Daily Kos

I'm a Tax & Spend Liberal--And Why You Should Be, Too!

Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:19:19 AM PDT

When the Republicans heat up the slime machine, there's one tried and true line that nearly always makes Democrats run and hide.

Tax & Spend Liberal.

I've watched elections in which Democratic candidates did amazingly well in the polls, and the more Liberal their platform, the better the people loved them. Until the Republican slime machine cranked up.

"Yer nuthin' but a Tax & Spend Lib'rul!"

And off the candidate would run, desperate to prove that he wasn't. "He?" some of you will ask. I've noticed men doing it. But both sexes do it.

And, I promise you, this line is going to surface again in October and November.

So it's time to stop running.

Let's take a look at exactly what the Republican Slime Machine is accusing us of, shall we?

TAX.

Let's start by assuming government has a legitimate reason to exist. After all, the Republican candidate is running, and that candidate certainly intends to enact a program in office, and hopes to run the government. Both parties agree that Federal, State, Local governments have a reason to exist (for those who've read the Declaration of Independence, you've already noted that the only legitimate purpose for government is to enable people to more easily exercise the rights their Creator gave them).

If the government is going to use money for any purpose, what is a fair way to derive that money? Should we borrow it from foreign governments? That makes foreign governments our landlords, with disturbing financial power over us. Should we borrow it from corporations or the wealthy? That again gives inordinate power over our government, instituted among us to serve all the people, into the hands of the wealthy, rather than the totality of us Americans. Or should we ask each citizen and resident of our nation to contribute to the functioning of the government they have instituted, according to their ability to do so, and according to the benefits that they derive from that government?

That last, to me, seems by far the most just. It is for that reason that we have progressive taxes--by no means a new idea (Athens, the world's first experimental Democracy, had them)--such as Federal Income Tax, whereby those who enjoy the greatest benefits of our society are asked to shoulder the largest share of the burden of supporting it.

So if my choices are: Mortgage our nation's future, Borrow money we don't have from other countries, or Pay for our own government via fair Taxation... I'm in favor of Taxation. I want it to be fair, progressive, and I want that money spent wisely and well--but that's the method by which I want that money raised.

SPEND.

Make a list of things you think the government should do, in order to better secure the rights of Americans for their enjoyment (which is, as the Declaration says, the only reason to have a government at all). You might pick some of these. You probably won't pick all of them. But I'll bet everyone, no matter their party, will pick at least one of them.

* Defend American citizens from foreign invasion.
* Make orderly treaties with foreign governments.
* Provide proper avenues of legal recourse for injustices.
* Punish crime and keep the peace.
* Foster the growth of small businesses, so that the citizenry make their best contributions to our society.
* Guarantee that our food and drink are not poisonous or adulterated.
* Uphold the dignity of the downtrodden with temporary assistance.
* Ensure a good education to all citizens, that they may run their country wisely.
* License professionals in the public interest, such as physicians or attorneys.
* Maintain safe roads and infrastructure to facilitate safe trade and travel.
* Insure the stability of financial institutions, so that citizens invest confidently.
* Uphold the freedom of all citizens to worship freely, speak freely, and publish freely.

Now if you think any of these should be government activities, I have bad news. Those activities will cost money. Yep, in addition to any of the activities you've chosen to ask your government to do, you have also asked the government to Spend.

Like you, I want the government to Spend wisely--especially because I want that money raised through Taxes! In fact, that's the easiest way to ensure that I will ask the government to Spend wisely: having the money they spend be money they got from me!

LIBERAL.

The world around us changes. This is no surprise. To be ready to meet those changes wisely, we need to be open to what those changes are. We might not embrace every single one of them. But in order to know which to embrace and which to reject, we'll need to look at each of these changes with open eyes, and without fear. And we'll need our government to do the same.

The government does not merely raise money through Taxation so that it may itself become rich. A surplus is nice, and a wise precaution to have. But the monies the government has belong ultimately and directly to the citizenry, and that money ultimate should return to the citizens in the form of public goods. That means that in order to provide the best government possible, we might at times call upon our government and ourselves to be generous. We might ask our government to rebuild homes that natural disasters have destroyed, or to feed the hungry in our own neighborhoods or our neighboring continents. We might ask our government to support the children of soldiers who give their lives to keep us safe, or to pay for the medical care of those who risk and lose their health while pulling our loved ones to safety from fallen buildings.

