Well that is what I thought; but since she did not mention this as a point of fact when she was speaking with David re the controversy; I started to wonder if I was thinking of a different set of china.
This story is part of a 'false memory' created by the 'foe's of Reagan' so to speak; and it is amazing that it still holds the truth for so many. A small truth perhaps; but it does contribute to a mindset.
Anyway, thanks for the input; and for settling this; again.
The only difference between the media today and back then is 1) they have the additional tricks added by the Clinton Administration, and 2) the "Reagan democrats" forced them into a form of "restraint." I also think that they never thought he would win his second term by such a wide margin and were taken by surprise by it. I think that that is one of the reasons behind the unprecedented intensity of the assault against Bush - they somehow blame themselves for screwing up the last time.
You know, in my own mind it was the media response to Reagan during those years that clued me in to what they were about. Maybe they will have the same effect on some substantial set of voters this time as well. One can at least hope so.
Next week they will try to demean and defame him, and attempt to "deconstruct" his Presidency. They may not be able to get away with it.