Meanwhile, the corporate/government media, including all the major TV networks and government-controlled newspapers provide wall-to-wall coverage of the expensive, post-mortem rituals of flying Reagan's remains from coast to coast. That media coverage has been massive, almost reminiscent of the coverage of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It has been almost exclusively a sugar-coating of Reagan's "legacy", appealing to an illusory sentimentalism and outright denial of the facts of his presidency by many Americans. The media coverage has been revisionist in character, with lasting Hollywood-like impressions of only a caricature of a man rather than an honest description of who he was, who he served and what he did. In the dearth of any honest critique of the of Reagan's policies at the time of his death, we know that it is our journalistic responsibility to open an honest discussion of the late President’s policies during his 8 years in office. This critique examines some of the details of Reagan’s presidency in depth.

Some will yet accuse us of being "biased" or "one-sided". But the rules of debate compel us to present the Reagan that we see with greatest clarity. If you are seeking another network TV eulogy - an aggrandizement of the man and a glossing over of his policies, you will not find it on Axis of Logic. If you have an opposing perspective on Ronald Reagan, please feel free to submit it to us in a well-written article, and we will be happy to publish it along with the critical essays of Reagan that have been published on Axis of Logic.

THE ECONOMY

Ronald Reagan focused on tax cuts for the rich, telling us the benefits would "trickle down" to the poor.

"Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan felt that tax reduction was deliberately designed to create deficits of such magnitude as to block social spending".

- Arthur Schlesinger Jr., Historian

The massive federal budget deficit, which increased $1.5 trillion during his presidency, three times the debt accumulated by all 39 of Reagan's presidential predecessors? (1)

At the end of 1986 the U.S. had a national debt of $269 billion, at the end of 1987 it was $368 billion, but by 1992 it was $3.5 trillion. It was the greatest economic miscalculation in recorded world history. (2)

Reagan’s doubling of the defense budget, to more than $330 billion by 1987. (1)

His promise of a smaller federal government before increasing the number of federal employees by seven percent (7%)? (3)

That he persuaded Congress to slash tax rates: In 1981 he pushed a bill through Congress cutting taxes 5 percent; in 1982-83 10 percent; In 1986 he pushed through another tax bill that reduced tax rates on the wealthiest Americans to 28 percent (while closing some tax loopholes).

Stopped the cleaning up of federal nuclear weapons facilities?

Resulted in bank interest rates becoming more competitive, but the crushing of smaller banks by the larger institutions.

Failed to make American goods competitive in the world market, and which led to increased consolidation rather than competition.

Resulted in an increase in natural gas prices. It also eased some of the country's dependence on foreign fuel but what is the level of dependence on foreign oil today?

That dropped airfares on high-traffic routes between major cities but included a massive increase in fares for short, low-traffic flights.

That restored some short-term competition to the marketplace but in the long term, competition also led to increased business failures and consolidation.

That gave birth to the Savings & Loan scandal, the largest theft in the history of the world, robbing the US tax payers of $1.4 Trillion Dollars.

In eight Reagan years, the gap between rich and poor Americans increased to more than it had been for half a century. (1, 3, 4)

Dr. Eric Meyer of Emayzine notes:

"It is not enough to describe the U.S. as the world’s richest nation between 1945 and 1992. What is more important is the distribution of its wealth.

"In the 1980's so many millionaires had been created that the term essentially had become meaningless. By 1988 it was estimated that there were over 100,000 decamillionaires.

"The U.S. by 1984 had the greatest gap between rich and poor of any industrialized nation in world history.

"In 1953 there were 27,000 millionaires, in 1964 90,000 millionaires, in 1972 180,000, in 1980 574,000, and in 1988 1.3 million.

"In 1981 there were perhaps 10 billionaires in the U.S., 26 in 1986, 49 in 1987 and 52 in 1988. No parallel upsurge of riches had ever been seen since the late 19th century of the Vanderbilts, Morgans and Rockefellers.

