Ronald Reagan: An Autopsy by Murray N. = Rothbard

First published in=20 Liberty, Vol. 2, = No. 4,=20 March 1989.

Eight years, eight = dreary,=20 miserable, mind-numbing years, the years of the Age of = Reagan, are=20 at long last coming to an end. These years have surely left = an=20 ominous legacy for the future: we shall undoubtedly suffer = from the=20 after-shocks of Reaganism for years to come. But at least = Himself=20 will not be there, and without the man Reagan, without what = has been=20 called his "charisma," Reaganism cannot nearly be the same. = Reagan=92s=20 heirs and assigns are a pale shadow of the Master, as we can = see=20 from the performance of George Bush. He might try to imitate = the=20 notes of Reagan, but the music just ain=92t there. Only this = provides=20 a glimmer of hope for America: that Reaganism might not = survive much=20 beyond Reagan.

Reagan the=20 Man

Many=20 recent memoirs have filled out the details of what some of = us have=20 long suspected: that Reagan is basically a cretin who, as a=20 long-time actor, is skilled in reading his assigned lines = and=20 performing his assigned tasks. Donald Regan and others have=20 commented on Ronald Reagan=92s strange passivity, his never = asking=20 questions or offering any ideas of his own, his willingness = to wait=20 until others place matters before him. Regan has also = remarked that=20 Reagan is happiest when following the set schedule that = others have=20 placed before him. The actor, having achieved at last the = stardom=20 that had eluded him in Hollywood, reads the lines and = performs the=20 action that others =96 his script-writers, his directors =96 = have told=20 him to follow.

Sometimes, Reagan=92s = retentive=20 memory =96 important for an actor =96 gave his handlers = trouble.=20 Evidently lacking the capacity for reasoned thought, = Reagan=92s mind=20 is filled with anecdotes, most of them dead wrong, that he = has=20 soaked up over the years in the course of reading = Reader=92s Digest=20 or at idle conversation. Once an anecdote enters = Reagan=92s=20 noodle, it is set in concrete and impossible to correct or = dislodge.=20 (Consider, for example, the famous story about the "Chicago = welfare=20 queen": all wrong, but Reagan carried on = regardless.)

In=20 the early years of Reagan rule, the press busily checked out = Reagan=92s beloved anecdotes, and found that almost every = one of them=20 was full of holes. But Reagan never veered from his course. = Why? God=20 knows there are plenty of correct stories about welfare = cheats that=20 he could have clasped to his bosom; why stick to false ones? = Evidently, the reason is that Reagan cares little about = reality; he=20 lives in his own Hollywood fantasy world, a world of myth, a = world=20 in which it is always Morning in America, a world where The = Flag is=20 always flying, but where Welfare Cheats mar the contentment = of the=20 Land of Oz. So who cares if the actual story is = wrong? Let it=20 stand, like a Hollywood story, as a surrogate for the = welfare cheats=20 whom everyone knows do exist.

The=20 degree to which Reagan is out of touch with reality was best = demonstrated in his concentration camp story. This was not = simply a=20 slip of the tongue, a Bushian confusion of December with = September.=20 When the Premier of Israel visited Reagan at the White = House, the=20 President went on and on for three quarters of an hour = explaining=20 why he was pro-Jewish: it was because, being in the Signal = Corps in=20 World War II, he visited Buchenwald shortly after the Nazi = defeat=20 and helped to take films of that camp. Reagan repeated this = story=20 the following day to an Israeli ambassador. But the truth = was=20 180-degrees different; Reagan was not in Europe; he never = saw a=20 concentration camp; he spent the entire war in the safety of = Hollywood, making films for the armed forces.

Well, what are we to = make of=20 this incident? This little saga stayed in the back pages of = the=20 press. By that point the media had realized that virtually = nothing =96=20 no fact, no dark deed =96 could ever stick to the Teflon = President.=20 (Iran-Contra shook things up a bit, but in a few = months even=20 that was forgotten.)

There are only two = ways to=20 interpret the concentration camp story. Perhaps Reagan = engaged in a=20 bald-faced lie. But why? What would he have to gain? = Especially=20 after the lie was found out, as it soon would be. The only = other=20 way to explain this incident, and a far more plausible = one, is=20 that Ronnie lacks the capacity to distinguish fantasy from = reality.=20 He would, at least in retrospect, have liked to be filming = at=20 Buchenwald. Certainly, it made a better story than the = facts. But=20 what are we to call a man who cannot distinguish fantasy = from=20 reality?

It=20 is surely frightening to think that the most powerful = position in=20 the world has been held for eight years by a man who cannot = tell=20 fact from fancy. Even more frightening is the defection of = the=20 media, who early lost heart and played the role of a = submissive=20 receptacle for photo opportunities and press-release = handouts. One=20 reason for this defection was the discovery of Reagan=92s = Teflon=20 nature. Another likely reason was that journalists who were = too=20 feisty and independent would be deprived of their precious = access to=20 the Presidential plane or to inside scoops or leaks from the = White=20 House. And a third reason was probably the desire not to = dwell on=20 the vital and hair-raising fact that the President of the = United=20 States, "the leader of the free world" and all that jazz, is = nothing=20 more than a demented half-wit.

But=20 why the Teflon? Because of the incredible love affair that = Ronald=20 Reagan has enjoyed with the American people. In all my years = of=20 fascination with American politics (my early childhood = memories are=20 couched in terms of who was President or who was Mayor of = New York=20 City or who won what election), I have never seen anything = remotely=20 like it. Anyone else universally beloved? Franklin D. = Roosevelt was=20 worshipped, to be sure, by most of the American electorate, = but=20 there was always a large and magnificent minority who = detested every=20 inch of his guts. Truman? He was almost universally reviled = in his=20 time; he has only been made an icon in retrospect by the=20 conservative movement. Jack Kennedy, too, is only a hero now = that he=20 has been safely interred; before his assassination he was = cordially=20 detested by all conservatives. Nobody ever loved Nixon. The = closest=20 to universal lovability was Ike, and even he did not inspire = the=20 intense devotion accorded to Ronnie Reagan; with Ike it was = more of=20 a tranquilized sense of peace and contentment.

