I've seen plenty of media outlets and liberals' comments that the rich don't pay their fair share, that in other countries the rich pay more of the taxes, the difference between top earners and low earners is biggest, yada yada. There's a problem with this kind of thinking. It's not based on facts! I know they think it is, but massaged data is not the same as raw data. You can analyze data to say anything you want it to say - I know this as a scientist. Unlike science with peer-reviewed articles, however, the media can get away with sketchy analyses without any immediate consequences.
Never before have more Americans distrusted the media or been more aware of the skewed information they are presented. This means more Americans turn to other sources, such as conservative media, to get to the bottom of any story.
Take this, for example. WSJ's Stephen Moore has a new book out, "Who's the Fairest of them All: the Truth about Opporutunity, Taxes, and Wealth in America." I read the The Washington Times review, which showcases Moore's claims that the media narrative is false: that the rich in America pay a larger tax burden than any other country. They also reviewed what happened every single time the top tax rate was lowered in this country over the past 100 years. The result of the tax cuts? More revenue from top earners. Every time. Why? More people were making more money so the government collected more in taxes. Just as Mitt Romney claimed in the debate last week. You'll never see this data - raw and unmassaged - as a headline anywhere but conservative media. But it doesn't make it less true. Yet Obama's false claim that Romney wants to cut $5T in taxes continues, even after the debate.
Here's another example: the movie Obama's America: 2016 (also Hating Breitbart). I've seen so many reports of people who changed their minds - or at least opened their minds - about Obama when presented with more information about his record in that film. The information that the media should be reporting, but they aren't and they never will cover that kind of thing because who would vote for a liberal if they did? They're liberals themselves by a large margin - over 90%, according to a study done in 2008.
Ready to watch the vice presidential debate tomorrow night? Jim Lehrer did a better job staying out of it than I anticipated though he still tried to throw Obama a rope a couple times. I'm expect more imbalance in the moderation tomorrow night. Biden needs all the help he can get! Easier questions, probably. More respect from the moderator, probably. Hopefully not more time - that would be too obvious. I don't expect Paul Ryan to get any more rattled than Romney did, given this opportunity to speak to the Americans directly without the standard media spin against him with whatever he says. Before the pundits rehash it, at any rate. I'm hoping that Paul Ryan will, like Romney, talk about the real data about Obama and Biden's record that is so often withheld from Americans by the media.