The Washington Post lies when it "fact checks":

Let's start with Yglesias: (emp add)

Rudy Giuliani runs an ad in which he explains "I know that reducing taxes produces more revenues," which is an impossible thing for Giuliani to "know" since it's false: [ad inserted here]

Fortunately, The Washington Post and The New York Times both have ad fact check features designed to set the record straight. But the Times doesn't notice what Rudy said, and the Post further misleads, saying "a matter of fierce dispute among economists." Brendan Nyhan asks "What's the point of fact-checking if you're not going to call Rudy on that claim?"

Yes, saying tax cuts bring in more revenue are "a matter of fierce dispute among economists" is bad, but look what else is in the Post's analysis: (emp add)

ANALYSIS: The ad, airing in New Hampshire, is accurate -- but selective -- in saying that the three Democratic contenders would raise taxes. What Giuliani leaves out is that Clinton, Obama and Edwards have pledged to repeal the Bush tax cuts only for the wealthiest Americans -- Clinton pegs the threshold at more than $250,000 in income, Obama at $200,000 -- while keeping the reductions for everyone else.

Letting the Republican-crafted Bush tax-legislation expire is not raising taxes. Raising taxes is an act of volition. If anybody, it's the Republicans who are raising taxes - because that's how they wrote the law. The Post is repeating a Republican slogan, when it declares that a program the Repubicans crafted to expire is an action by Democrats.

Just as a thought experiment, if in 2009 all members of Congress were kidnapped along with the President, which guarantees that the Bush cuts expire, would it be legitimate to say nobody raised taxes?


posted by Quiddity at 12/04/2007 10:43:00 AM