Thomas Friedman has a clever idea to do an end run around Bush, by semantically redefining tax cuts as "service cuts."

This could actually work on some of the dimbulbs that the Democrats love to gather in as voters.

A couple of minutes thought would screw things up, though. The idea they are trying to plant in your head is that if your taxes get cut, your services get cut. This relies on you accepting on faith two assumptions:

First, that every nickel the government spends is on some absolutely essential service, and cutting this amount, or even not increasing it enough, would be disastrous. It doesn't take too much examination of the budget to make this look pretty silly.

Second, that a taxpayer is basically paying for services received from the government. Oh, really? Certainly I receive services from the government, from Federal all the way down to local. But hey, guess what: the guy who pays a tenth what I do gets exactly the same services. If life were fair, the big taxpayers would have their own lanes on the highway, a private police and fire service, special privileges at the national parks, and many other extra services in line with what they pay. Fat chance. Heck, the people who pay no taxes at all actually receive MORE services than I do.

What the average taxpayer is paying for is services received by others from the government. Not for themselves. And they pay through the nose.

I don't think Democrats can win the presidency with a single issue. You win the presidency by connecting with the American people's gut insecurities and aspirations. You win with a concept. The concept I'd argue for is "neoliberalism." More Americans today are natural neolibs, than neocons. Neoliberals believe in a muscular foreign policy and a credible defense budget, but also a prudent fiscal policy that balances taxes, deficit reduction and government services.

At least he's honest enough to admit that the core of the Democratic Party's strategy is fear and anger in the voters. But then, it has been for many years.

As for the rest: yeah, old news, Thomas. Remember "The era of big government is over?" I do. Democrats believe the size of the state should be infinite...all for good purposes of course. If Friedman thinks he can snow the middle class--that half of the country that pays the freight for the other half--good luck to him.

I'm waiting to see if this idea ends up in the Democratic talking points, and on the lips of every media pundit in town.