Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:00 AM ET, 02/ 8/2011

Lining the toe

By Tom Toles

c_02082011.gif

***

What, me worry?

Let's get one thing straight with regard to the whole mythology of Ronald Reagan's "sunny optimism."

Conservatives like to bask in the warm glow of that optimism, having shed with relief the heavy burden of the green eye-shade. Who wants to be a dour scold actually doing the unpopular work of balancing a budget, when you can TALK about balancing the budget while actually catapulting the deficit into the stratosphere? GOOD MORNING SUNSHINE! Reagan's "optimism" on the budget was nothing more than his easy embrace of the now-obvious fantasy that tax cuts pay for themselves. The history of the budget wreckage that has followed in his wake is the American history lesson Americans don't want to read or think about. Conservatives turn into the circus of flying acrobats in their attempts to rewrite the clear facts on this. They prefer the sunny optimism of the make-believe world of make-believe economics. If business takes it's cues from government, it's no wonder they developed a taste for fraudulent activity.

Sorry, folks, but budget-balancing is the work of dour, green eye-shade scowlers. Hard, thankless work, but either you believe in it or you don't. --Tom Toles

***

sketchicon_ver1.jpg

s_02082011.gif

By Tom Toles  | February 8, 2011; 12:00 AM ET
Categories:  Economy and jobs  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Unhealthy food choice
Next: Budget Hole

Other Syndicated Editorial Cartoons:

Comments

Oops, my comment below was intended for "tomorrow's" comments.

Posted by: e30m42 | February 9, 2011 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Sorry if I was so obtuse--er--abstruse. I was ribbing them for "cherry picking": citing a cold winter as evidence against global warming. Speaking of which, here is brazen example from the Heartland Institute, hot off the web: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2011/02/articgate_now_thats_cherrypick.php

You can follow the links around: Huffington Post story; Heartland's Joseph Bast letter to the editor excoriating a bona fide scientist by name; former astronaut and senator Harrison Schmitt--quite a story--comments on various AGW-denier debunker websites are having a field day with it.

ArcticGate!

Posted by: e30m42 | February 9, 2011 5:45 PM | Report abuse

When you finally get Republicans/Tea Partyers to face the enormous debt Reagan ran up relative to...well anyone before him since WWII, then Republicans again dismiss debt as unimportant (sounds familiar doesn't it?) or say you're not comparing "apples to apples." Same when we are discussing Bush 1 and Mush 2 debt. It turns out the Republican debt is just not the same as Democrat debt! Republican debt is good, noble, pure as the driven snow, patriotic. Who knew?!?!?!?!?

Posted by: ptgrunner | February 9, 2011 12:24 AM | Report abuse

Ronald Reagan never did anything for me. In my sixty plus years, Ronald Reagan never did anything for me. Or for my family. Or for my friends. Or for anybody I ever met. Ronald Reagan never did anything for millions of poor and middle-class Americans. He was a B actor who could never quite see what was really going on in the world. He was a voice for the rich. He was a face for the entitled. He was a puppet on strings. Like Pinocchio with Geppetto, dancing for his master, but never dancing for me. Just trying to get the script right before his next performance. He was a second rate actor, a second rate governor, and a second rate president. Put him on your pedestals, sing your loyal praise, bathe him in all your glory, and worship him to your grave. Ronald Reagan never did anything for me.

Posted by: JD76 | February 8, 2011 11:01 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry but you seem to be forgetting another factor from the time that had a tremendous affect on our military and its morale, a little film called "Stripes."

Posted by: jhnnywalkr

----------------------

Now that's a true statement! My drill sergeant was in that picture - they filmed the basic training scenes at Fort Knox the year before my basic course. Sean Young was in that film too - zowie!

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 5:45 PM | Report abuse

jonroesler wrote: too many words but here is my response below!

----------------------

1 - Grenada and Panama weren't the best examples of military precision, true. But both victories were a boost to American morale. Our Rangers, Paratroopers, and Marines (some Sailors and Soldiers too) bravely put some wins on the scoreboard after the Vietnam disaster. Noriega went off the reservation and deserved his fate.

2 - You seem to give Reagan some but not all of the credit for pushing the Soviets over the edge. Who else do you give the credit to then? Reagan raised the debt to 2.5 Trillion. That was a manageable figure and the economy was soaring under his leadership.