"The top 10% of U.S. households controlled over 68% of the wealth of the U.S. by 1988.

"The average millionaire's income might be soaring, but the average family’s income was stagnating since the late 1970’s in real dollars. In fact real income in 1987 finally recovered back to 1973 levels. (2) 

As president, Reagan had a rather unique view of social programs. Digital History describes his views: (1)

"Reagan's laissez-faire principles could also be seen in his administration's approach to social programs. Convinced that federal welfare programs promoted laziness, promiscuity, and moral decay, Reagan limited benefits to those he considered the "truly needy."

Can we remember Reagan’s treatment of domestic social programs for the poor:

That cut Aid to Families with Dependent Children; food stamps; child nutrition; job training for young people; programs to prevent child abuse and mental health services?

That eliminated welfare assistance for the working poor, and reduced federal subsidies for child-care services for low-income families?

That included an the infamous attempt by Reagan’s Agriculture Department in 1981 to allow ketchup to be counted as a vegetable in school lunches?

That increased the growth of the gap between rich and poor Americans to a level greater than it had been for half a century after his 8 years in office; (1,3)

In a March 8, 1983 speech in Orlando, Florida, Reagan delivered his views on abortion:

"Abortion on demand now takes the lives of up to one and a half million unborn children a year. Human life legislation ending this tragedy will someday pass the Congress, and you and I must never rest until it does." (5)

Those whose position is "pro-life" champion Reagan for these statements. Those whose position is "pro-choice" dislike Reagan for these statements. But it should be noted that Reagan made these statements fully aware of how they would contribute to a divided America and do nothing to heal the wounds in our society. Great leaders do not cause strife among their people and divide them; rather they do what they can to bring them together, help them resolve their differences and strengthen their unity. Reagan was a divider, not a healer.

Reagan was never a champion of civil rights. One example of his insensitivity to African Americans was his support of Bob Jones University in a lawsuit to recover federal tax exemptions that had been formerly denied by the IRS. When I attended Bob Jones University (1961-1965) there was not a single black student, and racist epithets and jokes were relatively common in private discourse in the dormitories.  Obscure passages from the bible were used to defend segregation and prohibit interracial dating and marriage. The IRS denied tax exemptions to private schools that were racially segregated. Later, Bob Jones University admitted a handful of minority students but prohibited interracial dating and marriage. Reagan later said that the case had never been presented to him as a civil rights issue. (6)

Reagan opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as "humiliating to South". He never supported the use of federal power to provide blacks with civil rights. In 1989 Reagan said the Voting Rights Act had been "humiliating to the South." Lou Cannon wrote:

"While he made political points with white southerners on this issue, he was sensitive to any suggestion that his stands on civil rights issues were politically or racially motivated, and he typically reacted to such criticisms as attacks on his personal integrity." (6)

The working class and union-busting

Reagan’s view of unions and organized labor is expressed well in a 1982 AFSME resolution. (15) AFSME stated that the Reagan Administration treated organized labor aggressively and with contempt; that he carried out aggressive policies against members of organized labor by loading the Department of Labor with anti-labor appointees from big business; that he tried to destroy a series of regulatory protections for workers' health and safety by approving the use of tax dollars to finance strike-breaking; that he attacked federal statutes that guaranteed the rights of workers to organize and of collective bargaining and that he attempted to fill the National Labor Relations Board with advocates of business.

Lest anyone doubt AFSME’s claim that Reagan stacked his Department of Labor with the advocates of big business, consider the biographies of his 3 Labor Secretaries:

• Raymond Donovan was Reagan’s Secretary of Labor from 1981-1985. He worked for American Insurance Company and later worked as Vice President of the Schiavone Construction Company in charge of labor relations, financing, bonding, insurance and real estate. He then became Executive Vice President of Schiavone. As Reagan’s Secretary of Labor, he was charged with larceny and fraud and later acquitted. (7)
  
