"Yet to Rodgers, the most salient point of the story is that conservatives failed to see the collapse coming, and he asserts, implausibly, that “there is not a shred of evidence” that Reagan helped bring about the Soviet demise."

Besides the evidence that Star Wars forced the USSR into an add-on arms race it could ill afford, how does Rodgers or his liberal claque explain Reagan's sending V.P. GHWBush to Saudi Arabia in 1985 to lobby CP Fahd SUCCESSFULLY to bring down the price of OPEC crude from $34 to $18/barrel, thus drastically undercutting the USSR's main source of foreign currencies---the "Eurodollars"---and accelerating the economic downfall of the marxist regimes.

And here's a link that might elucidate Rodgers' shortcomings even more:

http://TheInterface.blogtownhall.com/2006/11/10/the_enemy_within.thtml

It is astonishing how small a role is given by academics to religion. Yet religion is one of the most important forces in the world. Is it that "if I don't go to church, it is not important"?

Surely this is the reason why Islam has been so long and so superficially studied. And why the sole religion capable of withstanding Islam - Catholicism - is downgraded.

Ronald Reagan fue para los Estadounidenses un buen presidente, sin duda, impulso su economia a traves de la industria belica, creando un boom armamenticio. Y si bien no participo directamente en la caida del socialismo si contribuyo en la politica mundial que propicio su caida. Pir eso es recordado con agrado.