I did a little in the rest of the text you pulled.
It's the “tax cuts cure all ills” and “tax cuts pay for themselves” narratives used in context with Bush record. Tax cuts have definite benefits but trying to defend those two simple messages have backfired. Talk radio will claim that Bush tax cuts alone created the recovery and increased tax revenues. But at the same time Greenspan was running the printing presses on high for three-four years and Bush and congress were happily spending the money(Bernake who Bush selected had promoted this under Greenspan) . That in itself will bring the temporary recovery that conservatives credit to Bush tax cuts and increase revenues too(and the deficit/or inflation).
To carry on this myth, they (Rush, Hannity and Levin) were forced to defend the economy up until the crash last year. After the crash they were suddenly experts, it was Barney Frank and Jimmy Carter that wrecked the economy years ago. But how could they have done it years ago when the same experts just Months earlier were talking about the strong Bush economy ?
All this "party this, party that", "us and them", "conservatism vs liberalism" talking points fell lame after the economic crash. Yet they still repeat them.
Notice how they (conservative talk radio) talk about the federal reserve printing money NOW! All of a sudden it's a factor, but not 2002-2005.
I should add that I agree with you. Partisans annoy me. But it’s almost impossible not to be one. Everyone says they hate both parties and pretends to be above it all. No one is.
The "tax cuts cure all ills" line is of your own creation....never heard it on talk radio.
The "tax cuts pay for themselves" has been proven in hard numbers....a lot more tax money came in after the cuts...exact figures are readily available, so you are a little bit less than half right, since the "cure all ills" item is debatable, the increase in incoming revenue is not.
Lot of talk shows out there, so someone may have said it at some point.