Sometimes, the truth hurts. In the case of an article published yesterday at 4:04 p.m. Eastern, it appears that Reuters editors were afraid writer Terri Cullen’s adventure into truthful journalism might hurt their news agency’s relationship with President Barack Obama — so they yanked it.
Published under the headline “Backdoor taxes hit middle class,” the article opened by describing the Obama Administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade as relying “heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.” Four hours and three minutes after it hit the wire, the story was “withdrawn,” apparently at the Administration’s urging, with a promise that “a] replacement story will run later in the week.”
Why did Reuters pull the story? One site cited a Reuters rep as saying the piece was withdrawn “due to significant errors of fact” and “should not have gone out.” I think it was the language used in the article that prompted Reuters to pull it. In particular, it was the series of phrases shown below that, combined with the one mentioned above, must have made the hair stand up on the back of Rahm Emanuel’s neck:
“…effectively a tax hike by stealth.”
“middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.”
Perhaps the largest contributing factor to the article being yanked is a list of tax break provisions popular among middle-class families that Obama might allow to expire:
* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes.
* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies.
* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses.
* Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid.
* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free.
The last line of the story was, perhaps, the proverbial “nail in the coffin” for the Reuter’s piece:
* Trickle-down-taxation.
NOTE: Terri, if you’re looking for a job, drop me a line.
Hat Tip: Many thanks to the folks at the Dump The Democrats blog for managing to snag the text of the article and publish it in a post this morning before it vanished from the web.
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
148 Comments
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by CO2HOG: via @BigJournalism Did Reuters Yank Article Because It Was Too Truthful? http://bit.ly/dv2rbe #tcot…
The last line was my own editorial comment. I didn't realize it had been included in the quote and it's now corrected. I wish she had written that! It would have been the perfect ending
Dave
Dumpthedemocrats.com
FUCK OBAMA
"A replacement story will run later in the week"….man, if that isn't Orwellian.
When was the last time Reuters pulled a story within hours because it was unfavorable to conservative or libertarian worldviews? Just askin'
Nice to know Pravda is right on the ball covering for -Zero. Can somebody please just kick that little twerp Rahm Emanuals ass. My God a worse case of short man syndrome I have never seen ever. Man his weenie must be micrometers long.
Who pulled their stories about Okeefe? Just asking…
What stories were pulled off the shelf about O'Keefe? I'm not aware of any…RETRACTIONS …especially forced ones…are quite different. Let's not be disingenuous or coy….there's enough sophistry in the entrenched media, without artificially adding BS to it.
Nice to see we can always count on Reuters to carry the water for these Progressives. Sometimes it's too easy to point this stuff out.
By PULLING this story they have MAGNIFIED its impact….it became the proverbial "tar baby".
Someone somewhere must have copied to the story to their hard drive. Maybe it'll surface with a nice cover story about it being yanked. What a world we live! It's sickening.
Got you covered. Go over to BigG…
"A replacement story will run later in the week"…. a creepy, cold feeling just filled my spine and gut. The same one I felt when that bear and I surprised each other at the cabin a few summers ago. The bear was probably less dangerous…
cfbleachers thinks it's "Orwellian" that Reuters plans to run a replacement story later in the week,, and wonders "When was the last time Reuters pulled a story within hours because it was unfavorable to conservative or libertarian worldviews?"
There's an interesting assumption implicit in that question—that Reuters' actions must be a matter of "worldviews" rather than getting the story straight,
Listen up: Traditional journalists—when they are applying traditional journalistic standards—deal in FACTS, and when they get facts wrong, they correct their errors.
I realize that in the age of Rovian spin , that may be a hard concept for some conservatives to grasp. But the sooner they remember, the sooner we can get back to a sane political dialogue in this country—one that is based on differing points of view about REALITY
We have always been at war with Eastasia.
Is anyone surprised by Reuters (pronounced "looters") actions here?
Anyone for a shot of Victory Gin?
Will the "replacement story" be equally as irritating or problematic for the Obama administration? It won't really be a "replacement" if it's a fluffy piece.
You mean "micrometers short".
You gotta love the internet. They goofed up and printed the truth for a change and thought they could hide it. *Note to Reuters* if you put out there we will find it. I wonder if the rest of the MSM bothers to even acknowledge this happened?