But=20 with Reagan, it has been pure love: every nod of the head; = every=20 wistful "We-e-ll," every dumb and flawed anecdote, every = snappy=20 salute, sends virtually every American into ecstasy. From = all=20 corners of the land came the cry, "I don=92t like his = policies very=20 much, but I lo-o-ve the man." Only a few malcontents, = popping up=20 here and there, in a few obscure corners of the land, = emerged as=20 dedicated and bitter opponents. As one of this tiny minority = I can=20 testify that it was a lonely eight years, even within = the=20 ranks of the libertarian movement. Sometimes I felt like a = lone and=20 unheeded prophet, bringing the plain truth to those who = refused to=20 understand. Very often I would be at free-market gatherings, = from=20 living rooms to conferences, and I would go on and on about = the=20 deficiencies of Reagan=92s policies and person, and would be = met with=20 responses like "Well of course, he=92s not a = PhD."

Me:=20 "No, no, that=92s not the point. The man is a blithering = idiot. He=20 makes Warren Harding tower like Aristotle."

Responder: "Ronald = Reagan has=20 made us feel good about America."

Perhaps that=92s part = of the=20 explanation for the torrent of unconditional love that the = American=20 public has poured onto Ronald Reagan. Lost in Hollywood = loony-land,=20 Ronnie=92s sincere optimism struck a responsive chord in the = American=20 masses. The ominous fact that he "made us" feel good about = the=20 American State and not just about the country is lost even = on many=20 libertarians.

But,=20 in that case, why didn=92t Hubert Humphrey=92s egregious = "politics of=20 joy" evoke the same all-inclusive love? I don=92t know the = answer, but=20 I=92m convinced it=92s not simply because Hubert was captive = to the=20 dreaded "L-word=92 whereas Ronnie is a conservative. It=92s = lot deeper=20 than that. One of the remarkably Teflon qualities of Reagan = is that,=20 even after many years as President, he is still able to act = as if he=20 were totally separate from the actions of the government. He = can=20 still denounce the government in the same ringing terms he = used when=20 he was out of power. And he gets away with it, = probably=20 because inside his head, he is still Ronnie Reagan, the = mother of=20 anti-government anecdotes as lecturer for General=20 Electric.

In a=20 deep sense, Reagan has not been a functioning part of = the=20 government for eight years. Off in Cloud-Cuckoo-Land he is = the=20 obedient actor who recites his lines and plays his appointed = part.=20 Some commentators have been critical of Reagan for napping = in the=20 afternoons, for falling asleep at crucial meetings, for = taking long=20 vacations at his beloved ranch. Well, why not? What else = does he=20 have to do? Reagan doesn=92t actually have to do = anything; like=20 Peter Sellers in his last film, all he has to do is be = there,=20 the beloved icon, giving his vital sanction to the = governmental=20 process.

Reagan=92s handlers = perceived=20 early on that one threat to Reagan=92s Teflon rule would be = allowing=20 him to mix it up with members of the press. Away from his=20 teleprompter, Ronnie was a real problem. So very soon, any = sort of=20 real press conference, including uninhibited questions and = answers,=20 was done away with. The only press "conferences" became = shouted=20 questions as Reagan walked quickly to and from the White = House=20 helicopter. One of his handlers has written that, despite = all=20 efforts, they couldn=92t stop Reagan from exercising one = peculiar=20 personality trait: his compulsion to answer every question = that he=20 hears. But fortunately, not much was risked, since the noise = of the=20 helicopter engines would drown out most of the = repartee.

The=20 worst moment for the Reagan handlers came, of course during = the=20 first debate with Mondale in 1984. For one glorious moment, = during=20 the give and take of the debate, the real Reagan = emerged:=20 confused, befuddled, out of it. It was a shaky moment, but = all the=20 handlers needed to do was to reassure the shocked masses = that their=20 beloved President was still sentient, was still there = to be a=20 totem to his flock. The handlers blamed Reagan=92s showing = on "over=20 coaching" they made sure that he slept a lot just before the = second=20 debate, and they fed him a snappy mock self-deprecating = one-liner=20 about his age. The old boy could still remember his jokes: = he got=20 off his lovable crack, and the American masses, with a sigh = of=20 relief, clasped him to their bosoms once again.

The Reagan Years:=20 Libertarian Rhetoric, Statist Policies

How=20 did Reagan manage to pursue egregiously statist policies in = the name=20 of liberty and of "getting government off our backs?" How = was he=20 able to follow this course of deception and = mendacity?

Don=92t try to get = Ronnie off the=20 hook by blaming Congress. Like the general public =96 and = all too many=20 libertarians =96 Congress was merely a passive receptacle = for Ronnie=92s=20 wishes. Congress passed the Reagan budgets with a few = marginal=20 adjustments here and there =96 and gave him virtually all = the=20 legislation, and ratified all the personnel, he wanted. For = one Bork=20 there are thousands who made it. The last eight years have = been a=20 Reagan Administration for the Gipper to make or = break.

There was no "Reagan=20 Revolution." Any "revolution" in the direction of liberty = (in=20 Ronnie=92s words "to get government off our backs") would = reduce=20 the total level of government spending. And that means = reduce in=20 absolute terms, not as proportion of the gross = national product, or corrected for inflation, or anything = else.=20 There is no divine commandment that the federal government = must=20 always be at least as great a proportion of the = national=20 product as it was in 1980. If the government was a monstrous = swollen=20 Leviathan in 1980, as libertarians were surely convinced, as = the=20 inchoate American masses were apparently convinced and as = Reagan and=20 his cadre claimed to believe, then cutting government = spending was=20 in order. At the very least, federal government spending = should have=20 been frozen, in absolute terms, so that the rest of the = economy=20 would be allowed to grow in contrast. Instead, Ronald Reagan = cut=20 nothing, even in the heady first year, 1981.

At=20 first, the only "cut" was in Carter=92s last-minute = loony-tunes=20 estimates for the future. But in a few short years, = Reagan=92s=20 spending surpassed even Carter=92s irresponsible estimates. = Instead,=20 Reagan not only increased government spending by an enormous = amount=20 =96 so enormous that it would take a 40 percent cut to bring = us back=20 to Carter=92s wild spending totals of 1980 =96 he even = substantially=20 increased the percentage of government spending to GNP. = That=92s=20 a "revolution"?

The=20 much-heralded 1981 tax cut was more than offset by two tax = increases=20 that year. One was "bracket creep," by which just inflation = wafted=20 people into higher tax brackets, so that with the same real = income=20 (in terms of purchasing power) people found themselves = paying a=20 higher proportion of their income in taxes, even though the = official=20 tax rate went down. The other was the usual whopping = increase in=20 Social Security taxes which, however, don=92t count, in the = perverse=20 semantics of our time, as "taxes"; they are only "insurance=20 premiums." In the ensuing years the Reagan Administration = has=20 constantly raised taxes =96 to punish us for the fake tax = cut of 1981=20 =96 beginning in 1982 with the largest single tax increase = in American=20 history, costing taxpayers $100 billion.

