Both Sides Take Aim At Pryor

Posted: September 2, 2011 at 3:47 a.m.

Mark Pryor is a rare kind of politician. And thanks to the poisonous climate in national politics these days, his kind gets rarer by the day.

This story is only available from the archives. Click here to contact the online desk.

Opinion, Pages 5 on 09/02/2011

(Advertisement)

« Previous Story

OTHERS SAY: Inexcusable bickering

Only a few short months ago, Joplin, Mo., was the place for promises. Everyone from President Barack Obama to FEMA bureaucrats pledged to help the tornadoravaged city rebui... Read »

Big Decisions On Schools

With contested school board elections coming up soon in all four of the major cities in Northwest Arkansas, here’s a reminder to patrons why these choices matter. Read »

To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Please read our comment policy.

I wonder how much in taxes a person on minimum wage (which is not enough to live on) can be expected to pay..???

On the other hand, tax reform can also "fix" the inequality of having the very wealthy pay only 15% income tax while those who have NO loopholes to "take advantage of" pay 35%...

One only has to look at the example Senator Pryor used in order to understand what he was meaning by "tax reform"...

Posted by: Aimee

September 2, 2011 at 3:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

The opinion stated in the 'Both Sides Take Aim at Pryor' article was well written and drives home a very good point. The response by aimee makes the original opinion's point even clearer (re: rock throwing from one side or the other) ...

Posted by: Publius

September 2, 2011 at 4:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

This is disgusting. NWA Times got it wrong but instead of correcting themselves, they are trying to shoot the messenger. Too bad for them that in the internet age, that strategy doesn't work any more.

Note in particular: "Arkansas Media Watch has not only criticized the two Senators for making inaccurate statements, but also the local media for letting them get away with inaccurate statements. Pryor’s office has now maintained that Pryor was misquoted. Arkansas Media Watch has contacted NWA Times and requested clarification. No response."

http://arkansasmediawatch.wordpress.c...

http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/vie...

http://bluearkansasblog.com/?p=6940

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/31/opi...

Posted by: ImUnarmed

September 2, 2011 at 4:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Publius--

As long as our elected representatives are unable to articulate positions and policies with enough clarity-- or honesty, as the case may be-- to avoid rock-throwing, rocks will be thrown. This is particularly true when they ignore or reject efforts at clarification and correction made less forcefully, and so increase the force required to get their attention.

One would think that the good Senator would have taken into consideration the current misleading, divisive conservative meme that-- in its least dishonest version-- "half of Americans pay no federal income tax", before being so careless in his phrasing. We need more accuracy from our representatives, not imprecision that, perhaps coincidentally, closely resembles conservative claptrap.

Why did it take Pryor's office a week to contact one unnamed blogger I know of to address the issue? Why has the paper not issued a correction? It was their apparently inadequate reportage that spurred the blogger's diatribe. The article above is indded well-written, compared to that other article. Apparently this paper can actually cover the news-- when the news is its own butt.

Posted by: AlphaCat

September 2, 2011 at 5:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Opinion:
"As an example, Pryor commented that the code allows 45 percent of citizens to pay no federal income tax and relies on the remaining 55 percent to pony up.">>

If that's what he said, it's not what this paper reported he said, which was:

“It’s hard to have a fair tax system where only about half the people are paying,...”

http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2011/au...

But it doesn't matter because either way he would be passing along just another variation of this ridiculous and extremely misleading tax canard.

This is to be expected from Boozeman, who can hardly deny his variation since it's on tape, but Pryor saying this doesn't make him a centrist, it makes him a person who fell for a carefully crafted, purposely deceptive, rightwing talking point. It happens.

Perhaps the author of this article ought to learn more about this issue before they go on about how it's wrong to point out how misleading and unfair Pryor's comment is (regardless of how it is massaged now). "ImUnarmed" has provided the links above. Fifth one down is my favorite of course.

(One last boast. Out of 2,700 topics over 5 years, that article has been *by far* our most popular ever with now 2,800 views in one week.)

