There are many people on the progressive side and many in the middle who support President Obama's recent argumment that Bush Tax Cuts for the Rich should expire at the end of the year.
Why are we as progressives not using an argument which at least has the potential to shame the rich and the Republicans instead of just focusing only on moral arguments of fairness and deficit? Economic fairness does not bother the rich republicans and their conservative base.
I propose that we should say : Bush's Taxes should pay for Bush-initiated wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
those of you with a better flair can modify it to may be Bush's tax cuts should pay for Bush's wars (of course I know that he left them for President Obama to clean up)
My observation is that there are two things conservatives (including Bluedog Democrats) and the republicans love and these are: wagging wars and issueing tax cuts for the wealthy.
History has shown that the rich in this country are not ashamed of demanding more and more wealth and that is why they insist on having their tax cuts remain permanently in place.
Even their fake cry on the deficit is not enough to put these people to shame about retaining the taxes for the rich. Of course they are opposed to spoending money on healthcare for the poor but are not ashamed to pay more to the wealthy. So we have to push an additional line of argument that will make it a little shameful to contradict - war funding through the expired taxes.
I believe that the only way we who support the expiration of these tax cuts can put some level of shame in these greedy people is to equate their favorate two things which are war and taxes.
Without a push from the progressive base we all that our cowardly Democratic party will not do the right thing.
I therefore propose that we start asking others in the progressive movement to argue that Bush's tax cuts for the wealth must pay for part of the wars which Bush initiated but did not pay for