Creative semantics is = the way=20 in which Ronnie was able to keep his pledge never to raise = taxes=20 while raising them all the time. Reagan=92s handlers, as we = have seen,=20 annoyed by the stubborn old coot=92s sticking to "no new = taxes,"=20 finessed the old boy by simply calling the phenomenon by a = different=20 name. If the Gipper was addled enough to fall for this = trick, so did=20 the American masses =96 and a large chuck of libertarians = and=20 self-proclaimed free-market economists as well! "Let=92s = close another=20 loophole, Mr. President." "We-e-ell, OK, then, so long as = we=92re not=20 raising taxes." (Definition of loophole: Any and all money = the=20 other guy has earned and that hasn=92t been taxed away = yet. Your=20 money, of course, has been fairly earned, and shouldn=92t be = taxed=20 further.)

Income tax rates in = the upper=20 brackets have come down. But the odious bipartisan "loophole = closing" of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 =96 an act engineered = by our=20 Jacobin egalitarian "free market" economists in the name of=20 "fairness" =96 raised instead of lowered the income tax paid = by most=20 upper-income people. Again: what one hand of government = giveth, the=20 other taketh away, and then some. Thus, President-elect Bush = has=20 just abandoned his worthy plan to cut the capital gains tax = in half,=20 because it would violate the beloved tax fairness instituted = by the=20 bipartisan Reganite 1986 "reform."

The=20 bottom line is that tax revenues have gone up an enormous = amount=20 under the eight years of Reagan; the only positive thing we = can say=20 for them is that revenues as percentage of the gross = national=20 product are up only slightly since 1980. The result: the = monstrous=20 deficit, now apparently permanently fixed somewhere around = $200=20 billion, and the accompanying tripling of the total federal = debt in=20 the eight blessed years of the Reagan Era. Is that what the = highly=20 touted "Reagan Revolution" amounts to, then? A tripling of = the=20 national debt?

We=20 should also say a word about another of Ronnie=92s great = "libertarian"=20 accomplishments. In the late 1970=92s, it became obvious = even to the=20 man in the street that the Social Security System was = bankrupt,=20 kaput. For the first time in fifty years there was an = excellent chance to get rid of the biggest single racket = that acts=20 as a gigantic Ponzi scheme to fleece the American taxpayer. = Instead,=20 Reagan brought in the famed "Randian libertarian" Alan = Greenspan,=20 who served as head of a bipartisan commission, performing = the=20 miracle of "saving Social Security" and the masses have = rested=20 content with the system ever since. How did he "save" it? By = raising=20 taxes (oops "premiums"), of course; by that route, the = government=20 can "save" any program. (Bipartisan: both parties acting in = concert=20 to put both of their hands in your pocket.)

The=20 way Reagan-Greenspan saved Social Security is a superb = paradigm of=20 Reagan=92s historical function in all areas of his realm; he = acted to=20 bail out statism and to co-opt and defuse any libertarian or = quasi-libertarian opposition. The method worked brilliantly, = for=20 Social Security and other programs.

How=20 about deregulation? Didn=92t Ronnie at least deregulate the=20 regulation-ridden economy inherited from the evil Carter? = Just the=20 opposite. The outstanding measures of deregulation were all = passed=20 by the Carter Administration, and, as is typical of that = luckless=20 President, the deregulation was phased in to take effect = during the=20 early Reagan years, so that the Gipper could claim the = credit. Such=20 was the story with oil and gas deregulation (which the = Gipper did=20 advance from September to January of 1981); airline = deregulation and=20 the actual abolition of the Civil Aeronautics Board, and=20 deregulation of trucking. That was it.

The=20 Gipper deregulated nothing, abolished nothing. Instead of = keeping=20 his pledge to abolish the Departments of Energy and = Education, he=20 strengthened them, and even wound up his years in office = adding a=20 new Cabinet post, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs. = Overall, the=20 quantity and degree of government regulation of the economy = was=20 greatly increased and intensified during the Reagan years. = The hated=20 OSHA, the scourge of small business and at the time the = second=20 most-hated agency of federal government (surely you need not = ask=20 which is the first most-hated), was not only not abolished; = it too=20 was strengthened and reinforced. Environmentalist = restrictions were=20 greatly accelerated, especially after the heady early years = when=20 selling off some public lands was briefly mentioned, and the = proponents of actually using and developing locked-up = government=20 resources (James Watt, Anne Burford, Rita Lavelle) were = disgraced=20 and sent packing as a warning to any future=20 "anti-environmentalists."

The=20 Reagan Administration, supposedly the champion of free = trade, has=20 been the most protectionist in American history, raising = tariffs,=20 imposing import quotas, and =96 as another neat bit of = creative=20 semantics =96 twisting the arms of the Japanese to impose = "voluntary"=20 export quotas on automobiles and microchips. It has made the = farm=20 program the most abysmal of this century: boosting price = supports=20 and production quotas, and paying many more billions of = taxpayer=20 money to farmers so that they can produce less and raise = prices to=20 consumers.

And=20 we should never forget a disastrous and despotic program = that has=20 received unanimous support from the media and from the = envious=20 American public: the massive witch hunt and reign of terror = against=20 the victimless non-crime of "insider trading." In a country = where=20 real criminals =96 muggers, rapists, and "inside" thieves = =96 are=20 allowed to run rampant, massive resources and publicity = are=20 directed toward outlawing the use of one=92s superior = knowledge and=20 insight in order to make profits on the market.

In=20 the course of this reign of terror, it is not surprising = that=20 freedom of speech was the first thing to go by the boards.=20 Government spies and informers busily report conversations = over=20 martinis ("Hey Joe, I heard that XYZ Corp. is going to merge = with=20 ABC.") All thisis being done by the cartelizing = and=20 fascistic Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department = of=20 Justice and its much-hailed Savanarola in New York, Rudolf = Giuliani.=20 All this is the work of the beloved Gipper, the = "free-market,"=20 "libertarian" Reagan Administration. And where are the = "conservative=20 libertarians"? Where are the "free market economists" to = point this=20 out and condemn it?