3 - I never said Carter's policy with the mujahadeen led to OBL. Carter, in fact, mismanaged the Iranian Crisis - before it happened and during - Reagan came to office and it was over.

4 - No fights left. That's a great assessment after DS/DS; OEF; OIF. You're probably right. We should take apart our military and give the money back to the people. Right on man! It's a good idea to allow Iran to patrol the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal. We don't need to secure the oil flow - trust them! Maybe North Korea will give up next week and start gardening competitions. I bet China we'll reevaluate their defense policy and give away all of their rifles, APCs, and tanks to Taiwan as a sign of good will. The Russians will fill all their silos with cement and declare themselves a peace-loving country (I'm sure Georgia and Estonia will believe that). In fact, I bet Hezbollah and Hamas will recognize Israel next week so we can stop worrying about them. OBL and Zawahiri will give up and that should make for a great kiss-and-make-up Party (as long as we give them their Caliphate).

It's real easy to wish away security issues from your basement couch in your Mommies house but out in the real world, their are real enemies that require a real military capable of operating in high/medium/low intensity conflicts.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 5:01 PM | Report abuse

The US military was broken when Reagan came into office. Not all Carter's fault but the despair from the Vietnam debacle had left the military rudderless and weak. Couldn't get parts; little money to train. We were watching early versions of video taped drill instead of doing the drills in order to save money. Lack of funds to train and procure the best equipment were components of the travesty of Desert One. Cap Weinberger was a brilliant DOD Secretary. He straightened out DOD which took a lot of cash to do. The result? We kicked butt in Grenada, Panama, and Desert Shield/Storm and outspent the Soviets into the ground, effectively ending the Cold War. No amount of stupid Liberal spin can change those facts.

Posted by: pararanger22

I'm sorry but you seem to be forgetting another factor from the time that had a tremendous affect on our military and its morale, a little film called "Stripes."

Posted by: jhnnywalkr | February 8, 2011 4:13 PM | Report abuse

sherm1- You clearly have not been paying attention, or you would know that throwing actual facts out there only confuses people.

Diamond104- Same goes for you.

Ranger- You are definitely on one today! Grenada as an example of U.S. military might? And Panama where, like Iraq, we invaded a country in order to get the guy to who we'd been selling weapons all along because somebody thought THAT was a good idea? Oh, yes, our post-WWII foreign policy has been nothing but success after success after success, except for when Democrats were in the White House. Carter began the Mujahideen and is therefore responsible for bin Laden; isn't that correct? And Bush's liberal-Democratic congress who are to blame for him never being able to capture bin Laden, in much the same way Carter failed to free the hostages? (And yes, I know; Obama hasn't gotten him either.)

And it was Reagan ALONE (?!?), rather than him pushing Soviet-style socialism over its own edge, that brought the USSR to its knees?
I mean, it's only fair to give credit where creidt is due and Reagan certainly deserves some credit, but you write as if, without Reagan and his strategy of spending money WE didn't have (meanwhile incurring enormous levels of debt) in order to force the Russians to spend money THEY didn't have, the old Soviet Union would have been just fine. Which might be true if you think Soviet-style Communism was a healthy economic and social system in the first place, but, really, we know that it was not.

Reagan pushed them over the edge but it cost us dearly, and our continued strategy of outspending the entire planet combined on a military with no real battles left to fight (peace has broken out among the Superpowers, in case you haven't noticed) is doing serious harm to our ability to fight the economic ones, including humanity's war on the environment, that we must win in order not to become the same sort of second-class, corrupt, Wild-West economic aristocracy (or government-partnered plutocracy, if you will) that Russia has since become... or worse.

(No offense to all you Russians out there. I'm sure your country is a very nice place to visit.)

Posted by: jonroesler | February 8, 2011 4:03 PM | Report abuse

Republicans are quite happy to be the sugar daddy party, handing out tax favors, and equally happy to leave it to the responsible Democrats to clean up after them by doing their work of balancing budgets. Irving Kristol said so himself. Note that this process accomplishes the Republican goals. Dems need to quit falling for it.

Posted by: moore_te | February 8, 2011 12:55 AM

-----------------------
Such a funny post. Dem's hand out every last dime they can tax in order to create a voter dependency but the GOP keeps taxes low and you Liberals lose your mind.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 3:14 PM | Report abuse

How about "Pigs in Space" for yourself, Ranger...
Like Hollywood, do you?

