The journalists at the New York Times are so biased they can’t see straight. I enjoy reading their always-lengthy corrections page. This appeared today (reg. req.):
An article yesterday that examined statements by Vice President Dick Cheney and Senator John Edwards in their debate on Tuesday night incorrectly supported Mr. Edwards’s statement that millionaires who receive stock dividends pay “a lower tax rate than the men and women who are receiving paychecks for serving on the ground in Iraq.” While some military officers may pay a higher rate, most soldiers do not. The monthly pay of enlisted troops in Iraq, as in other combat zones — and the pay of officers there, up to a ceiling — is exempt from federal income taxes. [Original article]
First of all, I have to note that the NYT properly adds an apostrophe “s” to the end of singular nouns ending in “s” instead of only the apostrophe. (Edwards’ hat, for example). So many writers don’t know the grammatical rule (drives me crazy).
The negative criticism: Why did the NYT support Edwards’s assertion without corroboration? A commenter at Lucianne.com says: “[A]nyone receiving checks for serving in Iraq ISN’T PAYING ANY TAXES. It’s a tax exclusion zone…” Can any veterans/enlisted/knowledgeable folks tell us what the deal is?
Check out the NYT’s correction page from time to time. Very entertaining.
Update: Journalists aren’t all bad. Bill Hobbs blogs about a reporter who was a fan of a blogger…who was dedicated to criticizing him!
{ 1 trackback }
{ 36 comments }
I know it’s the grammatical rule, but the s-apostrophe-s thing always looks weird to me. I always mentally add another s, like “Edwardses.” Sounds funny. So I usually leave it off because I’m a rebel.
Well “Edwardses” is correct if you’re referring to his whole family.
Ouch. My grammar is atrocious on my blog. It is laziness as opposed to ignorance. It is now my mission to correct the error of my ways.
PS I sent you an e-mail just a little while ago.
La Shawn,
In this case, the bias is a pre-requisite for employment. In order for someone at the New York Times to know about the tax rule, it would require either personal experience with the military, or else knowing someone who has. By default, either of these would exclude them from being employed at the Times.
Quote from my husband, a former Army officer: “One of the little itty-bitty financial perks of being deployed to a designated war zone is that, up to a certain level, your base pay is exempt from federal income taxes. Usually, the only people that pay any tax are sr. officers (Generals). All of the housing allowances, subsistance allowances, per diem, combat pay, jump pay, hazardous duty pay is always exempt from federal and state income tax.”
IIRC, the tax exclusion has always been in effect whenever there is a “war”. Soldiers were also excluded during Bosnia/Kosovo operations. They also get automatic extensions to file when the income has a mix of normal & war income, giving them reasonable time to reconcile their taxes upon returning home.
Furthermore, as far as i know, there is no ceiling. The ceiling only applies to any American citizen working overseas, depending on the income source. In this regard, soliders normally based in Germany, Korea, etc are not exempt from income taxes.
Eeek! I wish Word Press had a “Grammar Check”
Sadly, I don’t think enough people read the NYTimes Corrections page – if they did, indeed they’d get some chuckles. I think the Wash Post was on the ball re: their fact checking of the debate with respect to Edwards’* comments about lower tax rates.
*Hoping the apostrophe is in the right place
“[A]nyone receiving checks for serving in Iraq ISN’T PAYING ANY TAXES. It’s a tax exclusion zone…””
The contractors too?
And a follow-up from the husband…”It looks like the officer pay thing was changed, but some places actually have the old rules still in place. The officer exemption used to be up to the highest amount an enlisted person would receive. If that’s still the case, then most field grade officers would pay some in taxes (E-9 pay is about $5100 a month, and most Majors and up make about $5200 a month.). So if there is someone who wants to sharpshoot the answer, this one is technically correct.”
Off the top of my head, ANYONE working overseas is generally exempted from taxes up to $78K (as of mid-90s, Congress mandated that it increments by $2K every year), except for soldiers and government employees stationed in places like Germany/Korea, as noted above.
It’s been a few years since I “benefitted” from these rules and I know there are other preconditions etc, but that’s the general overview.
Is there supposed to be a problem with contractors getting exemptions?
So unbelievable. In journalism school is there a “How to lie with a straight face” 101 class??
Just a note on the apostrophe issue: from my research, it seems that the apostrophe + “s” in plurals-ending-in-”s” is going out of style. I prefer to do it the way you mention, but many experts disagree. It was with great sadness that I began ending in just the apostrophe.
(I’m a technical writer by trade, and I’m an editor by God’s grace, so these things matter to me.)
Andy – my parents spent 10 months in Korea (serving in a Christian school in Seoul), and they left something like two or three days too early and ended up having to pay exorbitant taxes on their income over those months. I think there’s a cut off before which the income is taxable. They certainly didn’t earn over $78k!
Actus,
Read SERVING in Iraq. If you’re a contractor, you’re WORKING in Iraq, not serving in the armed forces.
kiki.
