Thank you for your editorial!  As a retired civil servant, I know how many of my co-workers were dedicated to their jobs.  I suspect that much of this antipathy to civil servants my stem from the fact that it was civil servants who raised alarms about what was happening in Nixon’s White House.  Since then there has been a major campaign against “bureaucrats”.

Reagan was many things to many people: liar, con artist, braggart, blowhard, criminal, profiteer.

Reagan should NOT be given the credit for the downfall of the Soviet Union when much, much more that was much much more positive was done by Gorbachev and JPII.  In fact, the signle greatest impact ol’RR and even Bush I had on the Soviet Union was to prevent Gorbachev from achieving Parlian=mentary democracy within his own country.  So, once again, the GOP proved its contampt for true democracy.

Reagan also destroyed the US auto industry - for which the Japanbes paid him millions - and his actions forced the price of autos to rise far faster than they would have if subject to the market forces Publicans claim to prefer.  So, once again, the GOP proved its preference for large, multinational forporations and its contempt for real patriotic, hard-working Americans.

And, never forget, that sterling &L legislation which resulted in the theft of million$ (billion$?) from hard-working poor people by Neil Bush.

Also remember, Reagan’s involvement with organized crime via Lew Wasserman and Reagan’s personal choice to sell-out the members of the union he chaired in exchange for mafia cash - not to mention ol’ RR’s love of and admiration for the rich - best eviddenced by his toadying toward Nancy’s rich, reprobate criminal father.

In response to Paul Magil Smith:

I appreciate your desire to look past mere propaganda and repeated myth.

I would humbly suggest you do research on the following concerning Ronald Reagan and the collapse of the Soviet Union. I ask you to research because I sense a “I won’t believe it till I see it” sort of personality, like mine, and you would prefer to do it yourself.

1) What did the Reagan admin. do to encourage South Africa to flood the diamond market, creating a worldwide drop in price and therefore the massive USSR holdings that were collateral for their enterprises?

2) What did the Reagan admin. do to negotiate with Saudi Arabia to lower the worldwide price of crude oil, thereby reducing the inflow of cash for the USSR’s enterprises?

3) What did the Reagan admin. do to increase the necessary spending for basic food, perceived defensive needs, medicine, and other items that the USSR needed to import or produce themselves at a much greater cost?

It is the combination of these three major actions—reduce value of holdings, reduce cash flow, and increase cost of doing business as a Communist nation, that caused grave problems for the economy (and will to continue) of the USSR. And your research will show that RR’s admin literally caused the first two and aided the latter through defense spending.

You folks research it and tell us what you think it means. Those who do look it up will get an education in myth production.

The other night while watching either Stewart or Colbert the often repeated lie was reiterated that RR stopped the cold war and caused the break-up of the Soviet Union. A Republican ‘stooge’ female guest was mouthing the same tired old fiction without thinking or doing her homework.

For anyone who takes the time to study what actually caused the soviet system to fail they will find one of the major causes was fear. Much the same as Reagan (or Bush) the populace had been propagandized to fear the ‘other’, the bogeyman under the bed. This leads to massive expenditures on wasteful military spending, and neglect of useful social programs. Guns instead of butter is a good decsription.

Despite the fact Eisenhower gave us a stern warning against ‘the military-industrial complex’ we have continued down this destructive errant path. While we give huge increases to a military that has consistantly shown itself champions at wasting our hard earned tax dollars, our country slides toward insolvency, and more of our citizens become impoverished. The cold war was hurried toward its conclusion by similar circumstances NOT because Reagan told Gorby to, “Tear down this wall!” The people of the soviets, when posed with the choice between a new gun or food on the table, rightfully decided they preferred a full belly. We must make this same choice in America today.

A recent study of the Department of Defense has shown $65 billion in cuts we can make without having an effect on our military capabilities. Why are we giving massive increases to a system that is so inefficient at wisely using the funds it has previously gotten? Our quality of life would be greatly enhanced by redirecting these wasted monies toward necessary social programs.

From a military family I do appreciate the need for a strong defense, but when people like Reagan & the Bush clan prefer the concept of pre-emptive war I believe it is time for us to re-think our priorities, a nation in which its citizens flourish as a model for all around the world to emulate, or one feared & hated because it is armed to the teeth. 

