« McCain Ad: Empty "Hope" Won't Improve Our Lives | Home | Health Care Group Being Promoted By Elizabeth Edwards Goes Up With Ad »
New York Times Takes On McCain's Economic Hokum
Here at TPM we've been asking whether the national political press will take on John McCain over his economic hocus-pocus, such as his "plan" to balance the budget by 2013.
Well, today's New York Times comes through today with a double-barreled shot at McCain, publishing one piece pointing out that McCain's economic policies have slithered all over the ideological map, and a second piece noting that his balanced-budget promise is, well, complete horse-bleep.
The pieces are written in polite Times-speak, but they make the point pretty effectively. Too bad neither one is on the paper's front page, but we'll take what we can get.
Advertisement
The wingnutz have it both ways with the NYT.
when they slam Dems, they quote it relentlessly, saying "this was in the New York Times!"
when they take on Repubs, they dismiss it: "c'mon, it's the liberal darling New York Times."
The NYT is still searching for its place in the Internet age.
July 8, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
they got it right today, though.
July 8, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except for this snippet from the end of the second link:
On the other hand, history shows the deficit sometimes shrinks faster than experts expect. . . . Mr. Bush cut the deficit in half faster than he or many fiscal experts had predicted.
Huh???
July 8, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, wait a minute. I get it. Sneaky snarky NYT liberal-media dig...
It's just a way to put Bush and half fast together in the same sentence!
July 8, 2008 10:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
...And how many people that don't already know this stuff are going to really notice? My only hope is that someone out there in the MSM can talk about these. Too bad we don't have Russert anymore.. MtP would be all over this.
July 8, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Too bad we don't have Russert anymore.. MtP would be all over this."
You're joking, right? Russert was totally a member of the "tax cut fairies magiclly reduce the deficit" crowd.
No Republican gets called on his economic bullshit in forums where anyone other than diehard liberals dare to tread.
The silence surrounding the incoherence of McCain's economic "program," not to mention the damage it will cause if enacted, will be deafening.
July 8, 2008 10:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Russert always called McCain on his bullshit flip-flopping and idiocy. About the only other person who did (and still does do) it is Keith Olbermann, but never do McCain's face like Russert did.
July 8, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Just in: Obama campaign to have a 10:45 a.m. media call on the McCain budget proposals according to The Page!
July 8, 2008 10:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
hallelujah! Maybe that will calm the critics who are upset that he hasn't said anything - yet.
God we're hard on our candidates.
July 8, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
This just occurred to me - the fact that the Obama campaign doesn't call a press conference every time McCain wipes his ass will (in theory) make it more newsworthy when they do call one. The McCain campaign is constantly calling these press conferences which I believe has a sort of "boy who cried wolf" effect.
July 8, 2008 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Good point.
July 8, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think these are pretty good analyses for the MSM. I'd really like to see both of these plans analyzed and discussed side by side.
July 8, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
ChronoSpark- I would hold out hope for something else, the MSM is in complete denial about their bias towards McCain.
I keep watching the cable news thinking they have to turn a critical eye towards McCain at some point. But the more I do the more I realize that it is the definition of insanity- Doing the same thing over again and again and expecting different results.
Keep reading/posting factual blogs and comments and ignore the insanity of the MSM or you'll go crazy...
July 8, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
I know. I don't watch the news anymore. I only read stuff online, and only if it's coming from a source that I haven't seen give exceptional bias to. Unfortunately, it's getting harder and harder to find such sources. Basically every one that I used to trust has shown some blatant form of bias against Obama and for McCain.
You're quite right, but I'll continue to hope for change anyway. =)
July 8, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
That is never going to happen. The cable "nooze" puppies are conditioned to slobber every time the Roveites ring the bell.
July 8, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not conditioned. Ordered from corporate headquarters. The media conglomerates want more of the same from mcbush. It's better for their bottom line. It really makes you wonder when every other business, other than the media conglomerates and the insurance rip-off industry, want universal healthcare to help their bottom lines and make america more competitive. The first thing on the to do list should be break up the media conglomerates. It would definitely be better for america.
July 8, 2008 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are you looking for some kind of anti-trust action? I somehow don't see that happening.
July 8, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Regulation. The american people own the airwaves and can regulate their use, like they were regulated before clinton opened up the floodgates for media consolidation in the 90's.
Same thing with newspapers. Regulation.
July 8, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Regulate the press? I think that's called "censorship" and there's a little thing in the 1st Amendment about that....
July 8, 2008 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not content, ownership. It's apples and oranges.
July 8, 2008 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, you're suggesting that forced divestiture after decades of "symbiosis" (more like parasitism) is a viable option. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think you have a case. Even if you could make your "public interest" position fly, there aren't too many non-corporate entities who could sustain a coherent television network. I'm also not an economist, but spinning off newspapers at this time in their history is pretty much a death sentence for them. Most of them are already bleeding red ink and forcing them to sink or swim on their own will kill them off sooner rather than later.
July 8, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. Agree on the newspapers. Within 10 years they will probably be dead due to the internet.
2. I'm talking primarily about the airwaves, that are owned by the american people. I don't have an easy answer, but something has to be done and the way I see it is through regulation.
July 8, 2008 12:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only way Bush cut his "deficit in half" is by taking spending for the Iraq War and a whole bunch of other expenditures off the books, and highballing the predictions in the spring and then claiming he came in way under when his doomsday numbers didn't come to pass at the end of the year.
Do you get the impression the Times gets a John Bolton type screaming fit phonecall from the WH or McCain every time they write an article exposing their BS unless they include a piece of candy at the end?
July 8, 2008 11:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
CONSPIRACY ALERT!!!!
July 8, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
First GWB raised the deficit to ungodly heights wasting the surplus from Bill Clinton. Then he cut the rate of the deficit rise, although not the total amount of the deficit. This is like praising someone for only spending an extra $100,000 on their credit card for July because they overspent $200,000 in June. Traitor Joe Lieberman and Karl Rove would be proud the NYT got it wrong.
July 8, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I finally got it! The McCain campaign is handling his issues like the US Code. Every time they flip and/or flop they just reissue the previous statment and strike out the words that are no longer active, and add the new version.
This way they can refer you to the previous sub section.
What bright minds do weasels have.
July 8, 2008 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I meant the US CODE annotated.
July 8, 2008 9:20 PM | Reply | Permalink