A Washington Times editorial falsely claimed that under president Obama's 2011 budget, "people currently in the 10 percent, 25 percent, 28 percent, 33 percent and 36 percent personal income tax rates will all face higher tax rates." In fact, Obama's budget proposes allowing the top two income tax rates to return to their pre-Bush tax cut levels -- affecting only income that exceeds $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families -- and leaving the other three income tax rates at their current levels.
From a February 2 TalkingPointsMemo article:
The news service Reuters withdrew a story last night titled "Backdoor taxes to hit middle class" after the White House reached out and pointed out "errors of fact."
The story, which claimed the White House's deficit reduction plan relies on raising taxes against the middle class by allowing tax cuts to expire, was withdrawn at about 8 p.m. Monday, according to Yahoo timestamps. The original story ran at 4 p.m. The withdrawal promises a replacement story later this week.
"The story went out, and it shouldn't have gone out," said Courtney Dolan, a spokeswoman for Reuters. "It had significant errors of fact."
She would not elaborate on the specific errors, but said Reuters will "address those specific points that were incorrect."
A February 1 Reuters article - subsequently withdrawn by the wire service -- claimed that the Obama administration's budget plan includes "backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families," citing increases to marginal federal income tax rates that would go into effect if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to expire, and an increase in middle class families that would be subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) without the renewal of a patch to limit its impact. In fact, Obama's 2011 budget calls for the Bush tax cuts to be extended for individuals making $200,000 or less and couples making $250,000 and for the AMT patch to be extended at its 2009 parameters through 2020.
From February 2 edition of Fox & Friends:
From the February 1 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:
Loading the player reg...
From the January 28 edition of Fox News' Glenn Beck:
Loading the player reg...
Fox News chief political correspondent Carl Cameron claimed that "budget and deficit reduction" and "fiscally frugal principles and proposals" are "Republican issues." Cameron's claim is belied by Republican support for Bush policies that are far more responsible for current and projected deficits than proposals enacted since President Obama took office, as well as Republican opposition to health care reform legislation that would reduce long-term deficits.
From the January 27 edition of Fox News' The Fox Report:
Loading the player reg...
In recent months, media figures have advanced a litany of false and dubious claims regarding deficits and public debt. In addition to promoting the false narrative that portrays Republicans as responsible budget stewards and Democrats as fiscally reckless, these claims advance the argument that the administration should cut spending and focus on balancing the budget in the short term, a position rejected by numerous economists who advocate for continued stimulus spending.
Ignoring Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates showing health care reform will reduce deficits, a Wall Street Journal editorial asserted that President Obama should "[d]rop the health-care bill" if Democrats "really are serious" about fiscal responsibility. The editorial further attributed all of the fiscal year 2009 spending to Obama, but the increases in spending and the deficit also reflect the impact of policies enacted under former President Bush.
Purporting to grade President Obama's first year in office, Dick Morris falsely attributed to Obama all of the federal spending and deficit from fiscal year 2009, which began in October 2008. Morris therefore ignored spending that took place under President Bush from October 1, 2008, to January 20, 2009, including significant outlays committed by the federal government in response to the recession, as well as the impact of the recession itself on the federal budget.
Eric Bolling presented a chart titled "Obama's Checkbook" which purported to show the Obama administration's "new spending," but in fact included a variety of spending that was actually initiated during the Bush administration. Bolling also claimed that Obama has generated "$0" in revenue, despite citing the "new spending" that would occur if health care reform and cap and trade legislation were to pass, even though those programs actually increase revenues and are deficit reductive, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).
During his January 13 interview with Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck criticized John McCain as a "progressive" who "was for the bank bailouts," and also criticized those who call for windfall profit taxes on oil companies but ignore the Federal Reserve's "record profits." In fact, both Beck and Palin have previously expressed support for the 2009 Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), and Palin, while Alaska governor, increased taxes on oil companies operating in Alaska.
During his January 12 Fox News program, Glenn Beck claimed there was a "double standard" by Democratic politicians in attacking "windfall" profits from energy companies, but not criticizing what Beck described as the Federal Reserve's "windfall profits" over the past year. Beck did not mention that the Federal Reserve's profits will reportedly be returned to the U.S. Treasury, which The Washington Post described as "good news for the federal budget." Beck has previously highlighted the federal debt and deficit by suggesting that it would result in a "Venezuelan-style utopia wonderland" and stating that the American people are being "led to the slaughterhouse."