Foreign aid, a vast = racket by=20 which American taxpayers are mulcted in order to subsidize = American=20 export firms and foreign governments (mostly dictatorships), = has=20 been vastly expanded under Reagan. The Administration also=20 encouraged the nation=92s banks to inflate and pour money = down Third=20 World rat-holes; then bailed out the banks and tin-pot = socialist=20 dictatorships at the expense of U.S. taxpayers (via tax = increases)=20 and consumers (via inflation). Since the discrediting of = Friedmanite=20 monetarism by the end of the first Reagan term, the original = monetarist policy of allowing the dollar to fluctuate freely = has=20 been superseded by Keynesian Secretary of Treasury James = Baker, who=20 has concerted with foreign central banks to try to freeze = the dollar=20 within various zones. The interference has been, as usual, = futile=20 and counterproductive, but that will not stop the soon-to-be = even=20 more powerful Baker from trying to fulfill, or at least move = strongly toward, the old Keynesian dream of one world fiat = paper=20 currency (or at least fixed exchange rates of the various = national=20 currencies) issued by one world Central Bank =96 in short, = economic=20 world government.

But=20 didn=92t Ronnie "bring down inflation"? Sure, but he did it, = not by=20 some miracle, but the old-fashioned way: by the steepest = recession=20 (read: depression) since the 193Os. And now, as a result of = his=20 inflationary monetary policies, inflation is back with a = roar =96=20 which the Teflon President will leave as one of his great = legacies=20 to the Bush Administration.

And=20 then there is another charming legacy: the reckless = inflationary=20 course, encouraged by the Reagan Administration, of the = nation=92s=20 savings-and-loan banks. Virtually the entire industry is now = bankrupt, and FDIC =96 the federal agency supposedly = "insuring"=20 S&L depositors =96 is bankrupt. Instead of allowing the = banks and=20 their deluded depositors to pay the price of their = profligacy,=20 everyone of both parties, including our "free-market" = Reaganauts, is=20 prepared to use taxpayer money or the printing press to bail = out the=20 entire industry =96 to the tune of an estimated 50 to 100 = billion=20 dollars. (These estimates, by the way, come from government = sources,=20 which notoriously underestimate future costs of their=20 programs.)

I=20 have been cleaving to the strictly economic realm because = even the=20 staunchest pro-Reagan libertarian will not dare to claim = that Ronnie=20 has been a blessing for civil liberties. On the contrary. In = addition to his reign of terror on Wall Street (who cares = about the=20 civil liberties of stock traders anyway?), Reagan worked to = escalate=20 toward infinity the insane "war against drugs." Far from the = 1970s=20 movement toward repealing marijuana laws, an ever greater = flow of=20 men and resources =96 countless billions of dollars =96 are = being=20 hysterically poured into combating a drug "problem" that = clearly=20 gets worse in direct proportion to the intensity of the=20 "war."

The=20 outbreak of drug fascism, moreover, is a superb illustration = of the=20 interconnectedness of civil liberty and economic freedom. = Under=20 cover of combating drugs, the government has cracked down on = our=20 economic and financial privacy, so that carrying cash has = become=20 prima fade evidence of "laundering" drug money. And = so the=20 government steps up its long-cherished campaign to get = people to=20 abstain from cash and into using government-controlled = banks. The=20 government is already insinuating foreign exchange controls = =96 now=20 the legal obligation to "report" large amounts of cash taken = out of=20 the country =96 into our personal and economic = life.

And=20 every day more evil drugs are being found that must be = denounced and=20 outlawed: the latest is the dread menace of anabolic = steroids. As=20 part of this futile war, we are being urged by the = Reaganites to=20 endure compulsory urine testing (supervised, of course, = since=20 otherwise the testee might be able to purchase and = substitute black=20 market drug-free urine). In this grotesque proposal, = government is=20 not only not off our backs, it is now also insisting = on=20 joining us in the bathroom.

And=20 in the bedroom, too, if Ronnie has his way. Although = abortion is not=20 yet illegal, it is not for lack of effort by the Reagan=20 Administration. The relentless Reaganite drive to = conservatize the=20 judiciary will likely recriminalize abortion soon, making = criminals=20 out of millions of American women each year. George Bush, = for less=20 than twenty-four glorious hours, was moved to take a = consistent=20 position: if abortion is murder, then all women who engage = in=20 abortion are murderers. But it took only a day for his = handlers to=20 pull George back from the abyss of logic, and to advocate = only=20 criminalizing the doctors, the hired hands of the women who = get=20 abortions.

Perhaps the Gipper = cannot be=20 directly blamed =96 but certainly he has set the moral = climate =96 for=20 the increasingly savage Puritanism of the 1980s: the virtual = outlawry of smoking, the escalating prohibition of = pornography, even=20 the partial bringing back of Prohibition (outlawing drunken = driving,=20 raising the legal drinking age to 21, making bartenders =96 = or=20 friendly hosts =96 legally responsible for someone = else=92s=20 drunken driving, etc.).

Under Reagan, the = civil=20 liberties balance has been retipped in favor of the = government and=20 against the people: restricting our freedom to obtain = government=20 documents under the Freedom of Information Act and stepping = up the=20 penalties on privately printed and disseminated news about=20 activities of the government, on the one hand; more = "freedom" for=20 our runaway secret police, the CIA, to restrict the printing = of=20 news, and to wiretap private individuals, on the other. And = to cap=20 its hypocrisy, as it escalated its war on drugs, the Reagan=20 Administration looked the other way on drug running by its = own=20 CIA.

On=20 foreign policy, the best we can say about Ronnie is that he = did not=20 launch World War III. Apart from that, his foreign policy = was a=20 series of murdering blunders:

His idiotic=20 know-nothing intervention into the cauldron of Lebanon, = resulting=20 in the murder of several hundred US Marines.=20
His failed=20 attempt =96 lauded by Reaganites ever since =96 to murder = Colonel=20 Khadafy by an air strike =96 and succeeding instead in = slaying his=20 baby daughter, after which our media sneered at Khadafy = for=20 looking haggard, and commented that the baby was "only=20 adopted."=20
His=20 stumblebum intervention into the Persian Gulf, = safeguarding oil=20 tankers of countries allied to Iraq in the Iraq Iran war.=20 (Ironically, the US. imports practically no oil from the = Gulf,=20 unlike Western Europe and Japan, where there was no = hysteria and=20 who certainly sent no warships to the Gulf.) In one of the = most=20 bizarre events in the history of warfare, the Iraqi = sinking of the=20 U.S.S. Stark was dismissed instantly =96 and without = investigation,=20 and in the teeth of considerable evidence to the contrary = =96 as an=20 "accident," followed immediately by blaming Iran = (and using=20 the sinking as an excuse to step up our pro-Iraq = intervention in=20 the war). This was followed by a US warship=92s sinking of = a=20 civilian Iranian airliner, murdering hundreds of = civilians, and=20 blaming =96 you guessed it! =96 the Iranian government for = this=20 catastrophe. More alarming than these actions of the = Reagan=20 Administration was the supine and pusillanimous behavior = of the=20 media, in allowing the Gipper to get away with all = this.=20

