Friday, February 4, 2011
Yes, I was pulled in again and called the Larry Elder show this a.m. to debate a topic about Reaganomics and Reagan's intent in Nicaragua & El Salvador. I was on hold one hour and 45 minutes an the super nice guy managing the phones promised to get me in. I waited thru endless Reagan jokes which were soft spoken and funny but a bit long winded; Ed Meese's interview (I think he worked for Nixon as a cabinet member during Watergate as well as Reagan). Also Nancy Reagan's archive interview with Larry where she virtually had not a thing interesting to say. Anyways, the media has currently compared Obama to Reagan. In reality, Obama had a dinner where he was brainstorming the success of previous presidents and was curious how Reagan turned over the economy. Despite party, Reagan and Obama have more things in common than not. Both were elected into broken economies except in 1982, there was double digit inflation and the aftermatn of the Oil Crisis and America was on the advent of boom technology. I was a senior in college and graduated in Dec, 1982 and took a job in a bakery after college. Secondly, Obama inherited a two front war. Reagan created a two front covert war basically in response to his fear of Soviet hegemony and influence in Central America. It was noble of Reagan to support Jose Napolean Duarte in his newly elected government in El Salvador but it was not right to oppose the Sandinistas in Nicaragua by supplying arms and traniing. The Somoza family ruled over 30 years in Nicaragua and the Sandinistas were freedom fighters. However, their military style did put citizens in harm's way. If they had solidified their government immediately, they would not have had to attempt reform by force. By Reagan meddling in Central America, it was making another second world country subjected to the Cold War Conflict and not allow their government to achieve their own autonomy. With supply of weapons, it was unfairly balancing and counter-balancing both sides. Anyways, my point is that both Obama and Reagan faced similar problems in America but how they handle the problems will be different for Obama. He does see the institution of nationalized health care as a legitimate policy endeavor. Now Larry Elder may be right in his assertion of the liberal agenda, but it is not for a negative result. After all, is funeling weapons and money into a CIA backed covert war more egalitarian than allowing every citizen access to health care? And Reagan did equal damage to the economy. Trickle down economics only gravitationally trickled up and created yuppiedom, buppiedom and rich bastards who were reckless. Reagan also allowed deregulation and gave the authority for James Watts of the Interior Dept. to deregulate commerce and leased federal lands for oil exploration and the Gulf and other places. I am not saying Reagan is horrible. But being likeable is not enough. His legacy is duel-edged, just like Clintons. Why should our nation keep glorifying past relics. Lets face the problems of today. We can draw from the past but not re-create or use phony statistics to back up our arguments. Elder said once Reagan's economy improved, the media removed his coverage by and large. The media had other things to report like Contra gate, Yuppiedom, Silicon Valley and of course, the new found fame of Madonna Ciconne.