And to meet the challenges that life brings us, we will need to be at our best, rather than our worst. We will need to be loving, rather than hateful. Accepting of the fact that our fellow citizens do not all look like us, sound like us, worship like us, or love like us. We'll need to rise to our highest, best selves, to distinguish between instinctual fear of the unknown and the moral and ethical discernment that asks us to condemn harmful behavior.

And if there is a word that embodies generosity, progressiveness of thought, and loving aspiration to live at one's highest potential, that word is, yes, "Liberal."

So, yes, although the Republican Slime Machine is due to crank up on schedule, and although many will shout these words at you, or at me, or at our chosen candidates with hatred, fear, and contempt, I am a Tax & Spend Liberal, and I am proud to be one.

Because as far as I'm concerned, that's the finest thing an American could ever be: the most responsible, the most faithful, the most loyal, and the most intelligent.

And I hope you're one, too.

Poll

So what are you?

82%156 votes
1%2 votes
2%4 votes
0%0 votes
0%1 votes
14%27 votes

| 190 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: election, liberals, tactics (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 135 comments

    •  Really? (13+ / 0-)

      Didn't check your profile, so no idea you were a diary virgin. Was just talking about these same issues last night with someone else. Nobody wants to actually pay for meeting our domestic needs, the things that allowed for our country to excel after The Depression. How the Repubs convinced us to vote against our best interests, to sell-out our children...it just boggles the mind.

      I firmly believe the real promise of America in the form of social safety nets, medical coverage, a sense of being in this together, the understanding that poverty can hit anyone at any time, will continue to shrivel and die as the generation that brought it into being also leaves this world.

       Cynical? Yes. Depressing? Yes. But probably true.

      We cannot just lay blame at politicians' feet, though. It's all of our fault.

      When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. -Benjamin Franklin

      by MissAnneThrope on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:03:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks... (5+ / 0-)

        ...gotta take the Tiger to a training session, so I'll be away from the keyboard for a couple of hours. I'll return to the discussion when I get back. :-)

        So long as men die, Liberty will never perish. -- Charlie Chaplin, "The Great Dictator"

        by khereva on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:15:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Blame Grover Norquist (7+ / 0-)

        He's the asshole who made government a dirty word.

        1001000 -- it's code!

        by slippytoad on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:56:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no no no (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          emeraldmaiden, khereva, Bob Guyer

          This is a very old theme with Republicans, going back to Taft (the president, not the isolationist) at least.

          And at its core, the sentiment has some merit. Most Americans have a lot of issues with how their government spends their money. I sure as hell do with the Iraq occupation and in fact 75% of our military spending.

          And pork, don't get me started. Ted Stevens's bridge is emblematic but hardly isolated.

          What the left needs is its own John Stossel. You could easily make Stossel irrelevant because the real waste, the truly profound waste - in dollars and in lives - comes from the right.

          You got no fear of the underdog. That's why you will not survive. - Spoon

          by brainiacamor on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:04:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  But you can trace the origins (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            Albatross, khereva

            Of the whole theme of drowning government in a bathtub to Norquist.

            1001000 -- it's code!

            by slippytoad on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:22:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That quote, yes (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              MissAnneThrope, khereva

              But the idea is very old. Ronald Reagan ran on it (and promptly abandoned fiscal responsibility) both running for gov. of CA and POTUS. And when did he start pushing this idea? As a shill for GE in the 50s and early 60s. Then along came Barry Goldwater. Dems would do well to read "Conscience of a Conservative". It's a mess, but he connects with people and he was principled. So you have to ask why he connects.

              And the answer is: we don't get good value for our dollars from the government.

              Grover is a hypcrite and a moron but he is just the most visible example of a very old phenomenon, and not even its most famous proponent.

              You got no fear of the underdog. That's why you will not survive. - Spoon

              by brainiacamor on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:30:53 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Would have to agree (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            khereva

            It's a longtime Republican "value" and like so many of them, perverted and twisted to serve the greed of those with means and motive.

            Nothing wrong in theory; concerning ourselves with what our money's spent on, or wasted on, seems sound on its face. But...when it's corrupted, hypocritically used as a rationale for robbery, well then it's problematic.

            Think it's possible the coming generations, after suffering the fallout of our ridiculous collective sense of self-entitlement without putting in time or money, will turn it around. But that's gonna mean a whole lotta unneccesary prior suffering for people without health care, or decent economic prospects.

            Like my favorite college history prof said, it's all cyclical.

            When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. -Benjamin Franklin

            by MissAnneThrope on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:33:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Nice try. (8+ / 0-)

      But you make the fatal mistake that Dems keep making over and over again. We want to use logic and evidence to convince people to vote for us. Republicans use stupid, untrue four-word slogans to persuade people to vote against us.

