Associated Press
Earlier this year, Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) began criticizing his main Democratic rival, Elizabeth Warren, for being a "hypocrite." The argument went like this: Warren makes a fair amount of money, but she's an advocate for struggling, working families. Ergo, she's guilty of "hypocrisy."
The problem, of course, is that this line of attack is dumb, and reflects ignorance about the meaning of the word "hypocrite." Warren has acquired a fair amount of wealth, after having been raised by a family of modest means and putting herself through law school, but she's now one of the nation's leading voices in representing the interests of the middle class.
Brown can agree or disagree on the merits of her beliefs, and he and his fellow Republicans are free to argue that fighting for the middle class is a bad idea, but when those with considerable personal resources look at the status quo -- a growing class gap, wealth concentrated at the top, rising poverty -- and want a more progressive approach, that's admirable, not hypocritical.
And yet, Brown and his team are still confused.
Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown's campaign accused Democratic candidate Elizabeth Warren of "hypocrisy" after she admitted to not paying higher taxes than the state requires. [...]
"The problem with running a campaign based on self-righteousness and moral superiority is that you had better live up to the same standard you would impose on everyone else," [Brown campaign managed Jim Barnett] said. ... "This is the sort of hypocrisy and double-speak voters are sick and tired of hearing from politicians, especially those who can't keep their hands out of others' pocketbooks."
Let's explain this in basic terms.
1. Elizabeth Warren makes a good living and pays her taxes.
2. Warren believes she and others in her income bracket should pay higher taxes.
3. Warren would gladly pay higher taxes, but she hasn't made charitable contributions to the government treasury, and she hasn't urged anyone else to make charitable contributions to the government treasury, either.
If Brown and his team think this is "hypocrisy," perhaps Warren could use some of her money to send a dictionary to the Republican campaign headquarters.
Leave a Comment:
A "dictionary" wouldn't help because they don't believe in "reality" either. Just "seeing" the words on a page isn't going to make the term more coherent in his mind, just look at the sheeple who are "evangelical" - they don't take the words in that book seriously either.
I think the Republican definition of hypocrisy is: any discrepancy between your misrepresentation of another person's actions and your willful misunderstanding of that person's convictions.
So, Santorum, you were saying about college indoctrination?
Fine, Mr. Brown, you Tea Party candidate, I expect to see your FEDERAL wages returned, your free FEDERAL healthcare denied, I take it you won't be taking any interstates soon and you'll be growing your own food as to be not be under the FDA's thumb... correct? Or are you going to be a hypocrite?
OK...so I define 'hypocrisy' is using this attack against WARREN while supporting Romney for President. Yes?
First of all, I don't believe there is actually a mechanism in place that would ALLOW a person to intentionally overpay taxes. It would be seen as an error as far as the IRS is concerned.
Secondly, Sen Brown can also look up "facile" because that's what his argument is. If he wanted to make an effective point it would have been to compare charitable contributions over and above your tax liability. Especially those that would alleviate the governments need to provide the same need (donating to free clinics, community revitalization programs, animal shelters, etc...)
I could be wrong but I would bet that Warren might come out the better in that comparison.
dfabs4, In Massachusetts, we're given the option to voluntarily pay an increased tax rate of 5.85%. (In 2000, voters decided to decrease our tax rate from 5.85% to 5%. It passed 59-41. But in case anyone really wanted to pay 5.85%, the option was added to our tax forms.)
Thanks for the info. I take back and amend my comments... I should have noticed that the Senator was making an argument about Mass state taxes. If what you say is correct and he is basing his characterization on choosing to pay the higher Mass. tax rate, then his argument is factually based and I apologize to him.
I personally still think the ARGUMENT is moot if she charitably donates more than the difference would be (if she had $1,000,000 in taxable income the difference would be $8,500!). I would still bet that she contributes waaay more than that yearly. He may also, too , for that matter, but he should make THAT argument.
Heck, every H&R block and Turbo tax etc... ad on TV touts that no one should pay more in taxes than the HAVE TO. That just seems to be public opinion.
The basic reason why we have taxation is because that money has to be distributed across the populace in order for the government to provide it's services and protection. The reason why taxation is compulsory is because people will not pay the amount they owe voluntarily. The only way that Warren could be hypocritical given this context would be if there is evidence of her stating that voluntary taxation is adequate and the in another clip or statement her saying that it's not adequate. Otherwise we are talking about apples and oranges here.
Additionally Warren isn't running for state senator. She is running for the US Senate from the state of Massachusetts. This means that when she talks about taxation she is talking about taxation at the federal level. A state allowing people to make a 5% contribution payment above what they would otherwise pay does not equate to the same as the federal taxation level. Additionally she is talking about the base rate of taxation. Even if the 5% rate was being applied federally that would still not negate her statement or indicate hypocrisy.
Brown is peddling complete bull@!$%# and I'm sick and tired of Republicans playing this line.
Remember Republicans logical fallacies =/= indications of hypocrisy on the left
dfab4
I have an extra amount deducted from my paycheck for my federal income tax. This is because when tax time is due I have the amount due and then a little more as a refund. This allows me to be able to make purchases such as eyeglasses (I am legally blind without them) or even maybe a treat for my reenactment work. Yes a person can volunteer to have more money taken out of their paycheck but it can come back as a refund.
Like many Republicans, Brown treats his audience like rubes. This is not a winning strategy in a state where voters tend to be well educated.
Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc
They elected Brown, didn't they?
Anyone can be fooled once, but only a fool can be fooled twice.
Regardless whether Brown is trying to appear moderate during the campaign, he will still vote with the republican majority on most of the extreme conservative legislative purposals (i.e. the Ryan budget) should he win in November. So be careful what you wish for Massachusetts.
BTW, the countdown has started and Ted Nugent has 197 days left until he's either "in jail or dead" according to his recent rant. I'll be curious which way this goes.
In this Red Sox crazy state, don't be surprised that taking money from a Yankees executive is going to be more damaging than him voting for the Blunt Amendment. I think Warren will beat him, but he's being funded by the Koch-roaches so who knows exactly what'll happen. My neighbor put up an Elizabeth Warren yard sign Saturday, when I left for work this morning, it was gone. Apparently the victim of late night theft. So to our southern friends surrounded by Republicans, we've got clowns here too who think free speech only works in one direction.
Is that what's going on with the War on Women? Republicans think it's hypocritical for men to give a damn about women's concerns?
A dictionary would be of absolutely no benefit for once a word is reseaarched one must have the ability to retain the information provided and, as we are all aware, Repubs can retain nothing in their little pea brains; ergo, most suffer from acute to severe "Flip-Flop" fever.
This silly argument Brown puts forward is a corollary to the silly response to anyone who believes that taxes should be higher should "write a check to the IRS." I am retired with an annual income of about $70K and believe that I should pay more taxes. If I am singled out to pay more taxes or if I make a charitable contribution to the IRS the additional income would pay for some staples and paper clips for a government agency, but make no substantial difference. However, if everyone in my income bracket paid more we have a chance to maintain a reasonable quality of life for lots of Americans, and that would improve MY quality of life.
"If Brown and his team think this is "hypocrisy," perhaps Warren could use some of her money to send a dictionary to the Republican campaign headquarters."
I'm just wondering if they could even read all the big words in said dictionary.