Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Thursday, January 31, 2008

McCain Flip-Flops On His Opposition To Bush Tax Cuts

McCain says he opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 for the conservative-friendly reason of their not being coupled with cuts in federal spending.  But in 2001 what he actually said was different, and more populist than conservative.

WASHINGTON (AP) - Republican John McCain says he opposed President Bush’s tax cuts because they didn’t come with spending cuts. That is not what he said at the time.

In a presidential debate on Wednesday, McCain said he voted against the Bush tax cuts because he wanted to rein in spending.

“I disagreed when we had tax cuts without spending restraint,” the Arizona senator said.

The explanation fits with his history of railing against wasteful federal spending. But it does not fit with McCain’s comments when he opposed the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003.

In 2001, McCain said the tax cuts favored the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

So McCain, in 2001, was a “tax cuts for the rich” guy.  Not exactly someone conservatives should want in charge of fiscal policy, right?

Also, his complaint about the tax cuts being coupled with federal spending cuts rings hollow because since the Bush tax cuts federal tax receipts have been setting records.  I think we can all agree that the government absolutely needs to cut spending, but the Bush tax cuts didn’t cost the federal government a dime in revenue overall.

Comments

The first statement was the Dem “class envy” rhetoric, and the second one is the Dem “paygo” rhetoric.  They are both an illustration of economic ignorance.


"If the good men are silent only the wicked are heard.” - Edmund Burke

robert108 on January 31, 2008 at 04:01 pm

McCain=Kerry in flip flops… :(


check out Goon’s World

http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/

Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck

http://redneckndgoon.blogspot.com/

goon on January 31, 2008 at 04:02 pm

Is it worth noting that the same John McCain voted to keep the Bush tax cuts in 2006? I seem to recall that he said eliminating them would amount to a tax increase, which he opposed.


"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

THIS ELECTION IS ABOUT TWO THINGS: WINNING THE WAR ON TERRORISM AND SAVING THE SUPREME COURT.

pparets on January 31, 2008 at 05:34 pm
Avatar for Mittens McHuckniani

John Sidney McCain III could very well be the John Forbes Kerry of the Republican party in terms of flip flopping, at least on taxes.

If the right hates him, he might be worth my vote.

Mittens McHuckniani on January 31, 2008 at 07:00 pm

AMERICAN PEOPLE TO BE JUDGE AND JURY IN THE TRIAL OF INSANE MC-CAIN FOR DISLOYALTY

Amnesty for Illegal Aliens?
Sacrifice American Wealth and Blood for Israel?
Demonize the Christian Conservatives?
Sacrificial Killing of Children by Abortion?
Neo-Con News Media Propaganda against Conservatives?
Dirty Tricks to Defeat Romney? 
McCain-Feingold Suppression of Internet Freedom of Speech?
Early Caucus for Neo-Con Advantages over Conservatives?
Un-Constitutional Wars to “Occupy Iraq for 100 Years” and “Bomb Iran”?
Tax and Spend Opposition to Bush Tax Cuts?
No Grasp of Looming Recession and Inflation Threat?
No Record of Social or Economic Accomplishments?

If Neo-Con McCain is such a pretentious Christian and patriot, insanely dishonoring his God and his Constitution, how can he ever be trusted to cherish and honor the American People?

That the Republican Party so justly stripped Neo-Con dominated New Hampshire and Florida of half of their delegates, as punishment for trying to trick the American People into believing that Insane McCain is the leading candidate, is the first step to his final appointment with the Republican firing squad.

Jeugenen on January 31, 2008 at 07:45 pm
Avatar for syn

Why would any sane American vote for any candidate(that would be McCain, Clinton, and Obama for all those unaware) who is a current member of the worst Congress in the history of the United States.

It’s like Americans have a real need to be miserable so much so they’re willing to give Executive power over to those who are members of the worst Congress in the history of the United States.

I’ll say it again since it’s important:

McCain, Clinton and Obama are current members of the worst Congress in the hisotry of the United States.

syn on January 31, 2008 at 08:41 pm
Avatar for syn

Jeugenen

You make some valid points however Neo-Cons were run outta town a couple of years ago, McCain was one who helped to drive them out of DC with his Gitmo interrogation=torture crap and talk of bringing enemy combatants to American soil.

That said, RonPaulRonPaulRonPaul is just not cutting the mustard to get the nomination but he is useful to reminding Americans why anti-war peace people are creepy-freaky psychodelic-wide put an end to your life kind of people.

I hop[e he stays in the race for a long as he can.

syn on January 31, 2008 at 08:49 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.