Off Message. Of course not.

McCain, the supply-sider, says the fundamentals of the economy are
strong. What are the fundamentals he cites? The american worker and
small businesses. That's the opposite of supply side economics Mr.

Ms. Palin, the corruption fighter, has refused to fully cooperate with
the ethics investigation that predates her vp run. The claim is that
dems have hijacked the investigation. The panel that voted to issue
subpoenas is 3 rep, 2 dems. The republican that voted against her -
he's from Wasilla.

When the facts support you, argue the facts.

Sent from my mobile device

read the "small thoughts" blog


thegameiam said...

I'm not sure how saying that small business is a fundamentally strong portion of the economy contradicts supply-side economic theory. Perhaps you mean a different term?

bachrach44 said...

McCain's comments have nothing to do with his economic theory - he was simply getting hammered by Obama, so he decided to backtrack in a hurry. (Now that's change for you).

As for Palin, she continues to claim she said "thanks but no thanks" to the bridge to nowhere, when the truth is she said "thanks", and then only when it became politically inadvisable did she say "no thanks" to the bridge, but kept the money. Usually when a politician is caught in a lie (like Hillary and her "landing under fire" story) they stop telling the lie. In Palin's case, she seems to think that she can actually change reality by continuing to spout nonsense.

LuvNmuzic said...

Supply-side is indeed the correct term. Xerp is referring to the current weaknesses of the financial behemoths, weakness of the dollar, and incredible federal deficit which, in trickle-down, would have to be strong, productive, and profitable in order for the not-as-powerful actors (the American worker and small businesses) to benefit. Xerp is saying that if there's nothing but famine trickling down, the American worker and small businesses won't be able to bolster the economy on their own.