Government is necessary in our complexed society. Government is not bad; bad administrators of our government are. The delusional, liars, cheats, and thieves have no place in our government. A bit less secrecy, and more oversight will go a long way toward correcting the problems a warped conservative philosophy has foisted upon us.

#57791 Skruff, people who “live recklessly” shouldn’t depend on the gov. to bail them out.  Neither should Savings and Loans and the other mega businesses that the gov. either has bailed out or helped make huge profits possible with gov. subsidies.  Come to think of it, the government has done so much to prop up businesses over the years that maybe it’s not a bad idea to “spread the wealth” a little.  After all, many of the people in New Orleans and LA were loyal taxpayers whose hard work made it possible for the fed to subsidize business.  It’s the American way, isn’t it?

Bert, you may not have been alive during Reagan’s administration.  Back in the day when he did that big military build up there was a lot of gnashing of teeth and tearing of garments about him running us into debt for the next three generations.  He did his best to assure everyone that they shouldn’t worry, the adults would take care of them.  He had to set up a whole government department that devoted all their time to changing the extra amount of diapers they went through.  Presently we have a lot of rewriters of history that would lead you to believe that the reason the Soviets gave up was because we chatted.  After the wall came down in ‘89 we all found out that when the CIA and KGB were able to compare notes the only one chatting was Ted Kennedy.  Do you think that the Soviets gave up because Reagan chatted and said please or do you think they were afraid that Reagan would unleash the hounds?  And the debt into the next three generations, it was paid off by the middle ‘90’s.  I was in my thirties at the time so I’m doing this all from memory.

Raygun was just as much a tool or product as Donald Duck, he was a senile old fart that people remembered from the movies, and they handed him a script, and he read it. Phil Collins sent him up a long long time ago in ‘land of confusion’, Reagan was ‘ketchup is a vegetable’ guy, and closed the mental health places, and just about started WWIII with ‘we begin bombing in 5 minutes’. George Sr. was his V.P., Jr’s just the end product of passing forward the baton, except that I think Sr’s just about disowned Jr. It’s still the de-facto royal family thing, though,
and Uncle Dick, well gosh golly, he’s been hanging around out back of the White House for HOW many years, now? Same tired sorry cast of characters, public accountability? PSHAW!

I vote in favor of impeachment. General principles, if nothing else. Mark Twain said it best: “Politicans, like diapers, need to be changed regularly, and for similar reasons.”

There was nothing conservative about Ronald Reagan, other than some lip service for conservative causes and his tax cuts…Don’t you realize that when he entered the White House the nation was enjoying a trade surplus and that when he left office we were running a hugh trade deficit? Over the years, this trade deficit has cost us millions of jobs and trillions of dollars in deficits…Don’t you realize that he tripled the national debt over his eight years in office? If he was a true conservative he would have balanced the budget instead of spending and borrowing our money like a drunken sailor…Don’t you realize that if he was a true conservative, he would have strunk the Federal Government, instead of growing it? Sure, he laid off thousands of federal workers (in violation of Civil Service laws) but he hired even more through federal contracts…Don’t you realize that Reagan’s economic policies were a complete disaster and that he created the deregulation disasters and the half-tillion dollar savings and loan scandal?...And don’t you realize that his amnesty program for three million illegal aliens only drew an additional thirty million Illegal Aliens into our country and created the hugh mess we have today? If he were a true conservative, he would have defended our borders, language and culture.

suffered ‘cuts’ under reagan? what cuts?  the government was bigger when he left office than when he went in, and not just the defense department.  You left-wing wackos have constructed an alternate universe, where reagan cut the government, and his economic program didn’t work, and tax cuts reduced revenue to the government…all flying in the face of facts.  Just like you loons think joe wilson is telling the truth.  What a joke.

Truth is, your savior government, doesn’t work.  The government has gotten so big, and so bureacratic that it cannot ‘care’ for people like you wackos think it should.  Any fool could see that the problems are walter reed are emblematic of the failure of government health care….but no you libs never see that, in fact you want us all to suffer under government ‘care’...no thanks.  Oh and I’ve seen the conditions in VA hospitals, and its not too good.