As=20 we all know only too well, the height of Reagan=92s Teflon = qualities=20 came with Iran-Contra. At the time, I na=EFvely thought that = the=20 scandal would finish the bastard off. But no one saw = anything wrong=20 with the Administration=92s jailing private arms = salesmen to=20 Iran, while at the very same time engaging in arms sales to = Iran=20 itself. In Reagan=92s America, apparently = anything, any=20 crookery, any aggression or mass murder, is OK if allegedly=20 performed for noble, patriotic motives. Only personal greed = is=20 considered a no-no.

I=20 have not yet mentioned the great foreign-policy triumph of = the=20 Reagan Administration: the invasion and conquest of tiny = Grenada, a=20 pitiful little island-country with no army, air force, or = navy. A=20 "rescue" operation was launched to save US medical students = who=20 never sought our deliverance. Even though the enemy = consisted of a=20 handful of Cuban construction workers, it still took us a = week to=20 finish the Grenadans off, during the course of which the = three wings=20 of our armed forces tripped over each other and our military = distinguished itself by bombing a Grenadan hospital. The = operation=20 was as much a botch as the Carter attempt to rescue the = American=20 hostages. The only difference was that this time the enemy = was=20 helpless.

But=20 we won didn=92t we? Didn=92t we redeem the US loss in = Vietnam and=20 allow America to "stand tall"? Yes, we did win. We beat up = on a=20 teeny country; and even botched that! If that = is=20 supposed to make Americans stand tall, then far = better we sit=20 short. Anyway, it=92s about time we learned that Short is=20 Beautiful.

The=20 US war against the Sandinistas on the other hand, = which has=20 been conducted at enormous expense and waged hand-in-hand = with=20 Guatemalan, Honduran, and Salvadoran dictators, is going = down the=20 drain, despite illegal CIA mining of harbors and injury to = neutral=20 shipping. Even the nearly comatose American public is giving = up on=20 the idea of supporting bandit guerrillas, so long as they = are=20 anti-Communist, despite the best efforts of Ollie and Secord = and=20 Singlaub and Abrams and all the rest of the war = crowd.

The=20 Reagan Administration=92s continued aid and support to Pol = Pot in=20 Cambodia, the most genocidal butcher of our time, is more=20 reprehensible but less visible to most Americans. As a = result, Pol=20 Pot=92s thugs are mobilizing at this very moment on the Thai = border to=20 return and take over Cambodia as soon as the Vietnamese pull = out,=20 presumably to renew their bizarre mass murders. But you see, = that=92s okay with the Reaganites because the = Cambodian Commies=20 are guerrilla fighters against the Vietnamese = (pro-Soviet)=20 Commies, who by definition are evil. Pol Pot=92s butchers as = "freedom=20 fighters" show us that, in the arsenal of the Reaganite = Right,=20 "freedom," like "taxes" and many other crucial words, means, = as in=20 the case of Humpty Dumpty, whatever they choose = it to.=20

Grenada was the = perfect war as=20 far as many conservatives (and apparently much of the = American=20 public) were concerned: it was quick and easy to win, with = virtually=20 no risk of loss, and allowed ample opportunities to promote = the=20 military (and their Commander-in-Chief) as heroes while = bragging up=20 the victory on television =96 in short, allowing the U.S. to = glory in=20 its status as a bully. (It helped eradicate the awful memory = of=20 Vietnam, which was the perfect war for American centrist = liberals:=20 virtually impossible to win, horribly expensive in terms of = men and=20 property =96 and best of all, it could go on forever without = resolution, like the War on Poverty, fueling their sense of = guilt=20 while providing safe but exciting jobs for members of their=20 techno-bureaucratic class).

While the American = masses do=20 not want war with Russia or even aid to the bandit = Contras,=20 they do want an ever-expanding military and other = aggravated=20 symbols of a "strong," "tough" America, an America that = will, John=20 Wayne-like, stomp on teeny pests like Commie Grenada, or, = perhaps,=20 any very small island that might possess the tone and the = ideology=20 of the Ayatollah.

Setting the Stage: = The=20 Anti-Government Rebellion of the 1970s

I am=20 convinced that the historic function of Ronald Reagan was to = co-opt,=20 eviscerate and ultimately destroy the substantial wave of=20 anti-governmental, and quasi-libertarian, sentiment that = erupted in=20 the U.S. during the 1970s. Did he perform this task = consciously?=20 Surely too difficult a feat for a man barely compos. = No,=20 Reagan was wheeled into performing this task by his = Establishment=20 handlers.

The=20 task of co-optation needed to be done because the 1970s,=20 particularly 1973=9675, were marked by an unusual and = striking=20 conjunction of crisis =96 crises that fed on each other to = lead to a=20 sudden and cumulative disillusionment with the federal = government.=20 It was this symbiosis of anti-government reaction that led = me to=20 develop my "case for libertarian optimism" during the = mid-1970=92s, in=20 the expectation of a rapid escalation of libertarian = influence in=20 America.

1973=9674 saw the = abject failure=20 of the Nixon wage-price control program, and the development = of=20 something Keynesians assumed could never happen: the=20 combination of double-digit inflation and a severe = recession.=20 High unemployment and high inflation happened again, even = more=20 intensely, during the greater recession of 1979=9682. Since=20 Keynesianism rests on the idea that government should pump = in=20 spending during recessions and take out spending during = inflationary=20 booms, what happens when both occur at the same time? = As Rand=20 would say: Blankout! There is no answer. And so, there was=20 disillusionment in the government=92s handling of the = macro-economy,=20 deepening during the accelerating inflation of the 1970s and = the=20 beginnings of recession in 1979.

At=20 the same time, people began to be fed up, increasingly and = vocally,=20 with high taxes: income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes, = you name=20 it. Especially in the West, an organized tax rebel movement=20 developed, with its own periodicals and organizations = However=20 misguided strategically, the spread of the tax rebellion = signaled a=20 growing disillusion with big government. I was privileged to = be=20 living in California during the election year of 1978, when=20 Proposition 13 was passed. It was a genuinely inspiring = sight. In=20 the face of hysterical opposition and smears from the entire = California Establishment Democratic and Republican, Big = Business and=20 labor, academia, economists, and all of the press the = groundswell for Prop 13 burgeoned. Everyone was against it = but the=20 people. If the eventual triumph of Ronald Reagan is the best = case=20 against "libertarian populism," Prop. 13 was the best case = in its=20 favor.

