ALTERMAN: 'LIBERAL MEDIA' STRIKES AGAIN

[dArKeR]

The ‘Liberal Media’ strikes again.  What you’re seeing this week is the product of a forty year right-wing campaign to brand the media as unpatriotic.  In truth, Ronald Reagan was never as popular as he is being presented to be with Americans.  As president, was never even as popular as Bill Clinton during the period of Clinton’s impeachment.  Don’t believe it?  Look here.

Nor was he considered to be as “great” a president after leaving office, at least compared to Clinton whose post-presidency rating is also higher.  Those figures are here, not that you will hear any network or cable news reporter mention them this week.

As a matter of historical record, Reagan campaigned on government discipline but vastly expanded its size and scope, along with the deficits it created; he provided weapons to terrorists and misled the country about it; he helped engender genocide in Central America—according to the terms employed, for instance, by Guatemala’s own truth commission, and misled the country about that too-- and showed no compassion to those who were stricken with AIDS, owing to a personal prejudice or (more likely) political calculations that homosexuals were not worthy of presidential attention. 

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/

My personal Reagan corruption story:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=55254

[alarcojon]

1. Kick for this great chart

Reagan's popularity versus Clinton's, Carter's, and the Bush pair.

[orlin2k]

2. Alterman is right on

I think that media coverage of Reagan should prove that there is not a Liberal media, just a lazy corporate media. I'm sick of the sugar-coated coverage of Reagan. I'm not old enough to really remember Reagan presidency but I have read history books and if this isn't revisionist history I don't know what is.

[newyawker99]

4. Hi orlin2k!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Manix]

3. ...very well said!