To say again what is right there in my post you quoted:

Yes, revenue is based on GDP, but it varies based on tax and budget policy.

GDP grows with inflation. It's always growing. But it's up to the government to pay down the debt, and the only way to pay down the debt is to have a budget surplus. You can have as high a GDP as you damn well please and if the government isn't making effective policy then it won't see a surplus.

The Bush campaign has promised more tax cuts and more defense spending and I don't see how the two can possibly create a budget surplus.

You can be damn sure that if a Kerry administration doesn't create a surplus I will be just as dissatisfied with the result. I will not, by any means, try my hardest to make it seem like the party which I favor is doing a great job when it's really not.

But right now it seems as if Kerry has a more concrete plan to balance the budget. Yeah, he's going to spend money on social programs, but he's going to cut defense spending and he's going to hike taxes on the $200k+ bracket. That signals to me at the very least an attempt to create balanced fiscal policy.

If you have a moral attatchment to defense spending, or a moral objection to higher taxes on the $200k+ bracket, then you would probably prefer the Bush plan even if it offers no possibility of a budget surplus. He has in no way shape or form shown how he is even going to try and balance the budget. Are the fiscal conservatives really willing to cling to some of their morals at the expense of their most important goal?