Posted by: fayfreethinker

September 3, 2011 at 3:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

I stand by my opinion. Well written article and some of the seething responses proves the articles central tenet. We need more civil discourse on issues like this. Me, I favor a flat tax - say 10%. You earn 1,000, you pay 100 - no deductions. You earn 1,000,000, you pay 100,000 - no deductions. Same for all sources of realized income - dividends, inheritance, capital gain, payroll, etc.

Posted by: Publius

September 3, 2011 at 7:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Publius has a good point. Tax loopholes were created by the lawmakers and people who take advantage of them are not to be blamed. Some scream "regressive" in connection with a flat tax. It is no different from a state sales tax or a city tax. If cities collected taxes the same as the Feds, there would not be enough money to pay a street sweeper. A flat tax may never happen...tax accountants, IRS agents, and a lot of other agencies paid by tax victims would be disemployed. As to Pryor, he is a Democrat and he is a politician. He went along with Obama's healthcare abomination and he will never get my vote.

Posted by: MrD

September 3, 2011 at 1:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Publius and MrD--

Most economists, Thomas Jefferson (Founding Father!), and Adam Smith (the Father of Modern Capitalism himself!) have all favored a progressive tax system as being more fair than a flat tax. But you might know better.

See this thread http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2011/ju... for, among other things, a bit of discussion on flat versus progressive taxation. I say "a bit" because other than asserting that a flat tax is fair, those who espouse it cannot or will not explain how it is fair. Being based on the belief that "equal" is "fair", the assertion doesn't stand on its own: I have shown that "equal" is not always "fair", and I have shown by direct analogy that a flat tax isn't fair. I am still waiting for a justification from the proponents of a flat tax. Your thoughts?

Posted by: AlphaCat

September 3, 2011 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Along with the flat tax, we should bring back child labor. If it's fair for an 18-year-old to work, why not an 8-year-old? And, while we're at it, why not an 88-year-old? Why coddle the old geezers?

Posted by: Coralie

September 3, 2011 at 3:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

FFT: "This is to be expected from Boozeman, who can hardly deny his variation since it's on tape, but Pryor saying this doesn't make him a centrist, it makes him a person who fell for a carefully crafted, purposely deceptive, rightwing talking point. It happens."

Wow... you are defending Pryor for making the same comments as Boozeman, and yet chastising Boozeman. Your colors are true....

If Pryor "fell for a carefully crafted, purposely deceptive, rightwing talking point" then that yields him credibility? He has 9 years under his belt as a US Senator and he cannot think for himself? This is your endorsement of Pryor?

You have got to be kidding me! He voted lock-step with Obama and the democrats through Stimulus and Obama Care. And yet he "fell for a carefully crafted...."

You are truly a yellow-dog democrat. Defend at all costs... The costs will be extreme in 2012....

Posted by: commonsense96

September 3, 2011 at 5:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

commonsense96 (with my apologies to Thomas Paine)--

RE "He voted lock-step with Obama and the democrats through Stimulus and Obama Care. And yet he 'fell for a carefully crafted....'"
Why not? Surely you're smarter than some Obama-loving, lockstepping Socialist like Mark Pryor, yet you fell for it, too.

Posted by: AlphaCat

September 3, 2011 at 5:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

"I stand by my opinion. Well written article and some of the seething responses proves the articles central tenet."

In Publius' illogical universe, being proven wrong "proves the articles central tenet". There is nothing that the so-called well-written article gets right. It attacks unnamed bloggers and lays words in their mouths that nobody has actually used. In addition to that, the NWA Times editors are brazenly lying about what their own newspaper reported. They quoted Pryor as saying that half Americans don't pay any taxes. They now claim falsely that the article made a reference to income taxes. It did not. It's a lie. L-I-E.

Another worthwhile article: http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/...

Posted by: ImUnarmed

September 5, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ImUnarmed: "NWA Times editors... quoted Pryor as saying that half Americans don't pay any taxes. They now claim... the article made a reference to income taxes. It did not.">>

This is bizarre. Why do these two articles attempt to rehabilitate Senator Pryor's comment (whatever it was) by suggesting that even if he didn't refer to "Federal income taxes, it's what everyone understood he meant. To quote the above article:

"It was clear to everyone in the room that Pryor was talking about federal income taxes."

