Politico's Smith, Martin reported McCain campaign's claim that Obama would raise taxes on 21 million small businesses without noting it's false
SUMMARY: Politico writers Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin reported a claim by Tucker Bounds, McCain campaign spokesman, that "Barack Obama wants more taxes from 21 million small businesses," without noting that it is false. In fact, Obama has proposed rolling back President Bush's tax cuts only on "people who are making 250,000 dollars a year or more," and according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, 481,000 small businesses fall into the tax brackets that would be affected by those increases.
In a July 7 Politico article, senior political writers Ben Smith and Jonathan Martin reported an assertion by Tucker Bounds, campaign spokesman for John McCain, that "Barack Obama wants more taxes from 21 million small businesses," without noting that the claim is false. Bounds' claim echoed McCain's false suggestion during a June 10 speech at the National Small Business Summit that Obama plans to raise taxes on 21.6 million sole proprietorships that file taxes under the individual income tax. In fact, Obama has proposed rolling back President Bush's tax cuts only on "people who are making 250,000 dollars a year or more," and according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center's table of 2007 tax returns that reported small-business income, 481,000 of those returns are in the top two income tax brackets -- which include all filers with taxable incomes of more than $250,000 -- not 21.6 million.
From the July 7 Politico article:
On June 19, Barack Obama released his first television advertisement, a multi-million dollar, 18-state production that conveyed the core of his campaign's goal this summer: To establish his American cultural normalcy.
Obama offered a clear new version of his complex family story: "I was raised by a single mom and my grandparents. We didn't have much money, but they taught me values straight from the Kansas heartland where they grew up." His African father and his upbringing abroad were never mentioned, and he was pictured in six images surrounded by ordinary-looking white people.
Two hours later, John McCain's campaign spokesman, Tucker Bounds, emailed reporters a terse, standard-issue and irrelevant response: "Barack Obama wants more taxes from 21 million small businesses, 10 million seniors and he's confessed that his economic proposals could damage the economy -- we're confident the more Americans know about Barack Obama the less likely they are to support him," he said.
The exchange encapsulated the disconnect between the two campaigns. John McCain is attacking Barack Obama in well-worn terms: As a flip-flopper, an elitist and a typical politician. But in a year when polls show a generic Democratic candidate easily taking the White House, the Illinois Senator has little reason to fear being defined by his party -- or as anything typical.
"There has never been a major party candidate less relevant in an election than John McCain," said Democratic strategist James Carville. "It's all about Obama."
To Obama right now, McCain is indeed almost incidental.
I see the lies are starting up again after the holiday weekend.
(BTW - does anyone else find it ironic that Larry Harmon - TV's "Bozo the Clown" - and Former Senator Jesse Helmes died on Thursday and Friday within 24 hours of each other?)
I see the lies are starting up again after the holiday weekend.
I do not think the GOP takes time off from lying nor do the hacks they have in the media. This is just tryuly pathetic of Politico.
Are there even 21 million small business? That doesn't seem possible.
Speaking the truth about raising taxes on 481 thousand small businesses would be effective enough if you wanted to present it that way. Just tell the truth.
Are there even 21 million small business?
Found thru Google:
In 2004, there were approximately 24.7 million businesses in the United States, according to Office of Advocacy estimates. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) estimates there were 29.3 million nonfarm business tax returns in 2004; however, this number may overestimate the number of firms, as one business can operate more than one taxable entity.
Census data show there were 5.7 million firms with employees and 17.6 million without employees in 2002 (and 18.6 million without employees in 2003). Applying the sole proprietorship growth rates to the nonemployer figures and similar Department of Labor growth rates to the employer figures produces the 24.7 million figure. Small firms with fewer than 500 employees represent 99.9 percent of the 24.7 million businesses, as the most recent data show there are 17,000 large businesses.
Information courtesy of the Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy.
http://www.smallbusinessnotes.com/aboutsb/sbfacts/sbnumber.html
You could join a cooperative operating for the good of the community, or simply give your profits to the proletariat.
Where do the right wing nutjobs get the idea that American liberalism isn't compatible with capitalism?
Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.
"Two hours later, John McCain's campaign spokesman, Tucker Bounds, emailed reporters a terse, standard-issue and irrelevant response: "Barack Obama wants more taxes from 21 million small businesses, 10 million seniors and he's confessed that his economic proposals could damage the economy -- we're confident the more Americans know about Barack Obama the less likely they are to support him," he said."
I don't know, I may have to bat around the notion of a WITH on this one. Though they didn't say "false" they did say "irrelevant." Then again, they did report it as a "This campaign said/this campaign said" instead of actually looking into the claims. That's a big problem that journalists need to work on.
All they want to hear is that liberals are bad...the details are irrelevant.
Sounds like the 1988 campaign all over again.
another false factoid that might as well have been lifted from a transcript of Rush Limbaugh's radio show (Irony101)
Eh, Rush Limbaugh, McCain's campaign, the guy working at the dinette. They're all reliable sources, and save our media from doing too much hard work.
How is it that THE LIBERAL MEDIA DOESN'T HAVE THE SAME FOLLOWING WITH THE TTTRRRUUUTHHH????? After reading many columns today, it's really gettin much HARDER to find the LIBERAL MEDIA.
WITH?
I disagree with MMFA for criticizing the McCain campaign here. I mean, let's look at the bright side. The McCain campaign was only off by a factor of about 40. That is downright excellent math for Republicans and I think we need to encourage that improvement. Bravo, Mr. Bounds! Bravo!
It's Republican math...like the projected costs of the Iraq war and the number of WMD that Saddam was aiming at us. ;>)
To establish his American cultural normalcy.
He's an elitist.
He attended a madrasa.
He's a closet muslim.
He's a "typical" politician.
His pastor is a racist.
He's black.
His wife is "angry" and prone to use terrorist fist bumps.
He drinks orange juice.
You forgot several more labels:
He's a socialist/fascist/commie
He's an 'empty suit' (whatever that means?)
He's a bad bowler
He's 'out of touch' with 'regular people'
"He's a Manchurian Candidate"..
Sorry, that would be McCain, he was Songbird, The POW, wasn't he?
it's a moot argument
Or, "lie" as we call 'em around here on Planet Earth.
Tell you what: Why don't you get out of your basement and out of those superman undies you like to wear (and nothing else) while you're in front of your computer, typing ahole remarks to people you don't agree with politically, and get a job, a girlfriend, a friend, a life. Then come back, debate the issues with some level of politeness and respect, and then I'll respond further.
I knew it couldn't be me the second I saw superman undies. Its strictly spiderman or commando for me!
; )
I don't wear underwear, Julia... in case you're interested. ;>)
Well, commando is okay with me, but the colonel says any undies he puts on become superman undies, so I dunno. He's lookin' better and better. And since Jeter is evidently cruising another liberal site for chicks, I may be in the market for a new BF soon.
I bet Col. had his mom stitch in a big P across the S for "SUUUUUUUUPERPROGRESSIVEMAN!!!!!"
FRIEND OF THE DOWNTRODDEN!
FOE OF THE PROFITABLE AND SUCCESSFUL!
INSULTOR OF ALL WHO DISAGREE!
But BEWARE Col's arch-nemesis, CONSERVATIVE GUY and his dim-witted sidekicks, NEOCONMAN and RELIGIOFASCIST BOY! And don't forget the one thing SUPERPROGRESSIVEMAN is NOT immune to, the ONE thing he cannot stand: SELFDETERMINATIONANDRESPONSIBILITY-ITE!!!
Give it up little boy. You're not getting any traction here.
They can dish it out, but they just can't take it...
Not only what, but who? Maybe if people (like Dex) would be a little more clear in making their points, they wouldn't have to go through feeling so persecuted when asked for a little "fleshing out" of their comments.
And everybody else would be spared the "you're just insulting me because I disagree" nonsense.
If you'll just say it often enough and LOUD enough, any conservative can/will understand anything said, by anyone!! Ex Limbaugh/Savage/Colter. What is said, and the true meaning are not as important as the NUMBER OF TIMES AND THE TONE it is said in. Love my country, not my gov't.
