© 1994-2012
![[Kottmann Consulting]](/images/kottmann_consulting_script2.jpg){kind=small}
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Disclaimer. Send us an email!
Written Winter, 1996
Here's an example of how they recently (January 14th, 1996) tried to convince the people of Dayton that conservatives had forsaken Ronald Reagan and his legacy.
Under the banner "Real revolution came within conservatism", Martin Gottlieb wrote the following editorial, first suggesting that conservatives had abandoned attempts to cut government waste (a common tactic, to assert one premise, then act as if it has been proven).
....The reason is the conservatives wouldn't go where the real money is: entitlements--which go primarily to the middle class.Most specifically, President Ronald Reagan and his generation talked about the nation's desperate need for a balanced budget; but they did nothing.
A few heroic commentators around the country made a habit of pointing out the utter phoniness of the Reaganite posture. (They noted, for example, that the Reaganites actually created the monster deficit by cutting taxes without getting serious about overall spending. By increasing the deficit, the tax cuts increased the amount the government spends on interest payments.) Those heroes got lambasted for partisanship and for making personal attacks. Now, however, their fundamental critique of Reaganism has been quietly accepted by the conservative movement....
The gist of the editorial, as you can see, is that conservatives have supposedly forsaken the notions of supply-side economics, Ronald Reagan's leadership, and any notion that government waste is a problem.
It's all lies (oh, excuse me, "opinions on the editorial page"). Prior to the advent of the World Wide Web, no one could reliably answer such unfounded, outrageous falsehoods (oh, excuse me, "opinions on the editorial page"). Too bad for the paper involved! Let's take apart the above point by point.
Ever since opposing the creation of the modern welfare state in the 1960s (Mr. Gottlieb has apparently dropped the usual liberal assertions of racism towards conservatives on this point to further his agenda for the day!) conservatives have opposed the theory that government should tax money from working Americans, filter it through an inefficient bureaucracy (there's that concept of waste!), then give back pennies to the dollar to the "needy". And as it has turned out, the "needy" are often those who vote for the people who promise them the most "entitlements".
Now if my only goal was to propagandize (hint, hint) I would merely assert the above and then move on. However, as an "evil" Reaganite Republican I pride myself on providing the facts to back up my positions. In 1980 George Gilder published a book entitled Wealth and Poverty wherein he states "I learned much from these researches about the devastating impact of the programs of liberalism on the poor. But perhaps the most important lesson I learned was the inadequacy of any theory of poverty that did not embody a theory of wealth." Mr. Gilder goes on to push what many were calling Supply Side economics. Mr. Gilder has not, despite the fervent wishing of Mr. Gottlieb, abandoned such notions, quietly or with great commotion. On page 363 of Ed Rubenstein's book The Growth Experiment, is entitled a section "Escalating Entitlements", and describes how without tackling entitlements, the budget will not be balanced. The book, incidently, was published in 1990, and is a summary of the greatest peace-time expansion in United States history--the Reagan Era. Mr. Rubenstein, despite the fervent wishing of Mr. Gottlieb, has not since recanted his book.
Finally, let's remember that on the days when liberals want you to think the conservatives are racists, they point to attacks on entitlements as proof! Just another example of how liberals think the average person is dumb enough to not remember from day to day what is said to them by people in positions of authority.
Once again, we're supposed to swallow what Mr Gottlieb spoon-feeds us--specifically that Reagan "created the deficits". However, having read at least one book on the Reagan Era, I can easily debunk the assertion made by Mr. Gottlieb, and have done so on The Reagan Information Page, most specificaly, in the section on debt and the deficit. In a nutshell, the deficit fell from a high of 6.2% of GNP in 1983 to 2.9% in 1989.
An often repeated lie of liberals is that the tax rate cuts (always put forth as "tax cuts" to entice the reader into thinking they were cuts in revenues) caused the deficits. Deficits were already increasing when Reagan took office, from the mid-two percent in the late 1970s to four percent of GDP level in 1981. After President Reagan's tax rate cuts were fully implemented in 1983, the deficit fell to 2.9% of GDP (as detailed above) because of two things:
The current plan scores tax rate cuts the old way (as revenue losers) because Democrats refuse to acknowledge history! Yet Mr. Gottlieb insists it's because the numbers aren't the way history records them to be. Perhaps he should go back and read the reasons why slavery was not abolished in the original constitution. Sometimes you have to acknowledge the backwards and outdated prejudices of some in order to move forward. Sad, but true!
So despite the fervent wishing of Mr. Gottlieb, tax revenues increased, as did the economy, making the deficits fall as a percentage of GDP as the Reagan Era advanced.
One of the Reasons I created The Reagan Information Page was to make sure that people like Mr. Gottlieb couldn't revise the history of the 1980s. Hopefully I have made it harder for him and people like him to do so. President Reagan is admired by millions, and will continue to be admired, despite the fervent wishing of Mr. Gottlieb.
I don't expect the paper to change its ways soon. But I refuse to let their lies go unchallenged.
© 1994-2012
All trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Disclaimer. Send us an email!