McCain’s ‘extensive background and knowledge’ needs a little work

February 15, 2008

John McCain recently acknowledged, “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.”

Ever since reporters started asking about this — and noting that now may not be the best time to elect a president who doesn’t understand economics — McCain’s been feeling a little touchy on the subject. Last night, he told Larry King:

“I’d like to convince people, because of my extensive background on the economy and knowledge, that I can see a path through this difficult time we’re in.”

There are two main problems with claim. The first, as Think Progress explained very well, is that it completely contradicts McCain’s repeated claims about his own admitted ignorance.

* Seeking to explain his shift to the left on economic issues, McCain claimed: “I didn’t pay nearly the attention to those issues in the past. I was probably a ‘supply-sider’ based on the fact that I really didn’t jump into the issue.” [Jan. 2000]

* “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues. I still need to be educated.” [Nov. 2005]

* “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” but “I’ve got Greenspan’s book.” [Dec. 2007]

Given the nation’s economic climate, the quotes are fairly devastating.

But there’s another problem. Not only has McCain admitted he’s clueless on economics, he’s made frequent economic claims that prove he’s clueless on economics.

In South Carolina, McCain told an audience a couple of weeks ago, “Every time in history we have raised taxes it has cut revenues.” As a matter of reality, McCain was talking gibberish.

A few days prior, at a Republican debate, McCain said, “I don’t believe we’re headed into a recession. I believe the fundamentals of this economy are strong and I believe they will remain strong.” He then reversed course, said the fundamentals of the economy aren’t strong, and inexplicably blamed government spending for creating an economic decline that he didn’t believe existed

He also recently told a national television audience that he’s “glad” when interest rates fall, and “wishes interest rates were zero.” Does that make any sense?

McCain also argued that he believes cutting government spending will serve as a government stimulus. What?

Look, I realize economics can be a complex subject, and after a quarter-century as a policy maker in Washington, McCain’s interests have been elsewhere. But if McCain doesn’t want to be made fun of for looking ridiculous, he shouldn’t brag about his “extensive background on the economy and knowledge.” It’s just too easy to prove otherwise.

Sigh.

I’d like to beat McCain, but I really hope the victory won’t be based on quotes where he’s actually honest about himself.

This is why politicians like to pretend they’re infallible. Because when they make even a remotely self-critical statement, their political rivals and the media go into an utter frenzy.

Like in the debates when Obama/Clinton/Edwards were asked about their “greatest weakness”. Obama actually gave a weakness, the other two bragged about how much they care and how passionate they are.

And then the Clinton hammered Obama for this admitted weakness for WEEKS in her advertisements.

Let’s be a little nicer to candidates that talk frankly to us, or we’ll drive them to extinction. Who really does understand economics as much as they should?

  • We already have two “read my lips” ad campaigns, one for the war, and one for economics: “It wouldn’t bother me if we stay in Iraq 100 years” and ““The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should,” but “I’ve got Greenspan’s book.”

    Just think what kind of field day the Greenspan-hating Krugman can have with that one.

  • As the past seven years have demonstrated, being mentally retarded is not a barrier to being elected president. You don’t even have to hide it.

  • “I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues.”

    Given McCain’s talk about turning Iraq into the 100 Years Wars v. 2.0 and his complete lack of understanding that the situation in Iraq must be resolved through political means and not military force, his understanding of economics is worse than we can all bear to live through.

    McCain isn’t smart enough to know that his own party’s talking points are BS and are meant to fool the public but not Republican politicians themselves.

  • Show me the anybody, politician or economist who really understands the onion layers of economic powers that currently drive our government & the world, much less any theory behind it.

    Usually the theory of Greed transcends all others.

    Which is why we need a leader who understands at least this much and is willing to try to stem the corporate power tide in an attempt to save: our government, our earth and our people.

    McCain is part of the problem, and so far has not seemed to recognize it… so highly unlikely to solve it. Edwards highlighted the problem. Obama has mentioned the problem, and now Clinton (who has abetted the problem in the past) is now talking about it too.

  • tamalak (1): At least Obama didn’t go out after that debate and claim that he was a micromanager.

    McCain’s biggest asset is that he is unencumbered by knowledge or integrity.

  • They obviously don’t teach Economics 101 at the Naval Academy. But wouldn’t you think that he would have learned something after 25 years in Congress?

    Oh – I forgot. He’s been steeped in orthodox Republican economic theory during that time. You know the stuff: cutting taxes increases government revenues, cutting government spending stimulates the economy – that sort of thing.

    Believing the opposite of what is true is much worse than simple ignorance.

  • Pace yourself, John. We need you to keep some of these stupid statements in reserve for when you debate the Dem. Idiocy like this is so much better live when you’re facing someone who can tear you to shreads. You say there’s more where these came from? We can hardly wait!