Just wanted to make sure. I’ve heard contractors are the second biggest coalition partner, so i think they’re real significant.
Actus,
Where do the Iraqi’s fit in the heirarchy?
Anyone else catch this earlier in the week?
President of Poland Calls Kerry ‘Immoral’
Reacting to John Kerry’s omission of Polands efforts in Iraq, President of Poland Alexander Kwasniewski said, “I find it kind of sad that a senator with 20 year parliamentary experience is unable to notice the Polish presence in the anti-terror coalition.”
When asked about Kerry’s derogation of non-U.S. coalition countries fighting in Iraq, Kwasniewski said: “I don’t think it’s an ignorance. Anti-terror coalition is larger than the USA, the UK and Australia. There are also Poland, Ukraine, and Bulgaria etc. which lost their soldiers there. It’s highly immoral not to see our strong commitment we have taken with a strong believe that we must fight against terror together, that we must show our strong international solidarity because Saddam Hussein was dangerous to the world.”
Not only those directly in the Iraq are elligible but from past experience I know that those of us who were on ships in the Gulf also go tax free (and free mailing).
Lawwife, yes, the exact time frame is critical to qualify. This is one of those byzantine (aren’t all IRS froms convoluted?) preconditions.
I had to stay here longer than planned before going back the last time to make sure I didn’t run afoul of the rules. One has to first be here X-long, there Y-long and back Z-long to qualify, then repeat.
wuzzy-
you got a link to that article. fodder for my blog. sorry, LB. J/K, i know i can google it at any time.
great point to bring up though. check my blog for my piece on “do democrats want bad things to happen to the U.S.” it fits right in with this type of Kerry rhetoric.
I’m with Treacher. I go to great lengths to avoid the “s-apostrophe-s” rule. If I can’t avoid it, I break it. I don’t care. It sounds stupid. Besides, I lisped as a child and the hissing double-s was traumatic.
So go ahead, send out grammarian hit squads to hunt me down. I’ll go underground. Stop me if you can.
Great blog! First time visitor. I’ll put you on my fav’s, and possibly link your site. I do not have many visitors, (or at least I don’t think I do!) but I try!
Lyle! Breaking grammar rules? Actually we do it all the time. I do it, too. For example, it’s become acceptable to begin a sentence with “But” and “And”, as I often do, but it’s grammatically incorrect. But (see?) there’s something about an apostrophe hanging at the end of a word without an “s” that is supposed to be there!
Think about it. The “s” at the end of “Edwards’s” (singular noun) indicates the possessive. The rule is that unless the word is plural, you add apostrophe “s.” If plural, only the apostrophe. For example: “Dan Rather read the bloggers’ posts and retired in shame.”
Bloggers is a plural noun ending in “s”, so you don’t need another “s” to make the noun possessive. But “Edwards” is not a plural noun despite the “s” at the end. It is singular, so you must add an apostrophe and an “s” to indicate the possessive. Got it?
Anyway, I think I should get off the computer now!
Hi, Rosemary. Welcome to my blog!
Addendum: Jeremy’s comment below reminded me that I posted only half the rule. A plural noun ending in “s” (”Bloggers”) needs an apotrophe without another “s” to indicate the possessive, as in my Dan Rather example. And this is what I forgot to note: for plural nouns not ending in “s” (men), you need to add an apostrophe “s” (men’s retreat).
I can’t believe I’m blogging about grammar…
Off-topic, but sort of related. Brit Hume just reported the CNN was flooded with email about the VP candidate debate, all of it stating that Edwards had cleaned Cheney’s proverbial clock.
The problem? all of the email was sent before the debate started.
In order for a civilian to qualify for the $78K of tax exemption, you must maintain a BONA FIDE PRIMARY RESIDENCE outside of the US for either one entire calendar year, or to be out of the country for 330 days of any 365 day period. If that time frame fell into two separate fiscal years, you would pro-rate your salary into the “taxable” and “tax-exempt” sections, and base your taxable income on the former category for each of those fiscal years.
I was able to enjoy this little benefit for several years while living in the UAE from 1995 to 2000.
And Jeff M., I always had a gripe with the your REMFs (meant solely in loving jest, of course, for those of you who understand the acronym!) “in the Gulf”, since I was a Marine Embassy Guard in Baghdad, Iraq from 1986-1988, during the Iran-Iraq War (Gulf War 1/2). We were having missiles from Iran land around the city every other night or so, but received no hazardous pay, while guys hanging around at the old Chicago Beach Club in Dubai were collecting that extra cash!!
The rule I learned is that you can add apostrophe-s all the time with any plural, but if you prefer to add just an apostrophe you can do so only when the following conditions all apply:
1. The word is a proper noun.
2. The word has at least two syllables.
3. The words ends in ’s’.
According to that rule, it would be fine to add just an apostrophe to Edwards’ name as I just did.
The fact of the matter is that standard rules for formal English vary, because different standardizations of spelling cropped up in different circles, and the ones that became most accepted are the ones that are most accepted now. There’s still not complete uniformity, just much more than there once was.
