New York Times congressional reporter Carl Hulse was up to his old rhetorical tricks on Tuesday , using the Democrat euphemism 'revenues' to protect the party's left flank, when Democrats are in fact calling for tax hikes as part of a budget deal tied to increasing the debt limit: 'Debt Divide Remains As President Steps In .'
The White House and Congressional Republicans remained deeply divided on Monday over whether a budget-cutting deal tied to a debt limit increase should contain new federal revenues.
As President Obama welcomed Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, to the White House for separate budget negotiations, his spokesman, Jay Carney, said Republicans must be willing to consider tax changes, including the elimination of 'loopholes' that benefit corporations.
'It's the only way to get it done if you want to do it right and you want to do it in a way that is fair and balanced and ensures that the economy continues to grow and continues to create jobs,' Mr. Carney told reporters.
But even before Mr. McConnell met with the president, he dug in deeply against proposals for new tax revenue, suggesting that the deal should be struck mainly by cutting spending. New taxes, he said, would harm the economy.
The Washington Post played it straight last Sunday, confessing that Democrats were looking to impose "as much as $400 billion in new taxes on corporations and the nation's wealthiest households.'
The Times only fleetingly linked the idea of new taxes to Democrats, as in this passively crafted sentence:
As the debt talks resumed at the White House, Senator Bernard Sanders, the Vermont independent, took the floor to urge the president to resist Republican pressure to wring most of the savings out of federal programs rather than impose any new taxes on the nation's most affluent.