Steve K. — thanks.

* * *

“Try again? They are both redistributionists on taxes.”

Oh, and the GOP as well as the Dems have enjoyed the tax _rebate_ game in the past, it seems. The point is, Obama's plan is worse than McCain's in this regard. I can't refute that McCain is not spotless. (In fact, McCain has a poor reputation among conservatives as well as partisan Republicans and the tension held in check since the convention will be released after next week, when McCain and the GOP likely lose big, and it won't be pretty, even though the problems don't lie only with McCain but with the GOP and with conservatism, too.)

Perhaps I shouldn't have tried to raise fine points and detract from your own position here; I just wanted to make it clear that there are distinctions to be made, and they encompass the two candidates' desires and their parties' plans as well as the details of the tax plans themselves. Note to others: it's not repeating GOP talking points to note what is obvious fact, much less to criticise the GOP candidate and the GOP, as I have done numerous times.

Yes DLS I think most regular TMV readers have. I've even posted a link to a very easy to read graph of it here a couple of times but I'll do it again for your benefit:

Obama and McCain Tax Proposals

And if it sounds ass backwards, there is a simple explanation: it is.

Try again? They are both redistributionists on taxes.

Obama's income tax reform plan is redistributionist (because of the rebates), and it's you, not I, who have been using the term “Marxist” and “socialist” whereas I have used the correct word as well and addressed the correct concept here (free of emotional excess), namely, redistributionism.

McCain is opposed to Obama's tax plan and its redistributionist elements (late in the campaign, _because_ of these elements, in large part, which is the key issue here).

He is not _my_ candidate (another mistake by others, rather than by me, in this case a wildly mistaken assumption). I am addressing Obama's plan and redistribution (which we see not only in the examples others have provided already, but in the case of highway funds, with innumerable strings attached; with revenue sharing for schools within states; with revenue sharing by pro sports leagues, which also feature other market-interventionist elements).

It is _others_ who (illogically) leap to the misuse of “Marxist” and “socialist” here; I do not do this.

I also have noted some other problems here, which perhaps are behind the emotional excess (such as the misuse of the Palin-anchor depiction when describing something McCain is doing on his own)…

[sigh] Touchy, touchy. [scowl]

Give us ONE, DLS. Just ONE. Give us ONE government program which can fairly be defined as redistributionist which Obama has supported and McCain has actively fought to eliminate and provide us with a link. If you do, I won't just admit you are right here. I will make a brand new column with the title “Obama is more of a Marxist than McCain.” You have my word. Just give us one and Ill give you the “matter of degrees” argument fair and square.

If you can't do it, please let go and stop trying to use the broad brush strokes to repeat GOP talking points and claim that somehow Obama is MORE of a redistributionist than McCain.

Is McCain perfect? Of course not. The GOP is often Dems Lite when it comes to spending (yes, including pork-barrel spending).

Are the states perfect? Of course not. Look at California, _already_ squawking to Washington about coming for assistance “if needed.”

Is the issue that McCain is as bad as Obama? No, for McCain is not as bad as Obama, just as the GOP have not been as bad as the Dems (in this regard; “bad” has several meanings), when it comes to redistribution of income and vote-buying through entitlements of many kinds, yes, which have been supported for ages by many in the GOP…

*** WHICH IS NOT THE KEY POINT ***. It's obvious that the Dems are more ambitious in this regard and that McCain may appear weak, but he nevertheless has a legitimate gripe, whether you like it or not. It is as I accurately have described it, nonsense-free (which the “creative” can restate in any misleading way they choose): It's a case of McCain doing too little, too late, in this campaign once more.

Is either side perfect? No, of course not. (The GOP is often hypocritical, something a number of us have long criticized — they have avoided being a true alternative to the Dems.) But the real question, of course, is, is Obama's tax plan and redistributionist mentality deserving of criticism? Of course. There _is_ and remains a matter of degree — at least if one takes the time and can understand this.

“We’re set up, unlike other states in the union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs.”
- Sarah Palin in the New Yorker

Unfortunately, Sen. McCain is still clucking about it out on the trail and his supporter in both the media and the blogosphere continue the chant. It makes for some good sound bites, but I’m afraid that it’s high time to remind some of my conservative, McCain-supporting friends of some uncomfortable facts.

When this is all over, you will retain your credibility.

The maverick independent hockey pitbull lady seems to be good at one thing and one thing only — completely alienating independent voters from supporting the John McCain campaign:
A majority of likely voters in a new Washington Post-ABC News natio…

I put it to you that they have BOTH spent their careers supporting a redistributionist system, and by your definitions I'm sure, are BOTH Marxists and socialists. In fact the only difference I see is that McCain has been doing it for over twenty years longer than Obama, who is still comparatively wet behind the ears in his redistribution career. McCain, by your standards, is a life long socialist, Marxist bastard.

How about state level programs? True, they are not under the care of the Fed directly, but national leaders should demonstrate their leadership in influencing the state. Has he actively fought to eliminate welfare in his state? (No fair saying he wants to “reform” it. They both do.) Has he fought to eliminate unemployment insurance? (It's mandatory and some people pay into it their entire careers without ever drawing on it, while others collect their money regularly.) Has McCain called for the elimination of any and all social safety nets our nation decided to put in place? Or are all of his Arizona constituents too much of a bunch of greedy, commie red, socialist Marxist bastards to give up their gravy train privileges?

He hasn't done any of that? Then guess what? He's a redistributionist, just like Obama, just like George W. Bush, just like Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnel and all the rest of those socialist Marxist bastards on Capitol Hill. So while you continue hyperventilating about how Obama is a redistributionist, the rest of us will get on with evaluating the actual issues involved in this election.

I admire your message discipline and how quickly you have memorized the script for the new Republican play, “The Redistribution.” With some coaching from your director, Matt Drudge, I'm sure it will be a hit on Broadway for (four) years to come.

I'll qualify this at the beginning, I am not being snarky, but I really want to know how you guys can totally disconnect yourselves from reality.

How do you do it?

Jazz just spent 4 paragraphs and approximately 600 words explaining the fallacy of the right-wing's “Redistribution” talk track, he did it with facts and verifiable references. He did it by pointing to John McCain's own words and actions, you immediately (within 30 minutes) responded by claiming everything Jazz said was untrue and immaterial anyway, in your world John McCain's “Redistribution” strategy is truthful and effective among those who know, and who care. Rather than tangential, it's central. You did this without any facts or backup, but with a certainty that would be admired if it wasn't a little scary.

I saw total disconnect from the right-wing at the start of the Clinton presidency, where they went over the top on every imaginable subject (some we couldn't even imagine at the time) and just made up their own facts and reality. Obviously its gotten much worse in the past 16+years, but I have to ask, How do you do it?

There's nothing wrong with the criticism, and just because we have redistribution now, even some that is accepted as fact and even conceded, obviously(!) that doesn't justify more of the same.

I feel disappointed when fewer and fewer can understand and logically interpret the admonition.