McCain Will Balance Budget By End Of First Term. Or Was It Second?
The McCain campaign appears to be unable to decide when he'll succeed in balancing the budget. Is he promising a balanced budget by the end of his first term -- partly contingent on a sudden victory in Iraq -- or by the end of his second term?
As Think Progress pointed out, McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin told the New York Times yesterday that McCain would balance the budget by the end of his first term. But during a conference call with reporters yesterday, Holtz-Eakin suddenly walked it back significantly.
Not only that, but he walked it back in a way that made it seem like this was always McCain's position, and not a flip-flop: "The senator has always pledged to balance the budget by the end of his second term."
Late Update: This isn't the first time McCain has gone back and forth on this one, either. As the New York Times noted, McCain promised back in February to balance the budget during his first term, but then changed it to the second term in April.
This is like arguing over whether Santa Claus weighs 300 or 350 pounds.
July 8, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well lets just hope Santa can swim since the north pole is going to be open water.
July 8, 2008 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This is like arguing over whether Santa Claus weighs 300 or 350 pounds."
Do you mean because McCain's "economic" "plan" is a fantasy? Or do you mean because McCain's "first" and "second" terms are fantasies? As far as I'm concerned, the answer is "both," and I can certainly work with this metaphor either way. I'd just like to know what you had in mind...
July 8, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking more in terms of his economic policy. His first and second terms do look like pipe dreams too, though.
July 8, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point!
July 8, 2008 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
In fairness, if he balances by the end of his first, it would be presumably balanced by the end of his second. But, I dont think that is what they meant.
July 8, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
So now McCain is promising he'll live to the end of his second term? What's next, unicorns?
July 8, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
So he tells the Times this:
but then says: The senator has always pledged to balance the budget by the end of his second term.'' A McCain second term would end in 2017.WTF? Thanks for pointing this out, Eric.
But I think the real question is this: Does Holtz-Eaking own a pet?
July 8, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"But I think the real question is this: Does Holtz-Eaking own a pet?"
Great comment. lol
July 8, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Especially funny, coming from a cat! :)
July 8, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
His second term? Did he not say already that he is not going to run for a second term? (IF HE wins) Or am I mistaken.
July 8, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Calm down, now. It's fine to say two different things on the same day or completely change a position. As long as he doesn't say he might refine any of his policies. Now that would be a four-day story.
July 8, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the new retooled McCain campaign?
These guys are confused about which story to tell, before they go and change their minds!
July 8, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why they feel the need to walk back what is obviously fantasy is beyond me.
July 8, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
To be blunt, I don't think the American people care nor should care too much about balancing the budget at a time when (1) we've lost over 400,000 jobs the last six months (2) before that experienced the first economic recovery in six months (3) have 48 million Americans without health insurance, and (4) have 35 million Americans living in poverty. Let's tackle the issues of the time -- not just any issue.
July 8, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Flip.
July 8, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
They all love second-term achievements. Bush promised Middle East peace in "year 5" of his presidency. Then that kinda slipped...
July 8, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Flop!
July 8, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to see 4 days of coverage on this issue or "refinement" of his position. My goodness, we Americans need to really understand McFuddle's thoughts on this balancing of the budget!...Well, maybe not!
July 8, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's funny - I coulda swore that "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter."
Isn't that the sum total of Republican fiscal policy right there?
July 8, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
flippity-floppity-floo!
July 8, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
And why do I have to rely on the Daily Show, of all things, to juxtapose the ridiculous promises made by politicians when they campaign with what they actually do?
Yeah, I know, the truthful Court Jester and all that, but still.
I guess this post is just another excuse to say how much our media really really really really SUCKS.
July 8, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
The media just sucks. I can't stand it.
July 8, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sure - all good things happen the 2d term.
[rolls eyes]
The Repugs do not have clue one about how to run the economy in this country and they've proven that now how many times? When will the media and the voters get that the Repugs claim that they are the only ones who can run the economy is a big fat lie? They run into the ground every fucking time - Reagan, Bush I, Bush II.
Every time. The only time in my life I remember Washington balancing the budget is when Clinton was in office.
July 8, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
But, but it's trickle down economics. See how wonderful it works. The rich get incredibly wealthy and everyone else gets screwed. Gee, what a wonderful concept.
July 8, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny thing - those at the top do well under the Repugs, like you said - no doubt about it. But when the entire economy goes south as a result of bad Repug policies, everyone loses. The wealthiest generally don't lose much under any government - they always do well; how could they not? They have all the tools they need to always protect their fortunes and they do, no matter who is in office.
But once the entire economy goes south, like it has under every fucking Repug administration since Reagan, they lose too. How the stock market is doing has a lot to do with how well the very wealthy are doing. It's sucking wind right now -
July 8, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's funny how when the economy gets into a real mess like the current recession, everyone including Republicans goes for a trickle up solution -- namely the $600 tax rebates. Even Bush knows that trickle down is utter crap.
