Don’t you find it amazing how liberal media members just can’t stand it whenever former President Ronald Reagan’s name is raised in conversation?
It’s one thing when the currently unhinged host of HBO’s “Real Time” Bill Maher complains that Republicans “love Ronald Reagan in a way that’s just gay.”
But when CBS and U.S. News & World Report’s Gloria Borger calls for a “moratorium on invoking the memory of Ronald Reagan” in a column about the recent Republican presidential debates held at a library named in his honor, this Gipper envy has clearly gotten way out of hand (emphasis added throughout):
First of all, if we're going to get through the next 19 months, let's agree to have a moratorium on invoking the memory of Ronald Reagan. Sure, the first Republican presidential debate last week was held at the Ronald Reagan Library. And sure, the first question was about Reagan's slogan "Morning in America." And of course, Rudy Giuliani answered by saying he would be just like Reagan-trying to "lead from optimism." And then, one by one, each candidate lauded the former president as if competing for his endorsement. Reagan "was a president of strength," Mitt Romney told us; Giuliani would have us believe that in the Iranian hostage crisis, our opponents "looked in Ronald Reagan's eyes and in two minutes, they released the hostages." Sounds like a made-for-TV movie. But here's the point for these GOP candidates: If you keep invoking Reagan, you'll only diminish yourselves.
So enough already.
Deliciously, the real absurdity in Borger’s position didn’t surface until her conclusion. See if you can spot the hypocrisy with one half of your brain tied behind your back:
As for Romney, he gets the Bill Clinton "Best in Show" award for glibness. Indeed, when asked how he felt about Clinton making a return to the White House as the first spouse, he deflected: "You have got to be kidding."
But nervous Republicans-the ones offstage-know it's no joke.
Yes, for heaven’s sake, let’s please stop invoking the name of Ronald Reagan at Republican events whilst we make sure to invoke Clinton’s in an article covering them.
How stupendous. Thanks for the much-needed chuckle on a Tuesday, Gloria.
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Chuckle heck...this is rip-ro
May 8, 2007 - 13:29 ET by bigtimerChuckle heck...this is rip-roaring hysterically funny!
Clinton okay to invoke....
President Reagan....no can do.
Nervous republicans my arse.
Ahhh Gloria, you still do not have one brain cell that works...and the one you have left floating around up there in outer space is on over-time.
Give it a rest.
The left is jealous because t
May 8, 2007 - 13:34 ET by JimboThe left is jealous because they don’t have a “Reagan” of their own, or at least one that was alive during most people’s lifetime.
Jimbo says - "There is a fine line between freedom of speech and treason"
...but Reagan was an awful pr
May 8, 2007 - 13:54 ET by TruthMonger...but Reagan was an awful president, right? They should be happy to constantly bring him up:)...
Unless he...wasn't...so...bad...after...all...?
Allright, then let's have a m
May 8, 2007 - 13:36 ET by rwesleyAllright, then let's have a moratorium on Democrats invoking the name of Kennedy. John that is. I pray for any Democrat to mention Fat Teddy in a debate.
rw,Good point...Throw in Fran
May 8, 2007 - 13:41 ET by bigtimerrw,
Good point...
Throw in Franklin Roosevelt too.
You beat me to it, BT. FDR is
May 8, 2007 - 15:07 ET by Indiana JoeYou beat me to it, BT. FDR is the closest Dem icon I could think of. But that socialist was no Reagan, that's for sure.
Hi IJ... Haven't seen you in
May 8, 2007 - 15:20 ET by bigtimerHi IJ...
Haven't seen you in ages!
Good to see you, we must hit and miss.
Yep, FDR was just that a socialist.
As an aside, I saw a documentary awhile back that he wanted SS to be made partly private, kind of like what Pres. Bush wanted to do, up to the individual...the Dem. congress over-rode his decision.
Figures doesn't it? If they can't get their hands on it...they aren't in control with all their socialistic programs.
Look at the mess they have created now...just what they planned.
I find Democrats invoking the
May 8, 2007 - 15:23 ET by Gat New YorkI find Democrats invoking the great days under Clinton and would urge them to keep invoking his name when it comes to his accomplishments in:
May 8, 2007 - 13:44 ET by Airforce_5_O:::::::::::::Between the Lines:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Read here--------> We are afraid of Reagan
:::::::::::::Between the Lines:::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Reduce the U.S. Carbon Footprint. Send Rosie to Iran. Airforce_5_O 04/04/2007
lol
May 8, 2007 - 19:44 ET by dahliatraverslol
That's what the left fears mo
May 8, 2007 - 14:15 ET by midnight cowboyThat's what the left fears most, another Reagan, one who takes the libs vitriol as pissin' in the wind. Unfortunately, the current crop of republican pres wannabees don't offer a Gipper 2. If you take a little thing from each one of them, Guiliani's tell it like it is, take no prisoners and stick you finger in the eye of your enemy style, with Romney's communication skills and grace in a public forum, along with McCain's patriotism, and throw in the conservatism of the some of the lower tier candidates, you might get something similar to RR. What boogles the mind is, as respected, and admired Reagan is and was, why doesn't any republican candidate want to follow in his footsteps?
Ronald Reagan
May 8, 2007 - 15:05 ET by doug1950Midnight,
I think you answered your own question. Because Ronald Reagan was the real deal. What you saw was what you got. Politicians today have "handlers" to tell them what to wear, what to say, how to stand, how to appear polished. Ronald Reagan was his own man and he didn't give a RA who did or didn't like it or him. That was what appealed to the American people on both sides of the political spectrum. He was unique, unassuming and did what he thought was the right thing regardless if it made him popular. That one thing is what made him a "Leader". Most of these guys have multiple views on any subject. You nailed it when you called them wannabes. They think by invoking his name that will give them extra credit with the American public but individually they are too scared to "be" like Reagan. It just might cost them a vote or two. Democrats / liberals are in even worse shape. The only one of them that has any gonads is Hillary and they aren't hers. She took them from someone.
The debate was held at the Re
May 8, 2007 - 15:05 ET by Gat New YorkThe debate was held at the Reagan Library. By not invoking his name would have been disrespectful.
H'mm, maybe we could work som
May 8, 2007 - 19:46 ET by dahliatraversH'mm, maybe we could work something out. Gloria, tell you what. We'll cut back on the Reagan references if you put Chris Matthews on a leash. Or at least make him get a brain transplant.
Matthews is already on a leas
May 8, 2007 - 22:06 ET by Gat New YorkMatthews is already on a leash - just not our leash.
Trying to take away the advantage
May 8, 2007 - 21:56 ET by nkviking75It's just part of the usual lib strategy to deny anything to the Republicans which might work in their favor. No president in recent memory was as beloved or admired as Reagan, even though he had many vocal detractors. Any Republican candidate would be wise to remind us of what we once had. Then they have to convince voters that they're the one closes to that idea.
Quit trying to tell Republicans how to run their campaigns.
Oh, and Gloria....
REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN REAGAN!!!!
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
And do this BEFORE Hillary st
May 9, 2007 - 09:01 ET by ucAnd do this BEFORE Hillary stops talking with Elenor Roosevelt?