The Democrats are going to be howling about "tax cuts for the rich" every chance they get. The class warfare card is the only one in their hand right now.

A few may try to pull the "deficit" card out of the pack, but it won't work very well, and here's why:

The New York Times had an excellent chart years ago that showed this steady revenue growth, unfortunately outstripped almost every year by the growth in Federal spending. Reagan budgets were "DOA" (the term actually used by Democrats) at the Democratic congress, and Reagan wasn't as tight with the spending in some areas as he should have been either.

The problem isn't low taxes, it's high spending, and it always has been. Name one Democrat who has ever showed concern about a new social program--where frankly most of the Federal money goes--causing deficits.

And yes, I've seen all the hard work done by liberals to "prove" that 1980s revenues didn't really increase. Usually this is done by charting them as a percentage of GDP instead of hard numbers, a favorite trick similar to the one used to show that we are less generous in foreign aid than Denmark is. Of course, if GDP was growing that rapidly, that says something about the results of tax cuts too, doesn't it?