      And they win, and we lose.

      I'm not saying you're wrong, khereva. You're totally right as far as how and why "tax and spend liberal" is a bunch of crap, and that both taxes and spending are good things. But as a second diary, perhaps you could take what people have to say here, add in your logic and evidence, and boil the whole thing down to a slogan of (since this is the beginning class) ten or fewer words.

      See if you can take your message and make it into something that will fit on a bumper sticker. Because a huge chunk of Americans, "the undecided," are really not so much undecided as simply breathtakingly ill-informed and uninterested in anything other than American Idol and drive-thru burgers.

      Later, after they like our slogan better, you can try to explain to them some of the theory behind what you're saying. But don't expect much.

      •  True, (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        khereva

        Though I think you could put the logic to use with a line something like "Oh, so you think Ted Stevens/George Bush/Dick Cheney is a 'tax & spend liberal'?"  It may not necessarily work that well right now as a way of defusing the attack since the attack is so well defined in people's minds.  Would've been good to use when it first came up, though.  Ah well.  

        If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. -- George Orwell

        by nilocjin on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:49:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'm a, tax fairly, invest wisely, Democrat (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        DBunn, khereva

        and proud of it. That would be my slogan. It draws a distinction that several short arguements can proceed from. Republicans don't mind taxin, they just don't do it fairly, they give the tax breaks to the rich and shift the burden onto the middle class. Republicans don't invest wisely, a long list of issues can be laid at their feet with this one, my favorite is the fact that we soon will spend more on the military that all of the rest of the countries of the world combined, we can back way off and still be plenty safe.

        It has taken me a long time to wean myself from the notion that taking someone through a long rational arguement, fairly considering the complexities and tradeoffs of an issue, and coming to a beautifully coherent conclusion, is the way to win hearts and minds. I have concluded that I like to do it that way and that most people don't.

        It typically works the other way around. Slogan first most people will resonate with it or not and stop there.

        For people that go beyond the slogan you need a couple of strong action items to give them, two items is probably about the right number, because we live in a complicated world, one item would be best from a marketing perspective.

        For people who want to know why it is wise to do the two things you propose doing, that's when you get into all the stuff that I like, analysis, what if, compare this and that, but you have to keep it really short there as well.

        Love = Awareness of mutually beneficial exchange across semi-permeable boundaries. Political and economic systems either amplify or inhibit Love.

        by Bob Guyer on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:45:52 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  tax and spend beats (0+ / 0-)

        borrow and spend any day, and that's what we've got with the current bunch.

    •  Well done! (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Albatross, khereva, Texas Tiger

      Recommended and Hotlisted.
      This is a keeper!

  •  Old adage (11+ / 0-)

    Liberals want to tell you what to do with your money.
    Conservatives want to tell you what to do with your body and want you to stay poor.

  •  It seems obvious, but apparently isn't. (13+ / 0-)

    "Borrow and spend more" republicans are gutting any hopes of American dominance, even prosperity, in this new and competitive century.

    "Pick fights and lose" republicans.
    "Speak loudly and throw your stick away" republicans.
    "Grovel and whine" republicans.

    Arrghhhh. Come on November!
     

    9/11 changed everything. And we're gonna change it back.

    by perro amarillo on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:15:37 AM PDT

  •  Apparently, you missed the Memo entitled: (11+ / 0-)

           "Don't Allow Republicans Do the Framing"

    We'll get a copy to you within the next few days.

    BenGoshi
    ___________________________________________________

    "We in the gloam, old buddy," he said, "We definitely right in the middle of it." -Larry Brown

    by BenGoshi on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:15:53 AM PDT

    •  "Don't Allow Republicans To Frame" (5+ / 0-)

      Need more coffee, to chase away the typo elves.

      BenGoshi
      ________________________________________________

      "We in the gloam, old buddy," he said, "We definitely right in the middle of it." -Larry Brown

      by BenGoshi on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:20:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, I got the memo (5+ / 0-)

      But what I'm advocating is take the frame out of their hands and wear it PROUDLY, and make it a weapon with which to win.

      When called a T&SL, smile broadly, and own it (don't jsut rent to own it), and explain why they should be one too.