I admit it… I’m too stupid to “get it”

Tell me how one can rail against RR for triming “big government (my foolish opinion is he didn’t trim enough) while also pointing out all the failures of “big government” Sort of reminds me that everyone has their own self-interest.

Now, I’ve already admited I’m a fool, so one can be forgiven for not accepting my suggestion, but isn’t it possible that Government is still too big.  That this big rich entity invites crooks, scalliwags, and charlitans to steal from it?

Wouldn’t it be better to fund disaster relief at the State level?  Why should folks who live on a mountain top fund repairs of a city built nine feet below sea level? Why do I owe the citizens of New Orleans anything? Ditto LA. if these people feel comfortable flocking to a city built on a fault, why should I subsidize their recklessness? 

No, when Government gives, it takes, when it extends a hand, it’s offering not help, but contract. the contract is a string which (over the long haul benefits no one except the connected few who get the money to rebuild under our system this means as cheap as possible.

Government is not to be trusted and funded only at the lowest possible level.

I’m no Reagan fan, but odds say he had to be right at least once.

Ok.  If you’re going to blame Ronnie then ...
... the Left MUST take its heritage from Marx and Hegal.  That makes you philosophical first cousins of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler, and all the other children of the Enlightenment. After all, it is a Marxist social dialectic that the Left is serving up.

http://evangelicalperspective.blogspot.com

Yes, as someone above said, very “gently put.” And for those who think it unacceptable to criticize Reagan because he’s dead, I say too bad. His daughter, Patty, once wrote that her father thought Nixon should have destroyed all records of what the Nixon administration had done re Watergate and denied everything, so he’s arguably more criminal than Nixon in many ways. Reagan caused so much death and suffering, and changed US societal attitudes so much for the worse, that I don’t think he suffered enough for what he did. Cocco mentions that no one could have predicted in 1980 that a generation later we’d have a president who despises government so much that he refuses to finance basic services, etc., but that’s just what Reagan did. It’s hard for people to believe now, but before Reagan it was virtually unthinkable to be opposed to environmental legislation, social services, feminism, and affirmative action. It was also once unimaginable that a president would build up the military partly out of a desire to bring on biblical Armageddon and fulfill prophecy, but Reagan was the first with that motivation, too. Sound familiar? Reagan changed popular attitudes toward all these things. He also pointedly ignored popular will, reviving the idea of the Cold War after a healthy period of detente, building up military expenditures and nuclear arsenals to unprecedented levels, dismissing mass protests against his policies, undermining Congressional attempts to stop him, etc. He also initiated the mass levels of racially-biased incarceration now considered “normal” in the US. Through his elimination of social services, masses of people also became homeless during his regime, initiating another US phenomenon now considered “normal.” He famously claimed to be against taxes, yet what he did was shift money from social services and education to the military, prisons, and police, sending the US into unprecedented debt and ruining millions of lives in the process. Meanwhile, wealthy people’s taxes were reduced, while the poorest were paying higher taxes for fewer services. So, no, young people, things haven’t “always been this way,” even though that word “conservative” makes you think something longstanding and valuable from the past is being preserved. There was a time when the beneficial potential of government programs was recognized. Before Reagan, Americans didn’t cynically and passively accept politicians lying and deceiving. But Reagan’s policies caused people to become dispirited and cynical. An age of “restored optimism” it wasn’t. As Reagan proceeded to make the social functions of government dysfunctional during the 80s, opinion polls showed people coming to have lower opinions of government and greater cynicism toward it, a big change from the previous decade. And there were those in the 80s who warned of even worse future presidents if Reagan’s institutional changes weren’t undone. I would argue that we now have that worse president, though, again, Bush II is just “completing the Reagan Revolution,” as I think Phil Gramm once put it. This is just a small sample of Reagan’s harmful actions, yet masses of Americans have now been taught to revere him, with several places named after him and a survey last year revealing that young students now place him at a level of greatness equivalent to Lincoln’s and exceeding Kennedy’s. So let’s just go ahead and rename the country the United States of Reaganland. As for the Bill of Rights, as Reagan once said, “It’s only a piece of paper.”