In a word, no, but it's still hard to believe they'd have such a tin ear when it comes to the new media and blogosphere calling them on it. Like another poster said: tar baby.
"Traditional journalists—when they are applying traditional journalistic standards—deal in FACTS, and when they get facts wrong, they correct their errors. "
Suuuuuuuuuure they do. Tell it to Retracto, the "Retraction Alpaca".
Its really unbelievable that you don't realize this article was pulled because it was FALSE not TRUE.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002020041
My God…"A Crock o'Bama" & his minions' slimy, creepy tentacles are reaching out and into everywhere – its getting really getting scary. Glenn Beck was right again- they're "stepping on the gas" per their Alinsky game plan! AND they don't give a damn who sees it. Everyday/hour it seems another "shoe drops". God help us to help ourselves and save this precious country…
Let's see we'll tax those bad banks ( meanwhile he's endorsed a guy in Illinois who's family ran a bank and the guy he's backing lost about 75 MILLION at the bank but enough of that ) So the banks get taxed. They raise fees. Who pays these fees? EVERYONE except probably for fat cats who the bank would be afraid of losing their business if they pulled the account. So everyone pays the FEE! And it will be people who can least afford these FEES that will be hit the hardest. So he'll talk about the BANKS being bad ( except for his friend he endorsed ) and make them PAY when in the end ( as in the military ) we'll all become gay with fees by taking it in the ***
I just read this article on Drudge. If all of the lamestream media started to honestly do their jobs, Obummer would HAVE NO CHOICE but to take whatever coverage he could get. Hold his feet to the fire. But I don't see the lamestream actually DOING their jobs.
looks like this is the full article
http://www.showbizgossips.com/ackdoor-taxes-to-hi...
The Obama administration’s plan to cut more than $1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade relies heavily on so-called backdoor tax increases that will result in a bigger tax bill for middle-class families.
In the 2010 budget tabled by President Barack Obama on Monday, the White House wants to let billions of dollars in tax breaks expire by the end of the year — effectively a tax hike by stealth.
While the administration is focusing its proposal on eliminating tax breaks for individuals who earn $250,000 a year or more, middle-class families will face a slew of these backdoor increases.
The targeted tax provisions were enacted under the Bush administration’s Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. Among other things, the law lowered individual tax rates, slashed taxes on capital gains and dividends, and steadily scaled back the estate tax to zero in 2010.
If the provisions are allowed to expire on December 31, the top-tier personal income tax rate will rise to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. But lower-income families will pay more as well: the 25 percent tax bracket will revert back to 28 percent; the 28 percent bracket will increase to 31 percent; and the 33 percent bracket will increase to 36 percent. The special 10 percent bracket is eliminated.
Investors will pay more on their earnings next year as well, with the tax on dividends jumping to 39.6 percent from 15 percent and the capital-gains tax increasing to 20 percent from 15 percent. The estate tax is eliminated this year, but it will return in 2011 — though there has been talk about reinstating the death tax sooner.
Millions of middle-class households already may be facing higher taxes in 2010 because Congress has failed to extend tax breaks that expired on January 1, most notably a “patch” that limited the impact of the alternative minimum tax. The AMT, initially designed to prevent the very rich from avoiding income taxes, was never indexed for inflation. Now the tax is affecting millions of middle-income households, but lawmakers have been reluctant to repeal it because it has become a key source of revenue.
Without annual legislation to renew the patch this year, the AMT could affect an estimated 25 million taxpayers with incomes as low as $33,750 (or $45,000 for joint filers). Even if the patch is extended to last year’s levels,the tax will hit American families that can hardly be considered wealthy — the AMT exemption for 2009 was $46,700 for singles and $70,950 for married couples filing jointly.
Middle-class families also will find fewer tax breaks available to them in 2010 if other popular tax provisions are allowed to expire. Among them:
* Taxpayers who itemize will lose the option to deduct state sales-tax payments instead of state and local income taxes;
* The $250 teacher tax credit for classroom supplies;
* The tax deduction for up to $4,000 of college tuition and expenses;
* Individuals who don’t itemize will no longer be able to increase their standard deduction by up to $1,000 for property taxes paid;
* The first $2,400 of unemployment benefits are taxable, in 2009 that amount was tax-free
Drudge has links to the article.
