I received the following frothy comment on my case for keeping the estate tax for the super wealthy and thought I would share my response for all to see. First the comment from Ramrod:

"Do you see your own contradiction? You open your unfounded essay by citing Jefferson's 'all men are created equal' adage, and then proceed to make claim that 'rich men should be treated different, if not exclusively punished by a tax burden' [sic]. And for what? I bet Walton's kids could have split peas to make that $1B work for them... but why should the government reap the remaining $99B of his estate, when the government has done nothing to earn it and likely more to cripple it (we'll do that some other time). The point is this: stick to your original claim, and ensure that 'all (taxpayers) are (treated) equal'. Once you've realigned yourself, turn on MTV Cribs and allow your rage to build once more."

And my response:

"I think everybody in America should have an equal chance at succeeding, which is how I interpret Jefferson's writings. I think Walton's future generations (or the current Kennedy's or Bush's for that matter) will have privilages (and will not be treated with equality when compared to the average American) for eons without having to contribute anything to society, simply because of their last name. The last time I checked, that is called royal lineage/feudalism/or whatever you want to call it. America should stand as the antithesis to that, not the new breeding ground for it.

"When Jefferson penned that line, it was legal to own slaves (and he did so himself). A modest leap of logic would imply he saw keeping Africans as slaves as being consistent with 'treating all men equal'. Do you still think we should strictly adhere to the letter of his writings, or do you think it better to interpret the spirit of his writings based on our modern society?

"And let me ask you this - do you really think that two white New England sons who both attended Yale and were Skull and Bones members (all because of who their family was, not because of any achievement of their own) were the two best candidates America could have fielded for president in the last election? I absolutely do not. I do not think that coming from a wealthy family should automatically disqualify somebody for higher office (regardless of what you think of his policies and how he exercises the powers of his office, you cannot deny the fact that Bush is very good at his job), just as I do not think coming from a wealthy family should automatically qualify somebody for higher office, which is clearly the case today."