New York Times's Larry Rohter today asked the question "Will the Real Tax and Spender Please 'Fess Up?" Fortunately, he tells us what the answer is, even though he has no facts to support it. He has this wonderful little nugget, in which he tries to refute John McCain's statement with two points:
Some question whether Mr. Obama’s tax plan can even be characterized as an increase. Some also argue that contrary to Mr. McCain’s assertions, the Democrat’s proposals, if enacted, would actually reduce taxes for the middle class — the voters both candidates see as the key to victory.
The first, bolded above, statement is completely unsourced. No one in the article makes this claim. The second point he actually defends. For example:
In a study of the candidates’ plans made public Wednesday, the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center concluded that in contrast to Mr. McCain, “Senator Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income taxpayers.”
This is not the only place in the story that Rohter lets his bias shine through. He quotes an analyst from the Economic Policy Institute and describes the organization as "generally viewed as sympathetic to working families." EPI is significantly union funded and operated. These are the same unions that are investing heavily in Obama's campaign. In other words, he cites a labor-controlled front group as "sympathetic to working families", a substantial leap.
