Oh, good, maybe they will explore their fear mongering over the AMT in order to kill the Bush tax cuts.

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

Ken, the polls in the IBD piece clearly reflect how the media has "kept voters dumb and Stupid" (to quote Donald Luskin).

In my mind one of the worst lies forced on the public  - by the D's and the MSM - is that Bush inherited this beautiful Federal budget surplus .. as far as the eyes could see... and promptly trashed it. In reality, the facts are that Bush inherited a free-fall in tax revenues amounting to $hundreds of billions annually. This, of course, was the result of the collapse of the Clinton bubble economy in early 2000, as well as the loss of millions of jobs. The effects of 9/11 also piled onto this train wreck in process. 

Assuming that in 2003, the old projected surplus from the Clinton years (say 2000 forward) was about $200 billion, and that the actual federal deficit came in at around $450 billion, what we witnessed was a shift of approximately $650 billion in 2003 alone.

In 2003, I believe the tax cuts were said to be in the amount of approximately $80 billion, and war costs around $50 billion, for a total of $130 billion.

In the media and on the street, it seems that the cause of the thrashing of the budget surpluses and the return to record deficits has always been referred to as because of the 1. Bush tax cuts and 2. war costs.

OK, so Bush caused $130 billion of the $650 billion shift in annual fortunes in 2003 alone. For the record, that is only 20% of the shift.

How many folks in the media can understand this? 

The markets will magically do a 180, just as soon as a democRAT gets into the Whitehouse!