Revisionist History I am familiar with.
I spent 4th Grade in the USSR. I have no doubt that some "economists" like Bowden for instance, will rewrite history. If Reagan is responsible for the growth in the 90's, why didn't it happen under Dubya's Daddy? Remember Clinton's signs: "It's the Economy, Stupid"?
No matter what rw zealots, or revisionist historians say, the facts will always remain:
1. When Reagan took office, the US was the world's leading creditor nation.
2. By the end of his first term, the US was a debtor nation.
3. By the end of his second term, the US was the world's leading debtor nation.
From World's Largest Creditor to World's Largest Debtor and you call that "economic success"? Embrace double-speak that well, do you?
It's surprising to me that even in light of the above facts, Stockman's admission that Supply-Side could not work and that they *knew* it, Dubya's Daddy his ownself calling it "Voodoo economics", all this (and more), you can still find people who support Reaganomics. UN-BELIEVE-ABLE!
