What's Mallard raving about today?
President Reagan, the Media, the Soviet Union.
In Mallard's world is it a sin to not invoke, every time the Soviet Union comes up in any conversation, Saint Reagan's name.
Did it ever occur to you, Mallard, that folks are a bit more concerned about the fact that your current hero President has generated a new conflict with Russia? And is being outmaneuvered diplomatically by Vladimir Putin?
13 comments:
Vladmir Putin is one clever cookie. Modestly evil, but clever.
Reagan was no more than a cheerleader in the collapse of the Soviet Union. If names must be named every time someone mentions that the Cold War is history, mention Lech Walesa or Mikhail Gorbachev, not Reagan.
I thought it was interesting that Tinshley says "only the American media."
Is he saying the French media and the Swedish media and the Canadian media and the Bulgarian media and Al Jazeera and so on always give Reagan his due when talking about the collapse of the Soviet Union?
I don't understand. What is Tinsley referencing? Was there recently a show about the end of the cold war that didn't mention Reagan? Is this coming out of his butt?
It's pissing him off because Al Gore and Jimmy Carter are getting coverage, but not some dead guy.
And the American media has been talking about him - Stephen Colbert!
He celebrated the 20th anniversary of the "tear down this wall" speech more than once in an episode last week.
It was hilarious.
See, Reagan wanted peace, which is why he didn't get rid of the nukes and armed the USSR's enemies and spent lavishly on defense while cutting programs for the people he was defending.
Mallard's an idiot. The GOP candidates know they can't latch onto Bush as a role-model, so they're clinging to Reagan.
That's been on the news.
Wait - why do they have to say how the Cold War ended? Isn't it sufficient to say, this is the whatever since the Cold War?
We're not idiots, we know how and when it ended.
And no one American politician was responsible for its end.
I said in a school paper that Chernobyl played a big part - it showed holes in the USSR's... um, everything.
I'm with eddypo as well - what's he talking about?
I watched a 2 hour show on hippies last week, and they referenced Reagan and part of the Cold War, the Vietnam one...
The thing is, Conservatives have to perform amazing doublethink regarding the Soviet collapse. They have a fundamental belief that Communism is inherently unworkable, and its collapse is inevitable due to the laws of history. Then, they hold fast to the belief that, without Reagan running up OUR credit cards and forcing the USSR into conspicuous consumption, they would still be around. You know who wouldn't be around if it weren't for Reagan? The Taliban.
Kaitlyn, you talk too much.
Anon - you sound like my sister.
Two things.
One: I can confirm that Swedish media knows how to talk about the collapse of the Soviet Union without mentioning Reagan. On the other hand, American Republicans seem to see us as 'former communists, soon-to-be Muslim Theocracy', so I'm not sure we count.
Two: I fully support Kaitlyns right to talk too much.
Did any of you catch the McSweeney article "Pros and Cons of The Top 20 Republican Presidential Candidates"? It is hilarious.
www.mcsweeneys.net/2007/5/2moe.html
#4. Zombie Ronald Reagan
Pro: Probably the most Reaganesque candidate available; if stoked with the brains of the living, should operate in an acceptable fashion.
Con: Long-dead eyes lack that magic twinkle; inhuman groans negatively impact "Great Communicator" status.
I consider Reagan the best Republican president in my parents' lifetimes. In fact, he's almost average by Democratic president standards.
kaitlyn, your sister sounds like a smart cookie
I always enjoy the belief that a senile, washed-up B-grade actor saying mean things was all it took to collapse a super power. I eagerly await President Gary Busey's defeat of the New Atlantian Empire.
Post a Comment