Found this: Gerald Ford also loved golf, but spectators had to watch carefully because the President was know for conking people on the head with his wild shots.
Here:
"charlie b"
discreet with
like
What is sad, is that Clinton inherited a world for the first time in 50 years with great promise (no cold war), a powerful country with a healthy rising economy (recession ended in 1991) and his defining moment of possible great achievement is his sexual proclivities...what a waste. Soggy.
elected to the
That is you
love to spend time
lived off lines
Funny how many falsehoods take hold and seem so real...I guess because the teller likes the message and truth be damned. For much of Reagan's radio/TV career he wrote much of his own material. His letters, essays and other public correspondence since often indicate a strong grasp of the language and clarity of thought......While as President he naturally (all presidents do) did have speech writers, he is however well known for selecting and placing his own mark on the material. Soggy
Bush, on the other hand...well, he's on the other hand. He
has descended from
he's remembered mostly for that today, thanks to the relentless harping of the right wing. I bet history will see it differently. I mean middle aged guys in positions of power using their influence to get laid is not news. It might be interesting to speculate what Clinton's legacy will be, but I really doubt it will involve Monica.
As if the left wing never went after anyone.
I think Monica will always be in the history. The media will NEVER let it die. Ed
Soggy responds:
Sure he did. B movie actors ALL wrote their own material.
Where'd you dig this one up?
Charlie Self "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." Ernest Benn
Where've you been?
The only thing that matters to the media is that Cheney once worked for Halliburton.
Aksurly, I saw an interview of someone on some show (BookTV/cspan or maybe Charlie Rose)... The interviewee held up copies of Reagan's speeches in which Reagan crossed out entire sections and pages and hand wrote his own words in their place. He routinely took an active role and made major contributions to the speeches. Damn. I wish I could recall where I saw this program. I'm not a Reagan fan but it was certainly interesting.
Funny thing, for the first time since the administration took office (or at least since the Iraq invasion), I saw an AP story regarding a hostage in Iraq who worked for KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root) in which the AP story indicated that KBR was a subsidiary of Haliburton but did *not* say "the company formerly run by Republican Vice-President Dick Cheney". This is the first time that AP has forgotten to add that last bit about Cheney.
What amazes me is that now it is "the relentless harping of the right wing" and that the left (or at least Clinton apologists) say it is no surprise that middle-aged guys in positions of power use their influence to gain favors. Before Clinton's transgressions, the left, and particularly the NOW gang and their supporters were continually screaming about how evil it was that those things happened and supported everything possible, including lawsuits and other actions to change this country into a gender-neutral neutered society. Remember Bob Packwood? He lost his position over actions that were less egregious than Clinton's. Remember the hoopla over the appointment and confirmation hearings for a certain black Supreme Court justice? He was tarred and feathered and labeled as unsuitable for his position for allegedly making only comments that were deemed as "offensive" years later by the person who allegedly heard those comments. The only difference in the latter two cases was the fact that those were conservatives being attacked by the left. The big difference is that neither of those latter two conservatives committed perjury during legal proceedings related to the behavior in question. The irony is truly amazing -- as is the hypocrisy of the left in this matter.
Read what he wrote. Radio and TV are not "B movies".
Oh, I don't doubt that he changed the speeches. Believe me, that's easier than it looks, once the basic speech is written. He also probably made a lot of hand written notes to give to the speech writer, the intent of which, one can expect, made it into the speeches.
But I do very much doubt he had a blinking thing to do with writing his roles in the movies. Maybe he got some input on TV, but for the most part actors don't write, whether they can or not, and certainly B grade actors don't get a shot at it.
I know someone is going to come back with remarks on how Paul Newman or or Harrison Ford and two or three others rewrite their roles. Two points: neither Newman or Ford are B grade actors; things have changed in the industry since the '40s and '50s.
Charlie Self "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." Ernest Benn
Radio/TV Charlie. Looks like prejudice trumps even your eyes.
The biggest difference is that those of the "right" normally resign rather than try to brazen it out.
George writes>
Trumps whose eyes? What facts have been offered?
I say that B movie actors didn't write their roles. I did not say they didn't modify TV scripts. Probably also radio. Using most TV scripts for toilet paper would improve both the quality of the writing and the tone of the show, so that's not a feat.
I made no blanket statements, and asked a question that no one has yet answered. Owen's sight of marked up copies of speeches is not MY sight.
Charlie Self "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." Ernest Benn
Bear in mind that all of Reagan's radio and TV work wasn't portraying characters. He appeared as himself with some regularity. The one that sticks in my mind was hosting "Death Valley Days" after Stanley Andrews ("The Old Ranger") left the series. I think it quite reasonable that he would have input in that kind of situation. And if you check IMDB you'll find that he did quite a lot of that sort of thing, and IMDB only holds that work for which there was some record kept.
still does.....
maybe. do you know the "truth"?
that's politics for ya.
As you would not believe what you read - why would anyone bother?
Any number of biographies out there testify to the "great communicator" having ability to write as well as deliver words with a great sense of timing and humor..
And, as the original, which you still ignore said, he also worked in radio and TV, and did a lot of his own copy.
So he's allowed to lie under oath if the truth makes him ...uncomfortable? That's a hell of a precedent to set, isn't it? "Well, as long as you would be inconvenienced by telling the truth, go ahead and lie"?
So, that bit about lying to congress was what, exactly? And yes, I find his views _and_ his behavior repugnant. What's a neocon, by the way? I only see it tossed around as an insult.
Right, and Dennis Rich and the whole laundry list of Clinton's cronies who got last-day pardons. "this other guy did stuff I disagree with" doesn't excuse anyone's own actions. Dave Hinz
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.