The fact is that Sen. "F--- You" McCain has a lot of supporters from the Wall Street Journal. Almost all supported the so-called "comprehensive immigration reform" bill-scam. Hence, they will prop up his fiscal conservatism. Even leaving out key talking points such as how the tax cuts favored the "rich". They will not let class warfare get in the way of the thought that a President McCain will eventually pursue "comprehensive immigration reform" the way that was defeated by We The People. It is one thing to be a fiscal conservative, but Sen. "F--- You" McCain should also remember that this is a sovereign nation, the United States of America.
Armando
· 1 year ago
Could you be any more incoherent?
wharrison51
· 1 year ago
The article is very detailed except for two key points: first, Mr. Stach mentions McCain's defense that he wanted spending cuts to go along with the 2001 tax cuts, but fails to mention McCain's remarks about the tax cuts "favored the wealthy" at the expense of the middle class. Second, Mr. Stach fails to mention McCain's vote against the 2003 tax cuts at all.
For someone who is purporting to write a fair description of John McCain's record of fiscal conservatism, these are fairly big omissions.
philwynk
· 1 year ago
I think I believe the story about McCain refusing to vote for a porked-up tax cut bill. However, the rest of the article is pretty meaningless. There have been two McCains: the one befor 1997, who had an average ACU rating of 88.4, and the one after 1997, who has an average ACU rating of 74.9. All of Stach's examples are from the earlier McCain, and yes, that McCain was reliably conservative.
I still am bothered by his support for the BCRA, but it's entirely possible that he would undertake the seriously overdue revamping that Social Security and Medicare require.
Seriously, take a look at the current budget and run down the list until you see the line item for Supplemental Security Income. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/ssa... has the info. In 2007, SSI cost the taxpayers $36 billion dollars. It's supposed to be over $41 billion this year and $43 billion next year.
Mike
· 1 year ago
Now if McNutt wasn't for Shamnesty, against closing the border, Glob Al warming, for drillin in Anwar and elseware, McNutt-Feingold, Against strong interrogation of Terrorists, On and On and On!
it'll be "A Cold Day in Hell" before I vote for McNutt
Squid_Shark
· 1 year ago
He is for closing the border.
He is for strong interrogation, just not torture.
Have fun with your Liberal actviist majority on the supreme court for the next 40 years.
Max Lybbert
· 1 year ago
McCain may have been right about voting against the tax cut bill when it was porked up. But why did he go out of his way to say the bill was wrong-headed as a tax cut to the rich ( http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24421 ) instead of complaining about the pork? This sounds like revisionist history.
TheYell
· 1 year ago
So, The Rest Of The Story is, McCain voted FOR the tax cuts before he voted against it? Wonderful.
jharp
· 1 year ago
Imagine that. It turns out wasn't McCain's fault at all.
It was the other republicans.
Don't worry guys. I have no doubt the knuckledraggers will buy it.
AngryDumbo
· 1 year ago
You mean us "agents of intolerance"?
Monkei
· 1 year ago
For fiscal conservatives, this track record looks better than one might expect. In fact, it looks considerably more Reaganesque
Yep, exactly, this guy is as close to Reagan in stature and in his body of governmental work as you can get, I don't know where the talking head blowhards and far right wing wackos are getting their information from.
Then there is that great record he has on earmarks ...
Any conservative who does not support McCain should not even call themselves such.
wharrison51
· 1 year ago
The article is very detailed except for two key points: first, Mr. Stach mentions McCain's defense that he wanted spending cuts to go along with the 2001 tax cuts, but fails to mention McCain's remarks about how the tax cuts "favored the wealthy" at the expense of the middle class. Second, Mr. Stach fails to mention McCain's vote against the 2003 tax cuts at all.
For someone who is purporting to write a fair description of John McCain's record of fiscal conservatism, these are fairly big omissions.
Armando
· 1 year ago
McCain made dozens of comments regarding those tax cuts. To take just one of the comments and ignore the rest is dishonest. The truth is that he voted against it because it did not reign in spending and was pork-ridden. That tax cut marked the beginning of a downward spiral by conservatives.
TheYell
· 1 year ago
If McCain makes "dozens of comments" explaining himself, and some of them are contradictory, how do you know which is "the truth"? And how are we the dishonest ones for quoting McCain on McCain?
Max Lybbert
· 1 year ago
You'll notice in my previous comment that I linked to a list of several comments by John McCain, such as “I’m not giving tax cuts for the rich,” "I don’t believe the wealthiest 10% of Americans should get 60% of the tax breaks. I think the lowest 10% should get the breaks," “We give the millionaire a $2,000 refund. Gov. Bush gives him $50,000," “I don’t think Bill Gates needs a tax cut. I think you and your parents do,” “Mr. President, the principle that guides my judgment of a tax reconciliation bill is tax relief for those who need it the most—lower- and middle-income working families," and several others.
