While liberals continue to rail against the "tax cuts for the wealthy," Bush tax cuts continue to help the nation as a whole, including bringing in more tax revenues from the middle class and poor corporations and the rich.

According to the right-wing paper of record, despite increased spending the projected deficit is falling because of a "steep rise" in tax revenues from those supposedly getting all the breaks from Bush’s tax cuts (big, evil corporations and the greedy rich).

The biggest reason is corporate tax receipts, which have almost tripled since 2003, and a large jump in personal taxes on stock market profits and executive bonuses (both evil). What happened in 2003 that would make such an impact? Wasn’t there a tax cut on stock dividends? But surely that wouldn’t actually help the economy and tax revenues.

Thankfully the NY Times does not let the Republicans get away with this. The story says that Republicans are arguing that this proves tax cuts work. I know, how prideful of them.

But the NYT saves us because they report that while Republicans are arguing that tax cuts spur the economy, "democrats and many independent budget analysts" have a different take on the issue. Of course "independent budget analysts" only agree with the Democrats take on this issue. All of the economists who agree with the Republicans are partisan by nature of their positions in favor of tax cuts.

I do have one question: where would this story be running if Clinton were still in office? I think it would have gotten just a little more attention.