Tom Toles readers may need a little vinegar to dissolve some fat around the head.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 8, 2011 12:53 AM

---------------------

Pigs in Space was a great Muppet snippet. One of the few shows I can remember my parents and I watching and enjoying back in the day.

I'm always prepared to match my CV to yours, Tony-KS. Lay down your cards!

As for fat, I could lose a few pounds but at 15 stone, 75 inches, I'm doing okay.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Some numbers:
Carter - debt went from 700 billion to 900 billion. 200 bil jump
Interest on debt last year in office - 75 bil

Reagan - debt went from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion. 1.7 TRILLION jump
Interest on debt last year in office - 214 bil

Now who was better at letting you keep your money, Carter or Reagan. Carter added 50 bil a year to the debt, and Reagan added about 200 bil a year (not to mention 140 bil more interest to pay out from your hard earned money).

In Clinton's last four years in office the debt increase 260 bil. In W's last four it increased 2 TRILLION. And Clinton handed W a budget surplus.

For those of you who were still in diapers when Reagan took office, "Morning in America" was pretty much Reagan sympathizing with the white backlash to the civil rights movement. The Republicans were playing the "Southern (white) Card" every chance they got.

Posted by: sherm1 | February 7, 2011 11:09 PM

----------------------

First of all, your debt comparison isn't an 'apples to apples' debate. Carter let our military decay so much that it took a lot of funding to bring our troops and equipment back up to standard. Do you think life was better under Carter? No way kemosabe. It was awful. That misery index of 21.5% was a true indicator. Leadership? 444 days of the debilitating hostage crisis because Carter mishandled it.

But let's follow your logic on the debt. Apples to Apples. In the first 19 months of the Obama administration, the federal debt held by the public increased by $2.5260 trillion, which is more than the cumulative total of the national debt held by the public that was amassed by all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Ronald Reagan.

Still want to go there dude?

The Southern white card propaganda is and remains a stupid, made-up Liberal lie.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 2:51 PM | Report abuse

@pararanger22, you fell for the myths, I see. Yes, Reagan cut taxes. Once. Then spent the next 7 years raising them again. "Revitalized the military"? Diverted more of our precious human resources and money into the pockets of the military-industrial complex, more like it. Reagan's "success" was in being telegenic, but the Presidency is not the Academy Awards. The President's responsibility doesn't begin and end with getting good polling numbers.

Posted by: fostersm1 | February 7, 2011 7:19 PM

---------------------

Interesting post...except it's wrong and stupid.

The US military was broken when Reagan came into office. Not all Carter's fault but the despair from the Vietnam debacle had left the military rudderless and weak. Couldn't get parts; little money to train. We were watching early versions of video taped drill instead of doing the drills in order to save money. Lack of funds to train and procure the best equipment were components of the travesty of Desert One. Cap Weinberger was a brilliant DOD Secretary. He straightened out DOD which took a lot of cash to do. The result? We kicked butt in Grenada, Panama, and Desert Shield/Storm and outspent the Soviets into the ground, effectively ending the Cold War. No amount of stupid Liberal spin can change those facts.

No myth - Liberals were in full retreat during the Reagan years so all you have is spite for that wonderful man. Pretty shameful.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 8, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Thank you those who used hard, cold facts to show which party runs up deficits. Democrats have been far better at budgeting than Republicans. Republicans slash taxes on the wealthy, leaving the next generation to figure out how to pay up. Have we finally come to a place where we can no longer pay?

Posted by: insightinc | February 8, 2011 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"Mr. Toles apparently hasn't learned that Congress is ultimately responsible for spending and taxation, not the President"
Fine. Then you don't get to blame Obama for the current budget mess.

Posted by: Capn0ok1 | February 8, 2011 1:07 PM | Report abuse

@ DirtFarmer1 | February 8, 2011 9:21 AM

Not so fast. I remember Congress attempting to restrain Reagan. I lived through those years and I paid attention. Reagan kept requesting huge spending budgets. From zfacts.com:

'Contrary to Republican claims, "The Democratic Congress" did not bust Reagan's budgets. In fact, for the first six years, Congress was not Democratic, it was half and half, and the Republican Senate had just as much say, even though the budget bill starts in the House. On top of that, Reagan got the Southern Democrats to vote with him and so he controlled the House too.