Jon, it’s obvious to me that you never worked in the govenment. As a former VA employee, I saw wonderful treatment, caring and competant employees and general “can do” attitude, permeate the halls of my former work. Even though we had suffered the cuts by Raygun, those people did more with less. I worked part-time at a “world class” trauma center nearby (for profit, of course) and was stunned at the terrible attitude of staff toward anything not in their “job description”. All gleam, no substance. Due to the continuing cuts in services, I am no longer with this fine organization (VA); cuts initiated by this “beloved” former president, Reagan.

The scandals of New Orleans and Walter Reed Hospital, and problems of the VA administration are not evidence of the fact that Ronald Reagan did too much in his attempt to reduce the size of government. Rather, he did too little. As a person who worked for the government for a long time I can tell you that it came as no surprise to me when I read of the conditions at Walter Reed. It reminded me of the conditions in the Portsmouth Navy Hospital when I was there in the late sixties. It reminded me of all of the demonstrations of incompetence, waste, mediocrity, and underworked and overpaid government employees you will find if you look closely at any government agency. In New Orleans after Katrina what you saw was an illogical urban plan, protected by one of the biggest bloated beauracracies ( Corps of Engineers ) in their usual mediocre fashion, and then bailed out by another stunning example of competence, FEMA. I may not have agreed with Ronald Reagan about everything but his antipathy towards big government was one of his best attributes.

PS: I forgot to mention that at one point, more than half of all sitting federal judges in the U.S. were appointed by the pimp, Ronald Reagan.  Imagine, all of those black robed pimps, masquerading as federal judges, implementing Reagan’s fascist agenda.  Today, the majority of sitting U.S. judges are still republican appointed.

And U.S. judges serve for life.

Ronald Reagan was the third worst president in U.S. history, behind only Bush and Nixon, and ahead of old man Bush.  He was the supreme fascist demagogue who sought to repeal the 22nd term limit amendment.

The success of his platform - getting the government off of the peoples backs, and promoting the free market, is irrefutable proof of the scope of the stupidity and mental malleability of the citizenry of the wealthiest most powerful country in history.

Reagan’s deregulation movement (getting government off of “the peoples’” backs), is what has led us to the place we are now - government agencies, charged with protecting the public from abuses of the industries they are supposed to regulate, now being run and headed by the lawyers who formerly represented those same industries.  As a result, federal agencies, like the FDA, EPA, USDA, NLRB, FCC, PBGC, etc., which were all created by Congress to specialize in discrete industries (impossible for an elected Congress) and promulgate regulations to protect the public from abuses of industry, now serve to protect industry from responsibility for harm that industry causes to the public. 

Ever heard of Vioxx?  Sure, it’s off of the market, and only 50,000 died.  How about Clear Channel?  The break-up of ATT was a real success, wasn’t it!  Now, like all unregulated industry, ATT has re-consolidated, like T-100 Terminator, except this time, the prior regulation of the former monopolistic giant is gone, but now, it want’s the internet too.  Ever heard of “net neutrality?”  ATT doesn’t like it, which means you should fight like hell to keep it.

When the pimp, Ronald Reagan, said he wanted to get the government off of “the peoples’” backs, it was a lie.  He meant he wanted to get government of off industry’s back, his whores.  Thanks Ronny, America is all the closer to the third world country - of have’s and have not’s - that you envisioned.  That’s right, the “shining city on the hill” that the pimp, Ronald Reagan, spoke of was not for all Americans, it was for the 1/10th of 1% of American industry leaders. 

Further, the notion of “the free market” is another lie, a fraud of the highest order.  THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE MARKET.  Markets are either: 1) regulated or, 2) monopolized.

“Those who fail to learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.”—George Santayana The American public has proven just how easily the past can be forgotten and ignored.

I’m not sure what land Ms. Cocco lived in before the 1980s, but the one I lived in needed no help from Republicans to teach contempt for government.  Government taught us that all by itself.

And even though I have nothing but contempt myself for Ronald Reagan and his followers (like the Clintons and the Bushes), I must agree that government help hasn’t ever been something I’ve looked forward to, either.  Most citizens never have anything to do with their government, except for having their pockets picked by them every April and occasionally getting hassled by policemen. 

