Killing Reagan

[BarryBobPosthole]

Bill O'Reilly has just published another in his 'Killing' series. I've read Killing Patton and Killing Lincoln and thought both were excellent books. I was looking forward to this one. At least until I read George Will's review and read about the slap fight they got into over it on the air. As much as I disagree with George Will on some stuff he has always been one of my favorite editorialists. His writing on baseball can't be touched by anyone. 'Men at Work' is a classic. But he is a certified nutbag on some issues and it kind of tarnishes the rest of his work.
His review of Killing Reagan tarnished O'Reilly in a bigger way for me. I'm a firm believer that we don't need people like this to tell us how to think. If for nothing else, the simple reason that we tend to love writings we agree with hate the ones we don't, regardless of the facts or lack of, in the piece.
But you have to wonder why close friends who were around Reagan say they noticed nothing of the kind that O'reilly describes. Which makes me wonder if either or both of these guys are liars. Like the guy in 'Silverado' who said," I think there's only one or two of them up there and this asshole is one of'em."
And I couldn't resist pointing out how this story is ironically similar to the one of Dr Ben Carson, famous Egyptologist, West Point scholarship recipient, and Coat of Many Colors wearer.

Here's a couple of links if you want to see the review and story of Bill and Will's spat on Fox.

(rubs hands gleefully)

BKB

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bill-oreilly-slanders-ronald-reagan/2015/11/05/d11300d6-83e3-11e5-9afb-0c971f713d0c_story.html

http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/06/media/bill-oreilly-george-will-killing-reagan/

[Captain]

I read them all except the Kennedy and this Reagan.
I've told the kids that's what I wanted for Christmas.
I'll give it a read and make up my own mind
But I will say I've enjoyed the three I have read with killing Lincoln at the top of the list.

[BarryBobPosthole]

I can make up my mind too. But I'll probably read it now more as a fiction book than a factual one. That's a big difference to me. You kind of have to know where the truth lets off and the fiction begins. Or I do anyway.

BKB

[Captain]

I agree.
I took the the Lincoln book as factual. It was perhaps the most interesting read I've done in years. The Patton was good also, the Jesus was a hard read for me.
I'm remember (as you do) the day Kennedy was killed. And although young I remember a lot of what all was going on at that time in the world. Reagan is one I will definitely be able to assign weight to what I read.
I'm Looking forward to it.

[Fido]

Watched the verbal fisticuffs between Bill and George last night. I've got the book on Reagan but have not as yet started reading it. I do have and read all the other Killing books that Bill has published and what I like is that they are for all purposes history books that cover facts that were not covered by all other writings.I have tooo believe that everything that are in the books have been thoroughly researched as it would compromise his integrity if they were proven false.

[Captain]

And you do know John Wilkes Booth lived another 38 years after they "killed" him and ended up killing hisself in OK about 1903....

[BarryBobPosthole]

I think when it comes to books like this, the best way to look at them is historical fiction, rather than history. Jeffery amd michael Shaara's books are perfect examples. They are published as novels, but they really do acquaint the reader with parts of history they wouldn't otherwise have known and color in a lot of the blank spots. For example, in shaara's 'Gods and generals' about the Mexican War, most of the story about the Mexican War are true and its really only the dialogue between characters is the part that's made up.
It might be best to look at the Killing books the same way. But that's really up to the reader.

BKB

[LJ3]

What Posthole said. There have been things that O'Reilly has said in other killing books that had me poking around other sources to see if they were consistent. I don't consider that a bad thing.