I enjoy having interesting people on.  I get probably 10-15 requests a day.  Most books are on topics or issues that I don’t think my audience will find interesting.  So, I delete and move on.  I interview all sorts of people on all sorts of topics.  Entertainment, politics, sports, pop culture — to name a few.  I take my job seriously as an entertainer.  I always have.  I know you have a choice when you turn on the radio and I hope to give you a wide enough variety that my show will remain your choice. If you listen regularly, you know I enjoy when people call in who disagree with me.  I am someone who only makes an opinion when I feel confident I’ve weighed the available information and have thoroughly examined the opposing view.  I NEVER use the opinions of other hosts to form my own as I would hope they don’t use mine.  This way my show is fresh and truly unique.  With what I said about callers in mind, you also know I enjoy when an interviewee disagrees. I am not required to interview anyone.  Never have been.  Never will be.  I do it because it gives my listeners a great perspective AND because I get to talk to some incredible guests.  If you hear an interview on the show, one of two things has happened:
  1. I sought out the interview with someone from whom I feel the audience will enjoy hearing.
  2. The guest or his or her representatives reached out to me in the hopes of getting them lined up.
Most of the time, it’s the second option.  I had an author on right after the Supreme Court ruling on the states having defined marriage as one man and one woman.  The SCOTUS did NOT decide that gay marriage is legal.  It simply said the 14th Amendment’s provision of equal protection under the law forbids states from making Constitutional amendments that exclude some from being married.  It was a HORRIBLE decision in which the court legislated from the bench.  I had this guest on, Ryan Anderson, who wrote a book on the decision.  His reps contacted me.  I had him on. It was a great interview.  He’s a very smart guy.  We agreed that the court was out of line and that something must be done about it.  Guys like Ryan come on my show so I’ll talk to them about their books.  After they appear on my show, their book sales go up.  I get a quality interview (hopefully) and they get some traction for their books.  It’s a good partnership. I was contacted by Ryan’s people again a few days ago on the Kim Davis situation out of Rowan County, Kentucky.  If you’re not familiar, she’s the county clerk and refuses to sign the marriage licenses of gay couples.  In fact, she stopped signing all marriage licenses claiming religious reasons.  I agree with Kim Davis and Ryan Anderson the SCOTUS ruling.  I believe in traditional marriage as defined by history, religion and (up til now) the government.  What I don’t agree with is that she continues to collect 80k per year while refusing to do her job. The SCOTUS ruling was horrible.  But, sadly, it’s the law of the land — at least for now.  Her job as the county clerk is to follow the law of the land.  I support her putting up the good fight — as soon as she steps down as clerk.  Step down in protest.  Get the biggest sign you can and march with thousands of others.  Shoot — I might even join you.  But, you cannot hold the clerk’s duties hostage while you do that protest.  She is NOT required by law to be the clerk.  Step down.  Show me how serious you are about this fight.  She cannot bring about change by being in jail.  She cannot win while being silenced.  Ryan disagrees with me.  And, I knew that going in. I had him on again and let everyone know up front that we agree on the core issue.. yet, disagree on Davis.  All was well until he decided to make a generalization about me and “conservative talk radio.”  Ryan’s problem is, he didn’t look into me before appearing either time.  He’s also got a problem with not only being firm in his position (which is a good quality) but also hearing someone else and countering their position without lobbing insults.  If you’ve listened to my show for any amount of time at all, you know I don’t like comparisons nor stereotypes.  Ryan made the mistake of going there. Here’s a Portion of the Interview Where He Decides Insults Are Best After the interview, I hit Twitter and Facebook.  This is my post on Facebook: “Had fun mixing it up with Ryan Anderson.. we agree on the SCOTUS ruling.. we agree on the definition of marriage.. but, when people disagree, the last thing you should do is generalize the guy who invited you on the show. Just saying.” Ryan took to Twitter seemingly unable to understand where I was coming from nor showing the ability to understand why we disagree.  It’s degenerated from there, sadly.  I’ve posted the portion of the interview to which I’m referring.  Again, I urged him to email me if he wanted to air this out.  Instead, he decided doing it on Twitter made more sense.  By the way, his response to me on Twitter was this — another comparison/insult:

CNN host thought I was using common sense and logic. Conservative radio host doesn’t. Interesting.