But none of this matters because over Reagan's 8 years, Congress approved smaller budgets than he requested on average, and the deviation from what he requested averaged less than half a percent. He raised the debt by $1,860 billion and Congress reduced his budgets by $16 billion. Otherwise he would have raised the debt by $1,876 billion.'

Posted by: ptgrunner | February 8, 2011 11:19 AM | Report abuse

Reagan was a fraud, just as the Tea Party is a fraud. Many of us were shocked as Reagan ran up deficits and debt faster than any other post-WWII POTUS. He smiled and said nice things--that was enough for conservatives. I'll say it again--deficits and debt are simply a political weapon that the GOP uses against opponents. The GOP could care less about debt, and they've demonstrated this many times: Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2 and their Republican followers account for most of the U.S. debt. And if you think the unemployment rate is high now, it was higher during the early Reagan years (see www.data360.org). Interest rates were extremely high as well. Moreover, it was the reduction of interest rates by the Fed. Res., rather than the Reagan tax cuts, that produced economic growth in the 1980s. And let's talk about the $100s billions needed to bail out the Savings & Loan Banks after they were deregulated in the 1980s. Sound familiar?!?!?

But the world is more complicated than conservatives think. And it seems unlikely that Reagan fully understand what he was doing, Democrats allowed the Reagan deficits--mainly because he was politically powerful--and many U.S. voters--who never saw a tax cut they didn't like, damn the consequences--supported the tax policies that resulted in massive debt. Blame the people who voted for Reagan.


I'm waiting for a job-creation program from the Republicans. I'm waiting for a deficit reduction program from the Republicans. Sure, Republicans will take credit for job creation in 2010...but they didn't and haven't done anything to create jobs. And they can't because Obama has already done all that can be done, because Republicans have prevented him from doing more.

Posted by: ptgrunner | February 8, 2011 10:57 AM | Report abuse

Enough of Reagan and Nixon.

Nixon got us deep into Chinese "discounts," now we don't count.

Reagan go us deep into shallow images, now we can't climb out of the swamp environment.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 8, 2011 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Toles apparently hasn't learned that Congress is ultimately responsible for spending and taxation, not the President. And it was the Democrats who controlled Congress during the Reagan adminstration. Reagan wanted both tax and spending cuts. Congress gave him the former, but not the latter.

