<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The War Tax Is For Real, And Here&#8217;s The Conservative Case For It</title>
	<atom:link href="http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:59:36 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: whyknot</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18076</link>
		<dc:creator>whyknot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18076</guid>
		<description>War surtax is a quick way to get Bush&#039; tax cut back w/o moving the expiration date up from 2011.  So long as it hits $250K+ in keeping w/Obama&#039;s middle class cut, I think the WH would sign this bill no problem.

Some Republicans would absolutely have to be for it - McCain for instance, he complained about cutting taxes during a war on the Senate floor.

I really like this idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>War surtax is a quick way to get Bush&#8217; tax cut back w/o moving the expiration date up from 2011.  So long as it hits $250K+ in keeping w/Obama&#8217;s middle class cut, I think the WH would sign this bill no problem.</p>
<p>Some Republicans would absolutely have to be for it &#8211; McCain for instance, he complained about cutting taxes during a war on the Senate floor.</p>
<p>I really like this idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: beowulf</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18064</link>
		<dc:creator>beowulf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 06:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18064</guid>
		<description>timr, you&#039;re absolutely right.  I&#039;ve always been a fan of President Truman&#039;s Universal Military Training (UMT) proposal.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,813666-2,00.html

When Congress renewed the Selective Service law during the Korea War, they actually approved UMT subject to  Selective Service ceasing to induct recruits.
&lt;em&gt; Whenever the period of active service required under this title [said sections] of persons who have not attained the nineteenth anniversary of the day of their birth has been reduced or eliminated by the President or as a result of the adoption of a concurrent resolution of the Congress in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section, all individuals then or thereafter liable for registration under this title [said sections] who on that date have not attained the nineteenth anniversary of the day of their birth and have not been inducted into the Armed Forces shall be liable, effective on such date, for induction into the National Security Training Corps as hereinafter established for initial military training for a period of six months.&lt;/em&gt;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50a/usc_sec_50a_00000454----000-.html

The second trigger was that Congress must vote again to approve a Pentagon Commisson&#039;s rules and regulations for this new &quot;National Security Training Corps&quot; (separate from the Army to ensure that no trainee could be deployed overseas unless they volunteered for active military service).

Congress hasn&#039;t voted on  the Pentagon&#039;s proposed UMT regs since the 1950s (it never passed).  Nevertheless Selective Service isn&#039;t drafting anymore and the UMT law is still on the books.  In fact, the law has this interesting clause--  &lt;em&gt;Provided, That any bill or resolution reported with respect to such recommendations shall be privileged and may be called up by any member of either House but shall be subject to amendment as if it were not so privileged.
&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>timr, you&#8217;re absolutely right.  I&#8217;ve always been a fan of President Truman&#8217;s Universal Military Training (UMT) proposal.<br />
<a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,813666-2,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,813666-2,00.html</a></p>
<p>When Congress renewed the Selective Service law during the Korea War, they actually approved UMT subject to  Selective Service ceasing to induct recruits.<br />
<em> Whenever the period of active service required under this title [said sections] of persons who have not attained the nineteenth anniversary of the day of their birth has been reduced or eliminated by the President or as a result of the adoption of a concurrent resolution of the Congress in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this section, all individuals then or thereafter liable for registration under this title [said sections] who on that date have not attained the nineteenth anniversary of the day of their birth and have not been inducted into the Armed Forces shall be liable, effective on such date, for induction into the National Security Training Corps as hereinafter established for initial military training for a period of six months.</em><br />
<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50a/usc_sec_50a_00000454----000-.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50a/usc_sec_50a_00000454&#8212;-000-.html</a></p>
<p>The second trigger was that Congress must vote again to approve a Pentagon Commisson&#8217;s rules and regulations for this new &#8220;National Security Training Corps&#8221; (separate from the Army to ensure that no trainee could be deployed overseas unless they volunteered for active military service).</p>
<p>Congress hasn&#8217;t voted on  the Pentagon&#8217;s proposed UMT regs since the 1950s (it never passed).  Nevertheless Selective Service isn&#8217;t drafting anymore and the UMT law is still on the books.  In fact, the law has this interesting clause&#8211;  <em>Provided, That any bill or resolution reported with respect to such recommendations shall be privileged and may be called up by any member of either House but shall be subject to amendment as if it were not so privileged.<br />
</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: timr</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18056</link>
		<dc:creator>timr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 18:04:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18056</guid>
		<description>You want to get the entire country involved? Bring back the Draft. Draft every mothers son and daughter as soon as they turn 18. No exceptions, no getting soft jobs in the NG because the parents are rich-like Bush and Qale, no defermits(sp) like Cheney and Clinton. Draft everyone. Be it Army or lets say menial jobs in Public service hospitals, VA hospitals, park service planting trees. Americorps. Whatever. JFK said it best &quot;Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country&quot; Its way past time that people realize that we are one country, that the rights that people have were earned with blood, that we as a country need much more than just a &quot;war tax&quot; we need a recommitment to the fact that we are one country, that our loyalties need to be with the country not a political party. It used to be that our pols actually put country over party, now it seems that both parties put party and power over country.