I have an idea, stick with people who won’t challenge you and stay on networks nobody watches.  I wish him well with his book.  I’ve let his reps know to take me off of their wish list of hosts on whose shows they would like Ryan to appear.  First person I’ve done this with in 26 years in broadcasting.  Maybe he’ll show more respect the next time he gets the shot to be on someone’s show and talk with his or her audience. jp  

  Donald_Trump_Laconia_Rally,_Laconia,_NH_3_by_Michael_Vadon_July_16_2015_09 (Photo: Michael Vadon) From the moment he announced he was jumping into the race for the Republican nomination for president, Donald Trump has been mercilessly attacked.  But, why?  Is it his hair?  Bombastic personality?  Business acumen?  His TV stardom?  Nope, it’s his tiny level of concern over what the political and media elites think of him. Over the weekend, Trump held a rally in Arizona to bring attention to something politicians and the media are doing their level best to ignore — illegal immigration.  Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said Trump’s visit to Phoenix, “fired up the crazies.”  That raised the level of a once-mundane rhetoric between the two to a new high — or low depending on your perspective.  In response, Trump was laying into McCain when pollster Frank Luntz reminded the billionaire that McCain is a war hero.  Trump quickly quipped that he wasn’t a war hero — than that he was a war hero because he was captured.  He then said, “I like people who weren’t captured, I’d hate to tell you.” That attempt at humor was certainly over-the-line and I think Trump should have said it was an off-the-cuff attempt at humor that fell flat — but, he didn’t.  That’s who he is.  He just doesn’t care what the establishment thinks of him.  In fact, compare it to Martin O’Malley who, many of you don’t know, is running for the Democrat nomination.  He was at an event recently where some of the recent racial uprisings were being discussed.  He dared say, “All Lives Matter,”  He was booed and the comments weren’t well received.  Instead of pulling a Trump and sticking to his guns, he found a microphone and camera and apologized for the comment. Yes, he really did apologize for saying All Lives Matter! Networks drop Trump and he calls them stupid and finds a different network.  Web sites say they won’t cover his campaign, he makes fun of them directly and laughs in their faces.  A politician calls his supporters “crazies” and Trump tells the world he raised over a million dollars for him when he ran in 2008.  Another politician calls Trump a jackass and the businessman responds by outing the politician for asking for help and he tells the world the lawmakers personal cell number. A guy who just doesn’t care and has no fear of alienating lobbyists and donors is a scary man to take on in a political race.  You attack him and he has no hesitation in attacking back.  You skirt issues and he takes them on.  I’m not saying Donald Trump is going to be the nominee and I really think he should have simply said the “captured” comment was a bad attempt at levity.  That said, I am hoping his brand of fearlessness will rub off on the others so we get some unfiltered, unafraid straight talk for a change about pressing issues affecting all of us and our families. Pags  

***Program Note*** I was never the host of “America Now.” From the beginning, my company, has given me the privilege of being heard on many more stations than I otherwise would have. What you have been hearing is “The Joe Pags Show.” It was to be for just a very short time.. and, thankfully, it lasted about a year. Meghan McCain has been announced as the new host of “America Now” and she starts on Monday. I wish her nothing but the very best in this new gig.. and want to thank Premiere, Julie Talbott, Bill May, Peter Trippi, David Bugenske, Miranda Moreno and everyone else involved for their incredible support of me and my show this past year. The Joe Pags Show existed before this opportunity and will continue. If you listen on WOAI, KPRC, KTLK, KHOW and KEX — nothing will change for you. My show will be same time for you after this week. Thank you so much to the great listeners on the America Now stations for taking this ride with us for the last year. Love you guys!! Pags and Cari

 That’s the question I’m asked a lot on my radio show or on social media.  Why the freak out?  He’s just a person like the rest of us.  Is he not allowed to make a mistake?  Should his entire career be over because his recollection changed?  Simple answer?  Yes.      Brian Williams is the Managing Editor and Main Anchor of the NBC Nightly News.  