• William Emerson Brock III, was Reagan’s second Secretary of Labor (1985-1987). He was the grandson of William Emerson Brock, a Representative and a Senator from Tennessee. He was employed by the Brock Candy Company as Vice President for Marketing and a member of their Board of Directors. He later became a Republican congressman. (8)
  
• Ann McLaughlin Korologos is hardly representative of America's working class.  She was Reagan’s 3^rd Secretary of Labor (1987-1989) She has been a director for Microsoft since January, 2000. She is a Senior Advisor with Benedetto, Gartland & Co., Inc., a private investment banking company; a Vice Chairman of the Board of Trustees of RAND and a director for the following corporations: AMR Corporation and its subsidiary, American Airlines; Fannie Mae; Harman International Industries, Inc., Host Marriott Corporation, Kellogg Company and Vulcan Materials Company. (9) 

Reagan devastated organized labor when he fired 15,000 striking air-traffic controllers in 1981 - the only labor union that endorsed him as president. (1)

Nelson Liechtenstein, a professor of history at the University of California, Santa Barbara (14) wrote of Reagan's firing of the air traffic controllers:

"It was completely radical that you would not just defeat a union but abolish it"

Again, Dr. Eric Meyer:

• The Reagan years between 1980 and 1988 did create more than 19 million new (low paying) jobs, exploding technology, unprecedented prosperity and had rekindled national pride. It also led to firing of 10 million high paying manufacturing jobs as corporations received tax incentives to move their operations overseas.

(The Neocon/Bush regime is now cynically trying to statistics on recover manufacturing jobs by reclassfying jobs such as making hamburgers at McDonalds Restaurants as "manufacturing jobs".)

• The income of White males fell through the 1980’s especially in the manufacturing sector as corporations received tax breaks to move their operations overseas.
  
• The GAO reported in 1988 that there had been a resurgence of sweatshops and other businesses that openly violated wage, child labor, safety and health laws in almost every sector of the U.S. due to business deregulation.
  
• While wages fell the number of economically active population fell as well throughout the 1980’s. By the summer of 1988 45.3% of the inhabitants of New York city were not part of the economically active due to poverty, lack of skills and education, drug abuse, apathy or other problems. The national average of economically inactive was 34.5%.
  
• Women were also losers in the Reagan Revolution. Families weren’t just shrinking, they were breaking down. 53% of all Marriages ended in divorce in the 1980’s a trend that continues in the 1990’s.
  
• Household headed by women, especially those with children ranked well down on the income scale.
  
• One survey that found that for those working in the 1980’s they were working harder than ever before in the 20th century. Americans leisure time declined 37% between 1973 and 1987--from 26.2 hours per week to 16.6 hours.
  
• In addition, a new sector of the labor force emerged for the first time in the 1980’s, "the contingent work force". Airlines, supermarket chains, offices and almost all businesses began to hire temporary labor rather than full time workers. It was cheaper and also seriously undermined the power of organized labor.
  
• For the first time since the depression a majority of Americans by 1989 could not afford to buy a home.

FOREIGN POLICIES

The most recent effects of Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy can be seen in the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and over 800 U.S. soldiers in Iraq in the past year. Reagan provided hundreds of millions of dollars to Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, building the power that gave the Bush regime the pretext for invading Iraq on March 19, 2003. (11)

Iraq: Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980 and the war lasted for 8 years. Reagan contributed heavily to this war and should be held responsibile for his part in the mayhem by the media and historians. Both sides accepted a cease-fire sponsored by the United Nations (UN) in 1988. MSN Encarta reports:

"The war was one of the longest and most destructive of the 20th century, with likely more than one million casualties. Despite the conflict's length and cost, neither Iran nor Iraq made significant territorial or political gains, and the fundamental issues dividing the countries remained unresolved at the end of the war."