It will be interesting to compare this years tax bill to last. I lost more then 30% of my income so I am interested to see what my tax bill is.
Your accusing Reuters of lying, when the only person making baseless claims is you. This article is disgraceful.
As far as getting the story right, I would suggest you look up Terri Cullen. She is an award winning financial writer with years of experience. I think she just got too close to the mark. Typical liberal BS to attack the messenger. Also BS to feign such surprise when we all know which "news" outlets are controlled by the chicago thug machine gone national.
…and he's clearly an angry little man…I think you identified one "issue".
Another is the "slow-motion train wreck" of an administration he's associsted with…
What a crock…really. Implicit in the question is forty years of burying facts, we didn't just fall off the turnip truck here. Try peddling that stuff in the echo chamber, it won't fly here.
Heck, the story didn't even begin to outline some of the most glaring questions. Where is the Fannie and Freddie mountain of debt on these books?
Answer?
It's not on the books.
The books are cooked.
John take your lotion and go back to MediaMatters. We have no use for pathetic libtard trolls here.
And your source is media matters?
What is really unbelievable is that you would post a link to Media Matters, a George Soros/Clinton funded Uber liberal PAC, as a credible rebuttal to the issue at hand.
Would you like some fresh Kool-aid? Oh Yeeeeah!
Link goes to an article about card check?
Thank you Andrew Breitbart. Big J is the best of the all the BIG sites to date. I know you are working hard and I hope you can keep all this going.
Everyone is entitled to their own point of view, but not their own facts. That's what you Kool-Aid drinkers don't understand. Fact checking isn't that hard. Try it if you ever get interested in learning the truth.
Is this what caused Rahm to use the word retarded? Sarah Palin has demanded an apology (or perhaps his firing) over the use of the word, retarded. Those with a child who is mentally challlenged can appreciate Sarah's anger over use of the word by Rahm. As for Reuters, I believe integrity cannot be compromised, so the sooner the Public learns why it withdrew its piece, the better.
Actually, the story appears to be predicated on an erroneous premise. It asserted that the budget doesn't seek renewal of dozens of middle-class tax cuts that expired on Dec. 31. Thos include things such as deductions for state and local sales taxes, a break for teachers who buy their own school supplies, and a patch for alternative minimum tax. In fact, the budget seeks renewal of ALL of these things. See http://www.treas.gov/offices/tax-policy/library/g... All the middle-class tax cuts being extended are on p. 27. The AMT patch is on p. 147. This Reuters story is completely erroneous. They withdrew it because there was no way to correct so many mistakes in a comprehensible form.
The obama administration is a comedy of errors that just isn't comical anymore. In this event a story is pulled because it is right on the facts and because BIG obama government more than likely sanctioned the removal. Breitbart has another article on the lead page that has obama stating "his government is the most transparent".
Baloney Factor is off the scale today.
Hussein will not be satisfied until or economy resembles that of a third world nation.
Barack Hussein Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are criminal filth and traitors. Oh how we've fallen from grace to have this caricature of marxist economic illiterates running this nation.
This admin is a dangerous joke. La Congress Nostra should be burned to the ground.
THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE
Terri, be prepaired for Reuters to do just that.
Well, Godbama can stand there with a straight face and say he did not raise taxes on the middle class. I sure am glad he is looking out for me and my family. Has anybody seen my government cheese?
JohnInOregon,
You are a NorthWest liberal cliche’ who I hope does not entirely ruin outsiders’ opinions of all of us up here in the beautiful Pacific Northwest.
The whole point of Breitbart’s article is to ‘question’ the cause for retraction. If the article had simple errors than Reuters could have simply amended them. Breitbart is doing his job. No shutup.
And the truth will set you free.
Can run, but can't hide. New the law of the land. Thanks.
Have you got a link that works?
Media matters linked me to this site. They did not provide any additional information from whats posted here. The fact remains that Reuters pulled their article and here we have people claiming it was pulled because it was true! That's just irresponsible.
In the comments section, a copied the full text of the article.
You had to be a blithering full on barking moonbat to not believe Barry the Bolshevik wasn’t going to raise taxes on anything with a pulse! Just remember, “he’s doing it for the children,” barf!