In other words, he’s the head journalist in charge at NBC News.  Is he a flawed person like us all?  Yes.  Is he imperfect like you and me?  Absolutely.   But, he makes a mint to be perfect in his reporting of the news.      The best I can tell, NEWS is an acronym for “North, East, West, and South,” The job is complicated and simple, difficult, yet reasonably straight-forward.  You go to all ends of the geographical area you’re charged with covering and report what you see.  A journalist keeps a journal of what he or she sees, hears, smells, feels and learns then delivers the findings to the listeners, viewers or readers.  The job changes a little for radio as one needs a voice that grabs attention when delivering the news.  On television, it changes even more in that the person delivering the information has to, along with all of the other necessities of a journalist, present him or herself in such a way that viewers will feel comfortable welcoming the journalist into their homes every night.      You might wonder why I think I’m an authority on what it is Brian Williams did or didn’t do.  I was a journalist for a very long time before jumping to the commentary/opinion side of broadcasting.  I’ll list my accomplishments at the end.  The reason why Brian Williams’ misgivings are important is because the only thing a journalist has when doing the job is integrity.  Brian Williams could have chosen any of a number of lines or work in which he could embellish, dramatize and/or make up stories.  He could have written for or starred in a Sit-Com or Sci-Fi piece or made-for-TV drama.  He could have written, produced and starred in movies on the big screen.  Instead, he chose to be a non-fiction, truth-telling storyteller.  With it comes great responsibility.  A responsibility he shirked.      Williams can lie to his family, embellish that story about the fish he caught to his uncle, make up a story to get out of a speeding ticket but, when he puts on that microphone and peers out to 13 million viewers, he MUST tell us the truth or he may not keep that job.  If a person in his position on any level “misremembers” one thing, he can never be trusted to do that job again.      It wasn’t a simple mistake of recollection if one simply examines the information available.  In examining the original report from 2003, it’s now been revealed by those who were there that not only did the helicopter in which Williams was riding not take on fire much less and RPG, he wasn’t even in that convoy.  He was, according to the military members there, in a convoy about an hour behind.  So, this story was flawed from the beginning.  Then in 2005 in the aftermath to Hurricane Katrina, Williams claimed he’d witnessed a man’s body, face down, floating past his hotel.  Problem is, those who run the hotel — the Four Seasons — say there was minimal flooding there and no dead bodies floated by.  In recent days, questions have been raised about whether Williams, as he claims, had really met the Pope in the late 70s or whether he’d been held up at gunpoint in New Jersey as a young man selling Christmas trees.  Those stories are less important than another story he tells during his time as a journalist.  He has often claimed he was at the Berlin Wall as it came down.  Information has since come out that he got to Berlin after the wall came down and that it was, in fact, Tom Brokaw who was there as it met its demise.      These are not simple mistakes — or misrememberings.  These, if true, are egregious acts of deception for the sole purpose of self-aggrandizement.  Brian Williams is an amazing communicator.  I have always loved his ability to be self-deprecating while “slow-jamming the news,” or deadpanning while being interviewed on late-night TV.  He was able to pull those appearances off so well because, to us, he was the authority behind the anchor desk who was above reproach.  For him to let his hair down and show that he was a real person like us, was a treat.  It turns out, if all of these allegations are true, he was never the authority presented to us.  And, that’s a real shame.  Fact is, we must now question every Brian Williams ever read or reported to us on the Nightly News.  And, sadly, his career is surely over. [1] I have won or have been a part of winning for my stations, 28 Michigan and/or New York AP awards for excellence in Journalism, a Michigan Association of Broadcasting award for Best Feature and rated the best local news product by the Columbia School of Journalism while serving as reporter, Main Anchor, Managing Editor and/or News Director.

