Demographically, the Democratic party base is largely made up of two groups: The rich and the poor. If only the middle class voted, the Democratic party would become an endangered species.

Yet it's Democrats who seem most inclined to raise taxes. Why would they raise taxes if its leaders are so rich? The reason is that there are rich people and then there are rich people.  The rich portion of the Democratic base aren't people earning money in the traditional sense. They inherit it or they earn it purely on their own as a service (lawyer, actress, investor).

So why does that matter? It matters because the tax system, written by lawyers in congress, puts in loopholes that enables them to get out of having to pay significant taxes. 

John Edwards, a personal injury lawyer, made his millions by suing insurance companies on behalf of "victims". He then took 25% to 50% of the jury award for himself.  Well, not quite. John Edwards set up an S corporation that he was the sole owner of. Instead of paying Edwards a salary, he took it as a stock dividend. Dividends that are taxed at only 15% and bypass payroll taxes (which means he didn't contribute to social security, Medicaid, Medicare, etc.) for virtually all his income. This is quite common and no doubt plenty of Republicans do it too. But Edwards is one arguing to roll back the tax cuts -- a move that would have no effect on him.

Theresa Heinz Kerry has various shelters herself too.  Last year, her effective tax rate was only 12.7% and in other years has been higher but still less than 15% (the average American pays over 20% in federal taxes).  John Kerry's proposed tax cut roll-back wouldn't affect him (well not entirely true since the President does get a regular salary that can't be monkeyed with).

Most Hollywood celebrities have tax setups that are very similar.  They set themselves up as LLCs or S-corporations and then pay themselves via dividends. It is unlikely that most big name Kerry supporters in Hollywood would be affected at all by Kerry's tax-cut rollback. 

Most "rich Republicans" actually do pay a lot in taxes.  That's because they earn their money via traditional businesses. The big time sales executive at GE making $280,000 a year in commissions can't set himself up as an S-corporation. And small businesses people can't usually do the trick because they tend to have lots of other stock holders. The dividend trick is less effective if you have 600 stock holders to split it with.  Or in some cases (such as mine) where the principle stock holder refuses to engage in such flimflammery (though if Kerry wins I'll certainly reconsider it).

I support the progressive tax system. But I think we pay too high in taxes even after the tax cuts. That's because I know that many of those elites who support raising taxes can be assured that they won't be affected. After all, they don't earn their income creating products and goods for the citizenry. They make it through selling a service in the form of themselves which enables them to dodge taxes. Or they inherited it.  But don't take my word for it, consider after you read this who they most vocal Democrats tend to be. Where did they make their money?  Then consider the most vocal Republicans and where they got their money.

When I'm paying an effective federal tax rate of 29% (that's after deductions) making a fraction of what the Kerry's make, I can't help but feel a bit offended.  Until they're paying their fair share they should shut the hell up about trying to get me and millions like me to pay more.