Gail Collins needs a copyeditor

Just for the record, this sentence from Gail Colllins's op-ed yesterday is wrong:

Witness Obama and Clinton at the debate, racing away from gun control as if they were a pair of greyhounds, forswearing middle-class tax cuts as if they were George H.W. Bush.

Actually, they ruled out middle-class tax increases. As her own newspaper reported, "Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama said they would not raise taxes on middle class Americans — those making less than $200,000 to $250,000 a year."

Update 4/18 2:56 PM -- Commenter Dave raises another issue for Times copy-editors:

I never knew that greyhounds were such strong opponents of gun control.

Update 4/19 2:35 PM: Collins corrected the error in today's column.

Comments

[Raleighite]

How do you make less than $200,000 to $250,000 a year? Does this mean more than $200,000, but less than $250,000?

[Rob]

They've both been vague about whether their rollbacks of the tax cuts would apply to those over $200,000 or those over $250,000. But sadly, journalists are apparently too thick to understand that if what the candidates are saying is that they'll roll back tax cuts for the top two brackets, those numbers apply only to married couples filing jointly. Single individuals, or married couples filing separately, would find their taxes increased once they earned about $160,000. Why isn't there someone in the press corps who will try to pin down the candidates on this important subject?

[Raleighite]

Because, what with all the focus on flag lapel pins, there just isn't time.

[David]

I never knew that greyhounds were such strong opponents of gun control.

[Raleighite]

Well, not as strongly opposed as, say, dalmatians, but yes, it is an issue about which they care deeply.