Subject: Benefits: Larry, before going into detail, let me state that I am a conservative who supports President Bush's tax cuts, but not his proposal on Social Security. I support much smaller government and lower taxes. I am in favor of saving for our own retirement and am working on my plan to avoid the need for Social Security for me and my family. However, while I am fortunate enough to be able to plan and save for retirement, there are many who are much less fortunate. Single parents, those who are disabled early in their lives and those who are supporting aging parents come quickly to mind. For some to suggest that merely cutting them off and stating that it is their fault shows a complete lack of compassion for one's fellow man. I do agree we should all assume a larger level of planning for our retirement. However, I will never agree with cutting off recipients' benefits and throwing those people in the streets. JC

RESPONSE: I knew all Republicans are not fools. You really make good points about Social Security and a sense of community that this administration seems to lack even while casting itself as "compassionate" and conservative. As for your point that you support the tax cuts, this has only pushed the burden of paying for services on our children and grandchildren and on local property taxes. The President has not vetoed a single spending bill.

You can't cut taxes for the wealthy and talk about fiscal responsibility without cutting expenses. DUH! So once again as we see at a State level here in New Jersey it becomes the responsibility of the Democrats reluctantly to make the cuts that Republicans who cut taxes were too cowardly to do...namely Florio raised taxes as a direct result of Kean's Republican debt and now Codey will make cuts as a result of Whitman's tax cuts for the wealthy. Yes, MCSLEAZY played the Republican game and just borrowed rather than do the fiscally responsible thing that Codey is now doing. Democrats are today the party of fiscal responsibility, again.