      So long as men die, Liberty will never perish. -- Charlie Chaplin, "The Great Dictator"

      by khereva on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:34:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then we lose. Bad pick for 'rope-a-dope' --nt-- (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        YetiMonk, Mr X, khereva

        "We in the gloam, old buddy," he said, "We definitely right in the middle of it." -Larry Brown

        by BenGoshi on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:36:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I disagree (6+ / 0-)

          Historically, Dem candidates do well with T&SL talk, but they run screaming out of the room when called by the title, or revert to pretending to be conservative. Republicans know Dems to this, so expect to see it pop up on schedule.

          File this instead under being ready for the "Well, there you go again" line so that we can ram it right back down their throats.

          So long as men die, Liberty will never perish. -- Charlie Chaplin, "The Great Dictator"

          by khereva on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:40:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm in a state where that will ensure... (4+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            racerx, YetiMonk, FindingMyVoice, khereva

            ...its "Redness" for the next 50 years.  

            My state is growing Bush-weary, but is all GOP in the Senate and mostly GOP in the house.  It will begin to start "trending Blue" over the next few cycles, but I know the people of my state, and embracing "tax & spend" in some sort of attempt to do aikido on the GOP would, in fact, be disasterous.  Utterly disasterous.  Maybe in some other state, but not here, and not in demographically similar states.  Hell, I'm a Populist and I don't like that term!

            BenGoshi
            ___________________________________________________

            "We in the gloam, old buddy," he said, "We definitely right in the middle of it." -Larry Brown

            by BenGoshi on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:51:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, if Dems are going to run (3+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Albatross, khereva, Texas Tiger

              under the presumption that they are NOT going to increase social services, thus increasing taxes; if they're going to promise that, they better follow through on it.

              On the other hand, if they actually do plan to increase spending and taxes, they should meet the challenge head-on.  Not by saying, "We want to take your money!"  But by saying, "We want to continue to fund the programs you rely on.  If they're to be funded, sorry folks, but we need money."

              It won't work in every state, but we can't pretend that we're going to do something we won't follow through on.

              ----------------
              The trouble with the world is that the stupid are always cocksure and the intelligent are always filled with doubt. -- Bertrand Russell

              by gpm on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:42:21 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  The point (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Albatross, Texas Tiger

              I think the point of the diary is that rather than having Dem politicians turn their tails and run when this charge is levied against them, they should should put their opponents on the defensive to justify, as wonkily as they can muster, their funding philosophy.

              So long as Dems remain fearful of that phrase, it will continue to have the power to intimidate. I think you can convince voters by simply having the stones to passionately express your positions. For crying out loud, Reagan declared "I'm a Contra too!" and got away with it!

              My other car is a pair of boots.

              by FutureNow on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 07:26:42 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  The Bush Regime Has Already Spent All the Money (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        BenGoshi, bluesteel, brainiacamor

        we can afford. Now is not the time to talk about spending more.

        The only tax increase that could possibly be acceptable to the general voting population at this point is one that affects only the wealthy, which I'm all for.

        Research Walter Mondale. His campaign tried telling the truth about being fiscally responsible. Voters punished him.

        This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.

        by Mr X on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:26:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  you are so right (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          BenGoshi, bluesteel, Mr X

          This is the losingest theme the Democrats could pick.

          Much better would be to point out that the Republicans are WASTING billions on fraud in Iraq and elsewhere - and THEY - not just their kids - are going to start seeing the bills soon.

          It's the Drunken Uncle throws a party syndrome. And it's a gift to the Dems. And for 25 years they have studiously ignored the gift.

          You got no fear of the underdog. That's why you will not survive. - Spoon

          by brainiacamor on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:52:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That was 20 years ago (3+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Albatross, khereva, Texas Tiger

          During a much more stable economy for Americans, and I think most of them thought he would take their working-class money.  Dems need to be clear to the public: they are only going to reset the tax system to where it was before Bush ruined our nation's finances.  What working-class Americans can say with a straight face that their taxes have noticably decreased in the last 6 years.  I know I can't.  And it's not because I'm below the poverty line, either.  I know damn well whose tax money is carrying the load here.

          1001000 -- it's code!

          by slippytoad on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:07:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Turn the Slogan around? (5+ / 0-)

      "Tax & Spend Liberal"

      "So you want Americans to give up their highways and social security?"

      Yeah, it's clumsy I know...I'm still waiting for the coffee to finish brewing.  But in conversations I've had with my wingnut SIL (who is first in the unemployment line when a job goes bad), there's a disconnect.  She swallows the Kool-aid and holds out her cup for more, thinking that times would be the same, and that the next job that goes sour on her will mean another six months of unemployment, and just doesn't realize that without the "tax & spend" there is no unemployment.

      Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part.  Maybe she wants to believe that with the neocons in power, her luck will turn and she'll suddenly become the elite who never need a helping hand when things go pear-shaped.  

      Me, I'm spending wisely, saving whenever and wherever I can, and doing my damnedest to be a success story, so the wingnuts can be forever irked by my presence.

      He Lied. He Spied. He Must Be Tried!

      by athenap on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:07:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  See, that's what this diary confuses (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        YetiMonk, JeffersonLives

        It's pretty easy to use the theory behind this diary, which is fairly sound, as a basis for questioning a rightie. "So, if you lose your job, you don't want unemployment, right?"

        The ideas work, especially in conversation. The words, though, are pure suicide.

        Worse, they are not even accurate. Democrats do not believe that you just total up the cost of every possible worthy program and present the bill to the taxpayers. Democrats don't believe the government can afford absolutely everything. And we don't believe the government can solve absolutely everything.

        But that's what the Republican phrase, "tax and spend" would have you believe.

        •  I don't think most people want (0+ / 0-)

          political accuracy.  Two things you never want to know how they're made are sausages and laws, and I think that's very true for the American people.

          I don't know if this is worth noting, but everybody I talk to, whether red, blue, Dem, Repug, liberal, or conservative, all have an easy time agreeing that "the gubmint" is full of corrupt fatheads whose only goal is to rob them all blind.  To each of them, the expectation already exists that all politicians are liars without exception (and who can blame 'em, really?).  The question comes down to basically who's the more charming liar.  Which one will bring me flowers and say he's sorry after he repeatedly beats the living crap out of me.

          To me, this is dangerous, because it sets up "the gubmint" to be the enemy of the people and makes it harder for the government to enact changes that will help people, and easier for people to vote to eliminate governance in one way or another.  They have little faith in it either way.

          He Lied. He Spied. He Must Be Tried!

          by athenap on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:22:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, yeah, RECOMMENDED. (6+ / 0-)

    9/11 changed everything. And we're gonna change it back.

    by perro amarillo on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:17:36 AM PDT

  •  Yeah, Yeah (6+ / 0-)

    Yeah, yeah.  Anybody with there head screwed on right know we form governments to promote the general welfare and to provide for the common defense (basically tax and spend).  Personally I like a more direct approach, asking the question “Do you want police, roads, schools, and defense? Well, you can choose to be uncivilized, but not me.”

    But this year and the last few years, the attack from the right is fear itself.  Don’t fight a battle from 10 years ago.  It’s time to nail the Republicans with the neocon label – fear World Wars, every one is with them or evil, the military is the answer to all problems. Responding to an old attack is not relevant today.

    I know you are still pissed that reason can be labeled with a slime tag.  But move on for now, and slime the Rs with the reckless flaws of their ideology.  Don’t make nice. Don’t get even.  Beat them at their sick game.  

    Do the right thing 'cause it feels better.

    by John Boy on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:23:12 AM PDT

  •  The Problem Is.... (5+ / 0-)

    Dems are not Tax & Spend Liberals.... This National Debt Doesn't Belong To Dems... This debt belongs to BushCo & Halliburton... If we were Tax & Spend Liberals how come Bill Clinton left office with a surplus...??? Robert Wuhl (probably spelled his name wrong) was in a social studies class & they were having a giggle about why we kicked the Brits out in 1776, & ofcourse we all know the cry, "No taxation without representation"... The new cry from Republicans is "No taxation even with representation, & we'll spend whatever we do have our way, even if we do go into debt..."
    If Dems do win I hope they put a program in place that eases the Debt whether BushCo signs it or not....

    Take Care All... PLHeart..

    by PLHeart on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:31:15 AM PDT

    •  Surplus, yes.. (4+ / 0-)

      because Taxing and Spending isn't all a good government does. But it must do those two things, and to govern well, it must do those well.

      So long as men die, Liberty will never perish. -- Charlie Chaplin, "The Great Dictator"

      by khereva on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:36:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Halliburton (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Albatross, khereva, Texas Tiger

      That's a company whose charter needs to be revoked, their assets seized, and their corporate officers brought to trial, every damn one.  They have robbed this nation blind.

      1001000 -- it's code!

      by slippytoad on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:08:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  for further examples of GOP magic (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      khereva

      witness the "Clear Skies" license-to-pollute.

