Ha ha, yourself. Didn’t ask and don’t care. For all I know, your real name might be Patrick. However, that expression about asking a woman her age is not one commonly used by anybody born after 1960.

As for the bit about Republicans, I did not assert that they believe in “spending more than we can pay for.” I said they “don’t believe in taxing to pay for what we spend.”

Proof is in the puddin’.

President Reagan cut tax rates from ridiculously high to ridiculously low while ramping up Defense spending, thereby creating more debt than all previous presidents combined. President Bush 43 cut taxes while ramping up post-9/11 national security spending, starting the war in Iraq and passing the trillion dollar unfunded prescription drug program, thus adding another $5 trillion to the debt, even while the real estate bubble economy was strong. And, now, they won’t raise taxes even one cent on anybody or even slightly reduce $1 trillion in annual tax preferences known as “tax expenditures” as part of a possible $4 trillion “grand bargain” to get the debt under control, even when Obama is willing to take heat from fellow Democrats for taking on entitlements.

They won’t even agree that hedge fund managers should pay ordinary income tax rates (rather than capital gains) on the millions in annual pay they receive for investing other people’s (not their own) money. Joe the car salesman making $60k in commissions pays 25% marginal tax plus 7.65% for his share of payroll taxes, but Harry the hedge fund manager pays only 15% for the millions in commissions he receives on the capital gains he generates for his clients, using their money at risk, not his own.

Taxes as a percentage of national income are at a 60-year low. But, noooo, revenue can’t be even a small part of the deficit and debt solution! So, like I said…

So, how old are you? Just kidding.

And, by the way, Republicans don’t believe in spending more than we can pay for.

If you served in Iraq or Afghanistan, a big shout out and thank you; and, yes, you would be exempt. If you served in another time and place, as I and probably some others on this blog did, then you pay. But it won’t happen. Because (1) as far as I know, nobody other than me has proposed it; and (2) the Repubs don’t believe in taxing to pay for what we spend.

Of course, since I did serve, and I am a veteran, I guess you are saying that I would be exempt. That sounds pretty righteous.

“the job” and “done” — please define.

“cut and run” — catchy slogan from 2004 campaign used against him who didn’t by thems that did.

We blew it after Charlie Wilson’s War. We blew it again when we redeployed from Afghan to Iraq. Yes, some reported progress; but will it ever be self-sustainable in that fundamentally tribal world?

Anyway, I assume that, as a supporter of the war and probably an opponent of deficits, you would support a special war tax to pay for continuing ops, for debt incurred to date and for long-term care of the wounded. Those serving or who have served, or who have sons, daughters, fathers, mothers serving would be exempted. Sound righteous to you?

This must come as a great surprise to the Vietnamese!

The same goes with Japan, Germany, Korea and Vietnam. Look at the years that have gone by since those conflicts in these countries and we (U.S.) are still there. Afghanistan and Iraq are now added to the list. My guess is that Libya will be next.