The war was also extremely destructive to the economies of Iran and Iraq. Encarta reports,

"Estimates vary, but the war’s total cost, including military supplies and civilian damages, probably exceeded $500 billion for each side. Both Iran and Iraq sacrificed their considerable oil wealth to the war for nearly a decade, and Iraq was forced to borrow heavily, especially from its allies on the Arabian Peninsula". (17)

On February 25, 2003, The National Security Archive at George Washington University (GWU) published on the a series of declassified U.S. documents that showed Reagan’s support of Saddam Hussein in the early 1980's. In 1983, Donald Rumsfeld, Ronald Reagan’s Middle East Envoy at the time, visited Saddam Hussein tree times. The GWU reports show that the Reagan Administration knew that Saddam Hussein had long-range nuclear aspirations that would "probably" include "an eventual nuclear weapon capability;" that he harbored known terrorists in Baghdad; abused the human rights of his citizens; possessed and used chemical weapons on Iranians and his own people. (18)

In spite of his knowledge of these conditions in Iraq, the Reagan Administration renewed diplomatic relations with Iraq which had been suspended since 1967.  Reagan provided intelligence and aid for Iraq’s war on Iran, and sent Rumsfeld to shake hands with Saddam on December 20, 1983. The documents show that it was during this period of renewed U.S. support for Saddam, he had invaded his neighbor, Iran.

The politicians in Washington are fond of talking about action "in our national interest" - a fundamentally dishonest and ethnocentric concept.  It's dishonest because we know they act, not in the interest of the United States, but rather in the interest of the Global Corporate Empire America serves.  It is immoral because it ostensibly places the value of Americans' lives over those of other countries. President Reagan signed decision directives that reveal his administrations plans for:

"preserving access to oil, expanding U.S. ability to project military power in the region, and protecting local allies from internal and external threats."

Even though it was Iraq who invaded Iran, the GWU report indicates that the Reagan administration deceitfully turned the blame for use of chemical weapons on Iran rather than Iraq in this convoluted statement:

"The 1984 public U.S. condemnation of chemical weapons use in the Iran-Iraq war, which said, referring to the Ayatollah Khomeini's refusal to agree to end hostilities until Saddam Hussein was ejected from power, ‘The United States finds the present Iranian regime's intransigent refusal to deviate from its avowed objective of eliminating the legitimate government of neighboring Iraq to be inconsistent with the accepted norms of behavior among nations and the moral and religious basis which it claims.’

The declassified documents show that on two Rumsfeld trips to Baghdad, reports on Iraqi chemical weapons use were concurrent with the Reagan administration's decision to support Iraq. In a 9/21/02 CNN interview, Rumsfeld claimed that he "cautioned" Saddam about using chemical weapons in a 12/20/83 U.S. cable transmission. The declassified documents show that there was no mention of chemical weapons. Rumsfeld mention chemical weapons on 11/26/83 with Tariq Aziz in a National Security Decision Directive NSDD, "U.S. Policy toward the Iran-Iraq war". In it he also outlined the priorities of the Reagan Administration again: "the ability to project military force in the Persian Gulf and to protect oil supplies" but without any reference to chemical weapons or human rights concerns. On 4/5/84, another NSDD called for condemnation of the use of chemical weapons without naming Iraq. Iraq requested a "lower level response" and the Reagan Administration complied. 

Nicaragua: In 1986, the Reagan Administration admitted that it had been secretly selling arms to Iran, with some of the profits going to the guerrillas in Nicaragua. Reagan’s defense was that he hadn’t been informed of the Iran-contra link. Reagan's CIA facilitation of drug traffic through established relationships with South American drug lords has also been well-established in connection to the Iran-Conta affair. His two policies of selling arms to Iran in exchange for hostages and sending arms to Nicaragua resulted in multiple investigations. Grolier Encyclopedia on-line, "The Presidency" Dec 25, 2000 states:

"The official 1987 report depicted Reagan as confused and uninformed, and concluded that his relaxed "personal management style" had prevented him from controlling his subordinates. Congressional committees heard testimony that Reagan did not know of the diversion of funds. Most committee members signed a majority report in Nov. 1987 asserting that although Reagan’s role in the affair could not be determined precisely, he had clearly failed to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Poindexter, North, and others were indicted in the affair. (16)

Grolier also reports:

"Reagan’s long-standing foreign-policy initiative was to assist anti-Communist guerrillas, known as contras, in thwarting alleged Soviet-Cuban inroads into Nicaragua and to pressure the Sandinista government to hold elections and negotiate with its neighbors. Congress reversed itself several times on whether to give humanitarian or military aid to the contras. Apparently Reagan’s real goal was to overthrow the Sandinistas, but after a 1988 cease-fire, this objective appeared unrealistic." 

