Amidst swirling controversy and officials from both parties, desirous of his head, President Trump put out his first budget. It was acclaimed, if not hailed. But when are these people, these antagonists, going to realize that Mr. Trump is no dummy. He knows his way around a spreadsheet. And, another reminder, he’s awoken as president all of 125 days. Let him work his way into the job.

Ronald Reagan, a genuine idol of the White House, had to. And whose first budget but The Gipper’s was trotted out to draw comparisons with Mr. Trump’s?

“This is the most fiscally conservative budget since Reagan,” said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at the Cato Institute. And from Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, came this observation: He called Mr. Trump’s blueprint “a Reaganite, limited-government, anti-waste, and anti-duplication budget. It certainly makes those Republican critics who said that [Mr.] Trump would be a big-spending populist look like idiots.”

Then again, some Republicans figured he had to be a liberal and would show his true colors right away. Others pegged him as a more protectionist version of George W. Bush, that “compassionate conservative.”

Let’s face it, when your choice as budget director is such a foremost conservative as former South Carolina congressman Mick Mulvaney, the green-eyeshade product will be routinely conservative.

We realize Mr. Mulvaney’s number —$4.1 trillion — is high, yet it all comes down to priorities, how the money will be spent. So consider the commendiums above.

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.