George Stephanopoulos¬†of ABC News has an ‚??exclusive‚?Ě interview with Mitt Romney (“exclusive” to what, one wonders, considering Romney’s given about a million interviews). Anyway, the entire thing is worth reading. ¬†but I noticed something peculiar going on when a few lefties on Twitter ¬†began quoting a line ¬†in Stephanopoulos‚?? story on the interview that goes like this:
‚??He defined middle income as $200,000 to $250,000 a year.‚?Ě
That sounds pretty crazy right? Did Mr. Richie Rich really say that middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 a year.
From the transcript:
MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.¬† So number one, don‚??t reduce‚?? or excuse me, don‚??t raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them.¬† Number two, don‚??t reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest.¬† The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today.¬† That‚??s principle one, principle two.¬† Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs.¬† And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.
So¬†$200,000 to $250,000 a year or less. That’s where Barack Obama caps the middle class (anything above 250,000 being a millionaire — you know, math) and that’s probably why Romney picked that number.
It’s possible¬†Stephanopoulos meant to write that Romney defines middle income as $200,000 to $250,000 a year, “or less‚?Ě or “or up to” or something else, but, as far as we know, Romney does not¬†define middle income “as $200,000 to $250,000 a year.‚?Ě The line should be corrected.