Skip to main content

You have probably seen Romney and Ryan tout six studies that show that their tax plan works during the debates. I saw it and thought "I bet they are lying". Turns out they are, and Chris Wallace was having none of it, and put Romney Senior Adviser to Ed Gillespie to task.

Video and Transcript below the fold

A bit in the end of the video is cut off, please read the rest in the transcript below.

Gillespie: These are very credible sources, and, you know...
Wallace: One of them is from a guy who is – is a blog from a guy who was a top advisor to George W. Bush. So these are hardly nonpartisan studies.

Gillespie: Look, Chris I think if you look at Harvard and AEI [American Enterprise Institute] and other studies are very credible sources for economic analysis

Wallace: You wouldn't say that AEI is a conservative think tank?

Gillespie: I would say it is a right-leaning think tank. That doesn't make it not credible.

Wallace: It doesn't make it nonpartisan.

Gillespie: It does make it nonpartisan. It's not a partisan organization, I can tell you, there are many instances where there have been things AEI came out with and said, I didn't find it to be necessarily to be helpful to the Republican Party.

Wallace: Would you say Brookings Institution is nonpartisan?

Gillespie: I would say the Brookings Institution is left leaning and nonpartisan.

Note that when Wallace wasn't buying Gillespie's talking point on partisanship, Gillespie tried to bait and switch and muddle the definitions of partisanship and credibility, but Wallace pounces on it. 

So Gillespie had to switch tack again, and as a consequence, he (speaking for the Romney campaign, by the way) is forced to admit that the Brookings Institution is nonpartisan.  Now, liberals can now tout their studies and point to Gillespie's grudging admission!

Also, I love the analogy of the candy and spinach. It's a catchy, subtle reference to their dishonesty and one that we should be using.

Whatever you have to say about Chris Wallace, this is GOOD JOURNALISM. It's like watching a cheetah taking down a helpless gazelle. When Wallace realized that he can't get Gillespie to agree on a particular fact- that the AEI is actually partisan- he pivoted and trapped Gillespie on consistency, forcing him to admit that Brookings is nonpartisan as well. This is what happens when you have intelligent follow-up questions and facts that dismantle their talking points.

If you want more detail on those studies, here is what Huffpo had to say:

The studies have been called into question for weeks now, as only one or two of them are actually academic. The rest are blog posts and op-eds, some written by the same author, others by conservative sources. One study cited was actually paid for by the campaign itself, though the campaign has since replaced that study with another.

More problematic for Romney is that a number of them reached conclusions that he would find uncomfortable. Harvard economist Martin Feldstein, for instance, said that Romney's tax plan could work mathematically if it eliminated deductions and exemptions for individuals making over $100,000 per year. A Princeton study put that figure at $200,000, though the author told Bloomberg News that the figure may need to be brought down to pay for Romney's 20 percent across-the-board reduction in tax rates.

Also, check out Meteor Blades's diary on the issue (thanks to Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse for pointing it out)

In other words, Romney and Ryan were LYING about the studies. Big surprise. And Chris Wallace, of all people, wasn't about to let them get away with it.

This is the second time that Chris Wallace embarrassed them on the issue. The first was when Wallace interviewed Ryan and exposed the Republican Party's math whiz kid's inability to differentiate between cost and NET cost. It's too good.  

I think Chris Wallace woke up one day and realized "damn , these guys might actually run this country again. I gotta do my job as a journalist"

By the way, I love the ambivalence we are showing towards Chris Wallace in the comments! He is such a tease, and it makes me want his punditry even more ;)

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site