.)

If someone here criticizes "the system", it doesn't mean they are a lefty commie pinko. They're taking a critical look at a system that is spiraling out of control. Drilling and drilling some more just at a time when the Earth refuses to easily gorge up more and more of the addictive lucre. Borrowing and borrowing some more just when it becomes clear that we can't burrow our way out of this mess. Propagandizing and propagandizing some more just because the noise feels like good ole' "sound logic".

Clinton? Bush? Raygun? It's all nonsense noise. The problem lies in the system and not in puppet propped at its top for the moment.

Reagan cut taxes, which over time INCREASED revenue once the economy picked up. Ditto for Bush 1. Clinton got massive peace dividends and the '92 Republican Congress dead-lock to help cut spending, and the welfare-reform dividend. Bush 2 spent tons and cut taxes, and grew gov't as well.

So, to me, deficits from tax cuts are bad, but deficits from spending and gov't growth are much worse. The real trick is TO SPEND LESS and then TAX LESS.

Spending habits are ONE part of a political ideology. You can't really believe what you don't do personally. Certainly there can be a difference in details and scaling from personal, to local, to state, to national gov't, but there shouldn't be a complete mismatch.

If you believe that you should be thrifty, but the gov't should be spendthrift, to me that's logically incompatible. If you choose to live within your means but give 5% to charity and you think the gov't should maintain a balanced gov't but fund help for the indigent, that's consistent.

To me conservative isn't a political position but a state of being. The politics just flow from the gestalt.

It's not a question of "abiding by", at least not for me. I don't even mind inflammatory remarks withing reason, as it keeps things interesting, especially if they're clever and inventive. Ad hominim attacks get tiring, though.

My frustration was seeing how quickly I see my negative score pile up when I'm trying to elucidate my conservative position (not necessarily Republican, BTW!).

As for the media, for me the frustration is that the media doesn't like being called liberal, even though something like 92% say they vote liberal. I don't get insulted at all if you call me conservative - it's a compliment. For some reason some liberals seems to want to believe they are centrist. Why?

I won't claim or defend any neocon positions (which I mostly don't share), but hopefully at least SOME of my individual opinions are sufficiently supported to at least cause some introspection within self-proclaimed progressive thinkers. I certainly re-weigh my positions as broader perspectives hove into view.