Nothing in my video was meant to be in the name of economics (and remember that I have nothing to do with this blog, which is obviously all about economics. Katherine was nice enough to post a link to my video, however, and again I thank her for that). I did use accurate economic data, but with the intention of getting Barack Obama elected. So criticizing my work based on the assumption I did anything in the name of economics is just off-base to begin with.

Re: the apples and oranges, again I’ll just say that I think the presentation was pretty clear, and obviously meant to speculate as to what personal motivations McCain might have for favoring the super-rich. That’s politics, not economics, or at least it’s the interplay between the two.

As for my welfare check: I’ve never taken a welfare check in my life. You don’t know me, but I’ve got a near-obsessive work ethic, and I would feel ashamed to take an undeserved handout. However, I’m happy to see more money made available for people who really need welfare, especially those at the very bottom of the ladder, who are struggling just to hold onto that last rung.

And if you’re angry about not getting the election results you wanted, well, I can relate. I am, after all, a Democrat. We’ve had year of experience with disappointment.

you got your man, so enjoy your welfare check!!

Dean: I hear ya on the apples to oranges. It was a bit of campaigning, frankly, meant to take a jab at McCain. Still, I think it was pretty clear that was my purpose. I was saying: why would McCain steer his benefits to the super rich? Well for one thing, look at the size of his wife’s fortune! And it says “fortune” – not yearly income – right there in the label.

Thanks for the comments. I think future efforts will always have some bias, but post-election, with there being less need for emphasis on boosting or downplaying one side or another, I’d like to steer it towards wonkier examinations of the policies.

I just really, really needed Obama to win.