McCain Adviser: Like Bush, We’ll Cut Taxes Even If We Don’t Control Spending
McCain Adviser: Like Bush, We’ll Cut Taxes Even If We Don’t Control Spending
On ABC’s Good Morning America today, senior McCain campaign adviser Meg Whitman defended Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) infamous flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts by arguing that McCain voted against them because “they were not accompanied by a decrease in government spending.” “You cannot just keep tax rates low, which is what Americans want, and keep government spending growing,” said Whitman.
But in a separate interview with CNBC today, Whitman contradicted this line of argument when pressed by Steve Forbes (whose ties to the McCain campaign were not disclosed). Asked by Forbes if McCain’s massive tax cuts are dependent on “controlling spending,” Whitman replied, “No, they are not”:
FORBES: But are the tax cuts contingent on controlling spending?
WHITMAN: No, they are not contingent. But what he has said is that they must be — you know, we have to do both. For the good of the American people, for the good of the American economy, we must do both.
FORBES: Now, Meg, one of the things…
WHITMAN: But they are not contingent.
Watch it:
Whitman’s claim that McCain’s tax cuts “are not contingent” on controlling spending is contradictory with the principle that she claims guided McCain’s vote against Bush’s tax cuts. It also contradicts McCain’s own claims about tax cuts.
In an interview with Bloomberg’s Al Hunt in April, McCain said “spending restraint” is necessary for tax cuts:
MCCAIN: But the spending, that’s like saying you agree with somebody in everything but - you see what I mean - because spending restraint has got to be a part of any economic package if you’re going to cut taxes.
Additionally, though the McCain campaign frequently claims he opposed the Bush tax cuts because of a lack of “spending restraint,” that’s not completely true. In fact, he largely claimed he was against them because they “mostly benefit the wealthy.”
Apparently, when you flip-flop as much as McCain has, it’s not hard for the candidate and his surrogates to lose track of what position he actually holds.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
27 Responses to “McCain Adviser: Like Bush, We’ll Cut Taxes Even If We Don’t Control Spending”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Again, I ask, Where can I buy one of the wands he has/??
July 7th, 2008 at 4:19 pmWands, hell.
I want his DRUGS.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:19 pmSounds like she came dangerously close to telling the truth. Look for the candidate to condemn, denounce and otherwise disagree in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. . .
July 7th, 2008 at 4:19 pmWhitman's comments also contradict the very foundation and function of taxes, which is to fund government.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:20 pmTax cuts mean less income for the Government which means less Government (in size, effectiveness, capability).
Just remember, McGrampa graduated 894 of 899 at the Naval Academy.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:22 pmToday is, quite literally, driving me to drink. McInsane's madness of the moment, plus Lieberman's continuing Lunacy, then add yet another massive dose of deficit spending, November 4th Cannot come soon enough! Abraham Lincoln, the First Republican President and one of the Greatest Americans of all time, is rotating in his grave at supersonic speeds upon learning of what his party has devolved into.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:23 pmImpeach Pelosi, Cheney and Bush and Save the Constitution. Come on November 4th and Save My Liver!
It always amazes me to see how easily very smart people dissolve into utter morons when they have to defend any types of Republican nonsense.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:26 pmBush's "tax cuts" have done wonders for this economy, haven't they? I'm still waiting forthe windfalls of Reagan's trickle down . . .
July 7th, 2008 at 4:30 pmI don't think she knows the meaning of the word "contingent". Wonder if all staffers on the McSame Campaign are as McStupid?!?!
July 7th, 2008 at 4:30 pmTPers aren't rich enough for tax breaks, so we better keep quiet.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:35 pm/snark
Dr Matt @#5 ~ Yeah, but that the top 5% of the bottom of the class!
July 7th, 2008 at 4:35 pmLeftside Annie Says:
I want his DRUGS.
Actually, no you don't. Unfortunately, one of the many adverse side effects associated with psychotropics (meds for mental illnesses) are constant drooling, as well as tardive dyskinesia, a symptom of uncontrolled jerking, which can be irreversible.
Just sayin'....
July 7th, 2008 at 4:36 pmStyve Says:I don’t think she knows the meaning of the word “contingent”. Wonder if all staffers on the McSame Campaign are as McStupid?!?!
I think the word she was looking for was 'incontinent', because McCain is, was & will be.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:36 pm12 - ack, I take it back. I *don't* want his drugs!!
July 7th, 2008 at 4:47 pm.
.
.
.
Uh-oh. Does that make me a flip-flopper...?
