Just spotted:

Thirty years ago, a newly elected Ronald Reagan made a fateful judgment: “Government is not the solution to our problem. Government is the problem.” Taxes for the rich were slashed, as were outlays on public services and investments as a share of national income. Only the military and a few big transfer programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and veterans’ benefits were exempted from the squeeze.

Reagan’s was a fateful misdiagnosis. He completely overlooked the real issue — the rise of global competition in the information age — and fought a bogeyman, the government. Decades on, America pays the price of that misdiagnosis, with a nation singularly unprepared to face the global economic, energy and environmental challenges of our time.

Washington still channels Reaganomics. The federal budget for nonsecurity discretionary outlays — categories like highways and rail, education, job training, research and development, the judiciary, NASA, environmental protection, energy, the I.R.S. and more — was cut from more than 5 percent of gross domestic product at the end of the 1970s to around half of that today. With the budget caps enacted in the August agreement, domestic discretionary spending would decline to less than 2 percent of G.D.P. by the end of the decade, according to the White House. Government would die by fiscal asphyxiation.

Both parties have joined in crippling the government in response to the demands of their wealthy campaign contributors, who above all else insist on keeping low tax rates on capital gains, top incomes, estates and corporate profits. Corporate taxes as a share of national income are at the lowest levels in recent history. Rich households take home the greatest share of income since the Great Depression. Twice before in American history, powerful corporate interests dominated Washington and brought America to a state of unacceptable inequality, instability and corruption. Both times a social and political movement arose to restore democracy and shared prosperity.

The author, Jeffrey Sachs, believes we are at the dawn of a new progressive age. I certainly hope so.

I didn’t watch the GOP debate last night. In fact, I forgot there was a debate last night. Mittens declared stoutly that if Barack Obama is re-elected, Iran will get nuclear weapons, and if he is elected, Iran will not get nuclear weapons. I take it Mittens has more pull with the nuclear disarmament fairy.

This is from WaPo:

At the first GOP debate that focused on foreign policy, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney and former House speaker Newt Gingrich indicated that if either of them were commander in chief, they would be willing to use military force against Iran, if tightened economic sanctions and support for the Iranian opposition did not work to deter nuclear weapons development in the country.

“If all else fails, if after all of the work we’ve done, there’s nothing else we could do besides take military action. Then of course you take military action,” Romney said.

Gingrich agreed: “If in the end, despite all of those things, the dictatorship persists, you have to take whatever steps are necessary to break its capacity to have a nuclear weapon.”

All kinds of military experts warn that neither a ground invasion nor a bombing campaign against Iran would likely succeed, and there’s a real question whether the U.S. has the capacity for such a military strike any more.

Ooo, but aren’t we so impressed at how cute little Mittens and the Newt look when they’re trying to act manly and chest-thumpy and show how mean and tough they are?

Herman Cain said he would assist the opposition, but “would not entertain military opposition.” What the bleep does that mean?

Texas Gov. Rick Perry said he would impose economic sanctions on Iran’s central bank — a move the Obama administration has backed away from, for fear of the economic damage that might occur if it disrupted international oil markets.

Hey, you know what they say … drill, baby, drill.