Under Reagan in January,1984, the CIA laid mines in Sandino harbor in Nicaragua to sabotage Sandanista communications, and destroy one of their arms depot. This was a clear violation of international law and the Senate resolution condemned the mining. The Sandanistas took their case to the International Court of Justice in the Hague and won, but Reagan refused in advance to recognize the court’s jurisdiction. This mining of the harbors was an example of Reagan’s "force against another state."

The court in the Hague stated: [US support of the contras] "amounts to an intervention of one state in he internal affairs of the other." This arrogant move on Reagan's part violated the Westphalian Treaty which has served to protect the sovereignty of all nation-states since 1648.  But Reagan did not acknowledge any international rules unless he found them to be in favor of his aggressive, arrogan foreign policies.  He only understood two rules: his own and that of the empire he served.

In The Role of a Lifetime, Lou Cannon wrote: By 1984 the contras had become an end in themselves. Loyalty to the contras had become the litmus test for loyalty to "Reagan’s policy" among conservatives. 16 The Reagan administration’s attitude toward the UN can be seen in his appointment of Jeane Kirkpatrick as UN Ambassador. She was critical of the "anti-Americanism" of General Assembly votes. Through Reagan’s 2 terms in office, his distrust and dislike of the UN was evident. His regime:

"Withdrew from UNESCO, and cut off U.S. contributions to the UN Fund for Population Activities, cast the single vote against a World Health Organization code for infant formula, and did not oppose the Kassebaum amendment [and reduced] America’s contribution to the General Assembly by 25% unless the UN should amend its charter."

The Reagan regime also encouraged Britain’s withdrawal from UNESCO (the objective of a Heritage Foundation campaign), and threatened its own withdrawal from several other international agencies.18

President Reagan claimed personal credit (and his supporters happily agreed), for the collapse of the Soviet Union. His supporters like to talk about a safer and richer America resulting from the demise of the Soviets.  Historians will continue to debate the reasons for the fall of the Soviet Union for decades. We will not engage in that debate.

Instead, we will ask a few simple questions: Is the world better off today, than it was when there was a balance of power in the days of the "cold war"? Are you better off economically than you were during those days? Do you have adequate health care? Are American schools offering a decent education to our young people?  Are our streets safer?  Is our nation more secure from foreign attacks? Are nuclear weapons safeguarded now as they were then? Are the people of the former Soviet Union now better off economically than they were before the collapse of their government? Of course the knee-jerk response by many of Americans to these questions will be hearty, "Yes!" - because that's what they've been led to "believe". But an honest response requires an in-depth examination of these issues that goes beyond the throw-away ideas we have all been fed by the corporate media.

Can we remember how under Reagan, The Environmental Protection Agency relaxed its interpretation of the Clean Air Act?  Under his infamous Secretary of the Interior, James Watt, the Department of the Interior opened up large areas of the federal domain, including National Forests and offshore oil fields, to private development. (10)  Now I am compelled to stop here for a minute to take a look at the man Reagan appointed as his Secretary of the Interior.  I remember watching James Watt on television during those years, utterly amazed at his level of arrogance, rooted in his ignorance. I am at a loss for kinder words for this man. James Watt was a piece of work.

"We will mine more, drill more, cut more timber."

-Secretary of the Interior James Watt 

"A left-wing cult dedicated to bringing
down the type of government I believe in."

-James Watt describing
environmentalists

"A tree's a tree. How many more do you need to look at?"

