JULY 14, 2008
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Quick question, per this interview in which McCain economic adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin disparages McCain economic adviser Phil Gramm: If, as Holtz-Eakin says, Gramm wasn't in any way speaking for McCain because only McCain speaks for McCain, why on earth should we believe him (Holtz-Eakin)? Why would Holtz-Eakin's words be any more reliable than Gramm's? Isn't he just as far from being John McCain as Phil Gramm is?
I'm afraid we've stumbled onto a bit of a paradox here:
If Holtz-Eakin is right about other people not speaking for McCain, then we can't believe him when he makes that point.
And if Holtz-Eakin is wrong about other people not speaking for McCain, then we can believe him in general, but, of course, what he just said turns out to be wrong
I think my head is about to explode...
--Noam Scheiber
4 comments
Not only is it a paradox, it's also a falsehood. Gramm was going to speak to the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board on McCain's behalf later that day. (Where is that kind e-mail the Obama folks sent me? . . . )
- rozenson
July 14, 2008 at 8:57am
The answer to the question is no one. McCain's economic plans make no sense, so it doesn't really matter who is speaking for them. The Washington Post, thankfully, makes that point very clearly in an editorial published today. McCain is relying on the old supply-side song to provide his plans with some kind of ideological and quasi-economic rationale, which is why, until very recently, he has been citing people like Jack Kemp and Phil Gramm when questioned about his economic ideas. If you believe that tax cuts will generate enough revenue to offset the money lost by said tax cuts, then you can buy what he's saying. If not, then you can't. Who is speaking doesn't matter much when all of the speakers are parroting what amounts to nonsense.
- propositionjoe
July 14, 2008 at 9:29am
Imagine if the Obama campaign had the nerve to be such stumbling, unorganized boobs on just about everything.
- Wandreycer1
July 14, 2008 at 10:02am
"Imagine if the Obama campaign had the nerve to be such stumbling, unorganized boobs on just about everything. "
ROFLMAO!
I bet tep would finally figure out where Obama stands on all the issues :P
- GSpinks
July 14, 2008 at 4:18pm