No, McCain is not being quoted out of context.
Back then he opposed across the board tax cuts because "across the board" includes rich people; now he claims he opposed it because of pork. I watched Sesame Street, and I can tell that one of these things is not like the other.
Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
· 1 year ago
McCain is more conservative in fiscal policies than almost any other Republican senator. McCain is more conservative in conservation matters than almost any other Republican senator. McCain is more conservative in supporting defense activities than almost any other Republican senator. McCain is a Republican. He is not a nut case. He was the most conservative candidate in the race from day one. The kook from Texas is not a conservative but a libertarian.
McCain is much more like Reagan than any Republican candidate since Reagan left the White House. The rest is all hot air and talking trash by people who need to sell soup, soap and sodas.
The Yell
· 1 year ago
"McCain is more conservative in fiscal policies than almost any other Republican senator. McCain is more conservative in conservation matters than almost any other Republican senator. McCain is more conservative in supporting defense activities than almost any other Republican senator. "
Agreed, which is why the Republican Senate caucus will be remembered for throttling the party of Reagan.
jpm100
· 1 year ago
Now if we could only open a portal in time and pull the mid 1990's McCain through it and replace current day McCain, we'd be fine.
Squid_Shark
· 1 year ago
That McCain was also boring and uninteresting, Like Bob Dole before the viagra.
Max Lybbert
· 1 year ago
That's funny because I feel like nominating McCain is a lot like nominating Dole. I get the feeling that people are voting for him just because he's wanted the job for so long that they feel he has a right to it.
Stew
· 1 year ago
"Yet a look at Mr. McCain's record in Congress over the past 25 years demonstrates a tax-cutting pedigree at least as strong as, if not stronger than, Mitt Romney's or Mike Huckabee's (they both raised taxes as governors).
One request when comparing a member of the Unites States Senate and a governor. Can we observe that governors are chief executive officers and are required to both create and manage a balanced budget edited by legislatures? That is not a requirement weighing down Senators, especially at the Federal level.
Armando
· 1 year ago
The senator - governer contrast is completely irrelevant. That would have been a convenient position during Bush 1. He had to raise taxes to acquiese demands for a more balanced budget. I guess that means that "conservatives" should forgive Bush 1 for raising taxes and revise history to reelect him.
Armando
· 1 year ago
Thank you so much for this posting. Everyday Rush, Ingraham, and Coulter are discredited more and more when it comes to McCain. I am glad to see that their diatribes are not gaining traction with the Republican electorate.
Stephen_Macklin
· 1 year ago
Maybe all the commenters he should pool their money together and buy some TV ads telling everyone what a staunch fiscal conservative McCain really is. Oh wait. We can't. Damn that's too bad.
All Comments
For someone who is purporting to write a fair description of John McCain's record of fiscal conservatism, these are fairly big omissions.
I analyzed the McCain ACU ratings on my blog, and then a site called Snarky Bastards did me one better. Check it out.
Seriously, take a look at the current budget and run down the list until you see the line item for Supplemental Security Income. http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2009/ssa... has the info. In 2007, SSI cost the taxpayers $36 billion dollars. It's supposed to be over $41 billion this year and $43 billion next year.
it'll be "A Cold Day in Hell" before I vote for McNutt
He is for strong interrogation, just not torture.
Have fun with your Liberal actviist majority on the supreme court for the next 40 years.
It was the other republicans.
Don't worry guys. I have no doubt the knuckledraggers will buy it.
Yep, exactly, this guy is as close to Reagan in stature and in his body of governmental work as you can get, I don't know where the talking head blowhards and far right wing wackos are getting their information from.
Then there is that great record he has on earmarks ...
Any conservative who does not support McCain should not even call themselves such.
For someone who is purporting to write a fair description of John McCain's record of fiscal conservatism, these are fairly big omissions.
No, McCain is not being quoted out of context.
Back then he opposed across the board tax cuts because "across the board" includes rich people; now he claims he opposed it because of pork. I watched Sesame Street, and I can tell that one of these things is not like the other.
McCain is much more like Reagan than any Republican candidate since Reagan left the White House. The rest is all hot air and talking trash by people who need to sell soup, soap and sodas.
Agreed, which is why the Republican Senate caucus will be remembered for throttling the party of Reagan.
One request when comparing a member of the Unites States Senate and a governor. Can we observe that governors are chief executive officers and are required to both create and manage a balanced budget edited by legislatures? That is not a requirement weighing down Senators, especially at the Federal level.