I have always had an affinity for civil servants.  Growing up, I wanted to be a fire fighter like my father and uncles and grandfather.  To help people while wearing a cool uniform and riding in cool vehicles was very attractive to me.  Although I took the fire fighter test (to see if I could do it), I never actual did the job.  Broadcasting came a calling.  But, my level of respect for those who put on police and fire uniforms, no matter their race or ethnicity, has only grown.  To make the decision to fight crime or fight fires is potentially heroic.  From case to case, fire to fire, these brave souls don’t know if they’ll make it home at the end of their shifts.  It’s something most of us will never face in our work. Do my feelings on the job they do affect my ability to see when someone in uniform does wrong?  Not even a little.  Was there a history of unequal treatment of minorities, especially Black Americans, in our country?  Yes.  Has that practice been absolutely, 100 percent eradicated?  No.  Is it world’s apart from the way it used to be?  Without doubt.  What I don’t understand is the outcry for revenge coming from some in our country.  I squarely blame this on race-agitators like Al Sharpton, AG Eric Holder and even our president. Before I continue, it’s important you know (and you already do if you listen to my show) that I believe George Zimmerman should have stayed in his truck that night.  Had Trayvon Martin NOT circled back to the truck and attacked Zimmerman he would be alive today.   Michael Brown should have made the decision NOT to strong-armed rob a store then pick a fight with a cop INSIDE of his police SUV.  Had he done that, he would be alive today.  And, I think the way Eric Garner was taken down was unnecessary and crossed the line.  Had that hold not been used, I believe he would be alive today.  The races of those involved nor my race play a role in my feelings on these cases.  Sadly, I can’t say the same for the men I mentioned above. On Trayvon Martin, the president said if he’d had a son, he would look like Trayvon.  He never said that if he had a neighbor, he would look like George.  On Michael Brown, the president sent three representatives to his funeral and talked about the distrust communities of color have of the police.  The top cop — chief law enforcement officer in the USA, Eric Holder, actually echoed that.  He said that he too in his life has had a distrust of law enforcement.  He never said he understood what officers like Darren Wilson faced everyday nor that he was waiting until all of the evidence was in to decide his opinion on the case. Al Sharpton has shown up and race-agitated every situation where he felt he’d get his face on television.  He’s offered no solutions and, in fact, has been extremely one-sided in his desire to rile up those in communities affected by these stories.  I have yet to hear any of these “leaders” talk about how we’re ALL American brothers and sisters or how we need to work together to make this a better land for all.  Their focus, sadly, is always only on making up for past ills or pushing the flawed idea that we’re still in the 1960s and that all authority and Whites in America somehow feel superior. Fast forward to today.  Two NYPD officers were ambushed and executed in Bed-Sty/Brooklyn.  It is being reported that the shooter, a Black man, had posted on his Instagram account that he was going to put some “pigs in a blanket.”  He also added hashtags #RIPEricGarner and #RIPMikeBrown obviously to give a reason for the “pigs” comment.  After the killing of the two officers, both Americans — one of Asian the other of Latino descent, it’s reported the murderer took his own life. Sick people do sick things.  The vast majority of us will never ever understand what makes a person who would do such a dastardly thing tick.  What sickens and saddens me to my soul is the reaction of others to what happened.  Almost immediately, there was what appeared to be sarcastic joy over the deaths of these two men who were simply on the job trying to protect a neighborhood.  The social media glee and celebrations show there’s an underbelly in our great land of people who don’t want  to make things better — they simply see us as an us vs them country where one is to mourn every person racially like them and wish death on everyone else.  This is an issue in which this administration had the unique ability to affect positive change.  The choice was made not to. Fortunately, those making celebratory posts about the executions of two law enforcement officers are on the fringe and do not represent the good people of all races in this, the greatest, land.  These fringe racists and race-baiters will never change no matter how much one tries to reason with them.  The rest of us CAN, however, make a great difference. We MUST get to a place where we actually see individual stories and situations for what they really are.  We MUST stop making any assumptions based on race, ethnicity or gender.  We MUST get to a place in our land where we see those involved as Americans first and weigh the evidence and information presented.  Our history is just that, history.  If someone is being mistreated because of some sort of prejudice or bigotry, let’s notice it and make it part of the issue.  But, we MUST get to a place where we do NOT assume that first then hear the details later.  Our president, attorney general, this administration, Al Sharpton, the New Black Panther party and others subscribing to the same outlook have hurt this process when they were all in a great position to help. Is it too late?  No.  The president and AG and Sharpton, et al should hit the public airwaves immediately to tell us how they mourn this loss of life.  The president should send White House representatives to their funerals.  The AG should be there in person and implore people to NOT target police and Sharpton should organize a march in NYC in outrage over the senseless killing of these men in blue.  Don’t hold your breath. Rest in peace officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.  I pray for your souls and for your families.   Pags

