Suppose you saw a graphic like this:
Think that's a fair representation? How about if I told you that the people affected by this had a tax cut of 12%, from 39.6% to 35%, about 12 years ago; and that this graphic is showing nothing more than how these people will have to go back to paying the 39.6% tax.
That is, the graphic is showing you a jump of just 4.6%, from a tax rate of 35% to a tax rate of 39.6%. Well, gee, that's not the impression you had, is it? That graphic kind of leads you to believe the tax is being at least quadrupled, if not more, right?
Well, so does this one.
Oh, yes, it's not as bad as my little effort here, but it's intended to be just as misleading, while not being quite so obvious about it. That is, my graphic is a parody of the Fox graphic.
But go back and take a look at that Fox graphic and ask yourself this question: "Is this graphic designed to mislead me?"
I won't tell you to answer that yes or no, but if your answer is yes, then ask yourself: "Do I still think Fox is 'Fair and Balanced?'"
Also think about this...
If dropping a tax cut is a "tax increase": Then why weren't all the tax cuts that the Republicans discarded for the poor and middle class, a tax increase?