One of the democrats publicity schemes in the presidental election has been called "Operation Fortunate Son." Named after the Creedence Clearwater Revival, Fortunate Son, tune from the 1960's in which John Fogarty, the noted political commentator, railed against the supposed privilidge of the wealthy and upper class. The "Operation" was designed to show that George W. Bush was a "Fortunate Son," A person born into rank and privilidge that, among other things, helped him get into the Texas Air National Guard and thereby avoid actually having to fight in the Vietnam War.
Well, since the Rather & Company fiasco with the forged documents, etc., no one has heard much about "Operation Fortunate Son" lately. But I think we ought to encourage some renewed interest for the continuance of this Operation and examine a new little piece of news.
The second stanza of Fortunate Son goes as follows:
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand, Lord, don't they help themselves, oh. But when the taxman comes to the door, Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes,It ain't me, it ain't me, i ain't no millionaire's son, no.
In an article in today's Wall Street Journal, Stephen Moore, President of the Club for Growth, wrote the followings (as noted on Drudge at http://drudgereport.com/flash2.htm).
"According to the Kerrys' own tax records, and they have not released all of them, the couple had a combined income of $6.8 million in income last year and paid $725,000 in income taxes. That means their effective tax rate was a whopping 12.8%.... "Under the current tax system the middle class pays far more than the Kerry tax rate. In fact, the average federal tax rate -- combined payroll and income tax -- for a middle-class family is closer to 20% or more. George W. and Laura Bush, who had an income one- tenth of the Kerrys', paid a tax rate of 30%. ..."Here is the man who finds clever ways to reduce his own tax liability while voting for higher taxes on the middle class dozens of times in his Senate career. He even voted against the Bush tax cut that saves each middle-class family about $1,000." The Kerrys "have unwittingly made the case for what George W. Bush says he wants to do: radically simplify and flatten out the tax code. ... So before John Kerry is given the opportunity to raise taxes again on American workers, shouldn't he and Teresa at least pay their fair share?"
One of the constant criticisms of liberalism is that it is a system that enjoys, in fact is founded on, spending other people's money on things that (1) they think are of vital importance; but (2) to which they are not willing to contribute towards. The revelation in the 2000 campaign of Al Gore charitable contributions compared to both President Bush and Vice President Cheney come to mind. It is reminiscent of Christ's condemnation of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew 23:4:
And they tie up heavy loads, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger (NASB).
Now, to those of us who advocate a "flat tax" system, 12.8% sounds about right. Since the next debate is about ""domestic issues" a good question for the candidate would be if everyone should pay the same rate of income tax as he does. This would be a great opportunity for Kerry to demonstrate some leadership and encourage all Americans too follow his example. I, for one, would sign up right now!
Posted by Narnia3 at October 11, 2004 5:58 PM | TrackBack