taxes and chickenhawks

[natedogg]

1. "Why don't you goddamn 30 year old gung-ho republican war supporters go sign up and fight if you think it's so important? Chickenhawks."

2. "Why don't you goddamn whining democrats volunteer to donate excess income to the government if you are so upset about the tax cuts. Hypocrites."

Enough with the chickenhawk threads. It's a stupid argument.

The only people who should be laying "chickenhawk" on the table are those who volunteered to pay extra taxes this year because they are unhappy about the taxcuts/deficit.

Otherwise, just shut the hell up and argue the merits of your position against the war.

natedogg

[Matty]

[ QUOTE ]
2. "Why don't you goddamn whining democrats volunteer to donate excess income to the government if you are so upset about the tax cuts. Hypocrites."

[/ QUOTE ]Uh, because we're all going to eventually anyway. Spending is increasing and that money won't come out of thin air.

Chickenhawk.

[Matty]

Also, it's the tax cuts for the rich that the left is against. John Kerry for example only wanted to repeal the cuts on those making over 200k.

And P.S. don't put so much faith in those Rush Limbaugh one-liners. You're smarter than that.

[LomU]

this would have to be the most retarded arguement i've seen today.

there's no equivalency between, support for a war, and support for a fiscally sound government budget.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, it's the tax cuts for the rich that the left is against. John Kerry for example only wanted to repeal the cuts on those making over 200k.

And P.S. don't put so much faith in those Rush Limbaugh one-liners. You're smarter than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Rush Limbaugh used it, I'm not aware. I made it up myself.

Also, you may be mistaking me for someone who supports the war.

And your reason for not volunteering more taxes could just as easily be used to explain for so called "chickenhawks" aren't signing. It's the same logic.

That is the point. Try not to be so blinded by your own partisanship. You're smarter than that.

natedogg

[jokerthief]

[ QUOTE ]
this would have to be the most retarded arguement i've seen today.

there's no equivalency between, support for a war, and support for a fiscally sound government budget.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has to be the most retarded post I've seen today (and I've been in oot quite a bit). The point is that both are dumb arguements and do nothing to advance the dialoge on either debate. The OP is making, what I think, is a plea to make substantive arguements for the sake of the potency of the forum.

To the OP, I agree these arguements only go nowhere and are useless for the sake of honest discourse.

Nice post, Nate. I knew there had to be a counter-example to that bad argument that anyone who supports the war has to enlist and fight.

[Matty]

[ QUOTE ]
And your reason for not volunteering more taxes could just as easily be used to explain for so called "chickenhawks" aren't signing. It's the same logic.

[/ QUOTE ]Uh, no it isn't. The recruiting shortage is going to be made up for in the future? What?

[phlup]

I can't donate money to the government. That's against the law.

I’m also thinking that if you overpay your taxes, they’ll end up returning money to you.

So to conclude, I can’t give more, but you can enlist.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't donate money to the government. That's against the law.

I’m also thinking that if you overpay your taxes, they’ll end up returning money to you.

So to conclude, I can’t give more, but you can enlist.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe you can indeed donate money directly to the government to help pay down the deficit, if you so wish.