Grumbling Trickles Down From Reagan Biopic

NYT ^ | 10-21-03 | JIM RUTENBERG

[Jeff Chandler]

and that sort of ugly specter of patriotism

I'll take the ugly specter of patriotism over the ugly sphincter of liberalism any time.

[Miss Marple]

HA! I had forgotten about the pirates in the Noah movie! Thanks for reminding me! LOL!

[ReleaseTheHounds]

"It is about telling a good story in our honest sort of way. We all believe it's a story that should be told."

This about sums up what I expect from this movie... in their "honest sort of way." That should make everyone feel real confident of what they see in this movie!

[OESY]

Grumbling Trickles Down From Reagan Biopic

The smug condescension of this article's title encapsulates why so many detest the New York Times.

Someone should tell them that Clinton's economy was a perfect congruence of the fruition of Reaganomics (they dropped their condescending nickname when they saw it worked), the Peace Dividend resulting from the End of the Cold War (which Democrats opposed as "destabilizing"), and the technology-driven preparation for Millennium 2000.

Of course, with active and ill-timed help of Alan Greenspan (and more specifically, partisan Clinton appointee Larry Meyers who got a 50 b.p. rise in interest rates two months after the stock markets began to plunge), Clinton was able to burst his own economic bubble by simultaneously attacking the Biotech (with Tony Blair), Telecom (prevented mergers in the dying long-lines business) and High Tech (i.e., Microsoft). The score: Up-to-Down Turnarounds -- Bushes 0, Clintons 1, and Down-to-Up Turnarounds -- Bushes 2, Clintons 0.

The Big Question is: Did Clinton, one of the most partisan presidents ever intend to wreck the stock market, the economy and three million jobs in his last year to create a positive legacy (The Clinton Economy) since there were so few accomplishments other than signing into law significant portions of Newt Gingrich's Contract For America?

Credit, however, should be given the Clintons for ushering in a whole new era of Republican successes, and only the Clintons could have triangulated Democrats into accepting passage of welfare reform. On the other hand, that's really part of the extended Reagan Legacy which CBS will ignore.

[jpl]

"The Reagans," according to the final version of the script obtained by The New York Times, does give Mr. Reagan most of the credit for ending the cold war...

Gee, how overwhelmingly charitable it was of them to do that.

[PJ-Comix]

"But there is no mention of the economic recovery or the creation of wealth during his administration, key accomplishments to his supporters."

This is like doing a biopic about Abraham Lincoln without mentioning the Civil War.

[PJ-Comix]

Elizabeth Egloff, a playwright who wrote the final version of the script, acknowledged there was no evidence such a conversation took place.

And yet this controversial quote about AIDS is included despite NO EVIDENCE that Ronald Reagan actually said it.

[crusher999]

There they go again.............

Spoken as only "THE GIPPER" would speak for himself...which is why I have ceased getting exercised by these Liberal/Leftist attacks since they continue to shoot themselves in the foot.

It's a JOY for me to watch them self destruct.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

This was very important for me, to document everything and give a very fair point of view," said Leslie Moonves, the CBS chairman.

"But then I got a call from Babs and thought, screw it," Leslie said.

[TedsGarage]

James Brolin is no superstar, but he's about as good an actor as Reagan was. Which is to say, bland. (Had Reagan come along 20 years later, he would have been in TV, not movies. It took him awhile to find his true calling.)

And these are the MOVIES. It's FICTION. Did George Gipp really say "Win one for the Gipper"? I doubt it. Whatever they put on the screen will not change Reagan's achievements as president.

[Teacher317]

This is sure to be a suck-o-rama

Who will watch it? The libs will avoid it because they despise Reagan. The Right will avoid it because they know not to trust Babs' pet monkey, Holywood, etc. The non-aligned aren't political junkies, and would have little interest. It jumped the shark before filming began.

[HenryLeeII]

I am sure that it will be just as accurate as the "Noah" mini-series a few years ago.

You mean the one in which Noah defeated Goliath by using his Coat of Many Colors in order to free Moses from the Romans?

[Servant of the 9]

Amazingly, Chris Mathews had a bunch or Reagan Biographers on "Hardball" and just ripped the picture to pieces and seemed genuinely angry about it.

So9

[MarkL]

I wonder when we'll be seeing an attack piece on TV about Martin Luther King, Jr, or maybe John F. Kennedy?

Mark

[T Lady]

Don't...hold...your...breath.

...It's truly no wonder the big 'RAT Media is so rightfully despised. It is also no wonder Barbra Striesand hasn't had a hit album or movie in a number of years, either. Not to mention that Brolin's her second or third husband. She's way too domineering for her own good. I was actually considering buying her latest release, until I read yet another one of her rantings in last week's edition of TV Guide, in which she said, among other things, "it distresses me that people cannot see what this administration is doing to the country..." And so on, blah, blah, blah. I'll just pocket that $13.99 thank you very much.

-Regards, T.

[MonroeDNA]

Notice that they pick up the story after RR, a movie star democrat, faught the (self proclaimed) communist union takeover of MGM.

He single-handedly broke that strike, as the communists admitted after.

They threatened to throw acid in his face, and he slept with a .38, guarding his wife and kids.

The battle with the attempted takeover by communists led him to switch parties.

His main philosophy was that people desire and crave individual liberty, and that any institution that prevented that was morally evil, and would fail.

They're back, at CBS.

Read "Reagan's War."