How is she twisting subsidiarity into something it's not? How
exactly is "redistribution of economic benefit" not an example of subsidiarity? Please don't answer with something snippy like "if you can't see it, I can't help you", or similar some such as commonly passes for discourse around here. I'm asking honestly.
Because for where I sit, cutting taxes, lessening or eliminating government regulation, and limiting the size and scope of federal government itself are all examples of "redistributing economic benefit", not money or wealth, which is not what he said, but "benefit". And also the goals of subsidiarity.