Also=20 exhilarating was the smashing defeat of US imperialism in = Vietnam in=20 1975 =96 exhilarating because this first loss of a war by = the United=20 States, many of us believed, was bound to get Americans to = rethink=20 the disastrous warmongering bipartisan foreign policy that = had=20 plagued us since the unlamented days of Woodrow = Wilson.

On=20 the civil liberties front, the de facto legalization = of=20 marijuana was a sign that the nonsense of drug prohibition = would=20 soon be swept away. (Ye gods! Was that only a decade = ago?)=20 Inflationary recession; high taxes; prohibition laws; defeat = in=20 foreign war; across the board, the conditions seemed = admirable for a=20 growing and triumphant libertarianism.

And=20 to top it off, the Watergate crisis (my particular favorite) = destroyed the trust of the American masses in the = Presidency. For=20 the first time in over a hundred years, the concept of=20 impeachment of the President became, first thinkable, = and=20 then a living and glorious process. For a while, I feared = that Jimmy=20 Carter, with his lovable cardigan sweater, would restore = Americans=92=20 faith in their president, but soon that fear proved=20 groundless.

Surely, it is no = accident that=20 it was precisely in this glorious and sudden anti-government = surge=20 that libertarian ideas and libertarian scholarship began to = spread=20 rapidly in the United States. And it was in 1971 that the = tiny=20 Libertarian Party emerged, in 1972 that its first, embryonic = presidential candidacy was launched, and 1973 when its first = important race was run, for mayor of New York City. The = Libertarian=20 Party continued to grow rapidly, almost exponentially, = during the=20 1970s, reaching a climax with the Clark campaign for = governor of=20 California during the Prop 13 year of 1978, and with the = Clark=20 campaign for the Presidency in 1980. The morning my first = article on=20 libertarianism appeared in the New York Times = in 1971,=20 a very bright editor at Macmillan, Tom Mandel, called me and = asked=20 me to write a book on the subject (it was to become For a = New=20 Liberty). Not a libertarian himself, Mandel told me = that he=20 believed that libertarianism would become a very important = ideology=20 in a few years =96 and he turned out to be right.

So=20 libertarianism was on a roll in the 1970s. And then = Something=20 Happened.

Enter the=20 Neocons

What=20 happened was Ronald Wilson Blithering Reagan. Obviously = Reagan did=20 not suddenly descend out of the clouds in 1980. He had been = the=20 cherished candidate of the conservative movement, its chosen = route=20 to power, ever since Goldwater=92s defeat. Goldwater was too = blunt and=20 candid, too much an unhandleable Real Person. What was = needed was a=20 lovable, manipulable icon. Moreover, Goldwater=92s = principles were too=20 hard-edged: he was way too much a domestic libertarian, and = he was=20 too much an eager warmonger. Both his libertarianism and his = passion=20 for nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union scared the = bejesus=20 out of the American masses, as well as the more astute = leadership of=20 the conservative movement.

A=20 reconstituted conservative movement would have to drop any=20 libertarian ideology or concrete policies, except to = provide=20 a woolly and comfortable mood for suitably = gaseous=20 anti-government rhetoric and an improved foreign policy that = would=20 make sure that many more billions would go into the=20 military-industrial complex, to step up global pressure = against=20 Communism, but avoiding an actual nuclear war. This = last=20 point was important: As much as they enjoy the role of the = bully,=20 neither the Establishment nor the American people want to = risk=20 nuclear war, which might, after all, blow them up as well. = Once=20 again, Ronnie Reagan looked like the Answer.

Two=20 important new ingredients entered into, and helped reshape, = the=20 conservative movement during the mid 1970=92s. One was the = emergence=20 of a small but vocal and politically powerful group of=20 neo-conservatives (neocons), who were able, in a remarkably = short=20 time, to seize control of the think tanks, the = opinion-molding=20 institutions, and finally the politics, of the conservative=20 movement. As ex-liberals, the neocons were greeted as = important new=20 converts from the enemy. More importantly, as = ex-Trotskyites, the=20 neocons were veteran politicos and organizers, schooled in = Marxian=20 cadre organizing and in manipulating the levers of power. = They were=20 shrewdly eager to place their own people in crucial opinion = molding=20 and money-raising positions, and in ousting those not = willing to=20 submit to the neocon program. Understanding the importance = of=20 financial support, the neocons knew how to sucker Old Right=20 businessmen into giving them the monetary levers at their = numerous=20 foundations and think tanks. In contrast to free-market = economists,=20 for example, the neocons were eager to manipulate patriotic = symbols=20 and ethical doctrines, doing the microequivalent of Reagan = and=20 Bush=92s wrapping themselves in the American Flag. Wrapping=20 themselves, also, in such patriotic symbols as The Framers = and the=20 Constitution, as well as Family Values, the neocons were = easily able=20 to outflank free-market types and keep them narrowly = confined to=20 technical economic issues. In short the neocons were easily = able to=20 seize the moral and patriotic "high ground."

The=20 only group willing and able to challenge the neocons on = their own=20 moralizing on philosophic turf was, of course, the tiny = handful of=20 libertarians; and outright moral libertarianism, with its = opposition=20 to statism, theocracy, and foreign war, could never hope to = get to=20 first base with conservative businessmen, who, even at the = best of=20 times during the Old Right era, had never been happy about=20 individual personal liberty, (e.g. allowing prostitution,=20 pornography, homosexuality, or drugs) or with the = libertarians=92=20 individualism and conspicuous lack of piety toward the = Pentagon, or=20 toward the precious symbol of the Nation-State, the US flag. =

The=20 neocons were (and remain today) New Dealers, as they frankly = describe themselves, remarkably without raising any = conservative=20 eyebrows. They are what used to be called, in more precise=20 ideological days, "extreme right-wing Social Democrats." In = other=20 words, they are still Roosevelt-Truman-Kennedy-Humphrey = Democrats.=20 Their objective, as they moved (partially) into the = Republican Party=20 and the conservative movement, was to reshape it to = become,=20 with minor changes, a Roosevelt-Truman-etc. movement; = that is, a=20 liberal movement shorn of the dread "L" word and of = post-McGovern=20 liberalism. To verify this point all we have to do is note = how many=20 times Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, et al., properly = reviled by=20 conservatives while they were alive, are now lauded, even = canonized,=20 by the current neocon-run movement, from Ronnie Reagan on = down. And=20 no one calls them on this Orwellian revision of conservative = movement history.

