Angry Reader #6 wrote: “Mr. Hanson unfolds the conservative Procrustean hide-a-bed. If a Democratic president is wealthy, he’s a hypocrite. If a Democratic president isn’t, then he’s guilt of envy and class warfare.”
This is a childish snark. My point is not that wealthy liberals should not enjoy the fruits of their labors like conservatives, but that in doing so to the nth degree they are at odds with their Robin Hood, endless class-warfare rhetoric — fat cat, corporate jet owner, you didn’t build that, at some point you’ve made enough money, not the time to profit, Las Vegas junketeering, etc. True, we see conservatives who are hypocrites, but they are of a different sort: evangelical pastors calling for a return to 1930s family values who have been caught in sexual escapades, money scandals, or extravagant expenditure beyond their devotion to Sermon of the Mount frugality.
If you are a liberal man of the people, and if you stump for much higher taxes, and if you caricature the lifestyle that ill-gotten rich provide, then, please, do not try to welch on your yacht taxes, or junket to Costa del Sol, or sell your TV interest for $100 million to an authoritarian oil-mogul in hasty fashion to beat soon-to-rise capital gains taxes — a few of the ignored examples I pointed out in the article. The Angry Reader’s deafness at those and many more illustrations of liberal aristocratic hypocrisy in the article suggests that he can’t defend or won’t defend such paradoxes and so goes back on the attack.
And finally, note the faulty logic: as one without riches and one who is a registered Democrat still, I don’t think that thereby I am thought to be envious or calling for class warfare. Class warriors John Edwards (“two Americas”) and Barack Obama (“millionaires and billionaires”) — not to mention a Buffett or Soros — are a long way from ‘give ’em Hell’ Harry Truman of Independence. Surely anyone can see that.