How Low Can You Go?

by

PASS THE MALICE

Five mistakes in a single sentence must be some kind of recordfor America's greatest newspaper. On August 17, in an articleabout the new White House roles of Sidney Blumenthal and PaulBegala ("Clinton Looks for Inspiration From the Left"),the New York Times quoted the New Republic as saying about Blumenthal, "A beat is just an assignment but a slut is who you've become maybe."

The next day the Times admitted the following:

  1. The statement had not appeared in the New Republic.
  2. The statement was not a reference to Blumenthal.
  3. The source of the statement was, in fact, Blumenthal himself.
  4. The statement comes from a work of fiction written by Blumenthal—itis a line in a play, spoken by a reporter bemoaning his own career.
  5. The word "slut" was actually "slot."

What does the Times say when it has twisted a man's own words into an insult supposedly directed at him? It says there was an "editing error." No apology necessary.

As if this weren't bad enough, the same day the Times made these mistakes it also carried a story about the Drudge Report, a gossip sheet on the Internet, written by Matthew Drudge. The focus of the story was Drudge's admission that he published a totally fabricated charge against a new White House employee other than Sidney Blumenthal. The charge, according to Drudge, came from "top GOP operatives." "I think I've been had," Drudge said to the Washington Post—yet another in the great tradition of aggressors who portray themselves as victims.

Thus does the rising drudge abide by a simple credo: Malice towardall, charity for none—except for himself.

STOP US BEFORE WE LEGISLATE AGAIN

You remember the great virtue of the flat tax. It was supposedto simplify the federal tax system, make compliance easier, andprevent Congress from creating loopholes that could be manipulatedby the powerful.

Now along comes the tax legislation of 1997, approved by manyof the same conservatives in Congress who have called for theflat tax. The 1997 legislation, however, makes the federal incometax much more complicated, increases paperwork requirements fortaxpayers, and creates lots of loopholes that the powerful canmanipulate.

The single biggest giveaway is the reduction of the tax rate oncapital gains. Back in 1986, Congress cut tax rates across theboard but created a single rate for capital gains and ordinaryincome. The result was indeed a flatter tax system, less susceptibleto elaborate tax avoidance schemes. In contrast, the 1997 taxlegislation goes in the opposite direction and restores many ofthe old incentives for tax manipulation.

And yet, in a triumph of political inconsistency, the 1997 taxlegislation becomes one more argument in favor of the flat tax.By making the internal revenue code even more complicated, thenew law shows how necessary the flat tax is! Like sex offenderswho voluntarily plead for castration, flat taxers in Congresscan call for radical surgery to stop them from ever again votingfor similar legislation. Take away our power to make loopholes,say the great loophole-makers of 1997. But, in the meantime, re-electus because of the loopholes we created specially for you.