ryoder 1,590 #1 August 20, 2007 http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6580"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
algboy 0 #2 August 20, 2007 Quote http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6580 Direct quote from the just published REAGAN DIARIES. The entry is dated May 17, 1986. 'A moment I've been dreading. George brought his ne're-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,989 #3 August 20, 2007 Paging Mr. Snopes . . . suspected joke-gone-awry in aisle 17 . . . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,297 #4 August 20, 2007 QuoteNope, he didn't. The quotation is pulled from an article titled "My Lunch with Reagan" by Michael Kinsley in the New Republic (vol. 237, issue 1, 7/2/07). And, not surprisingly, the quotation is taken out of context. In its original context it's easy to tell that it's meant as a joke: The literary editor of The New Republic, Leon Wieseltier, brought the joyous news. "Guess what, Mike. You're mentioned in Reagan's diaries." The diaries were published recently by HarperCollins and were generally well-received. Edited by America's historian-on-steroids, Douglas Brinkley, The Reagan Diaries apparently reveal Reagan to be more thoughtful than he is normally given credit for. Of course, our standards in the area of presidential thoughtfulness have plummeted in recent years. Still, the fact that Reagan was writing it all down was news, and an interesting departure from presidential tradition. Traditionally, presidents use a hidden tape recorder. But I was more interested in the me angle, frankly. And it was a puzzle. What on earth could Reagan have written? I indulged my imagination, and my ego: "January 22, 1983. Mommie [Nancy] says that Kinsley's column this week in The New Republic undermines the entire philosophical basis of my administration. O dear O dear, I had better not read it." Or: "October 6, 1987. Why does Kinsley keep picking on me? He is the only thing standing between me and the total destruction of the welfare state. But, ha: I will destroy him--destroy him utterly-- or my name's not … not … not … . Say, they had 'State Fair' on TV last night. What a wholesome, clean-cut young man that Pat Boone is." Or: "May 17, 1986. A moment I've been dreading. George brought his ne'er-do-well son around this morning and asked me to find the kid a job. Not the political one who lives in Florida. The one who hangs around here all the time looking shiftless. This so-called kid is already almost 40 and has never had a real job. Maybe I'll call Kinsley over at The New Republic and see if they'll hire him as a contributing editor or something. That looks like easy work." Source: http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/did_reagan_call_gw_bush_a_neer_do_well/Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #5 August 21, 2007 QuotePaging Mr. Snopes . . . suspected joke-gone-awry in aisle 17 . . . Yep. After Googling it and looking at a number of bloggers claiming credit, i found it in a recent piece in the New Republic by Michael Kinsley. It's basically his fantasy of what Reagan's diaries might say - before he actually bought and read the book. ' http://magazines.enews.com/doc.mhtml?i=20070702&s=kinsley070207 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
