Paul Krugman, The New York Times, January 21, 2008
Historical narratives matter. That’s why conservatives are still writing books denouncing F.D.R. and the New Deal; they understand that the way Americans perceive bygone eras, even eras from the seemingly distant past, affects politics today.
And it’s also why the furor over Barack Obama’s praise for Ronald Reagan is not, as some think, overblown. The fact is that how we talk about the Reagan era still matters immensely for American politics.
Bill Clinton knew that in 1991, when he began his presidential campaign. “The Reagan-Bush years,” he declared, “have exalted private gain over public obligation, special interests over the common good, wealth and fame over work and family. The 1980s ushered in a Gilded Age of greed and selfishness, of irresponsibility and excess, and of neglect.”
Contrast that with Mr. Obama’s recent statement, in an interview with a Nevada newspaper, that Reagan offered a “sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.”
I think that Bonzo would have agreed with the Liberal Media, No one else could make red ink taste like Chateneau Du Boef’56 the way The Sainted Bonne Vivante did.
Over the teeth and through the gums,Lookout
Poorhouse here we come!
Comment by Rainlander — January 22, 2008 @ 1:58 am
I didn’t know Reagan knew Bush Junior when he was an infant. Where did they find that photo? (And is Ronnie the real father?)
Comment by RS Janes — January 22, 2008 @ 9:15 am