During the dot com boom under Xlinton liberals weren't whining about "greed" then.
Ooops!
Of course none of what followed - two terms of Bill Clinton - would ever lead The Atlantic Monthly or CNN or anyone who hires Schneider to issue a disclaimer. He's the kind of "expert" they like.
AM: Hope I'm not violating any posting/reply rule by entering this from the Palm Beach Post.
Not that I believe there's a conspiracy, but I think the media and Dems are taking this oppurtunity to "act" as if they always cared about Reagan and that all this recent division is product of Republican mean-spiritedness. I've already seen Woodruff comment on how things seemed so much more civil back in the old days...as she was interviewing Dan Rostankowski, who agreed. This, as with all things liberal, is more revisionsim.
Hell, I was there. The liberal media HATED Reagan with a passion and used every opportunity to bash him. RWR's policies and gentlemanly manner sent the Left into convulsions. The same bunch of pinko losers (like J. F'n Kerry) supported the communist thugs in Nicaragua right in the middle of the Cold War. Reagan's margin of support in Congress for his policies was sometimes very slim. The liberals that hide their true feelings and politics now were much more open back then.
While its nice some are documenting the history of liberals and their various inaccurate pronouncements, the fact is liberalism hasn't come up with a new idea in over five decades.
Liberalism as a political belief is in effect bankrupt, having been so thoroughly discredited liberals have been forced to change their own self definition to "progressives" or "moderates".