Ask yourself, with the anti-capitalist, corporate demonizing, union bootlicking leftwing filth that runs our nation do you think they'll extend the tax cuts and patch up the AMT? If you believe that then you'll believe anything.
95% of Americans will be getting a tax increase one way or the other. Otherwise we fund our debt with skittles and resemble Zimbabwe.
Who in their right mind votes for these leftwing high school dropouts, drug addicts and affirmative action imbeciles?
Never let the truth get in the way of what you wish it to be.
Looks like someone forgot to take their meds again.
It was a mistake for me to post that link as a source because obviously most viewers of this site do not trust it. But that doesn't change the fact that when a journalist retracts an article and claims its false after errors are pointed out to him/her, there's absolutely no basis for some wild conspiracy theory. It is what journalists are supposed to do.
MediaMatters???
Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!
No fool, linking to leftwing mediamatters is what's irresponsible. Get back to work jackass and don't forget to smile when you ask "paper or plastic?"
The reason it was yanked is obvious. Economics.
Obama coverage sells, at least still enough for now. If Reuters wants access, they dance with who brung them.
Well, obviously this is double ungood. The story should have been dissembled by the Outer Party automatons at the Ministry of Truth before it was released to the Proles. Big Brother is not pleased…
You can put lip stick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
For those suggesting that the piece was pulled because it was "false and not true", can you point to any part of the article that was incorrect? It looked to me to be a concise and data driven report. (Even if the article contained an error, it would be hard to understand why a news organization could not have the error corrected within the hour rather than "later in the week".
reuters proved during the election that they were part of the obozo media family
its what journalists dont do, unless it hurts a fellow radical/liberal/America hater
Dear John, The problem that most of the people writing on this site have with your opinion that the article was pulled because it was false, is that there have been articles discussing these back door taxes out on the internet for months.
Most of the writers on this website are not as angry at the back door taxes, but at the fact that Reuters is attempting to censor information. If they really believed that this article was false they would not have pulled it but rebutted the article with facts. Unfortunately the only facts out there support the article!
Sorry that you were treated rather harshly, but Conservatives have been attacked by the left for so long we're not willing to put up with the liberal norm, of "I said it, so it must be true".
That fact that you're willing to enter the "Lions den" and keep your discussion civil is of some credit to you, but before you enter this den make sure that you've taken the time to verify the truth of what you are standing up for. I guarentee that many of the commentators on this site, take a lot of time checking out what they support. They also tend to maul anyone that comes here unprepared.
That's why I say it's almost impossible to parody these dimwits.
I know the answer to that, my friend. I just want our leftwing imbecile to provide a working link, so it can rightfully be discredited.
Yep! You can put lipstick on a liberal pig, and clothe it in designer gowns, but it will still be a pig and wallow around in the mud.
Latest from Reuters on Yahoo:
The story Backdoor taxes to hit middle class has been withdrawn. A replacement story will run later in the week.
I am totally gone. Anyone who posts here wil be audited by the IRS for their last 25 tax returns. I contribute money to Democrats, vote for Republicans. Pretty crazy, huh? Your freedom is threatened. The tea party means nothing. No power. Totally dismissed. Get ready for class warfare. $250,000 of income? Pay your taxes. 1st year you made it. (3 jobs for a couple) Last year you'll earn that much! Never inherited a dime. Never will. Oh, by the way. Did I say 2 cars? 2 kids in college? Hey, friends. This is "pay check to pay check". Sorry for the reality check. Jesse Jackson, when he ran for President, wanted to confiscate 100% of incomes over $75,000. The most opposed? The very poor. They wanted a chance and believed they could. Bravo! We all can!
…and they have continued the tradition with this episode.
Reuters is about the farthest thing from traditional journalism.
.
Evidence upon Evidence that the media is controlled and censored on a daily basis to advance a political agenda. Nauseating. Thanks to Drudge and FOX and to Breitbart! If this was about conservatives they would slam it home.
Marxism never sleeps.
.
That's "MOOchelle to you Jack…
I suggest that Sarah Palin's objecting to Rahm was the use of both words — the word "f—ing" and the word "retarded." Which shows that Rahn is way below his pay scale in both his pay rate and his brain function. He's another hot headed kook who should be fired.
