Dave Yaseen is a good friend of mine, because we've learned to never talk politics. If he said anything like this to me at a party, I would, well, just politely excuse myself and get another drink:
Repealing that god-awful insult of a tax cut isn't a winning position? I beg your pardon? It wasn't all that long ago we could energize people by saying something like 'they're gonna take your money and give it to, of all people the rich! America, is that what you want?'
In other words, it wasn't all that long ago that Democrats could energize people by lying. Well, half lying. The government *is* taking away your money. That's called taxation. The lie is that a tax cut is the same as taking person X's money away to give to person Y. Let this fact sink in, folks: it is person Y's money in the first place! If I steal $100 from someone, and don't return $90 to him, you can't say I'm giving him $10. And you certainly can't say I'm taking $10 from you to give to him.
With repetition and coordination, it would have sunk in and won us a lot of races.
Yes, repeat the lie until people start to believe it. (Sadly, many people already do.)
Yes, this debacle of an election is the media's fault. But it's our fault as well, and we need to drastically change the way we do things in the Democratic party, not diddle around with how to phrase things to make them palatable to the electorate. If we have to drag American voters, kicking and screaming to chose their own interests, so be it.
Somehow I don't think "we're going to have to force the public to vote for us because we think the public is stupid" is much of a winning position. But hey, at least it's honest - in that it's an honest view into the elitist mindset of a good portion of our friends on the Left.
Comments (1)
Yo, Pete my good friend with whom I don't talk politics:
Does anyone really think that all taxes are going to be repealed, and everyone will be happily reunited with all of their money? Maybe in some libertarian utopia in which things like national security and roadbuilding are free, but not in the world I inhabit.
Whatever your position on taxes, they're currently a given. You know, like "nothing is certain but..." Paying taxes is the status quo. As a society, we do stuff collectively, and someone pays for it. That kind of thing. When changes, like the current administration's tax cuts, are made to to the system, the burden shifts, so that my (non-rich) portion of it gets bigger and that of the rich, who get so much more from government than I do, goes down. It may not be technically correct to say "taking my money and giving it to...," but it amounts to the same thing: more money for them, and less for me. As lies go, it ain't much.
I took a lot of flack for the "kicking and screaming" graf, and rightly so. It was a poor description of what I was trying to say (the left needs to stand for something). I addressed that at the time in A.L.'s comments, and again on my blog when it came up recently.
But even in the context of the original post, your criticism takes me way out of context. I was talking about changing the focus and platform of the Democratic party, not using some nefarious, unspecified means to "force the public to vote for us." I'm surprised you think I'd advocate something like that.
If believing one's own position is right and the other side is wrong is elitist, then call me an elitist. Oops, never mind.
p.s. Is it too early to think about what we're doing for New Year's?
Posted by David Yaseen | October 18, 2003 11:11 AM
Posted on October 18, 2003 11:11