[joesbucks]

I'm not saying it was without problems and roadblocks. Compared to Carter and Bush I, Reagan had a media cakewalk except during Iran Contra. Many have said he was able to get around the media. I saw he was able to use it to his advantage.

And yes, there were many unkind things said about Nancy, just as there have been many unkind things said about democratic first lady's by right leaning reporters. Her use of astrology was, let's say, different. He did appear shrill and high strung. It stuck because to a point it was true. Should that have been part of the debate? I don't know. But we've obviously been active in our assualt not only on Hillary because of her political aspirations, but also on Gore's wife. We sometimes went after Roselyn Carter, and she was pretty inert.

Partisan politics isn't pretty. We remember the attacks on us (our side) and forget those we make on them.

[Miss Marple]

I am not talking about comments made on this forum. I am talking about the media and the public spokesmen of the left.

For example, Maureen Dowd has a column today which ends with her comment that Ronald Reagan was exhilirating, but right or wrong, George Bush is a bummer.

Maureen Dowd had a front page story in the New York Times accusing Nancy of cheating on her husband with Frank Sinatra.

THAT is the two-faced type of behavior I am talking about. I don't expect the media to fall all over themselves in praise, nor do I expect tacky criticism. I would appreciate it if they wouldn't LIE about their past behavior.