To just deem the article as false without premise or cause is simply empty rhetoric devoid of logic or reason. You sound like a hysterical street preacher, casting all who do not repent imaginary sins to an eternity of fire and brimestone. Please post the items in the above article that are false and any credible non-partisan sources, i.e. CBO, that state them as false or misleading. Please do not insult my intelligence by utilizing Media Matters, HuffPo, DailyKos, or any other ideologically biased sources, if you please.
We will see if all of this actually makes it. Fact is that the president only proposes the budget. Congress has the purse strings and they will decide if the above items make it or not. I would say the original article is a very educated guess at what will happen in congress.
Who was it that said.. "You are entitled to you own opinion, but not to your own version of the facts"..?. I think it was CF in the Bleachers…Jan '10
I think Reuters sent it down the hall to the Minustry of Truth for the revision. When it comes back, the increases will be calledTAX CUTS….Workin' on it now….BB…
Plausible deniability ring a bell or better yet think of Bill Clinton wringing his hands saying I tried to balance the budget without raising taxes.
Chisten
Well said. Kind of you to be nice to a newbie. We get so many brainless trolls just spouting gibberish because they have a keyboard and fingers, we tend to forget that there are those with different opinions that are just honestly confused.
The white house has shown evidence to the contrary in the budget. However that is not to says that Congress will act as the lightning rod and kill all of the president's budget proposals. After all the public's opinion of congress can not get much lower can it?
From Article by Dick Morris on the 2010 Budget…titled :"Behind Obama;s phiny deficit numbers"
President Obama is being disingenuous when he says that the budget deficit he faced "when I walked in the door" of the White House was $1.3 trillion. He went on to say that he only increased it to $1.4 trillion in 2009 and was raising it to $1.6 trillion in 2010.
Congressman Joe Wilson might have said "you lie," but we'll settle for "you distort."
(As Mark Twain once said, there are three kinds of lies: "lies, damn lies, and statistics.")
Here are the facts:
Terror Chatter High, Prepare Now with the Emergency Radio! In 2008, Bush ran a deficit of $485 billion. By the time the fiscal year started on October 1, 2008, it had gone up by another $100 billion due to increased recession-related spending and depressed revenues. So it was about $600 billion at the start of the fiscal crisis. That was the real Bush deficit.
But when the fiscal crisis hit, Bush had to pass TARP in the final months of his presidency which cost $700 billion. Under the federal budget rules, a loan and a grant are treated the same. So the $700 billion pushed the deficit — officially — up to $1.3 trillion. But not really. The $700 billion was a short term loan. $500 billion of it has already been repaid.
So what was the real deficit Obama inherited? The $600 billion deficit Bush was running plus the $200 billion of TARP money that probably won't be repaid (mainly AIG and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). That totals $800 billion. That was the real deficit Obama inherited.
Then…he added $300 billion in his stimulus package, bringing the deficit to $1.1 trillion. This $300 billion was, of course, totally qualitatively different from the TARP money in that it was spending not lending. It would never be paid back. Once it was out the door, it was gone. Other spending and falling revenues due to the recession pushed the final numbers for Obama's 2009 deficit up to $1.4 trillion.
So, effectively, Obama came close to doubling the deficit.
Obama seems not to understand that the deficit is the jobs problem. To add to the deficit in the hope of creating more jobs is an oxymoron. Additional deficit spending just crowds out small businesses trying to borrow money to create jobs and consumers seeking credit to buy cars and homes.
Soon, when the Fed stops printing money and we have to borrow real funds from real lenders, the high deficit will send interest rates soaring, further retarding growth and creating a cost-push inflation.
The interest rate we are now paying for the debt — about 3.5% — is totally artificial and based on the massive injection of money supply created by the purchase of mortgage backed securities by an obliging Federal Reserve. Once these injections of currency/heroin stop, the rate will more than double, sending our debt service spending into the stratosphere. Once we had to choose between guns and butter. Now we will have to choose between guns and butter on the one hand and paying our debt service on the other.