      The GOP formula for pursuing politically unpalatable but personally profitable ventures is to:

      1. Find the policy/program that will make you the most money.
      1. Give the policy a name that embodies the exact opposite of the policy's results.
      1. Accuse the Democrats of doing exactly what you just did.
      1. In case of emergency, raise the terrorist threat level, or convince someone famous to have a baby.
  •  And remember: (7+ / 0-)

    Blue states contribute the most in taxes, while Red states get back most in tax based benefits.

    -7.63,-4.31 "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." -Will Rogers

    by mlbx2 on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:37:56 AM PDT

    •  Blue states tend to be wealthier (4+ / 0-)

      and red states tend to be poorer.  If you believe that government should be a tool to reduce disparities in wealth, than this would not be a problem.

      The trouble comes when you see who in those red states gets those benefits and who is in charge of disbursing these benefits.

      January 20. 2009 cannot come soon enough.

      by Crisis Corps Volunteer on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 04:54:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, it is a problem (0+ / 0-)

        when all the red states do is attack the blue as immoral.

        What's more, you're mixing up unrelated things. Government concern over "disparaties in wealth" applies to people, not states. Nor does it entail impoverishing the middle class, which is stronger in the blue states than the red. And finally, it's not our job to pick up the mess for Red State problems that are their own fault: in many cases, their pathetic public education, crappy roads and generally shitty infrastructure are a big cause of their weak economies.

  •  These people confuse me (6+ / 0-)

    There is a gentleman from the state of Washington by the name of Tim Eyman who has sponsored several ballot initiatives in that state which have reduced the annual tax revenue because he feels that the citizens of Washington like himself a conservative Republican should be able to enjoy all the services that the state, county and the city where he lives provides but he doesnt want to have to pay for any of it.

    •  Ooh, look, it's the Social Services Fairy!! (5+ / 0-)

      Where do these people honestly think the money comes from? The couch cushions in the governor's mansion?

      Perhaps this all stems from our country's poor math abilities as compared to the rest of the world?

      "Not just with words, but with deeds." -- Barack Obama

      by kath25 on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:26:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  He used to be a used car dealer (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      DBunn, khereva, Texas Tiger

      and the first tax he went after that enabled his business - the license tab fees that went to road infrastructure (either directly or indirectly).

      He is also from Eastern Washington, where few people live with lots of farms.  Somehow he thinks that Eastern Washington is more productive to the state than the Western half.

      Hmmm ... western Washington.  Home to Microsoft, Boeing, and tons of start-up businesses.  The flagship school of the state, University of Washington, is there, and has been brilliant in pulling down funding despite the stinginess of the state lately.

      Eastern Washington has apple groves, a lot of open land and Wal-Marts.  It's much less dense over there as well, so what services and infrastructure is invested are less cost-efficient to provide.

      It actually makes for a great red-blue microcosm within the state.

    •  Oh, and (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      khereva, Texas Tiger

      don't forget that Eyman pockets a fair amount of money that he raises for his campaigns.  He actually has become somewhat of a hired gun.  Just about everyone I know from the area hates his guts.

  •  Our taxes subsidize corporations and.... (8+ / 0-)

    ..their tax breaks.  We provide the infrastructure that we pay for but corporations don't pay for.  ABC's use of public airways to psyop us on behalf of BushCo comes to mind.

    We have let our 'commons' become controlled by corporations, not us.  

    I'm for a liberal agenda, but we must also take back the control that we've given up over our economy, our infrastructure, and our politics, and get the GOP right wing agenda and corporations out of it completely.  

  •  It's not 'tax and spend' (14+ / 0-)

    It's "investing in America".  Why do Republicans want the ship of state to founder on such a petty issue as personal greed?

  •  Great Post! (6+ / 0-)

    Yes, use these words to ram their own talking points back at them.

    And no this isn't the only point to run on but one shouldn't run from when it is used!

    Recommended!

    (disclaimer, I'm married to Khereva!)

    Congress, what else does this man have to do to get impeached by you?

    by Texas Tiger on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:03:10 AM PDT

  •  Yesterday's "West Wing" on Bravo (11+ / 0-)

    was that then-live debate between Matt Santos and Arnold Vinick, which I wanted to see just for this particular exchange (from here) over the word liberal:

    VINICK
    ...You're not an unthinking liberal. Are you?

    The audience laughs and applauds.

    SANTOS
    I know you like to use that word 'liberal' as if it were a crime.

    VINICK
    No. I'm sorry. I shouldn't have used that word. I know Democrats think liberal is a bad word. So bad you had to change it. What do you call yourselves now, progressives? Is that it?

    SANTOS
    It's true. Republicans have tried to turn liberal into a bad word. Well, liberals ended slavery in this country.