Jeebus. It sounds like Grover is filling up the tub again.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:49 pm"Flip-flop" is too cute to describe McPander Bear's shilling. I suggest we refer to his continuing contradictory statements as "betrayals". After all, he has betrayed every moderate position he's ever taken. He has betrayed the American people by becoming a creature of the Radical Right. And, he constantly betrays rational policy and his own, once "staunchly held" positions. Heck! About all that he hasn't betrayed is his support for Dubya, as long as he's committed to killing brown people.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:52 pmNow they're even admitting that they're not fiscally responsible? Does everyone hear 'cut taxes' and then nothing else? When things get tight, do most people cut their income first and then figure out where to spend less money? That seems backwards and idiotic to me.
July 7th, 2008 at 4:58 pmIs it just me, or does it sound like McDepends is literally throwing out ANYTHING that sounds good, and hopes enough LIV's buy it?
There is no central theme, no consistent message, and nothing consistent between what he says and what his handlers are saying.
I think he could be even more dangerous than Dubya!
July 7th, 2008 at 5:02 pmWith the nation in recession it is not the right time to cut spending because that requires job cuts, which make the recession more pronounced.
McCain has to come to grips with what the nations economic priorites need to be. Right now he makes no sense.
July 7th, 2008 at 5:43 pmupside99 Says:
I think he could be even more dangerous than Dubya!
July 7th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
You could be right about that upside. But, I tend to think it's premeditated. It would just make sense for the GOP to set up Sacrificial McLamb(TM) as a Bush clone. That way the American people get their referendum on Bush, the GOP can send him out to pasture, and they have four years to purge Bushbots from their system while blaming Obama for not fixing the mess he inherits.
At this point I wouldn't be surprised to see Rover reveal that Chimpy and McPander Bear are gay lovers. I think that this bizarre campaign is akin to staging a fake death to avoid prosecution. I can't escape the image of a pile of clothes left on a beach and a single set of footprints leading into the sea. Then someone with "clean hands" will happen by to don the suit.
Heck! There's even a chance that honorable people could reclaim the GOP from the gang of thugs in power today. But the rebranding won't begin until the existing structure is torn down, the bodies are buried, and the failed leaders have been deposed.
July 7th, 2008 at 5:48 pmNo offense Dallas, but, introducing "priorities" into a discussion of McPander Bear is a little silly. Apparently his only priority is to whore himself to anyone who can deliver a couple dozen Reichwing votes. Plus his penchant for obstructing military procurements during wartime indicates a lack of ability to prioritize.
July 7th, 2008 at 5:54 pmSo we'll spend now and leave the debt for later.
Isn't this kind of thinking the core of the credit problem and housing crunch today ?
Yet, this sounds so much like Bush. Look at the stock market under the trickle down presidents (Reagan and the 2 Bushes).
Like most sequels, the quality is lacking. So why would we want Bush III ?
July 7th, 2008 at 7:13 pmBy this logic, the best of all possible America's will be the one where Government spending is unlimited and nobody pays any taxes.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:32 pmRonnie Reagan has successfully instituted the Robber Baron regime again. We had regulations to combat these thugs for years but in the past twenty five years, the dumbassed cons have taken us back to where we thought we would never go again. McSame is not good for the country.
July 7th, 2008 at 10:40 pmNancy PFOTENHAUER (McCain Campaign Policy Advisor) on CNN Situation Room with Miles O'Brien today:
"The way Senator McCain approaches reaching a balanced between in his first term is to -- is to cut taxes that will spur economic growth and that have been proven to spur economic growth, so you get a nice economic growth lift. And that's what you need. Again, these are policies that work not just in the United States, but if they're tried in Ireland, they work. If they're tried in New Zealand, they work, the same way Senator Obama's proposals, if they're tried in other countries, don't work. So, you're going to cut taxes to spur economic growth. You're going to impose significant and real budget process, or discipline -- spending disciplines that should have been in place, frankly, decades ago and have not been."
----------------------------
Is the memory of Americans really that horrible that they will fall for this? Have they forgotten that this is what Reagan, GHWB, and GWB did with disastrous results? Will they really fall for it again?
July 7th, 2008 at 10:53 pm.
Q U E S T I O N:
How responsible would I be if I were to be filling up my SUV(15MPGHY) so that I can commute the 30 miles it takes for me to get to my minimum wage job at Walmart?
Meg Whitman thinks I'm on the right track...
LOL
.
July 8th, 2008 at 2:04 amHe's going to balance the budget by spending more and taking in less.
He may not be the sharpest on economics but he absolutely bottomed out in math.
July 8th, 2008 at 12:31 pm