OK

As so many of us sit and pore over poll results and bask in the warm glow of Joe Biden's smackdown of Paul Ryan last night, questions keep bubbling to the surface. How can anybody enjoy their election porn when they can't concentrate? So, what's bothering me? Glad you asked.

Lots and lots of discussion lately about the budget deficit and the debt being passed on to the next generation. Why no discussion from democratic candidates about the maintenance deficit and infrastrucuture debt that will be passed on if conserative dreams of austerity come true?

Teabaggers, et al, want to drastically cut funds for K-12 education and college assistance and student loans. Most of them hate immigrants, too. When the population of the U.S. is too stupid to operate power equipment and those damn furriners are all on the other side of the fence, who is going to cut Mitt's grass, for Pete's sake? I've seen video of the Mittster himself talking about current jobs going unfilled because employers can't find qualified candidates. And cutting education funding still more is going to help how, exactly?

Mr. Romney is worried about welfare, food stamps, unemployment insurance, and so on, depriving the recipients of the motivation to work hard and creating a "culture of dependency". So why did he create a culture of dependency in his own home by giving his five sons a $100 million trust fund they didn't earn?

Conservatives are always telling us that we need to cut taxes for the wealthy and businesses so they can create lots of great paying jobs. Can someone tell me what tax rates they would be comfortable paying? You know, low enough so we can all be rich?

We don't want to be moochers. We all want to do our part. Once we all have those great-paying jobs and we're doing really well, can we get the same low tax rates as the job creators so we can be job creators too?

Mitt says that the 47% of the population that pays no income taxes are moochers. He also favors the elimination of the inheritance tax. Why do rich people want their heirs to be moochers?

While I asked some of these questions in a snarky tone, this diary is not intended as snark.

I think these are valid questions arising from the stated policy goals of the Republican party in general, and Mitt Romney in particular. Questions that no one on the national stage has asked (to my knowledge). I think that each of these questions could go a long way toward neutralizing these issues as talking points, as well as clarifying the issues for undecided voters. None of these issues has to be presented as a question, however. Each could easily be presented in simple declaratory terms in a debate, as a response to rethug statements, or on their own to illustrate the consequences and/or inconsistencies of rethug policy goals.

Jed Lewison put up good a piece on debate reactions of a group of undecided voters this morning, Undecided voters: Joe Biden won. Take a look at the 18 year old at about the 5:10 mark. Then think about my question about the debt and deficit at the start of this diary. How fucking hard would it be to crystalize this election in his mind by explaining, simply and quickly, what four or more years of conservative austerity will mean to future generations? How many others are out there just like him? Wouldn't it be a good thing to encourage them to think as we do by laying bare the folly of conservatism? Now, before they're hooked on the crack pipe of ignorance that is Faux News?

Enormous amounts of time and energy are expended extolling the virtues of progressive thinking and policies. Arthur Connan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes said it best; "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." Progressive truth is not perfect, but it not impossible, as is the case with conservative dogma. Why do we spend so much time fighting the same ghosts over and over when if we would only shine a light on it, most people would see that it is only a cockroach. Stomp, crunch, case closed.

Each of the questions I posed above has the potential to reframe the issue and force rethugs to defend the indefensible. I know there are a lot of really smart people out there in DK land. Most of them know a lot more about how our process works than I do, and still more have connections to, or are, democratic candidates.

So, I arrive at my real questions. Why are there no democratic candidates talking about this stuff in this way? Is it really that hard to look at these issues and see where the "logic" leads? Why does this verbal ammunition continue to lie at our feet, unused and unnoticed? Who has the answers? Questions I've got.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.