No of course not. Margaret Thatcher is not in good health, rarely goes out or receives visitors, and therefore had to miss the dedication of a statue of Ronald Reagan in London:
It was a fitting occasion for the 4th of July. A statue of Ronald Reagan was unveiled at the American Embassy in London yesterday to mark the centenary of the former U.S. president’s birth.
Foreign Secretary William Hague and former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice watched as the 10ft bronze figure was revealed in Grosvenor Square.
Sadly Mr Reagan’s great political ally and friend, former prime minister Baroness Thatcher, was unable to attend due to her frailty.
The reasonableness of the reaction to Thatcher’s non-appearance contrasts with the hyperventilation (and not just by the left) in early June when some anonymous “ally” of Thatcher supposedly (and falsely) told The Guardian that Thatcher refused to meet Sarah Palin.
In fact, The Guardian went so far at to state that Thatcher, by contrast to her rebuff of Palin, would be attenting the Reagan statute dedication:
It would appear that the reasons go deeper than Thatcher’s frail health. Her allies believe that Palin is a frivolous figure who is unworthy of an audience with the Iron Lady. This is what one ally tells me:
“Lady Thatcher will not be seeing Sarah Palin. That would be belittling for Margaret. Sarah Palin is nuts.”
Thatcher will show the level she punches at when she attends the unveiling of a statue of Ronald Reagan outside the US embassy in Grosvenor Square on Independence day on 4 July. This is what her ally told me:
“Margaret is focusing on Ronald Reagan and will attend the unveiling of the statue. That is her level.”
No doubt a rebuff from Thatcher will delight Andrew Sullivan, the creator of The Dish blog, who regards Palin as a dangerous lightweight.
Now that The Guardian story, down to the detail of Thatcher attending the Reagan dedication to prove “her level,” has been revealed to be phony, will The Guardian and those who used The Guardian story to bash Palin admit that they were wrong?