 Bring back the draft. It would bring back to everyone that we are 1 country and that we need to fight and argue, but when we decide on a policy, all the pols need to assist in making that policy succeed.
 Bring back the CCC. Put the unemployed to work just like back in the depression.
 There are  jobs available, but our citizens refuse to do them, the rethugs scream about illegals, yet they do the jobs that our pampered lazy citizens refuse to do. Of course I am talking about picking and harvesting food crops. And Chicken and meat processing plants. Those are hard jobs at fairly low wages, our citizens refuse to do them. (And before you all comment, yes I picked fruit crops, from strawberries and rasberries to apples and cherries and I did it after I got out of the Army at age 30 when that was the only job available.(and worked in a fish processing plant when I was 16) The same thing with resort housekeeping, they pay good wages yet can not get anyone other than latinos to do the job because it is hard work.
 We as a nation have become soft. Couch potatos. Our younger generations have loads of self esteem, but have no concept of what real life is. Put them in the military or other menial job for 2 years, they will learn what hard work is, they will learn that apathy got us into where we are now and it will take commitment and hard work to get us back on our feet. I do not want my generaton to be the last that did better than my parents. I want my kids and grand kids to do better than I did. Not worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You want to get the entire country involved? Bring back the Draft. Draft every mothers son and daughter as soon as they turn 18. No exceptions, no getting soft jobs in the NG because the parents are rich-like Bush and Qale, no defermits(sp) like Cheney and Clinton. Draft everyone. Be it Army or lets say menial jobs in Public service hospitals, VA hospitals, park service planting trees. Americorps. Whatever. JFK said it best &#8220;Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country&#8221; Its way past time that people realize that we are one country, that the rights that people have were earned with blood, that we as a country need much more than just a &#8220;war tax&#8221; we need a recommitment to the fact that we are one country, that our loyalties need to be with the country not a political party. It used to be that our pols actually put country over party, now it seems that both parties put party and power over country.</p>
<p> Bring back the draft. It would bring back to everyone that we are 1 country and that we need to fight and argue, but when we decide on a policy, all the pols need to assist in making that policy succeed.<br />
 Bring back the CCC. Put the unemployed to work just like back in the depression.<br />
 There are  jobs available, but our citizens refuse to do them, the rethugs scream about illegals, yet they do the jobs that our pampered lazy citizens refuse to do. Of course I am talking about picking and harvesting food crops. And Chicken and meat processing plants. Those are hard jobs at fairly low wages, our citizens refuse to do them. (And before you all comment, yes I picked fruit crops, from strawberries and rasberries to apples and cherries and I did it after I got out of the Army at age 30 when that was the only job available.(and worked in a fish processing plant when I was 16) The same thing with resort housekeeping, they pay good wages yet can not get anyone other than latinos to do the job because it is hard work.<br />
 We as a nation have become soft. Couch potatos. Our younger generations have loads of self esteem, but have no concept of what real life is. Put them in the military or other menial job for 2 years, they will learn what hard work is, they will learn that apathy got us into where we are now and it will take commitment and hard work to get us back on our feet. I do not want my generaton to be the last that did better than my parents. I want my kids and grand kids to do better than I did. Not worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mauimom</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18055</link>
		<dc:creator>Mauimom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 17:53:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18055</guid>
		<description>I was the lowest staffer on the totem pole in Obey&#039;s office during his first term [1969].  He was elected, as the first Dem-Farm-Labor candidate, in a district that had been represented by Mel Laird, who &quot;moved up&quot; to be Nixon&#039;s Sec. Defense.