-Ronald Reagan

James Watt was, according to the Audubon Society, "arguably the most anti-environment secretary ever." Watt was not only an enemy of the enviroment. He was remarkably stupid. When he testified before the U.S. Congress on Februrary 5, 1981, he was asked if he agreed that natural resources should be preserved for future generations. Reagan's Secretary of the Interior replied:

"I do not know how many future generations
we can count of before the Lord returns."

However, it wasn’t James Watts’ destruction of the environment that caused Reagan to eventually force him to resign. Rather it was the uproar that resulted from Watts’ comment that he made to a group of lobbyists regarding the makeup of his coal-leasing commission:

"We have every kind of mix you can have. I have a black,
I have a woman, two Jews and a cripple."

-James Watt, September 21, 1983

THE SAVINGS & LOAN DISASTER

The Savings and Loan scandal cost American Taxpayers $1.4 Trillion dollars while Reagan was in office. The scandal resulted at least in part from Reagan’s deregulation of the S&L industry. The earlier deregulation policies of President Jimmy Carter were accelerated by Reagan. Herbert Walker Bush, Vice President under Reagan for 8 years (1981-1989) and the his family benefited greatly from the S&L ripoff.  If justice had been served, members of the immediate family of Vice President Bush would still be in prison.  The prisoners I once knew in the state prison system used to laugh at the utter hypocracy reflected in the way the government treated these thieves.  I knew men who were serving 20-50 years in prison for robbing a liquor store or gas station in those days.  What could they say about Neil Bush's, who pled guilty to an $8.7 theft and got off with a $50,000 fine and no prison time?

The Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation (FSLIC), once insured the deposits at S&L institutions, just as the FDIC insures our deposits in federally regulated banks. The S&L disaster bankrupted the FSLIC, forcing the FDIC to assume responsibility for the lost S&L losses. (13)  Another way of saying that is that the U.S. taxpayer assumed responsibility for the losses.I also remember when news of the S&L scandal hit the papers. I remember the mind-boggling complexity with which it was reported by the press. Many Americans read the complicated language and retired from it with a ho-hum attitude of "business as usual".  Below, in a Chrono-Bibliography, in an excerpt I've taken from the Federal Deposit Insurance Company's report, the scandal is presented in a fairly straight-forward, readable manner.

Rational Revolution reports: "In the early 1980s, under Reagan, regulatory changes took place that gave the S&L industry new powers and for the first time in history measures were taken to increase the profitability of S&Ls at the expense of promoting home ownership". (4)

The FDIC explains some of the events that led to the collapse of the S&L associations this way:(12)

The problem began back in 1967 when the State of Texas (surprised?) gave S&L institutions unprecedented powers. Property development loans of up to 50% of net worth were allowed for the first time. This liberalization of the S&L power continued in graduated steps through 1979.  

1980-1982 Statutory and regulatory changes give the S&L industry new powers in the hopes of their entering new areas of business and subsequently returning to profitability. For the first time, the government approves measures intended to increase S&L profits as opposed to promoting housing and home ownership.

1982-1985 Reductions in the Bank Board's regulatory and supervisory staff. In 1983, a starting S&L examiner is paid $14,000 a year. The average examiner has only two years on the job. Examiner salaries are paid through OMB, not the Bank Board. During this period of supervisory and examination retraction, industry growth increases. Industry assets increase by 56% between 1982 and 1985. 40 Texas S&Ls triple in size between 1982 and 1986; many of them grow by 100% each year. California S&Ls follow a similar pattern.

December, 1982--In response to the massive defections of state chartered S&Ls to the federal system, Nolan Bill passes in California. Allows California-chartered S&Ls to invest 100% of deposits in any kind of venture. Similar plans adopted in Texas and Florida.

1987--Losses at Texas S&Ls comprise more than one-half of all S&L losses nationwide, and of the 20 largest losses, 14 are in Texas. Texas economy in major recession: crude oil prices fall by nearly 50%, office vacancy is over 30%, and real estate prices collapse.

