Oh how easy it must be to look back at history with all the knowledge of what has occurred in the last 20 years. Anyone who thought that the Soviet Empire was poised for a collapse in 1980 was considered an idiot.

Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson declared in 1981 "It is a vulgar mistake to think that most people in Eastern Europe are miserable." Strobe Talbot claimed that the United States, "goal of rolling back Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, the US simply does not ahve the military or political power to do that."

In 1982, Arthur Schlesinger JR stated unequivocally, "Those in the US who think the Soviet Union is on the verge of collagpse are only kidding themselves, wishful thinkers always see other societies as more fragile than they are. Each superpower has economic troubles; neither is on the ropes." And Seweryn Bialer of Columbia declared, "The Soviet Union is not now nor will it de during the bext decasde in the throes of a true systemic crisis."

Hmmmm..........So today the story goes, Reagan didn't do anything to hasten the collapse of the Soviet Union. Yet even former members of the Soviet Union state otherwise. KGB General Oleg Kalugin states, "Reagan and his views disturbed the Soviet government so much they borede on hysteria. Ther were cables about an imminent crises. He was seen as a very serious threat." Yevgeny Novikov, a senior staffer of the Communist Party Central Committee claimed that, "There was widespread concern and actual fear of Reagan on the Central Committee. He was the last thing they wanted to see in Washington."

Reagan called the Soviet Union and evil empire and he was ridiculed by academia and the main stream media. Reagan proclaimed that the Soviet Union would be left on the ash heap of history and these great members of the academia made their predictions.

Looking back now we see who was right and who was wrong. The amiable dunce knew more about the workings of the world than these highly estimed professors. To this day it still pisses them off. That is why they are so eager to rewrite the history, and you join them in excusing their ignorance.

And yes there was a President between Reagan and Clinton, Bush raised taxes, did he not, lo and behold, higher taxes and the deficit remained. It wasn't until Clinton was faced with a Republican House that cut spending coupled with his tax hikes did the budget become balanced. Imagine that, in order to reduce the deficit one need not only raise taxes but also cut spending. Hmmmm I wonder, I recall in 1986, President Reagan made a deal with Congress to raise taxes, providing for every $1 tax increase there was a $3 in spending cuts. To this day, we are still waiting for the cuts. Perhaps if Congress had kept their word, the deficit would have been nil much sooner. But then it was all Reagan's fault.

For 70 years the liberal have embraced the Keynesian economic model of increasing spending to stimulate economic growth, yet only complain when Republicans use the same model. So it is fine for the democrats to do this, but not for the republicans.

The simple fact remains, I will agree, the Republicans in Congress have abandoned their conservative principles. The recent election was not a repudiation of conservatism, but that of liberalism. For it was moderate republicans that were shown the door. They forget their basic principle and paid the price. I say good riddance, this opens the door for the conservatives to take the party back.

dmk