WaPo: Boiking's Pathetic Speech gets Three Pinnochios

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Jan 3, 2009
102,841
106,048
3,615
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
Axelrod and Plouffe better get the WaPo on the horn and "get their minds right! :lol:

pinocchio_3.jpg


“I mean, understand, it's not as if we haven't tried this theory. Remember in those years, in 2001 and 2003, Congress passed two of the most expensive tax cuts for the wealthy in history. And what did they get us? The slowest job growth in half a century. Massive deficits that have made it much harder to pay for the investments that built this country and provided the basic security that helped millions of Americans reach and stay in the middle class: things like education and infrastructure, science and technology, Medicare and Social Security.”



Inserting the words “for the wealthy” was interesting phrasing by the president, since he suggests these tax cuts were intended to benefit only the rich.

The bulk of the 2001 tax cuts were marginal rate cuts, which extended to all taxpayers, while the 2003 tax cuts included a reduction in taxes on dividends and capital gains.

“Some billionaires have a tax rate as low as 1 percent — 1 percent. That is the height of unfairness.”



This is a striking statistic. But the only evidence that the White House could offer for it was a clip of a conversation on Bloomberg TV, in which correspondent Gigi Stone made this assertion during a discussion about the tax strategies that the very wealthy use to avoid paying taxes. The TV clip was promoted by the leftist moonbat Web site Think Progress.

Obama's Kansas speech: some suspect facts - The Fact Checker - The Washington Post
 

Forum List

Back
Top