    VINICK
    A Republican President ended slavery.

    SANTOS
    Yes, a liberal Republican, Senator. What happened to them? They got run out of your party. What did liberals do that was so offensive to the liberal party? I'll tell you what they did. Liberals got women the right to vote. Liberals got African-Americans the right to vote. Liberals created Social Security and lifted millions of elderly people out of poverty. Liberals ended segregation. Liberals passed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act. Liberals created Medicare. Liberals passed the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act. What did Conservatives do? They opposed them on every one of those things -- every one. So when you try to hurl that label at my feet, 'Liberal,' as if it were something to be ashamed of, something dirty, something to run away from, it won't work, Senator, because I will pick up that label and I will wear it as a badge of honor.

    The audience vigorously applauds.

    Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

    by bwintx on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:06:50 AM PDT

  •  Important discussion (7+ / 0-)

    Though I have never used the expression, because it reduces the issue of taxes to the absurd, I have been extremely disappointed in Dems for letting Repubs frame this issue.

    And this isn't some old issue, not worthy of addressing now. It is the issue for Blackwell's campaign against Strickland. And frankly, I've been pretty disappointed in Strickland's response to it. At the debate in Youngstown, someone in the audience asked Strickland to make a promise that he wouldn't raise taxes if elected Governor. Strickland responded, "I don't believe that raising taxes is the best thing for Ohio. I don't know how I can be any more clear than that." (approximate quote) Now, anyone who speaks English knows that this is political waffling. Of course, he could be more clear by promising not to raise taxes. But he shouldn't promise and he should explain why.

    I'm not trying to pick on Strickland. I love Strickland and support him and give money to him. But once, just once, I would like to hear a politician say essentially what you have said here.

    I'd love to hear a Dem say,
    "I could promise not to raise taxes, but I don't think that's a wise thing to do. What if something changed in our state over the next four years and raising taxes were the best thing to do? Then I would have put myself in the position of breaking a promise to the people I represent or not doing what's best for the people I represent. I will do not do either. I would also like to encourage you to think about what taxes do. I'm proud every year when I send off my taxes. I'm proud because I know I've done my part to ensure that roads stay safe, that the elder poor are not abandoned, that children get a good education, that our country remains safe. Taxes are not the problem. Inequitable tax burdens are. Unwisely spent taxes are. So the promise I will make tonight, is that I will fight for working and middle class families and small businesses to ensure a fair tax burden. And I promise to ensure that we are held accountable for spending revenue wisely."

    Do not be overwhelmed by the enormity of the world's grief...You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.

    by Albatross on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:10:51 AM PDT

    •  Let's see... (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Albatross

      Mondale was honest and look where it got him.

      "Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove." P.G. Wodehouse

      by gsbadj on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:29:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Mondale was up against a different situation (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Albatross, khereva, Texas Tiger

        Reagan was immensely popular, charismatic, and things seemed to go well for him.  He made people think he was tough enough to be President and he took a weakened Democratic party and beat them over the head with their weaknesses.  Reagan was in the middle of a Republican surge.  This is not that time.  It is time to state clearly what needs to be done: and I will say that as I'm typing this I remember Bill Clinton also telling us that things would be tough.  He meant that he would raise taxes, and he did.  And our economy took off like a fucking rocket.  The failure of Mondale to win his Presidency was more than just his opinion on taxes.

        1001000 -- it's code!

        by slippytoad on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:16:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It got him honest. (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        khereva, Texas Tiger

        :)

        I don't think we should give up on honesty, just because it's not always popular. And I believe that was a different time. We see the reduction in services that are the effect of corporate and uber-wealthy tax breaks. And we see how much it has cost us. I think people are ready for some honesty.

        Do not be overwhelmed by the enormity of the world's grief...You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.

        by Albatross on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 06:18:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Paying one's taxes... (8+ / 0-)

    ...is one's patriotic duty, just like serving on a jury.  And the purpose for paying the taxes is to help improve the lives of everybody, but especially the less fortunate among us.

    That's what I have always believed.  

    •  [raises hand] me, too (5+ / 0-)

      not to mention VOTING

      My parents took us with them when they went to vote. I remember so well how big the machines looked, the sound the curtain made when it closed, and the satisfying 'cthunk' the red levers made.  This was important; this was something worth doing and worthy of forethought and attention.  Thank you, mom & dad.

      ps. good diary - recommended!  Bravo, khereva - you're off to a great start.

