[Hoot Gibson]

I would say that your own familiarity of the workings of the Reagan era is largely the benefit of second hand information. I doubt you had all that much interest in such matters when it was all going down. The point is, one more time, that you said this; "Don't fall for Trump's demagoguery on economics. Trump has always supported liberal politicians who have choked the life out of manufacturing and mining operations in this country. As they say, follow the money - and you sill see most of it has ended up in the pockets of corrupt liberal politicians."


Now, your having said that had nada to do with rankings among noted economists be they Friedman or Keynes, and everything about trashing Trump with another of you unfair characterizations of him. Mr Trump is being advised by the same men that advised Reagan. His economic plan is sound according to them.

Tell me if I am mistaken, but I don't believe that you have ever taken your first class in economics. I am no expert in economics, but I have taken several classes on the subject. One does not need to be an expert to know that Friedman and Hayek are two of the most important economists in history, but one must be pretty ignorant of the subject to deny that to be a fact.

You keep dropping names to defend Trump, but do you really believe that Trump's economic advisers agreed with his threat to impose up to a 45 percent tariff on all Chinese imports? I know that Laffer would not support such an action. He dismissed Trump's threat as political rhetoric and has given assurances that if elected, Trump will support free trade policies.

Those were Trump's words. If quoting a candidate's own words is unfairly characterizing him, what is the fair way to characterize such a buffoon?