History can be inconvenient can't it

Dinesh D'Souza at the New York Post

WRITING on Ronald Reagan's achievements in Newsweek, historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. notes, "Reagan's admirers contend that his costly re-armament program caused the Soviet collapse. Maybe so; but surely the thing that did in the Russians was that time had proved communism an economic, political and moral disaster."

Funny: Here's Schlesinger in 1982, observing that "Those in the United States who think the Soviet Union is on the verge of economic and social collapse" are "wishful thinkers who are only kidding themselves."

Many historians and pundits have refused to credit Ronald Reagan's policies for helping to bring about the Cold War victory, blaming communism's chronic economic problems. Yet, like Scheslinger, they failed to describe it as inevitable while Reagan was actually in office.

I guess those who didn't like Reagan while he was in office, don't want to have to eat crow and admit his accomplishments. That doesn't mean Reagan was perfect or that they even agreed with his positions, but they should have the honesty to give credit where credit is due. Anything else is mean spirited and shows them to be sore losers. It makes them appear to be spoiled children who are not to be taken seriously, which I am sure is not how they want to come across to the country.