Kossacks Unite: I need help formulating a rebuttal...

I have a good friend who I go back forth with on politics all the time - the presidential election being no different.  He is a very conservative Catholic Louisiana Democrat who makes good money as a lawyer.  He calls Kerry Ted Kennedy and vows to never vote for any liberal from Massachusetts.  He does not like Edwards either because of his focus on "two Americas - one of the rich and one of the poor."

Now, I freely admit my odds of getting him to vote for Kerry/Edwards are about as likely as the the air conditoning being turbed back on in hell.  Well, I recently received the following two e-mail from him and was wondering if anyone could give me help formulating a rebuttal or if anyone could provide a link supplying facts for a rebuttal.  Any help would be appreciated and thanks in advance.  The two e-mails are provided below:

Email 1:
Every year an independent tax watchdog group analyzes the average tax burden on Americans, and then calculates the "Tax Freedom Day."   This is
the day after which the money you earn goes to you, not the government.

This year, tax freedom day was April 11th.   That's the earliest it has been since 1991.   It's latest day ever was May 2nd, which occurred in 2000. Notice anything special about those dates?

Today John Kerry gave a speech in which he claimed Americans are actually paying more taxes under Bush, despite the tax cuts.   He gave no explanation and provided no data for this claim.

Another interesting fact:  Both George Bush and John Kerry are wealthy men.  Bush owns only one home, his ranch in Texas.  Kerry owns 4 mansions, all worth several million dollars.  (His ski resort home in Idaho is an old barn brought over from Europe in pieces. (Not your average A-frame).   Bush paid $250,000 in taxes this year; Kerry paid $90,000.  Does that sound right?

The man who wants to raise your taxes obviously has figured out a way to avoid paying his own.

Pass this on.  Less than 200 days until the election.

Email 2:
About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinborough) had this to say about "The Fall of The Athenian Republic" some 2,000 years prior.

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years.- During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From Bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; >From dependence back into bondage."

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the most recent Presidential election:

Population of counties won by: Gore=127 million Bush=143 million

Square miles of land won by: Gore=580,000 Bush=2,2427,000

States won by: Gore=19 Bush=29

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore=13.2 Bush=2.1

Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..."

Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "complacency and "apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy; with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

Pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake in this Election Year and that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

•  Your heart is in the right place...

  ...  but clearly this is a waste of time.  Anyone who has taken that much effort of sway your opinion against K/E is not receptable to seeing the real facts or accepting them.

  I am focusing my persuasive efforts on those who can be swung, not on those who have closed their minds.

  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ / -LONO- ® \ | Disjecta Membra | | Belligerati R.C. | \ San Francisco / \

  by lono on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:05:35 PM PDT

•  Did your friend

  actually compose these emails (e.g.: they are original content), or are they forwards?

  And did your friend provide links for the so-called facts in these 2 emails.

  Good friend or no, if they don't provide links or any kind of evidence for the "facts" they present, I'd either ignore it or demand evidence before continuing the argument.

  Besides, someone who talks uncritically about "Tax Freedom Day" already sounds like they've drunk the Kool-Aid.

  Sorry I couldn't be of more help...

  by jpb on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:08:32 PM PDT

•  Bullshit

  I'll do what I can to help, though I'm no tax scholar.  

  First, Kerry only paid 90,000 in taxes because he and his wife file seperately.  All those houses belong to Teresa Heinz.  This year JFK only paid taxes on his incomes, the one house he jointly owns, and a painting he sold.  Also, to rebut the paying more taxes, this is the old bait and switch.  while some taxes have gone down, others, like tuition and housing assistance, have had crippling effects on people.

  for the second email, point out the red vs blue state factor.  Not dem vs rep, but giver versus taker.  The blue states are those that give more per dollar than they receive from the federal government, while the red states take more than they receive.  And who do you think got mainly blue states?  exactly right, Gore.  All those selfish bastards on the coast actually support all those americans in the middle bitch and moan about how high their taxes are and how they shouldn't be supporting welfare queens

  by slapshot57 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:10:34 PM PDT

•  PLease oh please

  use the extended text box.

  You have the power to edit your diary. Please put most of this in Extended text, pretty please.

  by Maryscott OConnor on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:11:29 PM PDT

•  here are some ideas

  Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the most recent Presidential election:

  Population of counties won by: Gore=127 million Bush=143 million

  Who cares, gore got 550,000 more votes?

