Here's the beginning of "The New Big Dig," the lead editorial in today's Wall Street Journal:
Mitt Romney's Presidential run is history, but it looks as if the taxpayers of Massachusetts will be paying for it for years to come. The former Governor had hoped to ride his grand state "universal" health-care reform of 2006 to the White House, but his state's residents are now having to live with what he and the state's Democratic Legislature passed. As the Boston press likes to say, it's "the new Big Dig."
Catchy! But ask yourself: have you ever heard anyone in the Boston press describing Commonwealth Care as "the new Big Dig?"?
Me neither. There's also no record, in the Massachusetts Newsstand database, of that particular phrase ever being used to describe Commonwealth Care. And a Google search for "new Big Dig" and "Commonwealth Care" turns up just one non-WSJ result--a Citizens for Limited Taxation update from February 15 titled "The New 'Big Dig' is upon is: mandated health insurance."
Since Paul Gigot & Co. seem to be confused, allow me to explain. Citizens for Limited Taxation is not part of the Boston media. It's an antitax advocacy group.
As the Journal's editorial suggests, there's a substantive case to be made against Commonwealth Care. So why the reliance on a bogus quote?