If Republicans were prize fighters,

people who bet on them would accuse them of taking a dive.

That's the way it's been in

the past, and it looks like that's the way it's shaping up for this year's

elections.

They work very hard on the

technical aspects of fighting the fight, but when it comes time to stand

toe to toe, they just plain don't hit hard enough.

The Democratic strategy is

as plain as the nose on Mike Tyson's face. Make sure no effective economic

recovery plan gets through Congress, then blame Republicans.

House Minority Leader Dick

Gephardt and Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle are the main tag team,

and they're doing a good job of getting their message across.

You see them anywhere there's

a TV camera, talking about how well the Democratic economic recovery plan

worked in the '90s.

The TV folks give Republicans

a chance to respond, and you hear them in mild tones arguing for the plan

they're pushing the novel idea of letting people keep more of their own

money as opposed to the Democrats' plan for taking the money away from

them in taxes, siphoning off half of it to keep the bureaucracy well fed

and then giving a little of it back in entitlement programs.

But not once have I heard a

GOP talking head dispel the myth that the Democrats' plan actually helped

the economy in the early '90s. It is a myth, and for the life of me I

can't figure out why Republicans are afraid to point out that the emperor

has no clothes.

Fact: Toward the end of Bush

Senior's administration, there was a recession brought on by a tax increase

that Bush let Democrats talk him into. It was a stupid mistake and cost

him the election.

Also fact: During the last

year of Bush's term, the economy had already started to recover nicely,

growing at about a 4 percent clip while Democrats kept shouting, "This

is the worst economic decline in 50 years," which wasn't true, and

following it up with "It's the economy, stupid!"

The strategy worked, partly

because a lot of conservatives were mad at George for going back on his

"no new taxes" promise and voted for the third party imbecile

as a protest. Bill Clinton moved into the White House and inherited a

robust, growing economy, which he promptly set about "fixing"

just as promptly ratcheted the economic growth back from 4 percent to

2 percent or thereabouts, where it stayed for most of his administration.

But that's not the end of the

story. Toward the end of Clinton's administration, the economy faltered

under the heavy burden of his steady barrage of tax increases, many of

them disguised as "reform," measures like doing away with several

deductions we had previously been able to take.

Remember when you could deduct

your medical expenses? Now you can deduct only the expenses that exceed

7.5 percent of your income, a threshold most of us can't meet. That's

just one minor example.

Anyway, George Junior inherited

an economy that was already in recession, but guess what Democrats are

blaming for this recession ...

You guessed it ... George Junior's

tax cuts, 99 percent of which haven't even gone into effect yet.

We need Reagan back, with his

charts and graphs and his "There he goes again," to show Republicans

how to put up a decent fight. If someone doesn't start hitting back soon,

the referee is going to finish counting to ten before the first bell rings.