  Square miles of land won by: Gore=580,000 Bush=2,2427,000

  Who cares, winning Alaska is the prsidential election prize?

  States won by: Gore=19 Bush=29

  Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore=13.2 Bush=2.1

  Who cares, I bet more animals are fucked by people in bush country than Gore. What's the point

  Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off government welfare..."

  Not True....Gore states send more money to DC than comes back to them in spending. He is ass backwards. The red states suck at the teat of the more wealty blue states.

  Olson believes the U.S. is now somewhere between the "complacency and "apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy; with some 40 percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

  Probably a bogus number. If you have a kid in public school, are you government dependent? Social Security is an earned benefit. Is this included in that number? This is a classic example of lies, damn lies and statistics.

  by Clark04 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:13:55 PM PDT

  •  who won the last 2 states?

    19 + 29 = 48

    i would think lawyers would have a greater mastery of basic addition.

    by scottesposito on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:51:04 PM PDT

•  Eek! I mean, Yawn!

  Parts of both letters have been debunked on urban legends site snopes.com

  In particular, parts of the first letter, regarding "Kerry's" homes, here, and the second letter here.

  It's always wise to run some distinctive keywords or entire phrases of letters like this through Google. You'll usually find them debunked somewhere.

  Short version: Teresa owns those houses, and their prenup separates their assets. So although they do belong to Kerry's wife, they were bought with her Republican husband's money. Ironic, given the smirking "man of the people" attack.

  Oh, and the book The Fall of the Athenian Republic to which the second letter refers apparently does not exist. Whoops-a-daisy.

  by Kagro X on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:16:49 PM PDT

  •  Always make

    sure to hit "reply to all" when sending out these debunkings.

    by Mike S on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:39:49 PM PDT

•  Point one

  Use Franken's Argument in Lies and the lying liars.  

  The independant group isn't so independent.

  As for the rest, let's take into consideration that the US is built on a solid foundation.  Yeah.  But the foundation is only as good as those who go and vote.  It's a responsibility, not a right.  In fledgling democracies more of the citizenry vote.  The more established the country the less likely.  Apparently, affluence causes apathy.

  I went to a Johnny Clegg concert this weekend and he told a story about having to walk away from a life you're accustomed to in order to take on the bigger struggle.  Mainly, Bullets for Bafazana.  

  Bafazana had worked his way up from shoe maker (really amazing shoes) to production manager.  But he was also a warlord (closest approximation I can give) and if his district declared a war or had one declared on it, he would be hunted by assassins.

  So, the band calls a meeting.  and they want to know who this "we" being hunted are.  From then on, Bafazana got his own room.  He got to be first and only in que for food as well.

  Then he tells Johnny one day that "we" found the assassins and "we" are goign to hit them first and all is well now.

  Band calls another meeting. They'd like to know who "we" is refering to.

  More importantly, it was difficult for Juluka to travel South Africa as an integrated band playing for everyone they could play for without having to worry about shadow warriors everywhere they went.

  Bafazana had a choice.  Be the warrior or be the manager.  Ultimately, he stayed with the band.  The goal wasn't individual for him anylonger.  It was pluralistic.  

  I belive in the same thing.  That if I want to think only of the costs in taxes to my pocketbook, then, I will get no furhter than my own pocketbook.  But if I want to have more of my money to stay with me, then I need to work for health care, child care and the right to privacy.  He apparently doesn't realize how much more he pays for health coverage for all those who don't and can't obtain health coverage.

  Besides, isn't it a Christian ideal to care for those who have nothing.  To clothe the naked?  Didn't Jesus wash a beggars feet?  

  Ultimately we are all in this together.  I choose like Bafazana did to think of the greatest struggle for the greater community then of my own personal struggles.

  by Bendygirl on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:19:51 PM PDT

•  One more thing...

  Just for kicks, you might want to ask your friend to do a little work of his own next time. First homework assignment (besides apologizing to you for forwarding you someone else's faulty research) should be plotting his ridiculous "Tax Freedom Day" chronology against a graph of the federal budget deficit.

  by Kagro X on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:19:58 PM PDT

•  Couple things

  First thing, about taxes, Kerry is referencing the fact that State's have hiked taxes and "fees" (de-facto taxes) due to budget shortfalls caused by the Bush tax cut.  Kerry has refered to this as the Bush tax.  One that resulted from his policies but which he can claim to lack responsibility for.  Also, everyone's tax freedom is going to be different so its a silly statistic.  Mine took place on March 14 last year (not counting sales tax, which disproportionately effects the poor AND is a state tax).  Golly, I wonder if the wealthy push that average up at all?

