FUDGING
President Clinton released his 2000 budget proposal on Monday, and Republican number-crunchers quickly counted 81 new taxes raising $82 billion over the next five years. They also identified 37 tax cuts that would save taxpayers $36 billion.

Biased news coverage is a big part of the reason why Republicans have a hard time fighting this kind of government growth. The Washington Post on Tuesday described the GOP's 10-percent across-the-board tax proposal as "costly." To whom? Reporters Eric Pianin and John M. Berry, in their "analysis" piece, go on to quote Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin as warning against "consuming [the budget surplus] with a tax cut." No "analysis" of that statement. Who is consuming what?

The Post's Albert B. Crenshaw didn't do much better in a companion news story. He described Clinton's tax hikes as if they wouldn't touch anyone's pocketbooks: "Tobacco would be hit hard, paying an additional $35 billion over five years. The insurance industry is targeted to contribute more than $5 billion in additional revenue over five years." And so on. Nobody mentions the people who really wind up paying Clinton's tax increases: smokers, insurance policy holders, etc., not abstract entities like "tobacco." Note, finally, the Orwellian "contribute". Perhaps muggers should tell their victims: "Your contribution or your life!"

SID VICIOUS
Sidney Blumenthal is planning to be a jerk at his deposition on Wednesday. At least that's what New York Post gossip columnist Cindy Adams reported on Tuesday. We doubt Blumenthal will have any trouble meeting that goal.

House prosecutors should have several goals of their own leading into the deposition. First, they will want Blumenthal to elaborate on his claim during grand jury testimony last year that President Clinton accused Monica Lewinsky of stalking him. Blumenthal probably won't let them get far on this line of inquiry--he'll deny repeating this statement to the press if only because admitting to it would bolster the obstruction of justice charge.

When chief interrogator Jim Rogan (R., Calif.) arrives at this point in the questioning -- Blumenthal confirming his earlier testimony but refusing to add to it--he'll then have to call Blumenthal's bluff. If in fact Blumenthal didn't share the stalker theory with the media, after all, he should be willing to make a statement releasing reporters from any confidentiality agreements they may have with him. If Blumenthal hedges ("I can't release them because I never bound them to anything," etc.), the truth will come into clearer focus. And the truth may not set Sid free.

RICH REWARDS
The New York Post also reports that we'll be seeing less of Frank Rich on the New York Times op-ed page: he's losing his Wednesday column, but will write longer articles for the Times magazine and every other Saturday for the op-ed page "It's what he wanted to do - it's not a demotion," says a Times spokeswoman. Sure.