Everyone in the land knows what Republicans have say about taxes. For instance:

"We ought to lower taxes."

"You ought to keep more of the money you earn."

"If we lower taxes, the economy will grow."

"A flat tax is a fair tax."

"The estate tax is a 'death tax.'"

What do Democrats have to say about taxes? I have no real idea and neither does anyone else. Democrats don't really talk about taxes or much of anything else. Democrats just seem to go around 'triangulating' or saluting or wishing the other guys would let them win.

... what is the Democratic message on taxes?

Since you are able to filter out the Republican message and absorb the Democratic one, you should be able to tell us what the message is.

Idealogues, on the other hand, think they already know all the answers. There is no point in arguing with an idealogue, because their mind is made up prior to evaluating the evidence (e.g. tax cuts are always good). Clinton was very critical of the current administration on the grounds that they have been overly ideological in their approach from the beginning, without regard for the practical consequences of their actions.

That's a characterization which even if true isn't going to help Democrats win elections. What are Republicans going to do, stop it? The public has known for years that Republicans are stubborn hard asses, but they still vote for them.

What is meaningful is that Republicans have a message which they been very successful at imparting to the country so that even the dumbest little Republican can expound on it. The Democrats OTOH seem so far from a message that even the biggest dog Democrat can't even seem to explain what it is.

...beleive in the bedrock principles of the scientific method. They believe in testing, experiment, verification.

And they know many, many things as facts. Scientists know that you can't get something for nothing. That everything eventually runs down. That all life evolves, including humans. That E = mc squared. Many people happend to consider scientists as dogmatic party poopers who don't know as much as they think they know.

But in fact, scientists are people who know what they think and why they think it. Scientists are curious people who study facts and then attempt to draw conclusions from those facts.

Many people on the left, OTOH, don't seem to be interested in looking at facts. They seem to actively recoil from drawing conclusions. They think what they think, but they don't want to know why they think it. They seem to get angry if you suggest there might a better way for liberals to think, because that seems to imply that liberals don't already know everything there is to know. I think that's why it's so hard to get Democrats to recognize that they don't seem to stand for anything. Democrats don't really want to stand for anything, they want to try to stand for everything. Otherwise they would have to try to draw conclusions, and they don't want to do that.

He knows that Congressional districts are heavily padded in favor of Republicans. Says Bruce Reed at Slate:

Attention, conspiracy theorists: The biggest conspiracy to steal votes already happened. It's called redistricting, and it offers Republicans' only real hope of holding onto the House this fall.

http://www.slate.com/id/2151647#CantLose

He knows the Christian conservative movement might still produce a miracle for the Republicans in a mid term election.

He knows Democrats have problems getting their vote out and that polls favoring Democrats could encourage Democrats to stay home if they expect the election to be in the bag.

He knows that Democrats are uninspiring to the voters and have no coherent agenda for a Democratic congress.

What worries me is not that he's unworried, it worries me that Democrats are unworried. Nowhere do I feel any sense of urgency from the Democrats this year. And I can't understand why.

...it means they don't care enough to tell us about it.

I'm tired of making excuses for the Democrats.

I'm tired of hearing that Republicans run everything and will steal the election.

Democrats need to start being proactive instead of reactive. We need to set an agenda, get our message out, and inspire our voters. Otherwise we have nothing to complain about.

Delusional and unworried? That sounds more like the Democrats.

Which liberal Democrats are constantly 'sniping' at religion? Which liberal Democrats have EVER sniped at religion? Could we have quotes and names, please?

And did the Democrats really have anything to do with 'Foleygate?' Seems like it was the media that went crazy over Foley, not the Democrats.

I do agree that Foleygate doesn't help the Democrats at all and the Democrats should have put Iraq front and center in this campaign.

Noam Chomsky isn't a Democrat. Michael Moore isn't really one either. He's a reformed Nader voter, at best.

Far from being hijacked by the extreme left, the Democrats have been hijacked by political consultants who tell them not to say anything lest they offend someone.

That's why I asked earlier, who are those liberal Democrats who Paglia claims are 'constantly' making snide remarks against religion? Is it Hillary, Kerry, Kennedy, Lieberman, Feingold? Was it Carter, Mondale, Clinton, Dukakis? Was it McGovern, years and years ago? I certainly cannot imagine any Democrat these days making a controversial statement, so I don't know who Paglia is talking about.