July 9, 2008 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hilarious, McCain's campaign logo should be a rowboat going in circles.
July 8, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was born when FRD was in his third term. That's what an old fart I am, though you would never know it looking at my picture :-). I must say that McBush is the most inept candidate I have ever witnessed.
July 8, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
is there video/audio of mccain and his people contradicting each other? this looks like it would make a great ad down the road. or, you know, if the press didn't suck it might make a good news story now.
July 8, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
One other thing on balancing the budget. Why is the military always off limits? I heard last night on countdown that we spend more on our military than the rest of the world combined. What's up with that? I bet that there is alot of pork in the military budget that could be cut, but it's always off limits. It shouldn't be, regardless of what's going on in iraq and afghanistan. More than the rest of the world combined. WTF.
July 8, 2008 4:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you not remember Clinton's 2d term? He actually made a stab at reducing the god-awful military-industrial complex we've carried on our backs since WWII. He caught holy hell for it, but by the time his 2d term was over, we had a big fat budget surplus.
I've come to see the military-industrial thing as our biggest problem - damn, who would have thought Eisenhower would turn out to be the best progressive prophet this country has produced since - I don't know who? Anyway, culturally they have fucked with us so thoroughly that Americans worship goddamn uniforms - our soldiers can do no wrong; just like lots of people are convinced po-pos can do no wrong and never lie [rolls eyes allllll they way back in head].
Economically, we support an enormous and unnecessary war machine even when we aren't at war. And most people seem to think this is how it should be - thanks to about 60 years worth of propaganda.
I really hate the military, I will be honest - I hate this volunteer army and I hate that we are headed toward producing a permanent soldier-class - but they're working on it. I see those Army commercials - and they are all lies.
July 8, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am with you on the military industrial complex problem. I traveled in the Soviet Union prior to its collapse and there was no way that they were the threat that was built up by the military industrial complex. They didn't even have a freaking road system outside the major cities. They couldn't feed their people, let alone a massive army that would be needed to attack western europe. Everything was falling apart. It was sad for the russian people, but I just thought about all the wasted money over the decades by us. What a travesty. They were no threat and we pissed away hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars. Outrageous.
July 8, 2008 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Umm, not to be contentious, but everything was falling apart because they spent all their money on their military, which was not something that foreigners were allowed to see much of in those days.
July 8, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get the argument. However, if you can't feed your troops and you can't move them, because you have no road system, what good are they. The road system didn't just vanish. It was non-existent. Also, the quality of their military hardware was a joke. Look at the arab-isreali wars. Also, how about the missles falling apart after the collapse. The intelligence was completely twisted to create a threat where non-existed. This stuff didn't happen over night and I am sure our intelligence people knew, but distorted the facts.
July 8, 2008 5:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's all whom you know. A lot of Wall Street is Repug and there's a lot of money there. With little in the way of market regulation, tho, it's a game of musical chairs rigged so the rich get to sit down first. It's funny NOW to hear Hank Paulson talking about regulation the JPMorgan Chases of the world, now that the fat cats have all found billion-dollar seats!
July 8, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's absolutely true.
But that's always absolutely true - there has never been a time in our history as humans when that wasn't true.
Some people get very rich and then they get to make their own rules. Whoever has the most of something desirable generally wins the argument.
;)
July 8, 2008 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
so what are the chances that mcmedia is going to charge mccain with flip flopping?
July 8, 2008 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
That depends on whether McCain keeps having regular BBQs and open seats on his campaign bus.
July 8, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, c'mon my friends, give him a break. As we know, his budget balancing plan depends upon the inevitable "Victory dividend" we'll get after he wins the war in Iraq, and we all know that we absolutely cannot put any hard timetables on when that victory will be complete, so how can he know which term it'll be when he balances the budget?
July 8, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the same game Bush has been playing. He's been talking about reducing the deficit by the end of his second term while avoiding any mention of the $3 trillion in debt he's created. A reporter should ask McCain about the debt. That's the reason there's no confidence in the dollar.
July 8, 2008 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well we can't even count on Jon Stewart for this one, he's so far up McCain's butt you can see his face when McCain opens his mouth...Maybe Colbert can come to the rescue...
July 8, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dude.
Have you just been watching reruns? Back when McLame was still acting all mavericky and going on TDS bashing Bush, they did have a good relationship. Jon has said himself that he doesn't know this McLame.
I don't feel I need to be an apologist for Stewart - in the first place, he's a comedian, not a journalist. In the 2d place, I don't always think highly of his opinion of some people.
But up McLame's butt? Dude.
July 8, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
this old fucker changes his mind every time he takes a fucking nap
this is the best the repuglitards have to offer ???
July 8, 2008 6:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not so sure about that.
W had a budget surplus at the beginning of his first term, but the budget wasn't so balanced 4 years later.
July 9, 2008 1:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Don't get too excited about what he's promising. In a day ot two he will deny he said anything at all in regard to our huge deficit and the biased media will back him.
July 9, 2008 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink