Your article certainly didn't say that...here's what it said:
It's a clever pitch, because it lets him pose as a middle-class tax cutter while disguising that he's also proposing one of the largest tax increases ever [u]on the other 5%.[/u]
What the article is questioning is the change in terminology from "tax credit" to "tax cut." It's still a "tax cut" (or "tax credit" if you will) on the bottom 95%.
Seems you're not being truthful, or your a poor reader.
This is actually a decent point. 'Course when were talking about the top 5% vs the bottom 95% we're talking pure populist politics. When that's measured against the last ten years where the top 2-3% have absorbed almost all the country's growth (see my plentiful other posts and links on this subject) It's not too surprising that populist politics came up, now is it?
See the chart in the link you provided? Notice how the numbers start at 250,000/year? What exactly is your definition of "middle class"?
I'm not sure about where anyone else comes from, but around Chicago I can honestly say that the "average" family doesn't have two kids "one in college and one receiving child care". That's saying you have one child around 19 years old and one around 3 or 4 years old.
I'm not saying the liberal groups don't also do it, but this opinion article from a very conservative group is clearly a case of "if you torture the data long enough, it will admit to anything."
If they really wanted to examine the policy they could have just shown a graph of the total tax due on a y axis against income on the x axis. Oh and they could have actually chosen a more "average" circumstance than a couple having two kids 14 years apart.
I think both understand that if they want to increase tax receipts, they have to decrease taxes. The Bush tax cut increased tax receipts to the highest level ever. Unfortunately, Obama wants to increase taxes on the top 1%, which will only harm the middle class. The more of their money the rich keep, the more they will spend, which will help those who aren't in the top 1%.