Posted by: DirtFarmer1 | February 8, 2011 9:21 AM | Report abuse

~~~Furthermore Americans do themselves in by buying Chinese-made products so they can pay less today, not realizing that they are helping to eliminate their own neighbor's, or even their own son or daughter's, job. If Americans were really concerned about our economy, they would stop buying Chinese-made products, and instead opt to pay more for American-made ones. I don't see that as very likely, because everyone thinks purchase price is the only thing that matters. When people have that mentality, they drive themselves into irrelevance.
Posted by: Diamond104~~~

FYI. Can't buy American products if they do not exist....Almost everything on the market I happen to need or purchase is made in China.
I did, "accidentally", purchase something a couple of weeks ago and flipped it over and to my surprise and I do mean SURPRISE, it was made in France...wow....things must be looking up : )

As for the 'budget'. I would suggest waiting for spring when we know what we are dealing with...then commence with the 'heckling'.

Posted by: bertzel | February 8, 2011 8:50 AM | Report abuse

Hilarious how the GOP only finds the deficit to be an issue when a Democrat is in the White House. Reagan in, who cares about the deficit as long as government funds are being routed to our programs. Clinton in, shut down the government, we have a debt crisis! Bush in office, deficit, smeficit, who cares about the deficit! Obama in office, we have to stop the spending and cut unnecessary programs (wonder who's programs are unnecessary). They are a party of such noble people and absolute hypocrites and deceivers. Why do so many people buy their lines of it? Perhaps in the hope if they praise those with the almighty dollar some of it might trickle down on them...

Posted by: EdRuff | February 8, 2011 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Kudos to Diamond104. Your post is absolutely spot on. Thanks for your clarity.

Posted by: wvng | February 8, 2011 7:25 AM | Report abuse

Here are the first 3 planks of Karl Marx Communist Manifesto

1. Abolition of property rights in land and application of all rents of land
to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

Can you say freedom killing taxes....

Posted by: jornolibist | February 8, 2011 6:45 AM | Report abuse

When you're shopping quotes from lenders, beware of points that they'll try to impose on your refi. Each point is a fee of 1% on the amount you borrow. I worked with "123 Mortgage Refinance" search online for them. I would strongly recommend them since they got me 3.24% rate on my mortgage refinance.

Posted by: kevinkeller | February 8, 2011 6:18 AM | Report abuse

In response to a comment below, Taiwan's economy didn't grow because the tax rate was lowered. The reverse is true: The tax rate was lowered because the economy grew.

Taiwan's economy is growing because it is a key supplier of technology to the entire world, and its recent trade deal with China opened it up to further expansion via the ability to sell a lot more directly into China. Unlike the US, labor in Taiwan is still relatively low cost, so Taiwan-made products can still be exported to China. The number one reason the US economy is suffering is that our labor rates are too high, so our products cost too much compared to equivalent products from other countries. As a result, American products lose competitiveness in the global market.

Furthermore Americans do themselves in by buying Chinese-made products so they can pay less today, not realizing that they are helping to eliminate their own neighbor's, or even their own son or daughter's, job. If Americans were really concerned about our economy, they would stop buying Chinese-made products, and instead opt to pay more for American-made ones. I don't see that as very likely, because everyone thinks purchase price is the only thing that matters. When people have that mentality, they drive themselves into irrelevance.

Posted by: Diamond104 | February 8, 2011 2:19 AM | Report abuse

Republicans are quite happy to be the sugar daddy party, handing out tax favors, and equally happy to leave it to the responsible Democrats to clean up after them by doing their work of balancing budgets. Irving Kristol said so himself. Note that this process accomplishes the Republican goals. Dems need to quit falling for it.

Posted by: moore_te | February 8, 2011 12:55 AM | Report abuse

How about "Pigs in Space" for yourself, Ranger...
Like Hollywood, do you?

Tom Toles readers may need a little vinegar to dissolve some fat around the head.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 8, 2011 12:53 AM | Report abuse

Some numbers:
Carter - debt went from 700 billion to 900 billion. 200 bil jump
Interest on debt last year in office - 75 bil

Reagan - debt went from 900 billion to 2.6 trillion. 1.7 TRILLION jump
Interest on debt last year in office - 214 bil

Now who was better at letting you keep your money, Carter or Reagan. Carter added 50 bil a year to the debt, and Reagan added about 200 bil a year (not to mention 140 bil more interest to pay out from your hard earned money).

In Clinton's last four years in office the debt increase 260 bil. In W's last four it increased 2 TRILLION. And Clinton handed W a budget surplus.

For those of you who were still in diapers when Reagan took office, "Morning in America" was pretty much Reagan sympathizing with the white backlash to the civil rights movement. The Republicans were playing the "Southern (white) Card" every chance they got.

Posted by: sherm1 | February 7, 2011 11:09 PM | Report abuse

To answer your question that translator needs to work both ways I suppose.

Posted by: dalyplanet | February 7, 2011 10:43 PM | Report abuse

You don't really want to know the answer to that "question".

Posted by: bertzel | February 7, 2011 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Bert

It is so funny you should ask that particular question at this particular time.

I am noodling the net on cap and trade plans, half listening to the radio, my guy Jason Lewis goes off and this crazy woman Laura Ingram comes on and I am sitting here thinking that she is speaking in some Right speak code that needs a translator\dictionary for me to properly understand. I flip over to TT's blog for a break and see your comment\question and laugh !!

Fate? or are you a mind reader?

Posted by: dalyplanet | February 7, 2011 10:29 PM | Report abuse

yeah...I know. Spelling error...oops.

Posted by: bertzel | February 7, 2011 10:18 PM | Report abuse

~~~Toles, I can't stand the way you equivocate on every issue. Get off the fence!
Posted by: Potter2~~

Can most definately be annoying...is an easy way out tho...don't have to be held accountable...Right Toles?

Posted by: bertzel | February 7, 2011 10:16 PM | Report abuse

Actually I heard that health insurance or "obama care" is the excuse/reason business is not expanding at this time....

daly, does that mean you are no longer in need of the code? : )

Posted by: bertzel | February 7, 2011 10:08 PM | Report abuse

Income tax on corporate profits may not make much sense. Corporations are NOT persons. Oh, wait. The Supreme Court declared corporations to BE persons when they exercise their free speech rights by spending shareholder money on political advertising. The Party of Business and the Party of God enjoys manipulating the public into choosing representatives who act against the interests of most voters. These days, anything and everything that Democrats support doing is shouted down by the GOP as "job-killing." If you want to see real "job-killing," examine what overly compensated hedge fund managers and operators of banks, brokerages, mortgage companies, and securities ratings agencies did to America's economy. For more "job-killing," see America's industrial leaders outsource jobs to India and Asia. Where's the patriotism in those things? And business leaders are back at it again. They want an extreme right-winger in the White House and all Republicans in Congress and on the Supreme Court. Then America truly will become a feudal society. Serfs up!

