… And goesfor it .
On a day when McCain is highlighting his own ethicalcleanliness by tryingto abolish earmarks for a year , Obama dings McCain for perhaps his most egregiouspolicy reversal: Bush’s tax cuts.
The logic of why he first voted against the tax cuts, thensupported making them permanent, is contorted at best. Jonathan Chait summedit up most pithily:
McCain explained that his position was perfectly consistentbecause, while he may have opposed the tax cuts in the first place, lettingthem expire would amount to a tax hike; and, he said, "I've never votedfor a tax increase in twenty-four years . . . and I will never vote for a taxincrease, nor support a tax increase." In fact, McCain had proposed atobacco tax increase in 1998. Nor would his position have made sense anyway.(Some economists favor higher tax rates and others prefer lower tax rates, butnone would oppose a tax cut and then oppose its repeal simply because it hadalready been enacted.)
Now McCain says he thinks the tax cuts are necessary tosupport a flagging economy. But Obama has an easy retort: How would you know? McCain himself admitted that he knows "a lotless about economics than … about military and foreign policy issues." Theflip-flop/confession combo is likely to be one of the strongest weapons againstMcCain in the general. No surprise Obama wanted to be seen as the first one touse it.