And frankly, most of my contempt comes from the fact that the people I’ve mentioned (Reagan, Bushes, Clintons, et al.) all work for the government.  What kind of useless swine would choose to simply be another snout in the public trough?  Sheesh.  Respect is usually reserved for people who do real work, and have real jobs, and therefore have no need to be in politics.

Government are those people who threaten me with guns that they’ve bought with money they stole from me in the form of taxation. They’re the ones who illegally search me when I want to fly in an airplane. They’re the folks who drafted my buddies back in the 60s and 70s, many of whom I never saw alive again.  They’re the folks who codify and standardize education with the result that now one in five Americans is functionally illiterate.  They’re the folks who print fiat currency and make our once-strong economy into a debtor nation.  And they’re also the folks who’ve made America into a country that only borrows money, exploits other countries’ workers, and exports nothing but war and weapons.

I mean, contempt sounds like the correct reaction to me.  Blaming that on Reagan seems pretty silly; it’s sort of like blaming the wet grass for the rain.  But hey, isn’t that what politics is all about, pointing fingers at each other and trying to win brownie points?  Nothing contemptuous about that behavior, right?

I have a 44 year work history so it’s not that I’ve been sitting around since I got out of the Army in ‘72.  In ‘81 it was my first time I needed medical help from the VA with some, shall we say, issues.  Not to mention the two operations they did on my neck in ‘82 and another in ‘04.  The one they did in ‘04 they removed bone number six, replaced it with titanium and screwed four, five and seven to it.  There was this on running PTSD problem that when it was finally peeled away by a number of visits and stays at the VA in Buffalo they discovered that I had this pre-existing condition called hypo-mania.  Something that if they’d have known about it in ‘67 when they drafted me they would have never taken me. Wound up with a total of five years in the Regular Army and then did from ‘84 to ‘94 in the New York National Guard.  They determined this at the Philadelphia VA in ‘03 and awarded me a 100% VA disability.  Through a quality of life program they even gave me this computer.  During my 25 years of needing the VA they never gave me a hard time.  I have heard of some glitches along the way but never personally knew of anyone that had a problem.  I know that with government agencies things can go wrong and sometimes one has to yell a little louder.  Putting things in their proper perspective the system works reasonably for most of the veterans.  We only hear about the exceptions, not the norm.  I can report to anyone reading this that I for one am your tax dollars at work. And I don’t want to be greedy, it would be nice if every US citizen had available to them what I have available to me.

We’ve all seen the horrors that came out of Katrina.  We also saw the parking lots that flooded that were full of buses.  I find it rather strange that the Mayor couldn’t get everyone out of New Orleans with the three day warning, yet when the next mayoral election came up he was able to get buses to Houston, Dallas and Atlanta so as to collect everyone to bring them all back for one day to vote.  And they re-elected him.  Any truth to the stories that the federal government has allocated recovery money to the state and city yet those two governments have the money held up in interest accruing bank accounts and has placed a lot of hoops in the way that people have to leap through in order to get the recovery money?  Or is that another Bush lied, people died story.  Somebody’s lying.

I’m not lying, during Bush’s presidency I’m getting my money at the age of 59 and plan to live a long life.

Ironic that Reagan’s disdain for domestic government was accompanied by massive government meddling in foreign nations. It was his administration after all that built Saddam Hussein (as a proxy to fight Iran) and the Mujahideen (as a proxy to fight the Soviets and now known as Al Qaeda). The most dreaded words are actually “I’m from America and I’m here to help your nation”.

The Regan Library burned…
Both books were lost!
Today, the main draw to Regan’s library is the no-expense spared hangar for his Air-Force-1 jet and Marine-1 helicopter, air-craft paid for by the tax payers of the United States.
What is not in the library are the ruined lives of the air-traffic controllers fired by “the gipper” along with the end of trade unions and Americans right to collectively bargain for a better life. Also missing is an accounting of the endless “user fees” doubled to pay for his reckless tax cuts which enabled him the presidency. A couple comes to mind; over-paying in advance our payroll taxes to secure the “baby boomers” retirement and the origins for taxing Social Security benefits.
Today we are seeing a repeat performance. Taxes are being cut this time as well, only the resulting deficits in government revenue are being borrowed to the tune of $2 billion+ each and every day. This form of fiscal child abuse, pioneered by Ronnie and perfected by both Bushies has systematically bankrupted the United States and has stripped Americans of any economic security. I hope you all enjoyed the last six years. The additional $3 trillion in National debt has no chance of ever being repaid. The republican catch phrase “watch your wallet”’ used to alert the populace against the perils of electing their fiscally prudent opponent, has in effect left the money in your wallet approaching worthlessness.