      Comfort the afflicted. Afflict the comfortable.

      by FindingMyVoice on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:30:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  How/why paying tax is patriotic (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      tryptamine, khereva, Texas Tiger, kath25

      (I'm proud to pay taxes except for crazy wars and mischief) and I'll believe Bush is a War President when this happens again:

      http://www.the7thfire.com/...
      [contrarian view website, but scroll down and read about a wartiime patriotic star, Donald Duck, paying his taxes!]
      SNIPPETS:
      "when Mr. Disney arrived to meet with Morgenthau and Internal Revenue Commissioner Guy Helvering, it was announced that the U.S. wanted him to "help us sell people on paying the income tax." Confused, Walt questioned why the government just didn't jail people who did not pay the income tax. Mr. Helvering retorted, "Walt, we want people to be enthusiastic about paying their taxes."
      SNIP
      It was a movie leader, much like a newsreel or preview, added to nearly every movie in the midst of World War II. The story started with Donald Duck, a patriotic little fellow reluctant to pay income taxes. Listening to a radio broadcast about taxes, Donald gradually realized that paying the income tax would help win the war. With a whole new attitude, Donald quickly goes to work filling out his income tax return, and so enthusiastic about paying the tax that he races from California to Washington to submit his tax return in person.
      SNIP
      In 1943, the Treasury Department again approached Walt to make another short cartoon to encourage Americans to pay their taxes. The purpose of this piece was to encourage Americans to save for their quarterly estimated tax payments to fund the war effort. This brilliant propaganda piece played upon the emotions and the sensibilities of Patriotic Americans to forgo self and contribute to ultimate victory - winning the war. Entitled The Spirit Of '43 the short shows Donald torn between a thrifty patriotic duck (who resembles an early Scrooge McDuck) and a spendthrift, zoot-suited duck obviously with Nazi leanings. They are battling over what Donald should do with his paycheck. Donald eventually smacks the free spender and runs off to pay his taxes."

      Best Diary of the Year? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/23/03912/3990

      by LNK on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:48:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly! (4+ / 0-)

      Taxes are the price of admission.  Every time I hear a conservative wingnut talk about how horrible taxes are I want to ask them "Okay, then what price DO you put on your freedom and this great country?"  They are so quick to point out how wonderful it is that our men and women in the military are willing to pay the ultimate price for their country, but balk when asked to pay their fair share, not with their lives (or their children's, of course) but with their money.

      The rich and corporations benefit from the Government the most and should pay the most for it.  Plain and simple.

      Also, any economics class will teach you that our wages have built-in partial "tax offsets".  If income taxes were reduced to zero, people would be willing to work for a lower wage because their net pay would remain unchanged.  There have been far better discussions of taxes on this site than I am capable of, but the bottom line is the same:

      Taxes should be progressive and fair, exactly how much in nominal terms depends on what we want from our society (want more military, raise taxes; want more welfare, raise taxes, want more security, raise taxes)  Balancing the budget, like Clinton did and you have a responsible government.

  •  Pinko (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    shermanesq, Texas Tiger

    Or should we ask each citizen and resident of our nation to contribute to the functioning of the government they have instituted, according to their ability to do so, and according to the benefits that they derive from that government?

    Hmmm.  That sounds familiar.

    From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.

    :)

    "Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove." P.G. Wodehouse

    by gsbadj on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:27:43 AM PDT

    •  Marx Got It Right (0+ / 0-)

      But the path to social enlightenment is blocked at every turn by corruption that exploits fear and greed.

      This is CLASS WAR, and the other side is winning.

      by Mr X on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:31:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  No, Marx ignored history (3+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        paradox, Albatross, khereva

        And supplanted it with his own pseudo-history.

        Which is ironic, because "History" for him was the avenging Jehovah who would lead us all to Worker's Zion. His is a bizarre, apocalyptic, ultimately unproductive philosophy. I once read him avidly but had to ultimately chuck him because his ideas did not at all square with the working class reality I was living at the time.

        We are the reality-based community, remember? Marx and Freud are toast, left behind by the triumph of Darwin. Does that mean we should advocate social darwinism? Of course not. Evolution is not about individual survival, and altruism and communal responsiveness and responsibility are arguably evolutionary survival mechanisms for a species with a long gestational period. In other words, Nietzche is toast too. As the teenage boy in "Little Miss Sunshine" learns in what seems to be his first step to adulthood.

        You got no fear of the underdog. That's why you will not survive. - Spoon

        by brainiacamor on Wed Sep 13, 2006 at 05:59:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]