The only thing conservatives do faster than accuse their opponents of "class warfare", is to go right ahead and engage in it.

The politics of envy are alive and well in the conservative world: talk of "limousine liberals", "liberal elitists" "Brie-eating new Englanders" "boutique liberals" and so on. What are they talking about?

The Myth is that a few overly-hyped millionaire celebrities can be compared to the secretive multi-billionaires who own the republican party.

Most celebrities are rags-to-riches born and raised like anyone else. Most republican elites were born and raised as elites. Celebrities are "new money", republicans are "old money".

20 billion (twenty thousand million) is larger than a million.

Despite there being an entire industry of unsubstantiated tabloid and TV attacks on celebrities, nobody can accuse them of being born with silver spoons in their mouths. Nearly all are Horatio Algar rags-to-riches stories - succeeding though hard word, determination, development of skill and self-discipline, all in an ultra-competitive world.

When conservatives say that the rich are superior to other people, they assume they're talking about rich people who earned, rather than inherited, their money - new money. Any conservative who is full of criticism for the new money of Hollywood obviously does not believe in his own rhetoric: he is lying. Whether about rich people being automatically good, or celebrities being bad, in one of those statements the conservative is knowingly lying.

Take a look at Forbes' Ten Richest list. A full half of the list is of people named "Walton". Wow! Does this mean that changing your name to Walton will make you more hard-working, thrifty, and moral? No. Half of the ten richest people in the world are related to Sam Walton, late owner of Wal-Mart.

Each of them have about 20 billion dollars. That's 20,000,000,000. Twenty thousand million.

That means if you want to compare the financial power of a Walton kid to Hollywood millionaires, you would need to fill a stadium with TWENTY THOUSAND MILLIONAIRES.

Want to play a game? I'll name a Walton kid. You name twenty thousand liberal millionaires. Then I'll name another Walton kid, and you'll name another twenty thousand liberal millionaires.

Or I could just name all 5 of the Waltons on the top ten list, and you name ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND liberal millionaires. Then we'll see who has more economic power, unpublicized republican billionaires, or the endlessly criticized liberal celebrities.

And that's just the Waltons. Also on the list is a Saudi prince (so you know my talk of aristocrats is not just rhetoric) and someone who made his money from "investments" - which means that, (unless he started by investing pennies he found on the street) he must have inherited a lot of money.

Now, let's talk about getting money for nothing. Ask a conservative to talk about that, and they'll talk about welfare, and how morally terrible those people are. Getting money for nothing really ruins their morals, they say.

So then, what of those billionaires? The conservative is lying - he might not believe that money for nothing is bad, or he might not believe that billionaires are more moral.

So now you see republicans lie TWICE with their that celebrities (earned money) are immoral, yet billionaires (on welfare) ARE!

Remember, the ONLY way to cut taxes is to decrease spending. Otherwise, all one can do is shift the burden around - by building up a debt (taxing your children) with interest payments which also increase taxes.

Think about it: if you buy things with a credit card, or decide not to pay your bills, are you cutting expenses? No, you're raising them. And that's what the Bush administration is doing.