  • McCain told an audience a couple of weeks ago, “Every time in history we have raised taxes it has cut revenues.” As a matter of reality, McCain was talking gibberish.

    Yes, but the people who control the news like that gibberish, so don’t hold your breath waiting for it to be debunked.

    BTW, if you ever wondered what’s really wrong with the world, and America in particular, watch this movie:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation

    One central theme of the documentary is an attempt to assess the “personality” of the corporate “person” by using diagnostic criteria from the DSM-IV; Robert Hare, a University of British Columbia Psychology Professor and FBI consultant, compares the modern, profit-driven corporation to that of a clinically diagnosed psychopath.

    Dr. Robert Hare, a consultant to the FBI on psychopaths, draws parallels between a psychopath and the modern corporation. His findings corroborate the following behavior:

    Callous unconcern for the feelings of others
    Incapacity to maintain enduring relationships
    Reckless disregard for the safety of others
    Deceitfulness: Repeated lying to and deceiving of others for profit
    Incapacity to experience guilt
    Failure to conform to the social norms with respect to lawful behaviors

  • “He then reversed course, said the fundamentals of the economy aren’t strong, and inexplicably blamed government spending for creating an economic decline that he didn’t believe existed”

    In McCain’s defense, this isn’t a flip-flop – he still believes the “fundamentals” are strong, but there is a temporary decline in the economy.

    But therein lies the failure of “free-market” philosophy – to see what’s happening as a temporary blip, and not caused by a fundamental lack of government oversight over the financial industry.

    As for government spending, I agree he doesn’t have a clue as to how govt spending links to the economic crisis – but isn’t he pushing for MORE government spending aka making the tax cuts permanent?

  • McCain is either a) a callous, treasonous liar who fully understands that US domestic and foriegn policy is entirely tailored to the needs and desires of the military/industrial complex (which includes Congress and all of the so-called intelligence agencies) or b) he is an idiot.

    I cite as evidence McCain’s gushing foreword for the Hearst Corporations’ book-form reissue of its articles in Popular Mechanics purporting to debunk the “9/11 conspiracy theorists” who correctly point out that the official story — 19 crazy Arabs with boxcutters — is a poorly constructed fairy story.

    Yes, McCain may have calculated that he is better off backing the criminals or he is possibly too dim to understand that the “Debunking 9/11” book is a pathetically transparent tissue of lies, but in either case he is clearly unfit for higher office. Whether he has any understanding of economics is irrelevant.

  • I hope Grumpy (comment #3) realizes the awful slur he made and apologizes for it. Calling someone a name by claiming they have a disability is shameful.

  • If I had called the current occupant of the White House “slow-witted,” “imbecile,” or “doofus,” would that have been acceptable?

  • I think interest rates should be negative, so the people who lend money will have to pay more money to the people they lend it to, and vice versa. They’d still have to repay the loan, just not all of the loan. I mean, who needs money more than someone who has to borrow it? Talk about economic stimulus!

  • Ron Paul is the only candidate in either party who has a clear understanding of economics and knows exactly why this country is in such bad shape financially. He has a “Economic Revitalization Plan” which outlines the steps he would take to correct the economic problems we are now facing. His plan is explained on his website: http://www.ronpaul2008.com.

    If you’re really concerned about having a president who understands the economy you would benefit by checking out his detailed plan. Please, no sophomoric comments about Ron Paul supporters. Be mature and stick with the issues.

  • mozarker

    I followed your link, but in the future, you would be better off by linking to his plan properly, instead of his general website. http://www.ronpaul2008.com/Prosperity/

    Eliminate Taxes on Dividends and Savings. –> This one, I could get behind, as it would benefit a lot of people through holdings in Mutual funds (dividends)

    Repeal the Death Tax. –> This one is a Republican invention: there is no such thing as ‘death’ tax. It is a disingenuous way to scare ordinary citizens into believing that everybody gets taxed when they die. It is called “Estate Tax” which pretty much only affects the wealthy. Using the break up of the so called family farm doesn’t cut it either. Have you checked lately how few family farms are left in the US? And their demise has nothing to do with estate taxes; rather the corporations who consolidated the smaller farms. (free-market at work)

    Cut Taxes for Working Seniors. –> I could get behind that one, provided it is not used as a loop hole for millionaires and billionaires, to claim that they are ‘working seniors’ when they go into their home office to check/work on their investments.

    Eliminate Taxes on Social Security Benefits. –> That would work, provided the ceiling is raised as well on income that needs to pay into the Social Security. That way people making $100K + would be paying more into it, thereby eliminating the troubles Social Security is going to experience in the future.

    Accelerate Depreciation on Investment. –> I think depreciation is already working pretty well the way it is.. maybe some fine tuning, but nothing major.