As=20 statists-to-the-core the neocons had no problem taking the = lead in=20 crusades to restrict individual = liberties,=20 whether it be in the name of rooting out "subversives," or = of=20 inculcating broadly religious ("Judeo-Christian") or moral = values.=20 They were happy to form a cozy alliance with the Moral = Majority, the=20 mass of fundamentalists who entered the arena of = conservative=20 politics in the mid-1970s. The fundamentalists were goaded = out of=20 their quietist millenarian dreams (e.g., the imminent = approach of=20 Armageddon) and into conservative political action by the=20 accumulation of moral permissivism in American life. The=20 legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade was undoubtedly the = trigger,=20 but this decision came on top of a cumulative effect of the = sexual=20 revolution, the militant homosexual movement "out of the = closet" and=20 into the streets, the spread of pornography, and the visible = decay=20 of the public school system. The entry of the Moral Majority = transformed American politics, not the least by furnishing = the elite=20 cadre of neocons with a mass base to guide and=20 manipulate.

In=20 economic matter, the neocons showed no more love of liberty, = though=20 this is obscured by the fact that the neocons wish to trim = the=20 welfare state of its post-Sixties excrescences, particularly = since=20 these were largely designed to aid black people. What the = neocons=20 want is a smaller, more "efficient" welfare state, within = which=20 bounds they would graciously allow the market to operate. = The market=20 is acceptable as a narrow instrumental device; their view of = private=20 property and the free market is essentially identical to = Gorbachev=92s=20 in the Soviet Union.

Why=20 did the Right permit itself to be bamboozled by the neocons? = Largely=20 because the conservatives had been inexorably drifting = Stateward in=20 the same manner. In response to the crushing defeat of = Goldwater,=20 the Right had become ever less libertarian and less = principled, and=20 ever more attuned to the "responsibilities" and moderations = of=20 Power. It is a far cry from three decades ago when Bill = Buckley used=20 to say that he too is an "anarchist" but that we have to put = off all=20 thoughts of liberty until the "international Communist = conspiracy"=20 is crushed. Those old Chodorovian libertarian days are long = gone,=20 and so is National Review as any haven for = libertarian ideas.=20 War mongering, militarism, theocracy, and limited "free" = markets =96=20 this is really what Buckleyism amounted to by the late=20 1970s.

The=20 burgeoning neocons were able to confuse and addle the = Democratic=20 Party by breaking with the Carter Administration, at the = same time=20 militantly and successfully pressuring it from within. The = neocons=20 formed two noisy front groups, the Coalition for a = Democratic=20 Majority and the Committee on the Present Danger. By means = of these=20 two interlocking groups and their unusual access to = influential=20 media, the neocons were able to pressure the Carter = Administration=20 into breaking the d=E9tente with Russia over the Afghanistan = imbroglio=20 and influencing Carter to get rid of the dove Cyrus Vance as = Secretary of State and to put foreign policy power into the = hands of=20 the Polish =E9migr=E9 hawk and Rockefeller Trilateralist, = Zbigniew=20 Brzezinski. In the meantime, the neocons pushed the = hysterically=20 hawish CIA "B" Team report, wailing about alleged Soviet = nuclear=20 superiority, which in turn paved the way for the vast gift = of=20 spending handed to the military-industrial complex by the = incoming=20 Regan Administration. The Afghanistan and "B" Team = hysterias, added=20 to the humiliation by the Ayatollah, managed not only to = kill off=20 the bedeviled Carter Administration, but also to put the = boots to=20 non-intervention and to prepare the nation for a scrapping = of the=20 "post-Vietnam syndrome" and a return to the warmongering of = the=20 pre-Vietnam Era.

The=20 Reagan candidacy of 1980 was brilliantly designed to weld a=20 coalition providing the public=92s instinctive = anti-government mood=20 with sweeping, but wholly nonspecific, libertarian rhetoric, = as a=20 convenient cover for the diametrically opposite policies = designed to=20 satisfy the savvy and politically effective members of that=20 coalition: the neocons, the Buckleyite cons, the Moral = Majority, the=20 Rockefellers, the military-industrial complex, and the = various=20 Establishment special interests always clustering at the = political=20 trough.

Intellectual=20 Corruption

In=20 the face of the stark record, how were the Reaganites able = to get=20 away with it? Where did Ronnie get his thick coat of Teflon? = Why was=20 he able to follow statist policies and yet convince = everyone,=20 including many alleged libertarians, that he was = successfully=20 pursuing a "revolution" to get government off our = backs?

The=20 essential answer was provided a century ago by Lysander = Spooner. Why=20 does the public obey the State, and go further to endorse = statist=20 policies that benefit the Power Elite at the public=92s own = expense?=20 The answer, wrote Spooner, is that the State is supported by = three=20 powerful groups: knaves, who know what is going on and = benefit from=20 State rule; dupes, who are fooled into thinking that State = rule is=20 in their and everyone else=92s interest; and cowards, who = know the=20 truth but are afraid to proclaim that the emperor has no = clothes. I=20 think we can refine Spooner=92s analysis and merge the Knave = and=20 Coward categories; after all, the renegade sellout confronts = the=20 carrot and the stick: the carrot of wealth, cushy = jobs, and=20 prestige if he goes along with the Emperor; and the stick of = scorn,=20 exclusion from wealth, prestige, and jobs =96 and perhaps = worse =96 if=20 he fails to go along. The reason that Reagan got away with = it =96 in=20 addition to his aw-shucks "lovability" =96 is that various = powerful=20 groups were either duped or knave-cowardly corrupted into = hailing=20 his alleged triumphs and deep-sixing his evident=20 failures.

First, the powerful=20 opinion-molding media. It is conventional wisdom that media = people=20 are biased in favor of liberalism, No doubt. But that is not = important, because the media, especially elite media who = have the=20 most to lose, are also particularly subject to the = knave/coward=20 syndrome. If they pander to Reaganism, they get the approval = of the=20 deluded masses, their customers, and they get the = much-sought-after=20 access to the President and to other big-wigs in government. = And=20 access means scoops, carefully planted exclusive leaks, etc. = Any=20 sort of effective opposition to the President means, on the = other=20 hand, loss of access; the angering of Reagan-deluded masses; = and=20 also the angering of their bosses, the owners of the = press=20 and television, who are far more conservative than their = journalist=20 employees.