Steve S.,
Better to be one of Unca Sam’s misguided children then a REMF, better to be a REMF than a wog (like me)
Jeremy: I learned the rule in the same manner as you; however, since La Shawn follows page 1 of Strunk and White’s, and failure to follow that rule drives La Shawn crazy, I, for one, am immediately changing my usage. The last thing in the world I want to do is drive that lovely lady crazy.
Juliette: wow! I hadn’t heard that but it’s not surprising, considering how the online polls about the debates were spammed with 99% of some polls saying Edwards “won”!
Lol, Juliette. Dems can be so dumb and desperate.
I’m with La Shawn on the “’s” argument for singular possessives, but unfortunately I have been forced to abide by Associated Press style throughout my writing/editing career, and it goes the other way:
“The main AP exception to Strunk and White’s Elements of Style involves forming the possessive of a singular proper noun that ends in “s.” AP says merely add an apostrophe. Examples: Otis’ cookies, Amos’ ice cream, …”
Combat tax exclusion (via I Love Jet Noise)
SCSIwuzzy
“Where do the Iraqi’s fit in the heirarchy?”
I must say that Cheney’s comment was the first time I’ve heard the Iraqi’s referred to as a coalition partner. Usually they’re a given, probably due to the fact that its not like they have a choice and can pack up and go home. I guess its fairer to say they are a coalition partner now that they have sovereignty, de jure if not de facto, but its still a strange comment, given how they really have no choice.
Democrat THUGGERY going unreported….
Democrats are behaving like their thuggish, ancestrally similar in ideology, socialist, Nazi Brown-Shirt brethren in hate. I dare ANYONE to tell me where I am wrong. I DOUBLE DOG DARE YOU!!! No one who reads this has a case in h@%% to distinguish their behavior from the thuggish and intimidatory (I made that word up) tactics used by Hitler’s goons.
This madness seems to be a trend all over the nation and unfortunately, most of the offenders seem to be African-American. When are we going to learn to behave? Maybe if we put as much energy and creativity into productive pursuits, we’d be too busy to act like the Democrat Party mascot.
It seems like a sociopathic anarchist arm of “black America” is taking EVERY opportunity to show its collective behind to the world thus confirming the negative stereotypes they have of our race and Americans in general.
WHERE THE @#$% IS THE MEDIA ON THIS? Sanitizing the news to keep that fluffed up traitor John Kerry in the race I’m sure.
In Gainesville, a left wing, maniacal, Democrat nutty professor (and I am being nice in my choice of descriptive terms) physically accosted a local campaign chief. The good news is I heard he got his clock cleaned GOP GATOR STYLE!
In Tennessee, these psychos even SHOT UP a campaign headquarters location. Come on people! Where is the outrage? Do you really want to turn the nation over to these childish fools? Please think about the REAL consequences of a Kerry victory. Yes, your “boogieman” Bush will be gone, but MY GOD, look at the garbage he will be replaced with! Where are the so-called black “leaders” on this? Huh Tavis and Tom?
PLEASE do not let Satan’s hate drive your heart on Election Day. Vote for Kerry if you must and if you feel it is right, but PLEASE do some homework first and THINK as much as you emote about your choice.
This is serious biz people. We are at war. What if America had replaced Halsey, McArthur, Patton and Ike during WW2 just because some ill-educated people hated them for some silly reason? Great Britain voted out Winston Churchill of all people after the war and now look at the sad state of England because of its hard left turn. In fact, look at all of Europe now. Once noble and rulers of the known Earth. Now a sad socialist network of economic and military failure overrun by islamo-fascist locusts taking advantage of their sickly defective welfare system.
Loyal opposition is fine, but this thuggery has to cease. This is America not Haiti.
Raymond C. Coleman
Tampa, FL
I am going to wager a guess that proper names ending in a consonant followed by “s” (Edwards, Hopkins, Watters, even Jones because the “e” is silent) are already possessive historically. Just as Johnson originates from “son of John”, Edwards probably comes from “of the family of Edward”. “Edwards’s statement” therefore is a double possessive, and as anyone who has ever uttered the phrase “I ain’t got no satisfaction” knows, a double anything in English grammar is really, really bad. Just as a double negative becomes a positive, a double possessive probably creates a free-floating, unpossessed political claim, and you never want one of those, especially in an election year. Better, I think to leave off both the apostrophe and the s, as in “Edwards statements.” This will give both liberal and conservative grammarians something to complain about. IMHO.
Of course, that should have been “I can’t get no satisfaction!” How I could have botched such a classical modern poetic reference is beyond me.
Hey we dont call it the New York Pravda for nothing its just one of our countrys left-wing socialists news papers if a dweeb like FRANK RICH were any different he would still be a dweeb and i.ll bet he belongs to the Council of Forgein Relations(CFR)a infamous socialsist organization
Comments on this entry are closed.