It seems every day there’s another story about gay marriage.  States are being forced to allow and recognize the marriages of two men or two women.  The courts that are calling state bans on such unions unconstitutional are pointing to the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution as the reason why these state laws are out of line.  The 14th Amendment was added to the supreme law of the land to ensure freed slaves were equally protected in our country by all laws.  It has been interpreted as a protection for everyone – with which I agree. To that end, the states wisely didn’t ban gay marriage, they simply said marriage is between one man and one woman.  This simple difference is why the claims these laws violate the Constitution are dead wrong.  Think about it.  Do these laws address the idea of love at all?  No.  Do these laws address which gender those who desire to marry are attracted to or prefer to sleep with?  Nope.  Therefore, can any man marry any woman in those states?  Yes.  Any man, no matter his preferences, can marry a woman.  And vice versa.  But, what if he didn’t want to?  Then, DON’T!  Therefore, these laws DO, in fact, offer equal protections as required by the 14th Amendment.  That doesn’t mean you must marry a woman if you’re a man or vice versa.  But, you are certainly allowed to. This is an opinion on the clearly written 14th Amendment and the clearly written marriage laws in some states.  You might feel I’m wrong and feel gays should marry.  You’re allowed.  But, I understand English and find the 14th Amendment easy to understand.  I also understand the clearly written laws in these states.  This needs to be heard and ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States.  If they’re ruling by the letter of the law and on what’s written clearly, the state laws should be held as legal. Having said that, it’s en vogue for state and appellate courts to deem these state laws unconstitutional.  Gays are allowed to marry in a growing number of states.  Forgetting the cogent argument I made above as to why there’s nothing illegal about state laws defining marriage, and allowing for the fact that gay marriage is increasingly legal, is the result what we really want America to be?  Do we really want individuals in our great land to be forced into taking part in things with which they don’t religiously or morally agree?  Also, if you’re gay, why on Earth would you want people like that to be forced to take part in this, your special day?  You wouldn’t. Case in point, an Oregon bakery whose owners decided not to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple has been ordered to bake the cake.  I believe the owners have every right to refuse to take part in a ceremony they deem a sin according to their religion.  The 1st Amendment would seem to agree with me.  A court ruling saying one must bake a cake in such a circumstance is a clear infringement of their ability to worship as they see fit without government persecution or prosecution.   The bakery has been forced to close its store front and the owners have moved the operation into their home.  (http://reason.com/blog/2013/09/03/bakery-that-refused-to-make-gay-wedding)  The overriding question I have in cases like this, why on Earth would gays desire to have this bakery make the cake for their happy day?  It’s not about the quality of the cake or that this baker does something no one else does.  When I got married, had there been a bakery that made it clear they hated or didn’t want to make cakes for those of Italian heritage.  I would never have considered suing them in an attempt to for them to make my cake.  I would tell them, “you just lost a lot of money,” before going down the street to give my money to someone else.  This is about forcing ones beliefs on others.  This is about trying to force this country, which is overwhelmingly filled with people whose religious beliefs see homosexuality as a sin, to accept gay marriage as somehow normal and exactly the same as traditional marriage.  No matter what the courts decide, that’s not going to happen. Court orders, threats, fines and forcing people out of business are horrendous.  But, now we’re seeing the next level of lunacy.  How about this: you’re a Christian minister who performs marriages.  You have chosen to only marry Christian men and women.  For some reason, a gay couple are insisting you marry them as well.  And when you refuse, you’re fined and threated with arrest.  You heard me right, do it or go to jail!  (http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/city-threatens-to-arrest-ministers-who-refuse-to-perform-same-sex-weddings.html)  Is this the America you know and love?  Why wouldn’t a gay couple want to be married by a minister who accepts their union?  They would, of course.  Unless they’re just activists trying to make a point by forcing their own beliefs on others. Before you agree or disagree with me, consider this.  Would it be okay to force a Jewish baker to make an, “I love Hitler” cake?  Would it be okay to force a Muslim caterer to serve food at your next pig roast?  Would it be okay to force a Christian baker to bake a cake which had “If You Don’t Love Satan You Should Be Killed!” written on it?  Would it be okay to force a Black photographer to shoot pictures and video at the next KKK gathering?  In this country, our freedom and liberties are protected FROM the government.  We are allowed to disagree.  We are allowed to believe in and follow whatever God or gods we’d like as long as that doesn’t cause physical or tangible harm to others.  Thus, we can’t scream “Fire!!” in a crowded theater.  That could cause panic and potentially injury as people run out.  Remember, this is not about having the right to not serve gays.  That would be wrong.  Your sexual preference or orientation should never stop you from getting some food, or watching a movie, or getting a job.  The reason why these rulings are wrong is because of the forced participation of business owners in a ceremony or event their religion tells them is a sin.  There’s a huge difference. There is no harm in allowing the Muslim or Jewish caterers to only serve foods specific to their religions.  You want different foods?  Go to a business who can cater to your needs.  You want someone to photograph or bake a cake for your wedding and you’re gay?  There are plenty who would love to.  Get one of them.  You want someone to memorialize your Klan rally?  I’ll bet there are some idiots out there who would jump at the chance.  Stop this ridiculous pattern of forcing what you believe on me while telling me my beliefs don’t matter.  Enough now.  