Obama's program of fiscal austerity in this new budget is a joke. He freezes very selected budget items while he shovels out new spending in his stimulus packages. If he wanted to lower the deficit, here's what he could do:
1. Cancel the remaining $500 billion of stimulus spending and
2. Cancel the $300 billion of spending in stimulus II.
Those are the real numbers. Or, as Al Gore would have it, "the inconvenient truth."
Sometimes knowledge makes a bloody entrance.
Depressing, but true…but I suspect most of these taxes are not going to make back into treasury.
[...] Journalism — Did Reuters Yank Article Because It Was Too Truthful? Sometimes, the truth hurts. In the case of an article published yesterday at 4:04 p.m. Eastern, it [...]
Well said.
Lets see:
cutting the rate of growth = cut (esp when a republican does it)
letting tax cuts expire and taxes go to old levels = tax increase = significant error of fact….
Hmmmm
don'no "…I'm gettin on in years and don't remember so well…"
And when you cast pearls before it, it will not redistribute them, nor can you make a silk purse of it's ear.
Don't make fun of old folks…You may be there some day…
A working link will be appreciated; we would all like to see the source of the info you provide.
Someone's gonna get the rat treatment…
It's not so bad once you can't remember your age.
wow. we are on the edge of fashism here. imagin Nixon getting a story pulled.
Its not me whos deeming the article false, its the publisher himself!
If you don't read the blogs or listen to TRadio, you would never know. That's how libs stay in power…..Mostly ignoring a subject they don't like..and it seems to do the trick….
Later latest on Reuters:
ADVISORY: Backdoor taxes story
Tue Feb 2, 2010 1:35pm ESTThe Feb 1 story headlined "Backdoor taxes to hit middle class" is wrong and has been withdrawn. The story said lower-income families will pay more under tax provisions scheduled to expire Dec 31. The Obama administration's budget calls for the extension of those tax provisions for households earning less than $250,000. There will be no substitute story.
PeterP
I was under the impression we were at war with Eurasia the month…It's really too confusing…Victory gin it is…
I read this article earlier this morning. I was really surprised that Reuters would send out such a blunt, honest story, as that's definitely not their Lefty MO. (If this reporter isn't fired already, his career at Reuters is hanging on a thread. He embarrassed Reuters with a non-Lefty truthful story and -for Photoshopped-pictures-and-Green-Helmet-"correspondent" Reuters- that is unforgivable!
John,
I looked at your link. Media matters accepts as fact Reuters' assertion that the article wasn't factual. Yet they don't point to a SINGLE ITEM that was not factual; you'd think they'd want to give us an example of how it wasn't. And Reuters didn't point out a single example either.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like you and Media Matters WANT to believe the story was wrong. You've taken their spin at face value without pointing to where the article was wrong.
Hussein's 2011 budget exceeds $3 Trillion. This is reparations; the affirmative action punk in the White House is going to steal 1/4 of the nations wealth and redistribute it into leftwing coffers. The working American taxpayer is of no concern to them other than squeezing money out of them while limiting their freedoms.
Death row inmates are executed for less.
The criminal leftwing filth in DC need to be purged.
We are talking about Reuters here, right, well right? Traditional journalist is not synonymous with ethical journalist, you mistake us for liberal sheep.
mediamatters…………. snort!
I think I'm there…Aging rapidly since Nov '08… Only enough money for 10 more months here at the home…then who knows…Guess I'll be joinin' Marshall Jim Duncan on Boot Hill soon…
"These decadent bastards are going down." A. Breitbart, a True Patriot
I dont consider retracting your own article as "spin." Your are right that I want you to believe the story was wrong, but that's because I want both sides to make an effort to stay informed on the facts so more productive discussions can occur. To take the fact that an article was retracted as evidence that is it true is irrational and counterproductive to this goal. Journalists make retractions when they discover errors in their reporting. Do you really think its more likely that they retracted this article because of its shocking truth?
It is always almost impossible to prove a negative. The real evidence that this article was wrong is that there is no evidence in support of many of its claims. (i.e. "back-door tax cuts) To rebut their error further, Reuters could only have gone into a description of just how baseless their claims were. There is nothing anywhere that can prove these claims are not supported in the bill except for the fact that they are not there.
I am frustrated and tired of the irresponsible ways that politics and policy are debated in today's culture. The only way any of our problems will be solved is if everyone makes an effort to be more responsible. Otherwise we can beat ourselves down deeper into the hole we are already stuck in.
