We begin, ladies and gentlemen, with today's harrumphing "enough is enough" headline, designed to set up the latest anti-tax rant from the editorial page of the city's only remaining daily.

The current outrage?

King County wants to increase the sales tax by .3 percent in order to keep courts and public safety services functioning in the face of drastic revenue shortfalls related to the recession. This isn't padding the public safety budget. This is staving off what prosecutors and law enforcement officials are calling a potential "catastrophe."

In today's editorial, the Times does admit that courts and police are kinda essential.

Those are necessary things. Without security, thuggery rules — as was made clear in the recent beating in the Seattle transit tunnel.

But what the Times hates more than thuggery is taxes! And so the paper engages in some rote griping about the county needing to tighten its belt by reining in its union health benefits and other contractually-obligated expenses. Except that, a few sentences later, the Times admits that this is not actually any sort of silver bullet.

Renegotiated contracts would not solve the whole problem.

Ok. Solve the whole problem for us, Seattle Times. Please.

This page does not have a detailed, prescriptive answer to King County's whole problem. We simply note that every time the pile of sales taxes is made higher, solving one's own problems becomes more difficult.

Translation: We don't have a solution! But we know that if that young lady in the bus tunnel wasn't over-taxed she'd have been able to defend herself, that's for sure!

Also, the Times argues that increasing the tax burden in King County will come off as so "unfriendly" that the only logical alternative will be for people to "drive three hours south from Seattle, to a place where the sales tax is zero."

Yikes. Where to begin?

How about here:

First, leave aside the crazy assumptions about Seattleites' rage against the tax machine. Second, leave aside the fact that the fuel expenses incurred by King County residents while hypothetically commuting to Oregon for all of their purchases would more than negate any sales tax savings.

Instead, remember that while Oregon doesn't have a sales tax, it does have an income tax. (Which Washington doesn't. Which the Seattle Times applauds.) On top of that, Oregon recently raised taxes on the income of its most wealthy residents in order to help that state deal with its own budgeting crisis.

And what was the Seattle Times' response to that news when it broke? A stern warning to Washington State leaders not to get any ideas, because "Now's no time to party with taxpayer money."

And. And! How did the Seattle Times feel about our state legislature suspending Tim Eyman's tax-blocking Initiative 960 in order to raise taxes that could help cover Washington's $2.6 billion budget shortfall? Hated it.

So.

To review: The Seattle Times detests taxes (except when taxpayers are paying to help the paper's bottom line), loves public safety, thinks courts are pretty important too, doesn't have any solid solutions for the huge revenue shortfalls the state and county are now facing, but knows it detests taxes.

Any questions?