What if my liberal blogroll wrote the captions for newspapers:
Long lines of liberals wait up to five hours to view the casket of the man who killed Conservatism– Matt Yglesias
After standing line for hours, onlookers are allowed three minutes to jeer at the corpse of the Least Popular President of the Modern Era– Atrios
Members of the African-American communnity, who long suffered under the burden of Reagan’s unfair tax policies, continue to shoulder the burden for rich white men.– Nathan Newman
Fueled by the media myth of Reagan’s popularity, thousands of Americans line Constitution Ave. to support a man they never really liked. – Ezra Klein
Horrified onlookers demand full release of all Reagan documents to determine if his policies were directly related to the Abu Gharib torture scandal– Kevin Drum
Sections were reserved for Reagan supporters within the homosexual community, but since Reagan killed them all with his indifference and his belief that homosexuals are unimportant, none were available to attend–
Josh P.
ROFLOL! So true, especially the last one.
MG2
Thenm of course there is Reuters. This is real: U.S. Ripe for Reagan Nostalgia After Grim Year
kelly
Nice work, John. Nice work.
shark
Amazing how these unwashed and uneducated peasants who live in that useless stretch of land between New York and California (or in some horrible cases, in NY and CA) continually fail to see the wisdom being forced down their throats by the press, left and academia….
Kimmitt
Oh, yeah, because the Press hated and still hates Reagan.
Oh wait.
Rick
What would Andrew Lazarus say? Oh! I hope to learn!
Cordially…
HH
Kimmitt, The bashing of Reagan in the papers has been duly noted in blog after blog. It’s TV that has been mostly positive on him because they’ve been broadcasting the funeral for a week. And even then, there’s been some attacks on him on occasion.
Ezra
Gross oversimplifications? Yeah. But it was also really damn funny. Nice work, John.
John Cole
Thx. I am glad you saw I was just poking fun.
Kadang
OK, John…
You owe me a bottle of windex for making me spew pepsi all over my monitor.
Toooooo Funny!
Far North
What significance does the number 138 have to the Reagan administration? Is it the number of times Reagan “kicked ass” on the press”. Is it the number of times Reagan “kicked ass” on the communists? How bout those godless liberals?
Sorry, conservative sheep. It was the number of Reagan administration officials who were either investigated, indicted or convicted of criminal behavior. When you break down the Reagan administration, corruption was the dominant feature. No matter how much the conservative dominated media tries to revise history, the Reagan administration was infested with unethical and criminal behavior.
Remember folks, facts are facts. Myth can’t erase the factual criminal behavior of the Reagan rein of corruption.
poormedicalstudent
far north: ‘facts’ are usually backed up with links of some sort.
Lex
Too funny. Nice work, John.
Ricky
far north,
You can stop fighting….Reagan won.
ape
Yes. And noone protested, anywhere, against a war they all agreed in.
And Reagan beat Communism all by himself. Particularly in China. It must be true because a splodge-faced commie said something vaguely similar.
JPS
Far North,
Since facts are facts, and you seem to have a confident command of them, save me some googling:
1) 138 out of how many? If it’s out of a few hundred, that seems quite shocking. If it’s out of a pool of 10,000, it isn’t so much.
2) 138, compared to how many in the Ford or Carter administrations (adjusting for their single terms)?
3) 138, compared to how many in the Clinton administration?
Now, this–especially #3–is not meant as a So’s-Your-Old-Man defense of Reagan; I’m just asking for calibration. You cite the number alone as though it proves a remarkable level of corruption. You may be right for all I know, but the number itself doesn’t mean much to me.
Brian
This fails on a number of different levels.
Hal
138 indicted, 32 convicted under Reagan.
40 for Clinton. I believe all were acquitted.
Still searching for Carter and Ford, but I believe the number is pretty close to zero.
Far North
poormed…..,
I ain’t too hot on the computer skills. Linking? Not at my level.
I will try to research other past administrations if I get the time.
On thing I will admit about Reagan…when those in his administration were exposed for their conduct, criminal and unethical, Reagan, on several instances, asked for their resignation or he fired them. You won’t see that with this corrupt Texan currently in the White House.
Bill Hedrick
Yup, Far North, that’s why George Tenet still has a job… oh wait.
ruprecht
138 indicted, 32 convicted under Reagan and the Soviet Union was defeated.
40 for Clinton, all were acquitted, Bill got a blowjob.
Its all a matter of perspective really but I think when the history books are written Reagan will come out ontop in the comparison.
LOL!
Yeah, you REALLY don’t want to assess Clinton’s blowjob “in comparison” to U.S. funding and general support of “anti-communist” South American political elements that thought the Holocaust was a great idea because they believed communism (which they hated, and why we supported them) was one big “JEWISH conspiracy.”
But let’s do it anyways:
Number of El Salvadoran civilian dissidents, women and children were killed by the U.S.-backed Hitler-admiring regimes during the course of Clinton’s blowjob:
Zero.