[Toddsterpatriot]

If you’d like a chuckle, check out this thread.

[nicmarlo]

Whatsa matter, toad...need help from your ilk?

[1rudeboy]

I think the article was pretty well-written, and its indicative of the argument these folks must make when they have to stoop to suggesting that the impetus for privatizing certain governmental functions (even imperfectly) dates back to the Clinton Administration, and not the Reagan Administration.

See, the problem with admitting that Reagan wanted to privatize non-essential governmental functions is twofold: first of all, a conservative icon takes it on on the chin, and second, it exposes the nay-sayers for what they are--statists.

I mean, how can one argue that because certain things such as the building/operating/maintaining of roads cannot completely be privatized, they must necessarily therefore be completely the province of government? What sort of a conservative argument is that?