[Silly]

On Sunday night, Showtime will air this program. Perhaps those who subscribe to that channel could take a look and report back:

QUESTIONS TO KEEP IN MIND:
Does it tell us anything new, or give us any new insight?
Is it respectful to Reagan, or hopelessly biased?

[Silly]

Reaganites, please send this to your ping lists and keep this bumped.

[Slyfox]

Did Mr. Reagan, an accomplished actor, become a "real" president in its aftermath?

No, he WAS a real President before he was shot. The only thing that changed was that he became firmly committed to doing the will of God.

I love to see these liberals squirm because Dubya is acting a lot like Dutch. And the contrast between them and Clinton is SO obvious that anyone with any semblence of a brain has to notice it. So, kids get used to it. The liberals are coming up with their own analyses of The Gipper. It must be very painful for them to admit that he was a decent guy. We must pity them. I just wish they wouldn't act like they are the first to discover Ronald Reagan was not an evil warmonger and that he actually may have done some good.

[WhatPriceFreedom?]

BUMP

[lowbridge]

Did Mr. Reagan, an accomplished actor, become a "real" president in its aftermath?

Well, I'm pretty sure he was a real Prresident before as well.

Did this assassination attempt by a deranged individual help bring about the end of the cold war?

Oh yeah. Ronald Reagan didn't win the cold war....John Hinckley inspired him to do it.

Where's the barf alert?

[Twodees]

[Sarah, an eloquent advocate of gun control]

Must be another Sarah Brady. The one I've seen is an incoherent, asinine drooler who can't articulate a complete sentence without lapsing into a cigarette cough. Eloquent, she ain't.

[mountaineer]

So, did anyone watch this last night?
My review:
I thought the movie itself, The Day Reagan Was Shot, was a bit over the top. Maybe Gen. Al Haig really was a frothing lunatic, I don't know, but that's how Richard Dreyfuss portrayed him. George H.W. Bush and Reagan were portrayed as amiable dunces, in my opinion (Reagan only slightly less so). Deaver, Meese, Baker and Nancy Reagan received some respect. The hero was the ultra-liberal doctor who saved Reagan's life despite political differences.

The documentary preceeding concluded Reagan felt he had been spared for a purpose and he accomplished that purpose when the Cold War ended. They showed the great "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" footage, which brought a tear to my eye. I didn't find anything about the Bradys to be touching. They sat there on camera and argued. The narrator reminded us about ten times that Brady now is a gun control proponent.

[dead]

Mr. Reagan's popularity soared after of the attack, and his advisers used it to push a series of tax cuts and other legislative victories through Congress.

As usual, everything at the Times is about image and perception. The actual legislation, Reagan’s direct appeals to the voters that thwarted obstruction in congress, and the positive effects that passage had, are all subordinate to people’s “feelings” about Reagan. Also, notice how Reagan's "advisers" got the legislation passed. In the world of the NY Times, Reagan was simultaneously a bumbling idiot and an evil genius, depending on the time of day.

His theory was, `We win and they lose.' "

Obviously, Reagan had a far more competent grasp on the real world than the emotional windbags at the Times.