This won't be much of a diary. Sorry folks, I'm tired, dead and I've not had breakfast yet.
But that "bastion of liberalism", the New York Times, has weighed in on Obama's budget plan.
More after this break from our commercial sponsors who can't afford to advertise any longer because no one is buying shit:
So why the cynisism when it comes to the Times? Well, it's got a lot to do with this paragraph in this storystory :
The combined effect of the two revenue-raising proposals, on top of Mr. Obama’s existing plan to roll back the Bush-era income tax reductions on households with income exceeding $250,000 a year, would be a pronounced move to redistribute wealth by reimposing a larger share of the tax burden on corporations and the most affluent taxpayers.
You get that there? A GOP talking point slipped right in "redistribute wealth."
Here's the bitch though, wealth was redistributed more than eight years ago by an inarticulate frat boy with the world view of a gnat.
The GOP likes to talk about how Obama will do exactly what the Times stupidly printed, yet everyone forgets that wealth was thrown in favor of those who had the most way back when - before the dark times.
As a member of the media, that paragraph represents an editorial comment and should have been re-worded. Does someone have an agenda at the Times? I don't know, but it seems certain that not everyone sees things the way Obama does.