January, 1987--GAO declares FSLIC (Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation) fund insolvent by at least $3.8 billion. Recapitalization has stalled on Capitol Hill until now by claims of powerful S&L lobbyists that Bank Board regulations are too harsh and arbitrary. 

The Bush-Family Rewards from the S&L Scandal

Summarized in the excerpts below, Geoff Price’s treatise, The War is About So Much More (4) reveals some of the Bush-Family involvement in the Savings and Loans scandal:

"There are several ways in which the Bush family plays into the Savings and Loan scandal, which involves not only many members of the Bush family but also many other politicians that are still in office and still part of the Bush Jr. administration today. Jeb Bush, George Bush Sr., and his son Neil Bush have all been implicated in the Savings and Loan Scandal, which cost American tax payers over $1.4 TRILLION dollars (note that this is about one quarter of our national debt).

"Between 1981 and 1989, when George Bush finally announced that there was a Savings and Loan Crisis to the world, the Reagan/Bush administration worked to cover up Savings and Loan problems by reducing the number and depth of examinations required of S&Ls as well as attacking political opponents who were sounding early alarms about the S&L industry. Industry insiders were aware of significant S&L problems as early 1986 that they felt would require a bailout. This information was kept from the media until after Bush had won the 1988 elections.

"Jeb Bush defaulted on a $4.56 million loan from Broward Federal Savings in Sunrise, Florida. After federal regulators closed the S&L, the office building that Jeb used the $4.56 million to finance was reappraised by the regulators at $500,000, which Bush and his partners paid. The taxpayers had to pay back the remaining 4 million plus dollars.

"Neil Bush was the most widely targeted member of the Bush family by the press in the S&L scandal. Neil became director of Silverado Savings and Loan at the age of 30 in 1985. Three years later the institution was belly up at a cost of $1.6 billion to tax payers to bail out.

"Neil Bush was charged with criminal wrongdoing in the case and ended up paying $50,000 to settle out of court. The chief of Silverado S&L was sentenced to 3.5 years in jail for pleading guilty to $8.7 million in theft. (Keep in mind that you can get more jail time for holding up a gas station for $50.)

"Today Neil Bush is working on closing a deal in Florida, where his brother Jeb is governor, to sell a software package to schools with his startup company Ignite.

It should also be noted that shortly after news of Neil Bush’s involvement in the S&L scandal hit the press his father, George Bush Sr., announced the Desert Storm campaign in Iraq, which subsequently had the result of making Neil’s name quickly fade from the headlines. In addition, while Neil Bush's divorce proceeding were exposing more backroom Bush dealings, America was once again bombarded with war propaganda for Operation Iraq Freedom.

This is actually just the tip of the iceberg as far as the Bush family and business dealings are concerned, the topic is a book in itself. In the interest of brevity I invite you to research the Bush family business ties yourself, including those in Saudi Arabia, where George Bush made millions as an oil well developer, and George Bush’s $14 million deal when he sold the Texas Rangers, while leaving tax payers footing the bill.

Whether we consider President Reagan's handling of the economy or his foreign policy - his treatment of the poor through social programs or his attitude and behavior toward our natural resources - his utter contempt for the labor movement or his support of Saddam Hussein's war against the Iranian people - he is found wanting. Rather than finding in him the wisdom, courage and strength that one should expect from the leader of the free world, we find a brutal figure, devoid of compassion, clever, but without the wisdom that sees not a "nation", but a whole people who counted on him to do the right thing.  Despite the Hollywood smile on his face, his jocular movements and comedic style, he has always struck me a sad, empty man as all men are sad who cannot see the beauty in the people who are deserving of their service.

"The Reagan legacy? In 1995, Newt Gingrich's "Contract With America" was supposed to complete the Reagan Revolution. It sank with hardly a trace, and Gingrich with it."

- Digital History

-END-

© Copyright 2004 by AxisofLogic.com