Blitzer did not ask Fiorina why other McCain economic adviser disputes her balanced-budget projections
SUMMARY: On The Situation Room, Wolf Blitzer did not challenge Carly Fiorina's assertion that Sen. John McCain "will balance his budget by the end of 2013." In fact, both McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin and McCain himself have reportedly said that he would balance the budget in eight years.
On the June 10 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer did not challenge McCain senior adviser Carly Fiorina's assertion that Sen. John McCain "will balance his budget by the end of 2013" by pointing out that McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin reportedly has "said McCain believes he can balance the budget in eight years." Nor did Blitzer point out that according to The New York Times, McCain said during an April 15 press conference in Villanova, Pennsylvania, that " 'economic conditions are reversed' and that he would have a balanced budget within eight years."
The Associated Press reported on February 16 that at a town hall meeting in Wisconsin, "McCain said he would propose a balanced budget in his first term if he is elected president -- but not necessarily in his first year." However, in an April 15 Reuters article, reporter Steve Holland wrote that Holtz-Eakin "said McCain believes he can balance the budget in eight years." Similarly, The New York Times reported:
Mr. McCain -- who said in February in Wisconsin that he would balance the budget by the end of his first term as president -- seemed to reconsider that on Tuesday, saying at a news conference later in Villanova that "economic conditions are reversed" and that he would have a balanced budget within eight years.
Moreover, after Fiorina said that "I can't make [Sen.] Barack Obama's numbers add up," Blitzer did not mention that prior reports on McCain's economic plan have noted that economists and nonpartisan analysts say that McCain's proposals will require massive spending cuts or will increase the deficit. On April 18 Bloomberg News reported that McCain's "plan to cut taxes and balance the budget wins praise from fellow Republicans," but that "[e]conomists and nonpartisan analysts say his numbers don't add up." The article further reported that "McCain's spending cuts, combined with increased revenue from economic growth, total $1.5 trillion over eight years, leaving a $1.8 trillion net increase to the national debt." The article quoted Joel Slemrod, "an economist specializing in tax policy at the University of Michigan," as saying, "This is really a massive increase in the deficit." Bloomberg also quoted Concord Coalition executive director Robert Bixby's assertion that "the huge imbalance" in McCain's plan "is that the tax cuts are specific and large and the spending cuts are small and vague," and later reported: "Ultimately, said Stan Collender, a former analyst for the House and Senate budget committees, it would take substantial cuts to Medicare and Social Security to balance the budget with the tax cuts McCain is proposing. Even then, 'there's no way McCain could balance it by the time he leaves, unless he doesn't leave for 25 years,' Collender said."
Similarly, according to an analysis by FactCheck.org, "McCain's pronouncements on cutting spending, and even on the growth in the size of the federal government, are dubious at best." FactCheck.org further wrote:
McCain's big promise is that he can balance the budget while extending Bush's tax cuts and adding a few of his own. He likes to leave the impression that this can be done painlessly, for example, by eliminating "wasteful" spending in the form of "earmarks" that lawmakers like to tuck into spending bills to finance home-state projects. We found that not only is this theory full of holes, it's not even McCain's actual plan.
From the June 10 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: I'll play this clip and then we'll discuss this. Listen to this.
OBAMA [video clip]: At a time when we're fighting two wars, when millions of Americans can't afford their medical bills or their tuition bills, when we're paying more than $4 a gallon for gas, the man who rails against government spending wants to spend $1.2 billion on a tax break for Exxon Mobil.
BLITZER: All right. Now, we were just discussing that. But the $1.2 billion tax break that he says Exxon Mobil would win as a result of reducing the corporate tax rate structure across the board, is that an accurate number?
FIORINA: No. I don't know where he gets those numbers, but -- it was $300 billion; it was $1.2 billion. By the way, he said yesterday that he could pay for all his programs, and then less than 24 hours later he said if his tax increases would hurt the economy, he would consider postponing them, because they clearly would hurt the economy.
I can't make Barack Obama's numbers add up. But I will tell you this, having studied John McCain's numbers for quite a few weeks now: He will balance his budget by the end of 2013. And he is proposing a set of tax measures that will help small businesses grow, which is vitally important, because small businesses create most of the jobs in this country.
BLITZER: He alluded -- he made reference to the cost of the war in Iraq right now. Here's how he phrased it in another part of this presentation. I'll play this clip.















I'm compelled to mention Bush's hilarious pledge to cut the deficit in half at the end of his first term. The deficit didn't even exist until he got in office.
If you elect a republican, you get big deficits no matter what. (Note: "no matter what" refers to reality, not to conservative fantasies.)
-- the man who rails against government spending wants to spend $1.2 billion on a tax break for Exxon Mobil. -- Obama
Issuing a tax cut is not spending by the govt. Letting Americans keep more of the money they earn is not spending by the govt. Although misguided he is on the right track...spending by the federal govt. is sure as hell the problem.
Clinton's first budget produced expenditures of $1.5 trillion to operate the federal govt...Pres.Bush's last budget estimates $3.1 trillion to operate the federal govt.
Republicans and democrats alike have spent insanely...and that is the problem. The US economy produces ample revenue to satisfy liberal social engineering programs and conservative tax cuts...if done responsibly.
What an oxymoron...responsible spending by the current crop of republican and democrat congressman. Forget the smoke screen of the bogus arguments about who should receive tax cuts...it's the spending, stupid.
Issuing a tax cut is not spending by the govt. Letting Americans keep more of the money they earn is not spending by the govt. Although misguided he is on the right track...spending by the federal govt. is sure as hell the problem.
Spoken by someone who thinks trickle-down is Gospel. Haven't you let them trickle on you enough yet?
I was at a Quinceañera in Baldwin Park recently, for the daughter of a lower-level official of the Mexican embassy.
As I reached to refill my horchata, I bumped into Cruz Bustamante.Cruz told me a couple of crude Irish jokes, then, perhaps a bit loosened up with drink, mentioned he had recently gone kayaking in Belize with Sands90210.
I'll leave out some of the more picaresque details, but suffice to say, Sands seems to cry under pressure.
hey, dummy, if you are gonna use a 25 cent word like picaresque, find out what it means. it certainly does not mean what you think it does.
as for cruz bustamante, he could not fit into a kayak.
precisely, you used the word incorrectly. you were thinking of picturesque, perhaps.
i don't use capitals, not because i'm like archie, but because if i inadvertently hit a key near the shift, it sends me back to the beginning.
in 2000, at the celebracion de california, at the natural history museum of los angeles county, i was tasked with presenting an award to bustamante. it was attached to a ribbon. he warned me that he had a 26 inch neck. no way he could get into a kayak.
I haven't seen such petty, derisive criticism since the eighth grade when Sister Mary HSTYBUF6553 graded my English exam.
I left out some of the more "picturesque" details...
Nah, that doesn't really work for me. Doesn't convey at all the idea I had in mind, actually doesn't make sense. Sandsybuff, I think you may be confusing the two words.
he warned me that he had a 26 inch neck. no way he could get into a kayak.
And you may be thinking of a cravat (pictured below).If your neck size has ever affected your ability to get into a kayak, you were getting into it in as ass-backwards a manner as you get into discussions here.
By any other name would still sounds batschit crazy"?
"No. I don't know where he gets those numbers."
Which is it: "no"; or "I don't know"?
If she doesn't know "where he gets those numbers", she doesn't know whether it's an accurate number or not, does she?