McCain changed story on opposition to tax relief
January 31st, 2008 by Brendan SteinhauserSenator John McCain has changed his story on his opposition to the Bush tax cuts. The Associated Press reports,
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.
While a hawk on spending and earmarks, McCain will have to convince skeptical fiscal conservatives that he will indeed support making the Bush tax cuts permanent if he is elected. Arguing against the tax cuts because they were “for the rich” is a liberal argument that McCain repeated at the time. Let’s hope he gets educated on this issue soon.
January 31st, 2008 at 6:24 pm
oh, I guess it’s just that one post about Clinton that has me in moderation for some reason..
January 31st, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Can I just say that I called this “attack” on McCain yesterday?
http://www.freedomtalks.org/2008/01/24/romneys-costly-healthcare-plan/#comments
February 1st, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Well I know Brendan had a thing for Ron Paul for a while. Looks to me like they’re bashing the mainstream candidates pretty equally, though if they want flip-flopping Romney’s the easy guy to go after. I wonder if they’re part of the “third way” movement trying to get Bloomberg to run…
February 2nd, 2008 at 4:42 am
Who can they be for now though? I’ve heard bad things about Romney, McCain, *and* Huckabee…I don’t get it…”none of the above” isn’t an option for them I would think. Hmmmm…Bloomberg would be great for the Dems in the fall and/or Lou Dobbs too!
February 2nd, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Steve Forbes has endorsed John McCain and joined his team.
I guess Forbes knows a little more about McCain’s commitment to the tax cuts than Brendan does, huh?
February 2nd, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Eh, Forbes is a hack. Brendan’s McCain attack is right on, actually. McCain was against the tax cuts before he was for them. McCain can’t even explain why he wouldn’t vote for his own immigration bill.
Don’t get me wrong, McCain’s clearly the best on the Republican side, but every time I watch those guys they sound batsh!t insane.
February 2nd, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Forbes is a hack? LOL!
Let me ask, are you a supporter of the Freedom Works agenda?
February 2nd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
(In case you don’t want to respond because you’ve beclowned yourself, here’s your “hack.”).
Idiot.
February 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
“Steve Forbes has endorsed John McCain and joined his team.”
Well, that’s enough for me to know that McCain is all wrong on taxes.
“Let me ask, are you a supporter of the Freedom Works agenda?”
Ummm, no…why don’t you read a little here before you start trying to insult anyone here Beth?
February 3rd, 2008 at 11:42 am
Well, I am not sure of the meaning of “hack” but Steve Forbes is really an “interesting” character. His main asset is his last name, and the fact that at least he has not ran his grand father legacy into the ground.
Contrary to what a young capitalist might think, Steve Forbes did not make his own fortune, he was born into it, so in my personal view his accomplishments are meritless (just because he has failed to create wealth of his own). Don’t ge me wrong, there are plenty of scions out there that despite (or because of) being born into wealth have managed to create their own empires, like William Gates for instance, or Warren Buffet. Those guys are true blood thirsty capitalists. Forbes is just a rich clown compared to them.
The funny thing, is that Forbes considers himself the king of capitalism (very similar to his father in that regard).
He ran fro president a couple times, but he failed dramatically, his flat tax platform was soundly rejected at that time (in 1996 in particular the defeat was embarrasing) which gets to show us that in the US people are not really interested on the thing (which exception of rich kids like Forbes himself).
He suffers from the same delusion that FreedomWorks spouses, he actually believes there is such a thing like earned and non earned income, and worse yet, that there is a difference between them. Meaning that non-earned income should not be taxed at all (how convenient, in particular coming from someone that receives almost all of his compensation in non-earned income money).
So there you have it, in my personal view, clown is a better adjective for Forbes.
February 4th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Well, Beth, since they deleted my prior comment, I’ll just leave you with this:
(Note: McCain now says he would have supported the tax cuts if Congress had reduced spending. McCain never mentioned spending before, except concerning the Iraq war.
But let’s go to the real source. The Club For Growth on McCain in 2007:
February 7th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Time to delete this entire post guys before the Left gets a hold of it…