Observations

Today, I came across an interesting Washington Post article, “Romney defines ‘middle-income’ as $200,000 to $250,000 and less in annual income”:

“Is $100,000 middle income?” Stephanopoulos asked.

“No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less,” Romney responded.

His campaign later clarified that Romney was referencing household income, not individual income.

The Census Bureau reported this week that the median household income — the midpoint for the nation — is just over $50,000.

Those paragraphs alone - particularly the cold, hard fact that the median income, quite literally the middle, the income which half the country is above and half above is a quarter of his low end - should be enough to call attention to the sheer absurdity of his bracketing.

But because I like charts, I made one to illustrate, with pretty colors, the preposterous nature of his claim, and really drive the point home.  You can click through for the full-size version.

I was sure this was some kind of taken-out-of-context remark, because Romney couldn’t really be that stupid, right?  But nope.  Stephanopoulos asked him, specifically, if $100k was “middle income”, and Romney came right back and stated very clearly, plainly, and explicitly that his “middle income” bracket was $200-250k.  The clarification of it being household income helps him none - all of the numbers above are household numbers.

As indicated, Obama hasn’t been perfect either - he and his administration have been all over the map.  But he’s never stated such a ridiculous lower bound, and he is much more in line with people whose job it is to decide these things.

Somehow, I don’t think Forbes is 100% behind the message of this piece.