Thus Obey&#039;s been through this vis-a-vis Vietnam.  I think it&#039;s a GREAT move: make those hypocritical Republican bastards, plus the Blue Dog deficit hawks, put their money [well, OUR money] where their mouths are.  If they think war is such a nifty idea, and if escalation is an even niftier one, then a surtax seems just the way to go.

We all know that these idiots believe tax revenues should go ONLY towards fighting wars [and bank bailouts] and that all other programs are the cause of our &quot;too high taxes&quot; and deficits. Thus the Bible Spice quote above:

&lt;blockquote&gt;“How can we ever put a price on national security?”&lt;/blockquote&gt;

They also engage in endless war as a way of sopping up tax revenue so there&#039;s nothing left for social programs or infrastructure.

I hope Pups and Progressives will get behind this war tax idea.  It&#039;s a good way of getting the focus off the &lt;strong&gt;spending&lt;/strong&gt; side of the equation [where the mantra is always &quot;we can&#039;t afford it&quot;  and &quot;we&#039;ve gotta cut this&quot;] and onto the revenue side.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was the lowest staffer on the totem pole in Obey&#8217;s office during his first term [1969].  He was elected, as the first Dem-Farm-Labor candidate, in a district that had been represented by Mel Laird, who &#8220;moved up&#8221; to be Nixon&#8217;s Sec. Defense.</p>
<p>Thus Obey&#8217;s been through this vis-a-vis Vietnam.  I think it&#8217;s a GREAT move: make those hypocritical Republican bastards, plus the Blue Dog deficit hawks, put their money [well, OUR money] where their mouths are.  If they think war is such a nifty idea, and if escalation is an even niftier one, then a surtax seems just the way to go.</p>
<p>We all know that these idiots believe tax revenues should go ONLY towards fighting wars [and bank bailouts] and that all other programs are the cause of our &#8220;too high taxes&#8221; and deficits. Thus the Bible Spice quote above:</p>
<blockquote><p>“How can we ever put a price on national security?”</p></blockquote>
<p>They also engage in endless war as a way of sopping up tax revenue so there&#8217;s nothing left for social programs or infrastructure.</p>
<p>I hope Pups and Progressives will get behind this war tax idea.  It&#8217;s a good way of getting the focus off the <strong>spending</strong> side of the equation [where the mantra is always "we can't afford it"  and "we've gotta cut this"] and onto the revenue side.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: georgewalton</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18054</link>
		<dc:creator>georgewalton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:52:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18054</guid>
		<description>But I repeat myself:


What we need by way of revising our separate points of view about escalating the war in Afghanistan is to make the issue a whole lot less abstract for folks hell bent on sending other folks sons and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters over there.

Simply revise the draft and end deferments. No deferments whatsoever. If you are not physically able to be inducted into the military you would be recruited into a non-military position that would aid the war effort in some capacity over here.

Also, the money spent fighting the war would come from new taxes. Graduated so that those who earn more pay more. Also a wealth tax on those who are particularly wallowing in dough. Since they have gained the most from the freedom our soldiers fight and die for let them sacrifice more from thir pocket books.

Wars are costly for those who fight them. Let them be costly in turn for those who don&#039;t.

See how that changes the debate.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But I repeat myself:</p>
<p>What we need by way of revising our separate points of view about escalating the war in Afghanistan is to make the issue a whole lot less abstract for folks hell bent on sending other folks sons and daughters, husbands and wives, brothers and sisters over there.</p>
<p>Simply revise the draft and end deferments. No deferments whatsoever. If you are not physically able to be inducted into the military you would be recruited into a non-military position that would aid the war effort in some capacity over here.</p>
<p>Also, the money spent fighting the war would come from new taxes. Graduated so that those who earn more pay more. Also a wealth tax on those who are particularly wallowing in dough. Since they have gained the most from the freedom our soldiers fight and die for let them sacrifice more from thir pocket books.</p>
<p>Wars are costly for those who fight them. Let them be costly in turn for those who don&#8217;t.</p>
<p>See how that changes the debate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: McMia</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18053</link>
		<dc:creator>McMia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18053</guid>
		<description>10 percent?

Hell I would be happy if only 10% of the Democratic caucus were really Republicans that crashed the Dem party.

In case you haven&#039;t noticed when Republicans are in charge we get Republican policy and when the Democrats are in charge we get Republcan policy.