  As to Kerry's wealth, they are playing games with reality.  Kerry's houses aren't his.  They are his wife's.  To be more specific, they are his wife's late husband's.  A Republican, by the way.  But you have to love the idea of blaming Kerry for the wealth of a Republican.  Also, Bush's "one home" is more than some Texas ranch.  Its a multi-million dollar estate/campaign prop.

  The 2nd email is just a really disgusting attempt to say Bush's votes are better because even though they were less, they have more land.  Last I checked, we went with the one man/one vote system in America, so I fail to understand why the land-mass of Bush counties matters one little bit.  Trying to repeal the American Revolution strikes me as a stunningly un-American stance for your conservative friend to take.

  by BStu on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:26:47 PM PDT

  •  never forget

    who really has bush's back, too. It is not his wife, but his father and their extended family of business and foreign governments, notably the House of Saud and other autocracies.

    Bush is not, and will never be, one of "us", unless by that you mean he can be bought.

    by garth on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:41:05 PM PDT

•  people people people

  You should know these answers by heart by now.  First, the "liberal" ratings that the right has attached to Edwards and Kerry are intentionally skewed.  Diary here.  Second, the working class didn't really get a tax cut... and neither did the small businesses Bush keeps talking about.  Diaries here (see last paragraph) or here.

  That last part is only a twisted look at the generally conservative rural Bush voters vs the generally more liberal urban Gore voters.  That is the only perspective from which to discuss the differences.  The rest is just gobbledygook.

  by mikepridmore on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:40:57 PM PDT

  •  sorry if I sound snippy...

    BushCo is just telling so many lies that are accepted as the gospel truth on their side and we really need to have our talking points and solid evidence down pat if we are going to make a dent in that blind allegiance to BushCo BS.

    by mikepridmore on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:03:54 PM PDT

•  Snopes.com

  http://www.snopes.com is your friend.  Here is a debunking of the second email.  Here is something that at least touches on the first email.

  by cevik on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:46:07 PM PDT

  •  snopes

    is your friend.

    I tried truthorfiction.com one time. They took the wing nut side on the Al Gore invented the internet story and have not been back since.

    by Clark04 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:54:39 PM PDT

    •  snopes

      snopes himself seems to lean a bit to the right, but his (and Barbara's) work seems to be very "fair and balanced" (and I don't mean the Fox definition of the phrase).  Just the facts style of reporting and very little of anything else.  Much of the research is done on the message board section of snopes.com (which leans heavily to the left, so much so that it's jokingly called the SLC, or secret liberal cabal)..  Anyways snopes.com is very good for debunking all these stupid wing nut emails that I get..

      Well at least the ones I used to get, none of my wing nut relatives even email me anymore, they know better, they'd rather believe their lies than have the cold hard truth pointed out to them.

      by cevik on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:03:31 PM PDT

      •  but but but

        Al Gore Did invent the internet
        Al Gore did discover love canal
        Sudan did offer bin laden's head 3 times on a silver platter
        Atta did meet Iraqi Intel agents in Prague

        ect ect ect

        by Clark04 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:13:07 PM PDT

•  By the way...

  I just re-read your diary, and I'm pissed!

  Your friend must think you're a real asshole if this is the amount of effort he'll put into a discussion with you. Now, I know you won't want to piss a friend off, and he probably didn't intend this level of disrespect for you when he sent you something he thought he should be able to trust, but you really ought to say something to him about this.

  And I don't know how much money he makes as a lawyer, but I can tell you this: he'd be disbarred if he gave his clients the same attention to evidentiary detail that he gave you.

  If you don't want to get this heated with him, you can always deflect this anger. Personally, I think he should slap the shit out of whoever sent him that bogus information and set him up for what for a normal human being should be paralyzing embarrassment. Utter mortification. At the very least, you should remind him that the people who armed him with that ridiculous turd of an argument are clearly -- CLEARLY -- not to be trusted.

  by Kagro X on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:46:55 PM PDT

  •  Lies and Distortion

    is all they have?

    You don't expect the bushtanistas to run on their record, do you.

