No one can be  sure if the author of former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's latest Facebook missive just skimmed PolitiFact's rationale for giving the former governor a "Pants on Fire" rating on Wednesday, or if the utter lack of comprehension was intentional, but the response posted yesterday on Palin's page completely missed the point.

PolitiFact examined Palin's claim, given on Fox News Sunday, that letting all of the tax cuts passed under President Bush expire would constitute "the largest tax increase in history." By consulting tax experts and a revenue study from the U.S. Treasury Department, PolitiFact determined that if all of the tax cuts were allowed to expire (which, based on recent statements from the White House and Congressional Democrats, seems unlikely), and that amount of revenue were expressed as a percentage of GDP -- which is customary -- it would amount to less than half of the estimated value of the biggest tax increase in U.S. history. Read more of PolitiFact's research, here, and read Palin's Facebook note, "Fact-checking the Fact-checkers on the $3.8 Trillion Obama Tax Hike," below, reprinted without alteration.

Yesterday, PolitiFact.com fact-checked my statement about the coming $3.8 trillion Obama tax hike - the largest tax increase in history. They did such a bad job of it, however, that I feel compelled to fact-check the fact-checkers.

First of all, they claim that there are Democrat proposals which would "keep the tax cuts for individuals who make less than $200,000 and couples who make less than $250,000."

Unfortunately for PolitiFact, no such proposal exists. They admit as much, by the way, when they state that "There are no formal congressional proposals yet to keep the Bush tax cuts in place, so we don't have precise estimates from official sources like the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office." That doesn't stop them, though, from claiming I "confuse the issue" by "using numbers that assume all the tax cuts are going away. That is not the Democratic plan nor is it President Obama's plan."

Plan? What plan? There is no plan. All we have is smoke and mirrors based on an old Obama campaign pledge that if elected, he would exempt families making less than $250,000 a year from "any form of tax increases." But this pledge was already watered down before he was even elected. First vice-presidential candidate Joe Biden lowered it to $150,000. Then campaign surrogate Gov. Bill Richardson lowered it even further to $120,000.

A few months after the inauguration, even that last promise disappeared in a puff of smoke. When asked to reaffirm the White House's commitment to the campaign promise of no tax increases for families earning less than $250,000, Obama's spin doctor David Axelrod declared the President had "no interest in drawing lines in the sand."

The truth is that as of today, Democrats haven't taken any action to extend any part of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for any income group - and in this case doing nothing equals hitting American taxpayers with a massive $3.8 trillion tax increase.

What we do know for certain is that the White House is more than willing to raise taxes on families with incomes of less than $250,000. Democrat Senator Max Baucus admitted as much during the debate about Obamacare when he stated that "One other point that I think it's very important to make is that it is true that in certain cases, the taxes will go up for some Americans who might be making less than $200,000."