These are quotes from our stellar media outlets on the just passed rip-off of the poor. First, from WaPo:

"The impact of the bill on the deficit is likely to be negligible, slicing less than one-half of 1 percent from the estimated $14.3 trillion in federal spending over the next five years."

The actual cut of $39 billion over five years equates to $8 billion per year. Sure, that's a lot of money. But when put in context as in the above quote, it's hardly a big deal. The Iraq war costs around $5 billion per week. The submarine program I talked about the other day is $2.4 billion per unit, ten units on order, and being deployed to listen to cells phone calls in Latin America!

Let's now take a look at how the ever objective NY Times covers the story (quote was in the second graf):

"The vote helped President Bush deliver on his promise to rein in federal spending."

Oh jeesh.

Please.

The WaPo must not have received the GOP talking points memo before going to press like the Times. This is the kind of nonsense reporting that leaves the public befuddled with the "there are always two sides to the story" myth.

The vote was party line with no Democrats crossing over. Yet another issue that can be condensed down for the 2006 campaign.

But then the LA Times weighs in:

The LAT isn't so slow. It notes that not only were the cuts themselves "mild," Congress is about to pump up the deficit a bit. As the House was voting on the budget tweaking, "the Senate was debating a $56-billion tax cut that the House had already passed." The net result of the two measures would "add $16 billion to federal deficits."

Swell. Of the budget ... literally.

But of course. The rich have certainly had a tough few years what with all those accounting fees to manage the tax cut windfalls already passed. They need some tax relief to help them pay the management fees of their dough.

If these guys are re-elected it's simply unfathomable. How ordinary Americans who will bear the brunt of the cuts via medicare cuts, tuition assistance cuts and other social program cuts could vote Republican is beyond me.

Update: From Eric Alterman who quotes the NY Times:

In 1985, the combined wealth of the Forbes 400 was $238 billion, adjusted for inflation. Today, the 400 richest people in America are together worth $1.13 trillion. To put that number in perspective, $1.13 trillion is more than the gross domestic product of Canada. And it is more than the G.D.P. of Switzerland, Poland, Norway and Greece - combined.