One=20 of Reagan=92s most notable achievements was his emasculation = of the=20 liberal media because of his personal popularity with the = masses.=20 Note, for example, the wimpy media treatment of = Iran-Contra=20 as compared to their glorious attack on Watergate. If = this=20 is liberal media bias, then the liberals need to be = saved from=20 their friends.

If=20 the media were willing to go along with Reaganite duplicity = and=20 hokum, then so were our quasi-libertarian intellectual = leaders. It=20 is true of the libertarian-inclined masses as it has been = always=20 true of the conservative masses: they tend to be not too = swift in=20 the upper story. During the late 1970s, libertarian = intellectuals=20 and free-market economists were growing in number, but they = were=20 very few, and they had not yet established institutions with = firm=20 ties to journalistic and mass opinion. Hence, the = libertarian=20 mood, but not the informed thought, of the = masses, was=20 ready for co-optation, especially if led by a charismatic, = beloved=20 President.

But=20 we must not under weigh the importance of the traitorous = role=20 performed by quasi-libertarian intellectuals and free-market = economists during the Reagan years. While their institutions = were=20 small and relatively weak, the power and consistency of = libertarian=20 thought had managed to bring them considerable prestige and=20 political influence by 1980 =96 especially since they = offered an=20 attractive and consistent alternative to a statist system = that was=20 breaking down on all fronts.

But=20 talk about your Knaves! In the history of ideological = movements,=20 there have always been people willing to sell their souls = and their=20 principles. But never in history have so many sold out for = so=20 pitifully little. Hordes of libertarian and free-market=20 intellectuals and activists rushed to Washington to = whore=20 after lousy little jobs, crummy little grants, and sporadic = little=20 conferences. It is bad enough to sell out; it is far worse = to be a=20 two-bit whore. And worst of all in this sickening spectacle = were=20 those who went into the tank without so much as a clear = offer:=20 betraying the values and principles of a lifetime in order = to=20 position themselves in hopes of being propositioned. And = so they=20 wriggled around the seats of power in Washington. The = intellectual=20 corruption spread rapidly, in proportion to the height and = length of=20 jobs in the Reagan Administration. Lifelong opponents of = budget=20 deficits remarkably began to weave sophisticated and absurd=20 apologias, now that the great Reagan was piling them up, = claiming,=20 very much like the hated left-wing Keynesians of yore, that=20 "deficits don=92t matter."

Shorn of intellectual = support,=20 the half-formed libertarian instincts of the American masses = remained content with Reaganite rhetoric, and the actual=20 diametrically opposite policies got lost in the = shuffle.

Reagan=92s=20 Legacy

Has=20 the Reagan Administration done nothing good in its eight = ghastly=20 years on earth, you might ask? Yes, it has done one good = thing; it=20 has repealed the despotic 55-mile-per-hour highway speed = limit. And=20 that is it.

As=20 the Gipper, at bloody long last, goes riding off into the = sunset, he=20 leaves us with a hideous legacy. He has succeeded in = destroying the=20 libertarian public mood of the late 1970=92s, and replaced = it with=20 fatuous and menacing patriotic symbols of the Nation-State,=20 especially The Flag, which he first whooped up in his = vacuous=20 reelection campaign in 1984, aided by the unfortunate = coincidence of=20 the Olympics being held at Los Angeles. (Who will soon = forget the=20 raucous baying of the chauvinist mobs: "USA! USA!" every = time some=20 American came in third in some petty event?) He has = succeeded in=20 corrupting libertarian and free-market intellectuals and=20 institutions, although in Ronnie=92s defense it must be = noted that the=20 fault lies with the corrupted and not with the = corrupter.

It=20 is generally agreed by political analysts that the = ideological mood=20 of the public, after eight years of Reaganism, is in support = of=20 economic liberalism (that is, an expanded welfare = state), and=20 social conservatism (that is, the suppression of = civil=20 liberties and the theocratic outlawing of immoral behavior). = And, on=20 foreign policy, of course, they stand for militaristic = chauvinism.=20 After eight years of Ronnie, the mood of the American masses = is to=20 expand the goodies of the welfare-warfare state (though not = to=20 increase taxes to pay for these goodies), to swagger abroad = and be=20 very tough with nations that can=92t fight back, and to = crack down on=20 the liberties of groups they don=92t like or whose values or = culture=20 they disagree with.

It=20 is a decidedly unlovely and unlibertarian wasteland, this = picture of=20 America 1989, and who do we have to thank for it? Several = groups:=20 the neocons who organized it; the vested interests and the = Power=20 Elite who run it; the libertarians and free marketeers who = sold out=20 for it; and above all, the universally beloved Ronald Wilson = Reagan,=20 Who Made It Possible.

As=20 he rides off into retirement, glowing with the love of the = American=20 public, leaving his odious legacy behind, one wonders what = this=20 hallowed dimwit might possibly do in retirement that could = be at all=20 worthy of the rest of his political career. What very last = triumph=20 are we supposed to "win for the Gipper"?

He=20 has tipped his hand: I have just read that as soon as he = retires,=20 the Gipper will go on a banquet tour on behalf of the repeal = of the=20 22nd ("Anti-Third Term") Amendment =96 the one decent thing = the=20 Republicans have accomplished. In the last four decades. The = 22nd=20 Amendment was a well-deserved retrospective slap at FDR. It = is=20 typical of the depths to which the GOP has fallen that in = the last=20 few years that Republicans have been actually muttering = about=20 joining, the effort to repeal this amendment. If they are=20 successful, then Ronald Reagan might be elected again, and = reelected=20 well into the 21st century.

In=20 our age of High Tech, I=92m sure that his mere physical = death could=20 easily have been overcome by his handlers and media mavens. = Ronald=20 Reagan will be suitably mummified, trotted out in front of a = giant=20 American flag, and some puppet master would have gotten him = to give=20 his winsome headshake and some ventriloquist would have = imitated the=20 golden tones: "We-e-ell..." (Why not? After all, the living = reality=20 of the last four years has not been a helluva lot=20 different.)

Perhaps, after all, = Ronald=20 Reagan and almost all the rest of us will finally get our = fondest=20 wish: the election forever and ever of the mummified con = King=20 Ronnie.

Now=20 there is a legacy for our = descendants!

Ronald Reagan: An=20 Autopsy