Leading Senate Republican: McCain offers a third Bush term on the economy

May 12, 2008

What’s the top message priority for Democrats hoping to win this year’s presidential election? When it comes to defining John McCain, it’s pretty obvious: he’d offer more of the same. On the key issues, McCain and George W. Bush share a script.

McCain is aware of the dangers here — no one wants to be closely associated with the most unpopular president since the dawn of modern polling, and no one wants to run on a “stay the course” platform when four out of five Americans believe the country is on the wrong track.

With that in mind, it’s always encouraging when some leading Republicans seem anxious to make it easier for Democrats to hammer their message home. Take Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), the second highest-ranking Republican in the House.

As a rule, Republicans are supposed to disagree with the Democrats’ central criticism of the GOP presidential candidate. But if Blunt & Co. want to tell national television audiences that we’re right, I couldn’t be more pleased.

As Faiz explained very well:

McCain is promising more of Bush’s economic agenda — unaffordable massive tax cuts for the rich that offer no help for the average family.

The McCain economic agenda includes: $1.7 trillion tax cut for corporations, $300 billion a year in tax cuts that aren’t paid for, and a plan that delivers 58 percent of the benefits to the top 1 percent of taxpayers and only 9 percent to the bottom 80 percent.

All of this sounds familiar, of course, because it’s the same approach embraced by the Bush gang for the last eight years. McCain isn’t in a position to deny his support for Bush’s economic policies, and apparently, neither are his campaign surrogates in the Senate.

Here’s the transcript from CNN:

BLITZER: When it comes to domestic economic issues, what is the major difference between President Bush’s policies, what he wants to do, and what John McCain would do if he were president?

BLUNT: Well, I think what John McCain wants to do is continue these pro-growth tax policies that our friends on the other side have been talking…

BLITZER: But that’s what President Bush wants to do too.

BLUNT: And there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with that.

BLITZER: So it would be in effect a third Bush term when it came to pro-growth tax policies?

BLUNT: It would be. I think it would be. And I think that’s a good thing.

Somehow, I have a hunch, based on the number of Americans who approve of Bush’s handling of the economy, that most voters are going to disagree.

Just amazing – the public has been spoon-fed crap about how great the economy has been doing under this administration – largely a lie. The folks that gerrymandered the vote counts in 2000 & 2004 also rig the key numbers for unemployment and other important economic stats.

In fact, the tax-cuts have been a disaster and the military-industrial complex is looting BILLIONS AND BILLIONS from the Federal Treasury, often wholly unaccounted for.

After to many years of BS and with $4 per gallon gas (soon to be $5) and huge inflation in food prices, most American’s (even the stoooooopid ones) know that they are worse off – far worse off.

So what does mclame do? Promises MORE – even though the vast majority of Americans no longer support the chimp (remember – the majority NEVER supported him except immediately after 9/11 and even then, he squandered that support away)

It just goes to show the gall of these people and the confidence they have in the MSM to “catapult the propaganda.”

  • “pro-growth tax policies”

    I should think it would be step one in arguing nonsense like this to point out where the growth supposedly is.

    Then again, I suppose if their campaign strategy is to go around talking about their pro-growth tax policy, their pro-democracy and freedom Iraq policy, their pro-Earth environmental policy, and their pro-balanced budget spending policy, I should just embrace the fact that 70% of the country has an IQ above 12 and watch the trainwreck unfold…

  • This is the sort of clip that we need to repeat endlessly until McCain disagrees with it. Then, once we have him on tape disagreeing with it, we attack him for flip-flopping on whether or not he is running to be like Bush.

    His campaign is giving us a treasure trove of stuff to hit him with. If we don’t use it, we have nobody to blame but ourselves.

  • I should think it would be step one in arguing nonsense like this to point out where the growth supposedly is.

    Easy. It’s in the wallets of Roy Blunt’s best contributors.

  • Psst, Steve….

    no one wants to be closely associated with the most unpopular ________ since the dawn of modern polling

    /schoolmarm

  • I cannot believe that Blitz just did us such a “stealth” favor. It’s almost as if he suddenly felt the momentary need to say “Nicht Bushylvanian” in front of a global audience.

    He must’ve missed the daily dose of intravenous koolaid….

  • Psst, Steve….

    no one wants to be closely associated with the most unpopular ________ since the dawn of modern polling

    /schoolmarm

    Hmmm…. More like /gene rayburn.

  • Roy Blunt

    This name will forever, for me, belong first to Roy Blount, Jr., who really, really does not deserve to share a phonetic name with that guy.

  • What about the lies of a former DEMOCRATIC VP – that hamas has somehow “endorsed” Obama?

    The shamelessnes of joe LIE-berman knows no bounds.

  • I guess their plan is that once they kick off the war with Iran nobody will give a shit about the crappy Bush economy (for a few months anyway), and the Corporate Media won’t tell us (again) how the smart people are saying that the whole retarded shebang is going to be a disaster (again). No, it’ll be RAH RAH GO TEAM LOOKIT THOSE SMARTBOMBS GOIN’ DOWN THE CHIMNEYS. WHERE’S YER GODDAM FLAG PIN???

    And anyway, wars are good for the economy, the pundits say so!

  • Racer X – spot on, well-said.

    And that is really what my point is – just the fact they think they are using this as a “positive” says that something crooked is in the works.

    It’s not just the sheer audacity either, they believe they can neutralize mclames biggests disadvantage now and then shift attention to some other issues when they steal the election.

  • BLITZER: So it would be in effect a third Bush term when it came to pro-growth tax policies?

    It bothers me that Blitzer parroted the “pro-growth” spin line, rather than taking the opportunity to challenge the trickle-down theory, which has been discredited again and again, and never so convincingly as during the Bush “expansion,” when the middle class failed to reap any of the rewards for the first time in history.

  • The ads write themselves. Actually, this one already has…

    BLITZER: What is the major difference between President Bush’s policies, what he wants to do, and what John McCain would do if he were president?

    BLUNT: Well, I think what John McCain wants to do is continue these pro-growth tax policies that our friends on the other side have been talking…

    BLITZER: But that’s what President Bush wants to do too.

    BLUNT: And there is nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with that.

    BLITZER: So it would be in effect a third Bush term when it came to pro-growth tax policies?

    BLUNT: It would be. I think it would be.

  • Admissions like this from Blunt suggest that top Republicans don’t think voters count, period. Literally. So: Are they that sure of gaming the system? The Carpetbagger item that follows this one, about laws that in effect disenfranchise (usually Democratic) voters, makes interesting companion reading. We’ve had one election, in 2000, where the real vote count clearly didn’t matter, and another, in 2004, that remains in many minds (including this one) highly suspect. And that’s without even considering the Diebold issue (both the ease of hacking and the overt pro-Republican partisanship of the company’s executives).

  • What would happen if Obama as his first act set the CPI back to teh components originally used and started over with the truth?

    Rather than have inflation blamed on his term, he should address teh lies and seek to correct them. He should do what he can to avoid being blamed for everythign teh way they love to do for Clinton.
    America needs to know that 8 years of GOP management CAUSED far more problems than it solved and they are far from economic wizards.

    • Comments are closed.