    Eliminate Taxes on Capital Gains. –>I don’t see any reason why that needs to be changed?

    Eliminate Taxes on Tips. –> Completely agree, as it only affects the lower tax brackets and those people can use the extra few hundred dollars a year.

    Support the Mortgage Cancellation Relief Act. –> I’m not familiar with this one, so no opinion on it.

    Reduce Overseas Military Commitments. –> This certainly makes sense, given that current technology allows for smaller and fewer bases across the world. No need to have 100’s of thousands of troops based outside the US.

    Freeze Non-Defense, Non-Entitlement Spending at Current Levels. –> And what would happen after a few years/decades of inflation, when the current levels would even pay for the bare minimum?

    Televise Federal Open Market Committee Meetings. –> Televised or not, it is not as if you’d have a say in the proceedings.

    Expand Transparency and Accountability at the Federal Reserve. –> Sounds to me more like a pet peeve. Do you really think ordinary citizen would care or understand what the Federal Reserve is up to?

    Return Value to Our Money. –> Going back to the gold standard sounds silly. What is stopping you from buying all the gold you want? You can always convert it to dollars anytime you want to buy something? Or are you planning on taking a gold ingot to Safeway to buy your groceries?

    Repeal Sarbanes/Oxley. –> I agree. That was one of those silly knee-jerk bills to address an issue, resulting in causing more harm than it intended.

    Repeal or Remove Costly and Unnecessary Federal Regulations. –> I agree that there are a lot of unnecessary Rules and Regulations.

    Considering Ron Paul is also advocating for making Bush’s tax cuts permanent, an amendment to the constitution to abolish income taxes, not to mention all the other items he’d like to cut from the government… How does Ron Paul intend to pay for infrastructure? How does he intend to take care of the millions of Veterans in the US? How does he intend to cover the minimum government services when he wants to cut the majority of revenue sources?

    Talking about cutting taxes is cheap… Everybody likes less taxes. Why don’t you convince Ron Paul to start talking about HOW he would pay for everything the government needs to do? Maybe he can show me a balanced budget. a budget that stands up to scrutiny from respected economists. (Right wing economists don’t count as they don’t live in reality)

  • I can see a path thru this difficult time, too: never vote for another Republican. Ever. I’m not a big fan of modern-day Dems, but modern-day Republicans are truly awful.

  • Bruno:

    Thank you for taking an honest look at Ron Paul’s plan. You would be surprised at how many people actually understand what the Federal Reserve does (and shouldn’t be doing). I do agree, however, that a great many people still do not know that the Federal Reserve is not a government agency but, rather, a private conglomerate of bankers. Unlike our banking institutions, however, the Federal Reserve has never been audited. Ron Paul is simply asking,”Why not?”

    He is not saying that we should remove all paper money from use but that we should back that paper money with something of value—like gold—like we used to. There are many countries that already have competing currencies and it doesn’t cause them any difficulties. Again, free market at work.

    Our country functioned before the income tax was enacted in 1913 and it can do so again. According to the constitution, there are many other avenues of tax revenue available to the Federal Government. By the way, the 16th Amendment, which covers income tax, was never ratified by 2/3 of the states which is required by the constitution.

    Ron Paul would end the war in Iraq and bring our troops home from overseas bases. He would station them at bases here, in this country, which would increase spending in this country and bring us back from the brink of bankruptcy. He could then use them to secure our own borders and stop putting the states at risk because their National Guard units are not available when a natural disaster strikes.

    He would also stop providing foreign aid to other countries so we can take care of our own infrastructure. Why should we pay to bomb a bridge in Iraq and then pay to rebuild the bridge in Iraq when our own bridges are falling down? And don’t get me started on Israel. There are many Jewish supporters of Ron Paul. They support him because they know that the United States gives Israel’s Arab neighbors three times as much in foreign aid than Israel receives. And, because Israel receives this foreign aid, they are not free to make their own decisions when it comes to military defense of their country.

    His freeze on non-defense, non-entitlement spending does not include Social Security. Our cost-of-living increases in Social Security don’t even keep up with inflation now. All of these measures, taken as a whole, should provide what we need to move us in the right direction again.

    No one says that all of these measures would be “feel good” measures. But let’s face it, we’ve already gone too far down the road of spending more that what we have and, I, for one, am sick and tired of Bush just borrowing more money from China, Saudi Arabia, and other countries to bankroll his immoral war.

  • A president should first and foremost show a basic instinct (intuition) about how economies, as economic systems, work. There is no substitute nor protesis for that. One doens’t need to be nor need an economist to know or be told that. — and hiding the shortage behind Greespan’s book along with admitted ignorance is on the contrary a very scary sign. McCain is clearly unfit for higher office.

    • Comments are closed.