Once on the Mike Reagan Show, Mike Reagan was really criticizing Clinton for his lying and denying what happened when he had sex / adultery with Monica. I called in to say that rather than lying like a lawyer to say that he (Clinton) can’t remember when he could indeed remember what happened or to say that it depends on what the meaning of the work is is, that Clinton would have done better to wiggle out of it like another scandal-ridden president in a sticky situation who was being asked about a highly significant event in the Iran-Contra Scandal when instead of answering the question he just responded with another question by asking the reporters a question about a very insignificant matter, “Well! … Can you remember what you had for lunch yesterday?” Ronald Reagan then paused briefly for a response to this unexpected question that he raised. When they were not able to quickly answer the question, he then quickly added, “Well! … You see, that’s just my point! If you can’t remember what you had for lunch yesterday, how do you expect me to remember what something that happened many months ago!?” This was a clever way out of giving an answer – honest or dishonest. Reagan avoided the question completely, even though he had lied to the American people on other occasions about events in Central America and about U.S. government involvement there to help prop up the drug-running Contra hoodlums, death squads, and terrorists. El Salvador was known for the death squads but the Nicaraguan Contras acted the same – with brutality toward combatants and civilians (non-combatants) alike. It is known that terrorists target both combatants and non-combatants, depending on how easy of a target they want to hit. Reagan was also good friends with Iraq’s Sadam Hussein and Sadam’s death squad government who Reagan also supported regardless of the lack of human rights and liberty that characterized Sadam’s rule from beginning to end.

( Both Clinton and Reagan were called the “Great Communicators”. They were both Great evaders of the truth. I think Reagan was a little better at it, making him an even greater “Communicator”. ) A thoughtful person noted that “When Clinton lied, no one died.” You can’t make that statement about Reagan. Reagan supported brutal regimes, drug runners, and terrorists who were worse than any East German border guards whom he preached against, and worse than the British colonial rulers who caused people to revolt and throw them out in order to form a new country – the U.S.A. For a reminder of how brutal the British rulers were in the 1770s, one need only watch the movie, “The Patriot” starring Mel Gibson.

Mike Reagan didn’t want to hear this and I was hung up on when he heard me suggest that his dad, Ronnie, was even better at evading the truth with the example I gave between Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton trying to evade the truth.  I suggested that Bill Clinton should have used the same lines that his step dad Ronald Reagan used to evade the truth by asking the reporters what they had for lunch yesterday and then saying that if they can’t remember what they had for lunch yesterday, then how can they expect him to remember something that happened many months ago.

The truth hurts, doesn’t it Mike? It only hurts buffoons and fools who think that a scandal-ridden president like Ronald Reagan (who props up bloody death squads, and drug-running terrorists and tells stupid lies to the American people against all common sense about what was happening in Central America) should somehow be on the Eisenhower Dollar instead of Eisenhower. Eisenhower was the greatest Republican President of the century. He was pretty much a scandal free President who warned us against trusting the likes of the Military-Industrial Complex, not to mention the CIA who misled people into supporting a military dictatorship in Guatemala in a 1954 coup-d’etat. Eisenhower was a great liberator during WWII, and a real military officer – the top commanding officer with five stars, unlike someone who only pretended to be a military officer – a Captain in a movie, “The Santa Fe Trail”. All those blind Ronald Reagan loving fools don’t want to pull their heads out or to wake up and smell the coffee or what ever they would smell after they pull their heads out.
The blind Ronald Reagan loving fools all think their crap don’t stink. Fortunately, they are a real minority.

Might I add another title for the greatest Republican President of the last century, “Supreme Allied Commander”. He had five stars, he wasn’t someone reading a script on how to pretend to be an Army Captain in the movie, “The Sante Fe Trail”. - Anyone who suggests that Ronald Reagan should be depicted on the Eisenhower Dollar instead of Eisenhower or on any coins and paper money or on Mount Rushmore or anywhere of dignity like this is just as drugged up as the Fifth Amendment druggie, Rush Limbaugh and all of his wanna-bees. I always thought that if Limbaugh wasn’t on drugs that he ought to be. It turned out later that Rush Limbaugh was indeed on drugs. Although he earlier said on his show that anyone caught illegally using drugs should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, when he (Limbaugh himself) got caught illegally using drugs, he didn’t throw himself on the exuberance of the court to really give it to him because he’s as guilty as a cat with feathers on its chin and then explain how guilty he was. No, No, No. Instead Limbaugh became the Fifth Amendment Druggie. Did you know that Limbaugh also used to be on the dough – sucking up welfare and leaving his first wife to be the bread winner while he (Limbaugh) refrained from working and aimed instead at getting welfare assistance? This fact is listed in the book, “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot”. The book was written by Al Franken and it sure caused Rush Limbaugh to go on a frantic crash diet and loose his fat. Rush Limbaugh still hasn’t lost his idiocy and he never will. Now he is just a Big Idiot and not a fat one. Did you know that Limbaugh has lost even more wives than fat? I lost count on which wife he is married to now. I think it is number four or five. Al Franken is still married to his first wife and leads a much better life.

 A caller to a night time radio talk show on a big 50,000 watt AM radio station – KSL in Salt Lake City – once said that unlike Clinton, Ronald Reagan was loyal to his wife. To this the radio talk show host asked, “Which wife? – the first wife or the second wife?” He was clearly a level headed talk show host and not some Rush Limbaugh wanna-bee.

Man, Alex called it dead on!

It was brought out what the main issue was going to be and you can hear that Michael did give Mark an open air to express what his agenda involving the disks is all about. Mark is the one who kept on going back to the murder call more than was needed. He did not answer easily what his agenda was when asked. He was not interrupted as has been claimed. Even the consistent question about giving names was a legitimate one giving that the main issue of the interview was suppose to be to give Mark a forum to tell the people what he knows and what he is trying to accomplish. The name question during such an interview is a standard of progression the way things were going. Yes, it was a tactic that “they” use when you give them something that is enough to get the point across, but again, this was a public airwave interview and the question itself was just a natural progression of it.

I give both Mark and Michael “A minuses” for having such an interview under the circumstance. What happens next as far as the murder call is concerned, is yet to be seen. I have said and still feel that since Mark came onto Alex’s radio show, not just articles about him in these websites, asked for all of our help and knows about the legality of what happened, that he is obligated now to go that next legal step. If not, then he is a user not much less than the enemy is.

The interview is 20 minutes long. I suggest since this is so big from both camps on what they are and did do, that you listen to the interview again. Realize that there is more than one issue in this whole thing and that even though they overlap, there are still separation points. What happens next will determine where the next change of the overlapping occurs. Thank you.