Replies

["The analogies between Islam and the former Soviet Union are few and microscopic in comparison. Iraq and the entire mid east, is small potatoes compared to the real, global threat that the former Soviet Union posed. At one point in our history, many if not all of our major cities were targeted with ICBMs. This was not a superman movie, it was *real*."]

Thank you for stating that. Lately, I have been hearing a smattering of criticism against President Reagan for "ignoring" the Islamic threat. But, let's get real; one President, even a President elected for a 2nd term, cannot do everything. He must prioritize, which is what President Reagan did and did correctly.

He did get our hostages back, and he did bomb Libya, sending the Middle Easterners a clear message that he was no Carter and that they'd better back off if they knew what was good for them. So then... he could roll up his shirtsleeves and address the greater threat: A patient, deviously calculating, and ever expanding "Evil Empire" that had the capacity to destroy every last one of us with the simple push of a button.

In the early 80's, communism was being exported from the USSR all over the globe. It popped up in Grenada, reared its head in Central America; It kept getting closer and closer to our shores. It had to be stopped before we were backed into a corner, and eventually ended up with the President of the USA and the President of the USSR both staring each other down, each one with his finger on "The Button".

I think President Reagan also understood the damage that was being wreaked by our domestic enemies as well (Lord knows, he took enough flack from them). Think about it. What if this ultimate showdown between the USA and the USSR had occurred during Clinton's watch?! It was Clinton who'd enacted the "madder than M.A.D." policy that we needed to be hit with nukes BEFORE we could retaliate. If the old Soviet Union had been alive and well during Clinton's term, it's very likely that the current "browbeaten yet still standing" America that we all know and love would definitely not exist ideologically (and possibly not even exist physically) today.

Fortunately, President Reagan was wise enough to see that the very thing that made the USSR such a great threat, its drive to expand and then strangle the life out of everything it engulfed, could also be exploited as a weakness. He was able to kneecap the Soviets, because the USSR had gotten too big to sustain its own britches.

I really believe it was the merciful hand of God, that placed President Reagan at the helm of America at a time when we stood at a most perilous crossroads. We will never know "The Fate That Could've Been" thanks to this bold and loyal man, who stood his ground even as a multitude of enemies surrounded, attacked, and ridiculed him without ceasing. God bless and keep him, and may Ronald Reagan spend all eternity in a shining city above the highest hill, where the streets are paved with gold.

OK, I've analyzed President Reagan, now I'd like to analyze President George "Dubya" Bush. I do see many similarities between the two Presidents, but there are differences as well. America's current enemy is much different than the one we faced two decades ago. Our domestic political landscape is vastly different and far more polarized than it was back in the '80's. The world has greatly changed & so have we, and President Bush is forced to grapple with this.

No two people are alike and no two Presidents are alike. President Bush can and will never be President Reagan; he can only give us the best that he has to offer. And, though President Bush is not without flaw, what he has to offer is in no way shabby. Most importantly, I do think that President Bush loves America as President Reagan loved America.

It's my impression that President Bush is a "rope-a-dope" master, maybe the upcoming election necessitates this. Perhaps, when President Bush is re-elected, he will then feel free to take off the gloves and throw any punches he wants. But until then, he must bob and weave and keep his opponents off-balance and guessing. I'm just a little too young to remember President Reagan's 1st term. Did his boldness increase after he became a "lame duck"?

President Bush also has to deal with a Clinton controlled 'Rat party. Granted, we gave him a Republican majority in Congress, but I often wonder how many of them have been marginalized due to the Clintons' wielding of the FBI files. President Bush faces a different uphill battle than the one President Reagan fought. But, I do believe that like President Reagan, President Bush is the best hope we have of surviving the threat we now face.