YEEeeeee HAAAaaaa, their secrets unveiled!!!! As more and more bail from their prison wagon and it's shackles of thought "Teachings", the more interesting the truth becomes!!!!
Where does this come from? What is hateful about anything I said?
I'm calling out a journalist for misinforming my fellow "real Americans," and I'm doing it for the sake of all of us. I look at mediamatters and bigjounalism, and neither has proven itself to the point that anybody should place all of their trust in one. After reading your reply, it seems like it would benefit you to do the same.
Oky dokey, for bo and his friends…..game up……….we have taken names, we know how you voted and we know where you live…….
Actually, it was just a little too accurate.
Doesn't matter. It casts the POtuS and his policies in a negative light, so it was, by definition, erroneous. Reuters was just maintaining a high level of journalistic integrity by not just printing a retraction or correction, but my disappearing it.
I guess that the Progressives and the enlightened on are trying to make us all homosexuals….because they are sure trying to shove it up our individual A$$e$
Sorry but there's a tattoo there that said EXIT ONLY!….long story.
Interesting that John posted this link –
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002020041
Which upon review actually states that the Obama administration called Rueters and had the story hanked! OMG, now the administration can directly control the news? Amazing and Scary.
Both John and MediaMatters go so far as to say the story was pulled for NOT being factual, but never take the time to mention a single item that is false in the article. So, I ask, what is not factual in the article?
Has Reuters retracted any or all of the global warming stories that were NOT factual and were NOT based upon actual scientific method? I think not, because the Obama administration didn't call Reuters to stop those stories.
Man is this country in trouble when the administration directly controls the media with a simple phone call. Information is power. Please people, fight for information freedom and for your country!
Well then – show me the work. Just because you say its wrong doesn't make it wrong. If you handed in your work and said "but its an A+ paper," is the teacher going to give that grade by taking the student's word?
Prove it or your nothing more than a liberal coo-laid drinker.
You are misinforming yourself and everyone on this website. It was retracted because it was false! Your making yourself part of the problem. How can you criticize any journalists when you are deliberately posting RETRACTED articles
This is all great stuff. The action by Reurters was center stage for the world to see and when the taxes happen the way they said they would the american people will remember the day Obama got the story pulled. This is great.
is that you – zerobama
or
"not proud of America" michelle?
Interesting twist on the modern liberal mantra to change the subject under debate to a more defendable ground. Not falling for it. Sorry, I've used the trick so many times, its painfully obvious.
But if you insist……
deal in FACTS
Facts are the President's budget anticipates the sunset of the so-called 'Bush Tax Cuts.' Which is a lie, no one person can get anything done in Washington. The constitution was designed to prevent that from ever happening.
Fact, when the so-called Bush Tax Cuts do sunset, every one paying federal income taxes will pay more than they currently do.
Fact, by definition, collecting more of an object (in this case taxes) means to increase it's quantity.
Fact, the budget increases taxes.
Your turn.
was kind of funny of the fool to issue the mediamatters as back up for his LIBERAL VITRIOL AND HATE of real Americans
I agree with huckle, thank you Andy Breitbart. BIg J is a great place to read others and then vomit my own opinions. I believe the entire democratic republic would be about 10 times smarter if everyone did the same…that is read and then vomit their own opinions…not in the reverse please.
What story are they going to give us? "The Ant And The Grasshopper" story? "The Little Red Hen? Or the story of "Chicken Little — The Sky is Falling?"
Whatever it is, I'm, sure it'll be good.
Media Matters? YEE, HAAWWW! Boys, we got a reeel live New Yawker here. Wanna bet he uses that steak sauce made in New Yawk? Har de har har har.
Oh yer kidding! No way!
I'm not seeing how the original story that was pulled was even newsworthy. Any idiot could tell you that this money is going to have to come from somewhere. Since the Government doesn't produce squat or create wealth, that only leaves the taxpaying private sector. Have we all become so moronic in this country that we actually believe in free lunches?
let me know when a "traditional" journalist shows up,(other than Tapper) and while we`re at it, I`d be curious to see when any of the msm has provided ANY facts regarding, well, anything that goes against the current admin.
yup, can`t have any of that irresponsibility going on—the federal debt is how much? the federal government owns what banks, and auto companies? we paid how much for a vote on healthcare? "the peoples business will be broadcast on c-span"- sorry, my bad, we were not talking about liars were we?
