Will media note $4 trillion increase in deficit over 10 yrs in SOTU?

[papau]

Now I know Bush will say nothing about the 2.4 million jobs lost since February 2001, but will note the 278,000 non farm payroll increase since July 2003 - the point in time that he claimed that job increases of 300,000 per month could be expected if we only passed his tax cut.

And I know the media will just nod their heads when he talks about the economic turnaround with its 278,000 new jobs in 6 months.

And the Economy.com study found the tax cuts added less than two percentage points to GDP growth in the third quarter, suggesting most of the economy's growth was due to pent-up demand after the first months of the war in Iraq - but that has been out for a year and the media still lets folks talk about the GDP gain that is coming from the tax cuts -

So I know the media will not mention any study that implies the tax cuts have not worked to increase GDP.

So when Bush Bush asks that the tax cuts be made permanent, at a deficit increase that exceeds $5 trillion for the years 2004 to 2013, instead of the $1.4 trillion now forecast by CBO if the Tax increases are not made permanent, I do not expect the media to say one word - and indeed the studies that agree with the above such as those by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities will not be mentioned - and if a guest mentions them the host will pop up - aren't they a liberal group?

And when Bush suggest making health care costs deductible for the poor, none in the media will note the very minor cost of this is due to the fact that poor folk pay almost 100% of their income tax as payroll tax, and not as FIT.

And unpaid mandates of yesteryear are to be topped by a Social Security privatization transition who's cost will not be estimated, and the media will say nothing about the recent Social Security trustees' studies that warns privatization will hurt the federal budget, at least in the short term, by redirecting payroll taxes to private accounts rather than to the government - so their is no point in expecting any media type to suggest this might be fiscally irresponsible.

Add in the tax gifts to oil and friends that is called the Energy bill, and throw in the need to destroy our parks and forests so as to give oil companies cheap leases (in Bush talk it is to encourages more exploration and development to help keep energy costs low) - and we have another topic the media will not comment on.

And when Bush says his mission to Mars will only require $1 billion added to the budget for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), while redirecting about $11 billion in NASA's existing budget to the projects, don't expect the media to recall the $500 billion estimate of the same proposal under Bush's Daddy - nope, the media will not laugh this off the stage - indeed, they will comment about his vision!

But if the media stays very silent as Bush rip off trillions, they might get that $3.2 billion to pay for federal Pell grants for low- and middle-income students, and even also get part of the worker training funds that he has cut over the last few years returned.

And those Pell/worker training funds will make the liberal media (or is it compassionate conservative media?) very happy.