Ridiculous spin of the day
posted at 11:11 pm on October 5, 2010 by Slublog
Republican leaders and their claque are promoting the idea that letting the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich expire would amount to a tax increase. The conservative lobbying organization Americans for Tax Reform says it would be “the largest tax hike in history.” Of course, that’s just standard talk for the ATR, which says it “opposes all tax increases as a matter of principle.” But many other Americans seem to have bought into that idea and the accompanying trickledown theory.
Lest anyone fall for this political explanation of what should happen to President George W. Bush’s gift to the millionaires and billionaires, here is the truth of the matter: Allowing the massive cuts to expire would not increase taxes, but rather it would simply undo an unwise and unfortunate tax reduction and let the tax level revert to that of the low-deficit Clinton years. Remember that as a time of budget surplus, not deficits.
Letting the Bush tax cuts expire would “not increase taxes.” It would just “undo” a “tax reduction,” leading to a situation in which the government takes so much of our money that they will have surpluses. So take that, wingnuts! The government wouldn’t increase taxes, they’ll just let the tax rate “revert” to a time when they took more money out of our paychecks! That is different from a tax increase because they say it is!
The editorial then devolves further from there, recycling the class-warfare pablum about how only the super-mega-rich will be affected by the elimination of the tax cuts. The rest of us?
What really makes this editorial sad is that our founders enshrined journalism as a civil right because they knew a strong and independent press was essential to a healthy democracy. They believed politicians must be held accountable by those who purchase ink by the barrel.
Those who write editorials like this have no idea how badly they debase a profession our founders held in such esteem. They have become more invested in protecting an ideology than pursuing the ideal that the founders intended for their field.
And the worst part? They’re doing so willingly. Consider this: journalists in Soviet Russia had to be coerced into protecting the regime.
Ours volunteer for the duty.
Cross-posted at slublog.com