Excellent. Got it. Doesn't matter.

Anyone who thinks it matters still doesn't understand the problem. To say about half don't pay Fed income taxes, is to pass along, precisely, *the* canard, in its most sneaky form (the other forms, for instance Senator Boozeman's, are just patently false).

Let me give an example.

First, whatever Senator Pryor actually said, his comment meant to convey that about half of the population, necessarily the poor, working class, bottom half or so, are not paying enough (their fair share). That is the central point of this nifty tax slight of hand, however it is stated.

Imagine if the good Senator wanted to make the case that a 2004 Toyota Prius was an under powered wimpy car. What if he said to support this:

"The Prius has a 1.5 liter gas engine that only puts out 76 horsepower." [audience laughs]
What a silly car! Most cars of this size have a gas engine with nearly twice that horsepower."

That claim, as stated, would be absolutely true. Those are the stats of the gas engine:
http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/c...

But this statement carefully leaves something out. The '04 Prius also has a 50,000 watt, 67 horsepower electric motor. If someone were to talk about the power of this car, with the intention of making the point that it is underpowered, while only referring to the horsepower of the gas engine, without mentioning the power provided by the electric engine, the comment would be completely, profoundly, misleading. Some might say dishonest.

Yet this is exactly how this carefully crafted tax canard works. It cherry picks the year, cherry picks the category (Fed income tax), and carefully ignores the category that hits the working poor the most, payroll tax.

The 2004 Prius has lots of power. I have one. If you want to talk about its horsepower, honestly, you can't ignore a great portion of how it is powered. Likewise, if you want to talk about Federal taxes, honestly, you can't pick one category while ignoring another large portion. It is misleading, and that's being charitable.

Hope this helps. Further explanation here:

http://fayfreethinkers.com/forums/vie...

Posted by: fayfreethinker

September 5, 2011 at 9:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

FFT: "To say about half don't pay Fed income taxes, is to pass along, precisely, *the* canard, in its most sneaky form (the other forms, for instance Senator Boozeman's, are just patently false)."

I agree. One statement is outright false, the other is misleading. Even if Pryor was careful to say he was referring to federal income tax, he needs to explain whether or not he is in favor of raising taxes on the working poor. Pryor could have cleared the air by releasing a clear and unambiguous statement. His office's statement, posted at http://arkansasmediawatch.wordpress.c..., seems to leave the door open to higher taxes on the poor but judge for yourself.

Unfortunately, the NWA Times has muddied the water further by publishing conflicting accounts of Pryor's speech.The original NWA Times article is posted at http://arkansasmediawatch.wordpress.c.... It is outrageous that NWA Times editors would come out with an editorial lying about their newspaper's own report. They'll have to explain that to their readers.

Posted by: ImUnarmed

September 6, 2011 at 10:08 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Btw here's an excellent article about GOP tactics and ideology. It includes a nice treatment of the "50% don't pay taxes" canard.

http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-...

Posted by: ImUnarmed

September 6, 2011 at 10:11 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

ImUnarmed: From your cited article above "As Sarah Palin would imply, the people who are not Real Americans. Racial minorities. Immigrants. Muslims. Gays. Intellectuals. Basically, anyone who doesn't look, think, or talk like the GOP base."

So you are citing Sarah Palin as a racist? What PROOF do you have outside of quoting some bogus article with no references. This type of slander from the left is really getting old. We have a Black President. He and his democratically controlled congress have not done their job. Now many are critical of the performance, and they are suddenly labeled as racist? What a bunch of BS! The Liberals HATED Bush for 8 years. That makes them racist for being against a White President? Get a grip and stop with the damn race card......

Posted by: commonsense96

September 8, 2011 at 11:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Registration is required to make comments. Click here to LOGIN.
You can register for FREE to post comments and receive alerts.