It's always humorous when people with no understanding of economics criticizes economic policy. Of course, it's even funnier when people that DO understand economics (i.e. Krugman) is a radical leftist (although there is an explanation-- he wants more people to be poor).
The first point on the matter is simply logical, which is that tax cuts by definition cannot be "wrong," as they merely are modifying a preexisting government imposition on the taxpayer. In theory a cut can be bad policy, but there is no moral component except very tangentially.
Secondly, there is no other kind of economic growth except that which originates at the top. Now, people without money can be loaned it by banks-- who are themselves businesses with a bottom line-- but even in that case it is ultimately the money deposited by "the rich" that supports those loans.
Socialists like to mask this, or least did when there were any real Socialists in power, by taking over private business themselves. This has two wonderful results, the first being the number of rich people is either held or reduced, and secondly that profits fly out the window due to government inefficiency.
But even in the mentally retarded (i.e. left-wing) economic worldview, where government intentionally damages the economy to make the poor look better by comparison, *growth* still requires private initiative.
note: National socialism actually did work in Germany, but the period of time in which it operated was brief, and it still respected incentive structures critical to economic development (unlike the various leftist ailments).
Most of BRTD's points are his usual silliness anyway, as many Republicans aren't religious, nor believe it is anti-American to criticize Bush, and so on. Mr. Straw Man is busy indeed.
It isn't "loaned" it's "lent". Read that again, "lent".