Reagan Quotes Pags 1 It dawned on me that my four children aged 4, 13, 21 and 22 — as wonderful as they are and as much as they know how I feel about freedom and liberty and as much as they get the concept of smaller government = a freer people — they don’t know much about former president Ronald Reagan.  Frankly, they hear the power brokers on both sides of the aisle constantly comparing themselves to him more than any other president this nation has ever had.  Think about it, when’s the last time you heard some politician say, “I’m going to do what Grover Cleveland did if you vote for me?”  There’s good reason why they choose to (usually ridiculously) compare themselves to Reagan.  He was a great president with a simple, “Government is a necessary evil, but is certainly not your friend,” sensibility. This outlook, along with his incredible ability to restore nationalism after one of the weakest American presidents ever (Jimmy Carter), proved desirous and very attractive to most Americans no matter what they’re usual preferred political leanings.  The term “Reagan Democrat” was coined as he saw great success no matter who the voter was.  President Reagan was smooth, quick, witty and, most importantly, hard not to like.  He was a calming figure no matter whether he was facing down the threat of global nuclear war or recovering from the gunshot wound of a would-be assassin. The things he said were wonderfully appropriate in the mindset of the role government should and shouldn’t play in the lives of a free people.  With that in mind, I decided to present some of these quotes here — as part of a series.  I’m doing it for a couple of reasons:
  • to refresh you and me of what we lived through and what helped us to figure out how we felt about this country and how it’s run.
  • and, more importantly, to give us a resource we can use as a reason to sit down with our kids and talk about the greatest president in our lifetimes and certainly in the last 100 years.
The first quote I chose really fits into the times we’re in.  It’s simple: “We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much.” First thing that jumps out is how he was railing against a “trillion-dollar debt.”  One has to wonder how he would feel about a federal debt approaching 17 trillion.  The meaning really is direct and simple.  The Federal Government doesn’t have a money confiscation problem, it has a spending problem.  You’ve heard many politicians say something to the effect of “Washington is broken.”  I disagree.  I say, “Washington is making the people broke.” Imagine if you will, you are getting paid at work.  You make $500 a week.  However, you consistently spend $600 a week.  So, you put the other hundred over on a credit card until you max the card out.  You don’t change your spending.  In fact, you decide to start spending $1000 a week.  Now, you owe interest on the debt you were accruing every week and instead of doing what would actually work — stop spending so much — you’ve increased your spending to the point that the money you’re making barely covers the interest on the built up debt.  Then, you tell — you don’t ask — your credit card company to increase your limit there because all of this spending and paying of interest has you maxed out.  Simple question: what do you think your boss would say if you went to him with your debt and spending portfolio and requested a raise?  Mine would say, I didn’t make you spend that way.  You know how much you make.  YOU spend less.  Instead, Washington automatically increases its spending every year through what’s called “baseline budgeting.”  It’s a monetary shell-game that lets politicians claim they’re cutting the budget when it actually auto-increases yearly. How do you solve the problem?  You stop the game of, “raising the debt ceiling is just to pay for the stuff we’ve already bought.”  That might have worked the first time.  Problem is, Washington refuses to stop buying stuff after getting the increase.  If the spending stopped or — God Forbid — were decreased, we wouldn’t have the dog-and-pony show ever two years over raising or not raising the debt limit. The eight years Ronald Reagan was the president encompassed one of the best recoveries from recession we’ve seen in our history.  How did he make that happen?  He lowered taxes for Americans across the board and limited the government’s reach in our lives.  The blueprint exists and should be followed today. Pags