More Excellent Economic News --Bush Was Right, His Critics Wrong

From the NYT:

WASHINGTON, July 8 — An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year, even though spending has climbed sharply because of the war in Iraq and the cost of hurricane relief.

....

Tax revenues are climbing twice as fast as the administration predicted in February, so fast that the budget deficit could actually decline this year.

Read it here.

So for you maniacal deficit hawks out there, particularly one of the inside the beltway guys who has been bashing Bush and me on the subject of "fiscal responsibility" for many months -- nya, nya, nya, nya, nya!

Don Surber gets more specific:

History will vindicate Bush on the war. For now, NYT must report -- reluctantly -- that Bush was right and Ted Kennedy was wrong. Bush was right and Bob Byrd was wrong. Bush was right and Hillary Clinton was wrong. Bush was right and John Kerry was wrong. Bush was right and Al Gore was wrong. Bush was right and Joe Biden was wrong. Bush was right and Tom Daschle was wrong. Bush was right and Barbara Boxer was wrong. Bush was right and Harry Reid was wrong. Bush was right and Chuck Schumer was wrong. Bush was right and ...

Read it here.

I agree, without reservation on all points. Bush is right on Iraq, on Afghanistan, on reorganizing the military, on bringing the permanent government to heel, on reforming the intelligence services, and most emphatically, on the economy. No president in history has done a better job of managing the economy..., none!

Now if he could just get some credit for it.

PowerLine notes that the NYT article actually misrepresents the scale of Bush's boom. The Times quotes Democrats and unidentified "independent economists" who say that the revenues are barely matching those achieved by Clinton, but in fact they are considerably higher. He also suggests that the picture would be even rosier if Democrats had not blocked Bush's attempt to reform social security.

Read it here.

Even Democrat blogger/economist, Brad deLong, is forced to admit that this is good news, but argues that the earlier figures on the deficit were highballed in order to make the decline look greater. He suggests that Bush deserves less credit for the situation than he will claim and [implausibly] accuses him of dishonesty.

Gee..., and if the numbers were bad, who do you suppose he would blame?

Read it here.