To people like Reagan and Bush who claim to support the troops, they really only care about the US being a impearilistic capitalistic government. They are responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people from the illegal wars they started alonf with Bush Sr. If any of their children had to serve in the military during the time of any of the wars they stsrted we would not have had those wars. Also if any of their rich cronies had to serve becaues of a draft, none of those wars would have been started. The poor and middle class fight ours nations in order to secure and protect the wealth of the owners of this country the corporations. And it done under slogans as being patroitic,fighting for freedom.and terrorism. All while they destroy our country and pretend that they will take care of those who have served’

By demonizing government, the Reagan administration offered the alternative of the so-called free market, that private enterprise could perform more effeciently with more regard for the public good. That has been shown false. With privitization comes a complete lack of accountability to the public and an allegiance only to shareholders. The Bush administration’s response to Katrina revealed its utter contempt for people of color, an act antithetical to government’s responsibility to protect those in the minority.

Same problem then as now: we have presidents who are ignorant and foolish puppets who rarely ever have a cogent thought if at all. Reagan wasn’t as bad as Bush because he at least was an actor who could play at being president, but in both cases there had to be a puppeteer pulling the strings and making the mouth work, and people who ought to be investigative reporters digging for the truth should have found out who is giving the orders to the ignoramuses.

Sad to say, but the media of today goes along by pretending that people like Bush and Reagan could ever be an actual president with the awesome responsibility that goes with that job. Reagan was a rotten president of the Screen Actors Guild, and worse at trying to play POTUS. Fortunately he was apparently afflicted with Alzheimers which precluded ever learning any truth from him, and of course it is doubtful that anyone will ever learn any truth from the likes of George Witless because he doesn’t KNOW any.

I guess it’s like the truth about Iraq: whether anyone in the public WANTS to know it or not, there is no one in the media who is going to report it to us, just like they haven’t bothered to report and analyze the supposed Iraqi oil agreement which makes the USA the owners of all the oil, no matter who gets a payoff out of the deal.

Bush himself has said several times that it never was about oil; of course it was about oil; there is nothing else for it to BE about. But the real truth about Bush is that he DOESN’T KNOW what it was about, and it is doubtful if he ever will.

There are two facts which have for nearly five years been ignored and even hidden by the media, current company here included, save for the few times Bob Scheer mentioned one of them which got him fired by the LA Times:

1. It’s about oil.
2. Bush is a moron.

These truths are self-evident, but they are also so awful as to make most people want to hide them and pretend that there is some other set of reasons giving rise to what we see today. It is horrible to contemplate that the USA has coveted, lied, murdered, and stolen with respect to the Iraq experience, and it is equally damaging to admit that the greates country in the world has a puppet leader who is virtually brain dead and can’t understand the issues, let alone the supposed orders he passes on from wherever they actually originate.

I see that Marie has gotten her payoff for keeping her mouth shut, a mailbox at the Washington Post no less, and she is to be congratulated for her success if not her candor.

There’s little chance of “collective soul-searching” changing this country’s course. FDR has been belittled, liberal is a dirty word, most of the Democratic leadership is gutless, Reagan is exalted as a great visionary and the collective has been dumbed-down by spin and under-education. The next time hard times hit the United States (probably within the next twenty years) chances are that a Hitler will take the helm not an FDR.

“An abiding distrust of government still is evident in opinion polls.” and rightfully so. And along comes the dimmo’s and contempt still will grow. Somehow a third party must come into being. Bush only amplifies the seriousness of the perils of the two party system. Pelos’s back-pedaling on dimmo promises gives little hope of justice done. The concept of all primary’s coming early is proof of how scared the leaders are of the discontinuance of the 2 party system.  How about a no primary system and all candidates are on one ballot, victor is based on majority votes. No electorial college.

