Michael Reagan: CBS Portrays President as Foul-mouthed Buffoon

NewsMax ^ | 10/24/03 | Limbacher

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

The upcoming CBS mini-series on President Ronald Reagan portrays him as a foul-mouthed buffoon who repeatedly used profanity - behavior he never exhibited in real life, his son Michael said Thursday.

"It's horrendous, it's absolutely horrendous," Michael Reagan complained, after viewing eight minutes worth of excerpts of the film, which stars James Brolin, husband of Reagan-hater Barbra Streisand, as the fortieth president.

"They paint my father as a buffoon," the former first son-turned radio host told fellow talker Sean Hannity. "They also have my dad taking God's name in vain in an angry, angry way . . . They have him calling another person in anger an S.O.B."

"I've never seen my Dad that angry and I've never heard him use the 'G-D' word in my life," Reagan complained.

"They dislike my father, and you can see that," he said. "They actually infer that Alzheimer's was setting in at the time the whole thing was going on with Ollie North and Iran-Contra - which is absurd."

The CBS film is even harder on former first lady Nancy Reagan, Michael Reagan revealed.

"All the bad things you've heard about Nancy - I mean, this show just hates her - absolutely hates her," he told Hannity.

Reagan called CBS's portrayal of Mrs. Reagan "obscene."

The former first son said he talked to Mrs. Reagan about the excerpts Wednesday night, saying, "Of course she's upset about it - we're all upset about it."

"The eight minutes worth of clips that I saw [showed] Nancy as the head of the government and Dad was just the buffoon going along for the ride with everybody laughing at him," Reagan said. "It is so sad."

Reagan said he sent a copy of the clips he viewed to the former first lady.

[hispanarepublicana]

I did a quick Google of the executive producers, Craig Zadan and Neil Meron. Story after story calls them the "openly gay duo" who produced Chicago, etc.

[So Cal Rocket]

List of potential sponsors for this hit piece can be found here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1007267/posts

Let them know in no uncertain terms that if they run ads during this movie, you will boycott their products.

[Agnes Heep]

The really bad thing is that, although Reagan is alive, he's in no condition to speak for himself. Taking advantage of the disabled is a really low, despicable thing to do, but certainly not out of character for liberals, as recent events have shown.

[Ff--150]

"They dislike my father, and you can see that," he said. "They actually infer that Alzheimer's was setting in at the time the whole thing was going on with Ollie North and Iran-Contra - which is absurd."

I disagree, Michael, THEY HATE YOUR FATHER! And they HATE us! And can we really trust this biased media to give us any truth concerning Dubya? The media is part of a conspiracy to bring this nation down.

[ladtx]

Could this mini-series be termed a "hate crime" since it is obviously going to defame a good man.

[Nea Wood]

They could have consulted Michael, Nancy, or any other Reagan family or friends before they did this hit piece, but obviously they did not. They didn't want to hear anything good about Reagan, anything that would stand in the way of their smearing him. I hope the ratings tank.

[Remole]

The most devastating criticism of this mini-series has come from, and will continue to come from, Washington insiders and reputable Reagan biographers: David Gergen, Lou Cannon, Peggy Noonan, etc. Some of them may have worked in the Reagan WH, but not all; and some may be Pubs, but not all. And so when THEY unite in their disgust with this show (as they already have done) and when there is sufficient uproar against the sponsors, it's my guess that this thing will go direct to the video store; in the back; in the dumpster.

[Paul Ross]

It could be sued preemptively for defamation, in the amount necessary to get CBS's corporate honcho attention: i.e., $10 billion...before they broadcast it.

With that big a class-action suit brought by the Reagans and the Party, they may yank it...as it is oibjectively defamatory per se...clearly fraudulent and done with sufficient malice so that it would not be protected speech under the standard of New York Times v. Sullivan.

It is also clear that it intends to inflict emotional distress on the nation and particularly on conservatives. This is war. Treat it as such. Get Angry. Now, before it is too late.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for the information!

[Catalonia]

This is going to backfire. The gay brigadiers who produced this show are Baby Boomer relics and don't understand that at best they can only preach to the choir. Only the 30% that is solidly Left will believe it. The rest won't care or won't believe it. People will be turned off by the obviousness of a hit piece directed at a living, currently disabled president.

They just don't get it. Nobody who votes will see this as real history.

[Carolinamom]

Besides its being historically inaccurate, pedalling this vileness is incrediably cruel to Nancy and President Reagan.

[cyncooper]

It is worse than I imagined. Drudge is sitting in for Rush and just played audio clips from the movie.

You won't believe the vile portrayal of both Ronald and Nancy Reagan. They've made Nancy Reagan sound insane.

I am shaking with anger, whereas before I was merely shaking my head at what I thought was the usual embellishment.

[Nonstatist]

The rest won't care or won't believe it.

Nonsense. The historically illiterate majority of the youth of this country may not care, but they wont disbelieve it. Having learned absolutely nothing about history in school , they certainly would not doubt a docudrama they see on TV (after all, they dont read much).

[Remole]

Wow. Thanks for the report. Has Pat Caddell (Carter aide and frequent guest on Chris Matthews' show) weighed in on this yet? He's one Dem whom I respect for integrity and honesty.

[cyncooper]

I haven't heard Caddell weigh in on this topic, but I agree with you; he appears to be fairminded and is not into character assassination based on political affiliation.

BTW, Drudge will play more clips and discuss more of the movie next hour. If anyone has access to a radio, turn on Rush's station and listen. You have to hear how over the top and nuts they make Nancy sound. It was truly sickening to hear. Ronald Reagan, too, but the clips were mostly of "Nancy" who sounded nothing at all like the real Mrs. Reagan. The gist was Nancy was this dominating shrew and Ronald this bumbling boob on the verge of impeachment.

[Travis McGee]

The Gen-Xers and Gen Y-ers who might have believed this stinking pile of rancid manure won't see it anyway, they'll be watching MTV while smoking dope.

The ones who watch it are going to be fans of our greatest 20th century presidents, who will be taking notes, and who will be PISSED!

This hit piece is going to explode in CBS' face.

[Cicero]

I agree that young people who watched it might believe it, because that's what their teachers are teaching them about Reagan in public schools.

But frankly that natural audience for a documentary about Ronald Reagan is older people who knew and admired him.

This is yet another instance of the triumph of ideology and leftist hate over economic sense. They will offend the people who tune in, they will offend their advertisers, and they will probably get low ratings.

How many of us would tune into a documentary about the life of bill clinton? How many of "them" will tune into a documentary about Ronald Reagan?

[Catalonia]

Well I wouldn't dare argue that Gen-Y is anything but illiterate of history, just that the piddling few of the younger generation who will bother to watch this and be significantly swayed by it will be more than offset by those moderates of whatever age who will see this clearly as a hit piece against a disabled former president, and regardless of their own personal politics, be turned off by the inapproriateness of it. Conservative media is already alerting the Muddled Middle of this fact. The issue will be spun to the detriment of the Leftover Left, albeit a minor detriment. Most of Gen-X and older will see it as partisan, not as history. Most of Gen-X received a decent education, and the politics of Baby Boomers has already been set, and thus largely immovable.

[KC_Conspirator]

They could have consulted Michael, Nancy, or any other Reagan family or friends before they did this hit piece, but obviously they did not.

Hell, they could have consulted Reagan biographers/historians like Lou Cannon or Edmund Morris, but they did not because the facts would get in the way.