Posted by: BlueTwo1 | February 7, 2011 9:57 PM | Report abuse

OOPS !!

GaryEMasters

It has taken me a bit to 'see' what you say in your posts but I enjoy your perspective much now.

Posted by: dalyplanet | February 7, 2011 9:56 PM | Report abuse

Meanwhile Taiwan cut its corporate tax rate from 25% to 17% and its economy grew 10% in 2010 and is projected to grow 5% in 2011.

Fools. Don't they know that cutting taxes hurts economic growth?

Posted by: DJ_Spanky | February 7, 2011 9:02 PM | Report abuse

Socialists like liberals, Democrats and progressives want government to confiscate more taxes and spend the people's hard earned money on lavish Super Bowl parties in the White House serving food with lots of fat and salt, but at the same time telling the people paying the taxes they need to eat less salt and more carrots.

Posted by: billybeer6 | February 7, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse

It has taken me a bit to 'see' what you say in your posts but I enjoy your perspective much now.

Posted by: dalyplanet | February 7, 2011 9:00 PM | Report abuse

Your words, with a bit of a twist (of course): "but either you believe in it or you don't."

I see nobody who believes more sincerely than those who believe in money.
But for most of the world money is a con job. So long as much of the world sees a mattress full of one hundred dollar USA bills, we will have a working currency - budgeted or not. But we have to con the world with optimism. That is the key. If they think we have a plan and actually know what we are doing, the bills sty in the mattress and we live to spend another day.

If we get dour and tight and pinch those cents.

OOPS!!

Posted by: GaryEMasters | February 7, 2011 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Toles, I can't stand the way you equivocate on every issue. Get off the fence!

Posted by: Potter2 | February 7, 2011 8:13 PM | Report abuse

@pararanger22, you fell for the myths, I see. Yes, Reagan cut taxes. Once. Then spent the next 7 years raising them again. "Revitalized the military"? Diverted more of our precious human resources and money into the pockets of the military-industrial complex, more like it. Reagan's "success" was in being telegenic, but the Presidency is not the Academy Awards. The President's responsibility doesn't begin and end with getting good polling numbers.

Posted by: fostersm1 | February 7, 2011 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Brilliant! I like today's Sketchpad even more than the finished drawing. I was one of them. I was a software engineer who watched the jobs being sent overseas starting ...hmmm... just about 30 years ago. Now the President wants us to "win the future"? With 25-year-old engineers repeating the same mistakes we made (and learned from) 40 years ago? Good luck with that.

Posted by: fostersm1 | February 7, 2011 7:14 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Toles has been visited by the Liberal Lotophagi again, lulled into a make-believe world where the Reagan years were all gloom and doom and accountants are the true immortals.

Reagan corrected the train-wreck of the Carter years. His popularity averaged 57% for his 8 years in office. Unemployment down; taxes cut; military revitalized; Cold War won; majority of American morale - high. He won 49 states in the '84 election for a reason: Reagan's Presidency was highly successful - not perfect - but one of the very best.

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 7, 2011 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Fraud from "the right" includes a systematic miseducation of our citizens and foreigners alike. So much so, that they would have to hit rock bottom before they know they were falling.

Posted by: Tony-KS

-------------------

The analogy you use here is similar to the ones Biff used in 'Back to the Future.' Drinking is always a good idea when reading Toles' rants but seriously...

Posted by: pararanger22 | February 7, 2011 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Fraud from "the right" includes a systematic slant of the truth of our citizens and foreigners alike. So much so, that "the right" would have to hit rock bottom before they know they were falling.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 7, 2011 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Fraud from "the right" includes a systematic miseducation of our citizens and foreigners alike. So much so, that "the right" would have to hit rock bottom before they know they were falling.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 7, 2011 4:39 PM | Report abuse

Fraud from "the right" includes a systematic miseducation of our citizens and foreigners alike. So much so, that they would have to hit rock bottom before they know they were falling.

Posted by: Tony-KS | February 7, 2011 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company