We need to be careful. We need maintain civility to educate people like John. Just slamming them insures that they stay liberals. But there are trolls that do need a kick in the rear and be sent home to their mommy.
I do wonder if some of the nastiest slammers of liberals on this site are actually liberals themselves. They could be blasting curious liberals to keep them on the plantation, and also give Conservatives a bad reputation as being rude, crude, and vulger.
Reuters got buried under a ton of merde. Look at their Feedback page and comments
http://blogs.reuters.com/gbu/2010/02/02/backdoor-...
(And that's just what they are admitting to)
RAHM. Your private room at Gitmo is ready, azzzPlier. Maoist prick…payback 4 u Nov 2…your TEAM is Farked…and ValleyForged Patriots will walk you to your future. I pity you azzPlate for trying to Communize America via your Chinese Sponsored Stooge: The Orange and Blue KupKake from Hell…get out. Can't wait to hear you scream out the names of those enemies of America who paid for you.
Well then – show me the work. Just because you say its wrong doesn't make it wrong. If you handed in your work and said "but its an A+ paper," is the teacher going to give that grade by taking the student's word?
Prove it or your nothing more than a liberal coo-laid drinker.
Okay, I get it…you mean FACTS like the War on Terror is now the Overseas Contingency Operations…Tea Party movement is "nothing but racism, straight up," and "astro-turf"….Those kind of FACTS?
No we are not stupid and understand that money to run the government has to be strong armed from the private sector. As in the pockets of Citizens or businesses. But here is a a crazy thought lets reduce the size of government instead of growing by over 20% last year. Obama needs to Shave 30% off the budgets of every agency. If someone is retiring do not back fill the position. If that persons duties are needed transfer their responsibilities to another employee. Obama made a BS speech about the American public having to tighten their belts and the government should do the same…. yet another lie as he has grown the government exponentially in the last year. You can not rob money from the GDP and expect that there will be money to finance growth and investment in the private sector.
My guess is they are already gone…
I'd be happy if they could identify any "fact" in the article that was erroneous.
[...] Stifling dissent? — Did Reuters Yank Article Because It Was Too Truthful? [...]
[...] [...]
No kidding. Hasn't anyone at Reuters or the White House ever heard of the "Streisand Effect"? A sure way to provoke interest in something is to publicly try to hide it.
I am thinking you might have hit on it Chisten! Except for a few regular posters who simply get fed up with some of the obvious trolls, the other rude/ranting style ones could well be poseurs simply causing more trouble. Good call!
John, in fairness to you, and your link to MediaMatters, I did not respond, until I could research Obama's budget plan on my own. But, I can't. No .gov website links it. None. Not whitehouse, not omb, none. They only link press releases. If you will diret me to THE actual budget, I would appreciate it, then I will decide for myself. Much appreciated.
[...] Source: [...]
[...] Update: Big Brother didn’t like the Reuters story, so he got his media lapdog to yank it. Details at Big Journalism. [...]
I don't think it was yanked due to clerical error nor the author would just edit again. The mere fact it was yanked implies that such article seems strong enough to tell the truth about the political realities that is happening now. Who did request to pull it out? "A replacement story will run after a week" – what does that mean? just curious.
H0w-d0-y0u-d0, I supp0se this web l0gs is solid, but setting up more than pictures would get it greater since it’s more attention-getting to the reader. Nice work by the way. Sorry for my defective english, Its n0n my usual language
it seems like all that the democrats in office and all of the main stream media’s must all be Queers it seams like they always want to screw someone in the ASS i think it’s time that we the people start screwing with their head’s and kick them in the ass out the door. and restore this country to a Constitutional Republic like it should be we don’t need a democratic party they are always corrupt and will do and say anything to get what they want everyone should vote for the Constitutional Republican’s in their state and if you are in texas please Vote for Debra Madina thank you.
TC no longer works for Reuters.
I believe you actually, It looks like! Will this be probable that will have your site translated directly into Italian? English is actually my own second language.
You must be logged in to post a comment.