Conversely, he does not mean

[a] white boy, born to wealthy parents, educated in private schools, enrolled

at Yale as a legacy with a 1200 SAT, given a National Guard pilot training

slot otherwise unattainable in a war, who then fails to even complete

his commitment, enrolled at Harvard Business school with less than stellar

academic record, does nothing significant for 20 years, becomes a baseball

owner and somehow governor of Texas and is then purchased the Presidency

(but not the popular vote) by Big Business. No, this is a high achiever.

Dave goes on to quote Citizens

Against Government Waste and their impression of history. "The United

States was created as the result of a revolution, sparked primarily over

burdensome taxation. Colonial Americans didn't revolt because of who taxed

them as much as the oppressive level of taxation."

Nothing could be further from

the truth, and if they can't get their history right, what did they do

to their figures? The salient question that led to the revolution, and

the one around which the middle class rallied was: Does the English Parliament

have a right to impose internal taxes on us when we have no representation

in that body?

A growing outcry and boycott

of British goods didn't end because the taxes were lessened or abolished.

The Sugar Act (1764), Stamp Act (1765) and Townshend Acts (1767) were

never crushing taxes, but did serve to put the Americans on notice. Before

signing the repeal of the Townshend Acts, George III said: "I am

clear that there must always be one tax, to keep the right," so the

tax on tea remained. The rest of course is history, one which the CAGW

and Dave Hamrick would do well to read.

It is funny he mentioned serfs

in the same breath as taxes, because there was a series of peasant rebellions

in the Holy Roman Empire (which was neither holy nor Roman) about the

time Luther was letting the genie out of the bottle.

These were people who did toil

on the lord's property 33 percent of their time, were not allowed to quit

or move, and were subject to his whims up to and including death. For

their pains they were allowed to live in constant hunger and deprivation,

possibly into their late 30s. Their rebellion was denounced by Martin

Luther and, of course, crushed by the nobility. These people were overtaxed

and over-abused, but how they were better off than the American taxpayer

I'm not too sure.

Which brings us to the subject

I think Hamrick was trying to address: Taxes.

Thomas Paine wrote: "Society

is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness."

We are stuck with government

without which we would have some other form of law. Governments spend

money, are normally profligate, and must be controlled so that people

have incentive to work hard and keep what they make. If the Republicans

stick to that message, they will find the proverbial middle politics.

Instead the Republican leadership

has become the mouthpiece for Big Business, protecting it at all costs.

They seek to shift the tax burden down, away from those who benefit the

most to those least able to pay. The Democrats, while no models of consistency,

at least give voice to the otherwise powerless.

So, Dave, continue to spew

your venom at a local audience hungry for their own affirmation. You may

get a Seig Heil around here, but the rest of the country doesn't lean

quite so far, and I believe the Republicans will find that out in the

next election.

Timothy J. Parker

Peachtree City

Back

to Opinion Home Page | Back

to the top of the page