Wow, Dex, you really went off on this. Maybe I misunderstood your original comment about it being a "moot argument". I saw it as an attempt at a variation of the WITH angle, I thought you were saying that the item was insignificant because the president can't unilaterally raise taxes. That would actually make the statement that he will raise taxes a lie on an additional level.
If I missed the point, I'm all ears.
And my mom lives in a condo, she doesn't have a basement. And any underwear I put on become Superman underwear. So there!
My apologies for being insulting. It's not couth and not eye-for-an-eye.
I do take offense when you and a few others seem to consistently attempt to belittle the person and intelligence of a poster whose position you disagree with. Sometimes we all get carried away, but don't you think it's important to try to convince someone that your position is best, if for no other reason than to win another for your cause? If so, we don't need to name-call, question intelligence, integrity, etc, we can be polite, respectful, and attempt to show each other the error of our ways.
Col., I do think there's a smart guy typing on your keyboard. I enjoy your unfortunately-too-few-and-far-between posts that are thoughtful instead of smearing. Im certainly not asking you to stop having a good time with your poster-friends here, but would appreciate keeping it respectful.
And I promise never to make fun of your underwear choices again. In my younger days, I was a fan of Super Mario bros. undergarments myself.
::insert mushroom tip joke here::
Mr. Dex.
I don't post often and I usually try to be respectful when I do. I am sorry if you took offense at my part in the goofing on your underwear post. (that sounds odd doesn't it) I have a lot of respect for the Col because he is usually smart and does not take himself too seriously. I come to this sight for the occassional insight, information and some laughs. I'm not sure why anyone would get offended by the the chatter on a blog but we should try to respect one another.
Dex, Hope you check back here.Thanks for the semi-compliment, and save the lecture. My initial response to you was only to your "it's a moot argument" comment.
It seemed unrelated to any comment near it, so I assumed (as I posted earlier) that you were pulling a variation of the always-fascinating WITH ploy,downplaying the lying about Obama's tax policy by the McCain camp. It seemed you were saying the lie was ok because it wasn't true.
I don't know where you're getting off calling my post a smear, unless I completely misunderstood your comment. I asked for clarification, you declined to give it, instead going for a lecture on manners to me (who had not said anything belligerent to you, except to try to focus when you seemed confused) and a bunch of weird basement/underwear images and dittohead stereotypes of liberals.
Seriously, if you can explain the "moot argument" remark , I'm listening.
I'd recommend that some of you posters stop being so thin-skinned in the face of good-natured jabs here, especially if you're going to be so unaware of your own less-than-polite comments.It really gets boring reading the poor little victims calling everything a smear that questions their comments.
Yep, JJ. another innocent victim conservative, crying bloody murder when asked to back up his statements. They really are delicate little orchids.
JJ,You posted a comment a while back that really hit home.Somebody was belittling you for posting jokes and limericks in a thread that had degenerated into a WITH/playing dumb/wingnut victim and politeness police mess. You described yourself as being an abstract thinker, and not interested in the micro-parsing of words, or dealing with forcibly explaining things to those trying not to understand. I think that's where I lose interest as well.
Nothing against those posters, I've seen the 300+ comment threads that are mostly copy & paste back and forth, links to different sites rebutting each other, and trying to manufacture every possible interpretation of a quote.
I'm more common sense, most of these issues at MMFA are fairly simple, and I've come to the conclusion that those who don't seem to understand them after reading the item, maybe with an additional explanation from other posters, are either;
A. playing dumb to waste other people's time, or
B. Dumb, and wasting people's time. This includes those who think playing dumb is a smart debating tactic.
Neither of these types deserve to be treated like the pampered brats Mommy obviously convinced them they are. Jokes and mild jabs toward them are not only acceptable, they're much better than they deserve.
Colonel, I appreciate that you and I get each other. You were one of the only people who responded to me when I first came on this forum and I've always appreciated you for that, as well as your insightful, humourous take on things. And to be honest, I've always harbored a little crush on you, but Shhhh. Don't tell Jeter (I see he's back).