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!
