John Kerry routinely accuses the rich of not paying their fair share of taxes. He has even gone on record as saying that he would raise taxes on anyone who makes more than $200,000 per year. But does Kerry practice what he preaches? Apparently not, opines the New York Post, who recently took a look at Kerry's state tax returns.

Weary of liberals always clamoring for higher taxes on other people, an anti-tax group managed to place a line on the tax form giving Bay Staters the option of paying at the old, since-repealed 5.85 percent rate, rather than at the current 5.3 percent rate.

For two years now, John Kerry has had the opportunity to pay his "fair share." But like some Benedict Arnold CEO, the Democratic Party candidate for president has taken the money and ran.

That Kerry opts to pay the lower tax rate is not all that surprising. Despite popular support for higher taxes, most Taxachussets taxpayers still opt to pay the lower rate. But then again, most people aren't running for public office on a platform of higher taxation.

Looking deeper at Kerry's tax returns, the Post noticed another strange phenomenon.

You can learn a lot about a politician by studying his tax returns. In John Kerry's case, one thing you can quickly figure out is what years his name actually appears on the ballot. If it's an election year, he makes charitable contributions. Last week, for example, he claimed $43,735 in charitable donations for 2003, more than he'd given in the prior two years combined.

In 1990, running for reelection to the Senate, he donated $1,835 to charity. After winning, he ponied up a total of $975 in the next three years.

This is probably a pretty common practice among politicians. But for someone who advocates using the threat of lethal force to seize even more of taxpayer's income, you would think they would at least start with their own.

(Link via Taranto)