The Republicans own the tax issue. It is the source of their power and their popularity with voters, especially the independents and "Reagan Democrats" who usually give them their margin of victory on the national level. Ask any American which party is most likely to cut their taxes, and there will be no hesitation: the Republican Party.

Ask any American what the Democratic Party has done for them lately, and it may take some time for them to answer. It's been decades since Social Security and Medicare were created. Decades since the Civil Rights Bill.

In the absence of a compelling economic program from Democrats that would make a difference in the average American's checking account, many will simply vote their pocketbooks and vote for the party that will cut their taxes.

But it's not too late. The Democrats can take this issue back from the Republicans and win on taxes, by promoting an aggressive policy of Rise Up Economics.

"If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right." --Jerry Seinfeld to George Costanza on Seinfeld.

If George W. Bush is the worst president in American history, then all the next president has to do to be successful is The Opposite.

What is the Opposite of Bush? With some issues, it's pretty obvious. In foreign policy, it would be ending the Iraq War, ending the policy of pre-emptive warfare, and working in coalition with our allies instead of unilaterally. With energy policy, it would be moving away from oil and developing solar, wind, and biodiesel. In civil liberties, it would be ending torture and electronic eavesdropping, and restoring habeas corpus.

But what about the economy, stupid? Bush's major economic policy was The Bush Tax Cuts, which went overwhelmingly to the wealthy in a continuation of the trickle-down economics of President Reagan.

The Opposite of Bush would be Rise Up Economics: tax cuts and tax credits for the poor and middle class, while making the wealthy and big corporations pay their fair share.

In the week that we celebrated the life and legacy of Martin Luther King, it's ironic that our nation's leaders settled upon a stimulus package that puts money directly in the hands of everyday Americans.

Forty years ago, MLK was calling for just that--but not a one-time influx of cash to jumpstart an economy on the brink of recession. He championed regular, monthly payments to help the non-wealthy make ends meet and address the savage economic inequality in America.

These days it has fallen out of fashion to suggest taxing the rich and giving to the rest of us. But as the gap between the rich and poor grows dramatically and the middle class continues to shrink, it may be time to give King's idea another look.

"Human beings were not meant to sit in little cubicles staring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about mission statements." -- From the movie Office Space, 1999

I love the movie Office Space, and especially the tagline, Work Sucks. It's a sentiment that I'm sure many of us share. Whether you're an "overworked American," under-employed, under-paid, or just plain unhappy with devoting half of your waking hours to an enterprise that you have very little control over, one thing is clear: work is an institution that dominates American life like no other.

People spend more time working than with their families and friends, and there's no end in sight. Unless you're one of the lucky ones with a real pension, most of us are doomed to work until we are at least 70. Even then, what will we have to show for a lifetime of work? A couple hundred thou in a 401K and a couple hundred bucks a month from Social Security? How long is that going to last if we live another 30 years? Will we have to come out of retirement at age 90 to work the drive-thru window?

As a progressive activist-type, my instinct is to try to figure out a way to make work suck less. But how?