AMEN!!!!!!! The point you make is THE fundamental argument against this administration, and more appropriately the ‘conservative’ ideology. Hey, you don’t have to have big goverment, but you have to have A government.

Thank you, Marie. What you’ve written about is a fundamental problem in the United States. It is the way in which Americans view “government” and the way in which the Republican party has manipulated that view to their benefit by painting an image of government as “bureacratic filled with red-tape” and “inefficient.”  The Republican party has done its best, thanks in no small measure to Ronald Reagan, to vilify government as the “enemy” of the common good leaving many Americans confused and forced into a hypocritical stance when disasters occur. These Americans expect “government” to bail them out even though they don’t believe in progressive taxation and constantly vote Republican. These Americans are hipocritical and are their own worst enemies. Republicans take advantage of these Americans by stoking the flames of “anti-government” and exploiting their irrational fears about the role government plays in a democratic society. When it comes down to it, in a democracy, government should be the most transparant body around and with constant vigilence, should be held to the highest accountability. But the Republican party has bastardized the notion of “government improving the lives of its people” and made a mockery of government in an attempt to destroy its credibility. The collective “soul-searching” that you suggest can only happen if the American people stop believing in the Republican propaganda that “government is the enemy” of the common good. The debate must be framed in such a way that the Republicans no longer are able to bastardize government because they no longer can afford to. If the democrats were to show effective leadership, they would reinvigorate the role government can play in American society by making people understand that without it, they don’t stand a chance at surviving.

I don’t know why, but this bothers me.

I find it immediately dissatisfying to read a title designed to diminish a dead guy, whose children and wife still live and grieve. Respect the office, respect a dead guy who can’t defend himself. One day you’ll be defenseless and who will defend you?

Moving to the rest of the article—the idea we are being sold is that Ronald Reagan gave a famous slap-in-the-face to the federal government and its never recovered.

But rather than prove that point, Ms. Cocco simply moves on to bashing Bush. How 2004.

Her solution to this crisis of mistrust in the government caused by Reagan (and Bush sucks) is that we should search our souls and ask if we would or would not want the government to help me if I were in harm’s way.

That is a valid question, Ms. Cocco. I may be critical of your article, but you finished well. The answer for me is that I’d rather the federal government followed the Constitution, respected state’s rights, and free us to care for ourselves and our neighbors. In my America, I don’t need the government to save me if Florida floods. I have friends, I have my church, I have good neighbors. We’ll not only take care of ourselves, we’ll take care of those around us—and all without turning our nation into a socialist experiment using heart-wringing scare tactics as our sword and secularism as our shield.

I know what this Bush & Co. was going to do even before they took office, and when the people reelected him then I knew that they had fixed the reelection, I for one am not going to stop voting, because in the state I live in the vote is done by the mail box. 

Some states are very corrupt but so far the vote by mail here is honest.

I live in a senior community and those people are very much against the Bush Administration.

After the Libby trial any person can see that this present administration should be removed before they do more damage.

The top of things is going to a prearanged war and then not wanting to take care of the wonded, this war was not supposed to have any wonded because this was supposed to be a cake walk, the funny things about wars is they can not be nailed down, funny thing is people running a war who had never been in the service.

Margaret from Vancouver, Washington

So gently said (but well said as well).

I’ve been wanting to ask Robert Scheer what he (or anyone) might think how Oriana Fallaci would have handled questioning anyone in the current administration. (Scheer interviewed her in 1981 for Playboy, and supposedly said:

“For the first time in my life, I found myself feeling sorry for the likes of Khomeini, Qaddafi, the Shah of Iran, and Kissinger—all of whom had been the objects of her wrath—the people she described as interviewing ‘with a thousand feelings of rage.’ ”

I liked her, although didn’t agree with all she said. At least she said it and got people’s attention (loved or hated).

I did an article about her (ahem, quoted the Sheer statement too!) at:

http://www.civilgideon.com/portal/index.php/site/article/oriana_fallaci/

So, when do we start shouting at this government to give it back to the citizens at last?