Excellent work Jonathan.

"As my book explains, political coverage almost never bothers to check on the truth of candidate's claims about public policy." Depressing but true. Easier to concentrate on how much a candidate pays for a haircut.

How do we stop these nuts? Look at Bush's "stimulus" package. It's another wave of supply-side, regressive class warfare.

As idiotic as they're argument is, they're still winning hearts and minds with it.

Again, how do we stop them?

I urge all Liberal readers not to be seduced by the McCain brand. Even if it is Hillary. Policy is more important than personality or character or whatever.

Please American's, give us a rest from Murdochonomics for a couple of years.  

Without experiments (you know, like the Negative Income Tax experiments of the 1970s), we'll never know the true impact of tax policy on behavior and hence on revenues.  I'm waiting for the candidate who promises to pour money into serious economic research on the impacts of tax policies on revenues and determinants of revenues.  The CBO used to do some good work in that area (e.g. capital gains), but we need less hot air and more hard data.

Why is the debate always "raising" versus "lowering" instead of trying to find that optimal set of tax policies? AFter all, if every politician promises to lower taxes, eventually you have no taxes and zero revenue ("corner solution") and Grover Norquist wins.

"But can they at least stop praising McCain as a brave truth-teller when he's totally reversed his position on the Bush tax cuts and now defends them with obvious lies?"

Why would they start now?  Just accept it - McCain's bizarre sway over political reporters will continue long after the man's death.  Thirty years from now we'll be reading nostalgic columns about the glorious days of the Straight Talk Express.

McCain lie?  Impossible!!!!!  (What do you mean you don't have sarcasm emoticons at The Plank?).

I don't know if anyone here heard Nichelle Norris' starry-eyed coo-fest with McCain on NPR yesterday, but I am just not getting the love affair the press has with this guy.  Maybe it's remorse for the tepid coverage (as I recall, could be wrong) in 2000.

I'm in total agreement with stgla.  What gets lost on most folks is that the goal of the tax system is to raise revenue for publicly-shared expenditures determined by Congress with input from the President (at least that's what I learned in Civics class back in the 1960s when the "How the Bill Becomes a Law" chart still reflected some form of reality and not an alternative universe).  Let's find the optimum set of tax policies that generates the agreed-upon level of revenue that ensures the requisite levels of fairness and stability.  This ain't rocket science.

"political coverage almost never bothers to check on the truth of candidate's claims about public policy."

This is true and the core of the problem. When someone does attempt to assess the veracity of a candidate's statements, it's national news. Look at how people zeroed in on how that reporter reacted to Romney's claim that no lobbyists ran his campaign. OH MY GOD! He contested the truth of what Romney said. It's a special segment on Hardball! That should be n-o-r-m-a-l, but it ain't.

I thought McCain was the last honest Republican. Not you too, John!

Lots of people actually believe this. They'll actually say 'you don't understand economics, cutting taxes actually raises revenue!'... It's awful.

Taxes are for financing government, not regulating the economy.  We decide what government should do -- infrastructure, defense, redistribution of wealth -- and then pay the bill on April 15th.  It's that simple.

Claiming to use taxes like the Fed uses rates has always been the demagogue's game.  Saying that cutting taxes helps the economy is like saying that corporate welfare "creates jobs."  Of course the GOP would say that.  Consider the source.

Anyway, I don't think McCain "lies" willfully.  I think he's just let himself be sold a bill of goods. I still think he's honest.  It's just that I don't think he's very bright.

<em>Anyway, I don't think McCain "lies" willfully.  I think he's just let himself be sold a bill of goods.</em>

Indeed, is there any evidence at all that McCain is lying rather than misinformed?  Chait certainly doesn't give us any.

Iggy Pop: "I urge all Liberal readers not to be seduced by the McCain brand. Even if it is Hillary. Policy is more important than personality or character or whatever."

Well said.  Lest we forget, McCain is a REPUBLICAN, and if the 2nd Bush administration has accomplished anything, it has been to deal a mortal blow to the proposition, current in 1999-2000 thanks to Ralph Nader (aka Judas), that there is no material difference between the two major parties.  

I don't care how good a bloke the old soldier might be, how funny and how principled (seems to me of latelike he's not so very principled at all, but that's beside the point), the guy will enact policies that to me--and I believe many of you softy soft McCain supporters--are anathema.

C'mon, the 'cutting taxes raises revenues' myth has been around forever. George HW Bush called it 'voodoo economics' in 1980. Until 2007, McCain ignored it also... suddenly, he's turned around.

He's not stupid.

Actually jm_rice, it takes both fiscal (tax and spend) and monetary (Fed, money supply, interest rates) to effectively manage a large economy.

The multiplier effects of say, raising spending, are quite dramatic and well-timed injections can be just what the doctor ordered.

You don't want to toss one of the tools in your bag away.

Even 'pro signal' monetarists have embraced this.

Not long ago, TNR&#39;s Jon Chait blasted the NYT for reporting John McCain&#39;s claim that, &quot;Every

For many years now I&#39;ve been wrting about the odd media double standard whereby reporters refuse