    My cousin forwards to me all kind of right wing email spam. I like to debunk them. I like the fact that the all end with "send this to everyone in you address book before they vote." Could this be a sign of panic that the usurper is doomed?

    by Clark04 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:08:01 PM PDT

•  That's "Transfer Of Wealth To Us Day"

  In taker state LA.  Does your friend think federal income taxes paid in disappear down a black hole?  They are paid back out -- redistributed to places like Louisiana that suck the blood of hard-working folks and taxpaying families in Massachusetts, while refusing to pay more than a dime for anything they are responsible for themselves, such as public schools.  Bunch of freeloaders.

  http://www.makethemaccountable.com/misc/Maps.htm

  by destiny6 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:47:27 PM PDT

•  well...

  the math behind the first e-mail is almost certainly based on averaging the tax burden. i know for a pact that my "tax free day" is absolutely not May 2. it's more like january 20 (i.e. I earn enough in a few weeks to pay of my taxes for the year). i imagine that this is true for the majority of americans. this is just overwrought hyperbole.

  the second e-mail is almost too stupid for words. Of course gore's counties owuld have a higher murder rate because gore won huge in urban areas. any idiot can tell you there's more murders per capita in cities than rurals.

  same goes for gore winning the "govenrment owned tenaments" vote. obviously there aren't too many people in "tenaments" in the middle of farm country in nebraska.

  as for "government dependency". since most industralized democracies have far greater government dependencies than us (i.e. far more welfare benefits, greater undemployment, universal health insurance), why don't we look at them to see how their democracy is doing? those nations have uniformly higher participation rates than we do. so much for apathy.

  of course, the whole analysis is stupid because you can't compare eras like that. are citizens of the british empire going to want the same things out of their government? obviously not. obviously, there was a completely different economic system, vision of medicine, state of international dependency, etc, during the british empire, to say nothing of the athenians and romans. you can't just compare us to them as though it is the same thing.

  typical of these e-mail viruses...completely idiotic. sounds good ont he surface, but doesn't hold up to the slightest hint of scrutiny. how is he a successful lawyer if he can't see through something this transparent?

  by scottesposito on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:47:28 PM PDT

  •  process

    how is he a successful lawyer if he can't see through something this transparent?

    There's a difference between "can't" and "doesn't want to."

    A lot of lawyers make their living pushing a client's agenda, no matter how weak, through every means available. I suspect this one likes what the GOP has to offer, and if bad logic and disinformation fill the bill, so what?

     

    by MattK D1 on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:00:41 PM PDT

    •  exactly

      "willful blindness"

      otherwise know as

      "looking for the answers you want"

      by scottesposito on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:35:34 PM PDT

•  Re: Email #1

  You might go with the analogy that you can save lots of money in your personal budget by making just the minimum payments on your credit cards--but in the long run the interest charges will wipe you out.  Bush's tax cuts and Iraq misadventure are the equivalent of scaling back your payments while maxing out your credit cards.  

  by Randomfactor on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 01:56:23 PM PDT

•  Some responses

  First off, even the group that calculates "Tax Freedom Day," which is far from impartial, would tell you that the change in the Federal Tax law under Bush has little to do with the date change.  In fact, it's an artifact of the way they calculate the date and a -large increase- in Federal revenue in 1999 and 2000 from the "boom" economy.  If your friend insists that this is some kind of legitimate measure, you might mention that the Tax Freedom day was earlier under Carter than under Reagan and fell after Bush senior raised taxes.  In fact, the last year in which the date came early was not 1991, it was 1993.  (1991, '92, and '93 were all the same, so the email suggesting that '91 was the last early date was flat out lying).  It was earlier in the first two years of Clinton than in the last two years of Reagan.  Those dates seem so special now?

  "Tax Freedom Day" is based on nonsense calculations that involve taking the count of citizens, the average income, and total federal revenues.  As a result, the day gets earlier every time the economy declines, and goes up when the economy booms.  All the movement over the last years comes from a precipitous decline in fenderal revenues and increasing debt.  Ask your friend how anxious he is to see that date creep forward.

  Second point, as has already been pointed out.  Goerge and Laura Bush file a joint return.  John and Teresa file jointly.  All those properties that "belong to John" actually belong to Teresa, so the statements are simply wrong.

  In the second email, the values represented are false right on their face and represent nothing more than rigging the statistics to generate a desired outcome.  It would be just as easy to prove that Gore won the hearts of the majority of NRA members.  It's a meaningless game, nothing more.

  by Devilstower on Mon Jul 12, 2004 at 02:01:51 PM PDT