BCT Editorial – 10/24/08

This page was last updated on October 25, 2008.

Scare tactics; Editorial; Beaver County Times; October 24, 2008.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“Republican presidential candidate John McCain claims his Democratic opponent wants to redistribute wealth in the United States.”

[RWC] Actually, it was Barack Obama who originally told us he “wants to redistribute wealth in the United States.” In replying to a question from “Joe the plumber,” Mr. Obama said, “It’s not that I want to punish your success. I want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance for success, too. My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.” The McCain campaign has simply been responding to Mr. Obama’s own words.

By the way, did you note Mr. Obama’s theory of “trickle up” economics? These are the same people who laugh at “trickle down” economics.

“There’s only one problem with that charge. The United States already redistributes wealth through its progressive income tax system.”

[RWC] Was it wise for the Times to admit that our regressive federal income tax system is actually a tool to redistribute poverty? Finally, some honesty! Previously lefties simply claimed the purpose of the regressive tax rates was to ensure the evil rich “paid their fare share.”

The editorial failed to note some low-income tax filers actually receive a “refund” (more accurately described as a handout) despite having paid no income taxes and having no income tax liability.

“The well-to-do are taxed at a higher rate (and tax-code exemptions often allow them to reduce the amount they pay).”

[RWC] The “tax-code exemptions” the editorial implies apply only to the “well-to-do” apply to everyone. Examples are the personal exemption, exemptions for dependents, mortgage interest deductions, deductions for charitable donations, et cetera. Once again we have an example of the Times being unable to defend its position while telling the whole story.

“When McCain attacks U.S. Sen. Barack Obama on this matter, he is knowingly misleading voters. Obama’s tax plan would tax the wealthiest 5 percent of earners. That would be those earning more than $250,000.”

[RWC] The last time I checked, IRS data showed the top 5% income earners pay 60% of total federal income taxes while the bottom 50% pay only 3% of total federal income taxes. How much more does Mr. Obama – and the Times – expect the evil rich to pay?

“But McCain and his surrogates aren’t stopping there. They’re recklessly using the word ‘socialism’ to describe Obama and his party.”

[RWC] I get a hoot out of lefties. They constantly label people to herd them into victim groups, but don’t like it one bit when they themselves are labeled correctly. You’ll also see in today’s endorsement of Jason Altmire the Times tried to convince us Mr. Altmire isn’t really a liberal.

“That’s laughable. The federal government just approved a $750 billion bailout of Wall Street. It has done the same for the world’s largest insurer and an investment bank.”

[RWC] I guess I miss the point of this paragraph. A government that’s dominated by socialist policies means “Obama and his party” aren’t socialist?

“These scare tactics are a sign of desperation. Nothing more, nothing less.”

[RWC] It’s interesting what the Times considers “scare tactics.” Recently we’ve been treated to Obama campaign ads telling us Mr. McCain wants to cut Medicare benefits. According to a source the Times told us to use to check out such claims, FactCheck.org, the ad is false. The same is true for an Obama ad claiming Mr. McCain wants cuts in Socialist Security. Both of these claims are trotted out like clockwork during national elections in order to scare older voters into voting for the Democrat candidate.