Sometimes, what's not said is the real issue
By John Temple Ligon Temple@TheColumbiaStar.com

The Democrats' debate on July 23, 2007, recognized presidential contenders, the ones of high enough standing with the voters to stand on CNN's stage at The Citadel.

Health care, the audience knew, was getting top billing as the major domestic issue, and Iraq and terrorism were still the international hot buttons ever since 9- 11.

But what could have been the issue overall, the departure point, typically, between the Democrats and the Republicans wasn't even mentioned.

What carries the day, what pays for all the grand schemes in health care, education, defense, intelligence, agriculture, and border security is the economy.

The American economy is the largest in the world, by far: $14 trillion. In the 1992 race for the presidency, George H. W. Bush (#41) was barely rising from the 1990- 91 recession, the economics Rotor- Rooter that runs through the system about every 10 years whether we need it or not.

Bush's predecessor, Ronald Reagan, had his recession on top of Carter's era of the "misery index," so Carter had to take as much blame as the Reagan administration. And the Reagan administration weathered the storm, so by the time of his re- election in 1984, he could proclaim it was "morning in America."

Vice President Bush saw that it was still morning in 1988, but by 1992, it might have been morning, still, but it was the wee hours after midnight, not sunrise.

Former Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas and his political advisor James Carville of L.S.U. had it all figured out for 1992: "It's the economy, stupid!" That was the sign in the election war room, the message the public could take as dissatisfaction with the Republican White House. Clinton won in 1992 on the economy as his major issue.

In 2008, maybe, the economy will be back as a major issue, but in 2007, especially at The Citadel debate, there was no sign of it. All the issues outside Iraq were what the Democrats score in, the domestic squabbles and the social tinkering focus groups always say the Democrats do better than the Republicans.

On the economy, however, most surveys still reveal an admiration for the Republicans' repair action. If there's something wrong with the money supply, world trade, wages and prices, employment, the Republicans, according to the polls, can be trusted to handle it better than the Democrats.

Since The Citadel debate had a big target in the Bush (#43) administration's seven years so far, why was the economy not included in the CNN- edited questions?

The economy is a roller coaster, ups and downs with enough downs, usually, to embarrass the incumbents. There had to have been questions on the economy streaming in from all over through YouTube, but none made it into the debate arena.

The problem with the economy, probably as CNN saw it, was there wasn't much of a problem with the economy. The dollar was down, but that always means exports are headed up as are foreign investments in the U.S., banking on an eventually rising dollar from its attractive slump.

The stock market was a little shaky, but the meteoric rise during the Bush administration, particularly the 1,000- point hike this summer up to the debate, was not something the Democrats wanted to discuss.

S.C. unemployment is high relative to the rest of the country, but the rest of the country is on the job in record numbers. Housing sales were slowing, but they were slowing from record highs. And any slowdown seems a bit reassuring when the alternative, inflation, is foreseen.

Had the debate been this week, after the even greater housing slump and after the 400- point drop in the Dow the week following The Citadel debate, the staged seven debaters and Anderson Cooper might have worked the economy as an issue. The questions, though, would have been the same questions already submitted through YouTube. They've been there all along. CNN just didn't see the need to highlight the Republicans' incipient success.