10% DINO, 90% Non-DINO? 

No, I would say it closer to the opposite, that is 90% DINO.

The best move the Republican Party ever made was to infiltrate the Democratic Party through the DLC and DLC pukes like Bill Clinton....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>10 percent?</p>
<p>Hell I would be happy if only 10% of the Democratic caucus were really Republicans that crashed the Dem party.</p>
<p>In case you haven&#8217;t noticed when Republicans are in charge we get Republican policy and when the Democrats are in charge we get Republcan policy.</p>
<p>10% DINO, 90% Non-DINO? </p>
<p>No, I would say it closer to the opposite, that is 90% DINO.</p>
<p>The best move the Republican Party ever made was to infiltrate the Democratic Party through the DLC and DLC pukes like Bill Clinton&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ann in AZ</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18052</link>
		<dc:creator>Ann in AZ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18052</guid>
		<description>David Dayen has a fresh &lt;a href=&quot;http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/25/top-democratic-house-recruit-attacks-presidents-proposed-afghanistan-policy/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;cross-post up&lt;/a&gt;: “Top Democratic House Recruit Attacks President’s Proposed Afghanistan Policy”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David Dayen has a fresh <a href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2009/11/25/top-democratic-house-recruit-attacks-presidents-proposed-afghanistan-policy/" rel="nofollow">cross-post up</a>: “Top Democratic House Recruit Attacks President’s Proposed Afghanistan Policy”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TalkingStick</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18051</link>
		<dc:creator>TalkingStick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:34:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18051</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t share the enthusiasm for Bob Corker. He is s smooth talking snake oil salesman.. As to the war I have faint hope there will be some opposition in Congress to the escalation. I am really finding it hard to believe RhamObama will go against the will of the people. Still in shock over the civil rights and health care sell-outs, to my understanding of history war, especially with a dedicated tax that is not supported by the people dooms the politicians in power.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t share the enthusiasm for Bob Corker. He is s smooth talking snake oil salesman.. As to the war I have faint hope there will be some opposition in Congress to the escalation. I am really finding it hard to believe RhamObama will go against the will of the people. Still in shock over the civil rights and health care sell-outs, to my understanding of history war, especially with a dedicated tax that is not supported by the people dooms the politicians in power.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: HelenaHandbasket</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18050</link>
		<dc:creator>HelenaHandbasket</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18050</guid>
		<description>The war tax is a good idea. Now, add to it:


a) War Profiteers Windfall Tax, so that no businesses or individuals enrich themselves on the public largess, it is their patriotic duty to answer Uncle Sam&#039;s call at little or no profit,


b) War Bonds, so that the yellow-ribboned adorned SUV owners can belly up to the bond bar to publicly and voluntarily demonstrate the full measure of their troop support.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The war tax is a good idea. Now, add to it:</p>
<p>a) War Profiteers Windfall Tax, so that no businesses or individuals enrich themselves on the public largess, it is their patriotic duty to answer Uncle Sam&#8217;s call at little or no profit,</p>
<p>b) War Bonds, so that the yellow-ribboned adorned SUV owners can belly up to the bond bar to publicly and voluntarily demonstrate the full measure of their troop support.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: masaccio</title>
		<link>http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/11/26/the-war-tax-is-for-real-and-heres-the-conservative-case-for-it/#comment-18049</link>
		<dc:creator>masaccio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/?p=5163#comment-18049</guid>
		<description>Corker is a money republican, not a culture warrior, except to the extent that repubs have to be. Generally Tennessee republicans avoided the worst of the culture wars til the last couple of elections, when the crazy right started to dig in. With the kind of democrats we have, John Tanner, Lincoln Davis, Phil Bredesen, and Bart Gordon, there really wasn&#039;t any reason for the sane republicans to go crazy on the nutcase issues.

Corker isn&#039;t that much to the right of the conservative democrats.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Corker is a money republican, not a culture warrior, except to the extent that repubs have to be. Generally Tennessee republicans avoided the worst of the culture wars til the last couple of elections, when the crazy right started to dig in. With the kind of democrats we have, John Tanner, Lincoln Davis, Phil Bredesen, and Bart Gordon, there really wasn&#8217;t any reason for the sane republicans to go crazy on the nutcase issues.</p>
<p>Corker isn&#8217;t that much to the right of the conservative democrats.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.215 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2012-02-17 19:23:06 -->

