Ronald Reagan was not a saint,

[playahata1]

and he should not be treated as such. I refuse to shed any crocodile tears or bite my tongue for a man who did not include African Americans and other people of color, women, gays, the working class, the poor, and union members in his vision of what being an American should be.

I can up close and personally bear witness to the destruction this man has caused. My grandfather lost his job in 1986 because his union had been weakened by Reagan's destruction of the air traffic controllers. The grocery chain for which he had worked as a forklift operator for 32 years was bought out by a NON-UNION chain; thus, the unionized workers had to go, or leave the union if they wanted to work for the new chain. My grandfather and the other unionized workers had to GO TO COURT in order to get that mere pittance of a pension he is receiving now.

Ever since then my grandfather has struggled financially, working jobs (porter for a used car dealership, security guard, van driver, courier/delivery boy) that paid him far less than what he was making at his old job -- and without union protection and benefits. Reagan's hand can also be felt in the paltry Social Security and Medicare benefits my grandparents receive. Their only child -- my mother -- catches hell trying to help keep them above water at the end of each month. That -- and the fact that he did not respect me as an African American and as a woman -- is why I refuse to genuflect before Reagan's memory.

I for one resent some people's telling me and others to shut up in our criticism of Reagan. Personally and professionally I am a believer in the First Amendment, and as far as I am concerned, it applies here. I have seen very few threads in which people talk abour "pissing and dancing on Reagan's" grave. Most of the criticism has to do with Reagan's politics and record, and, by God, I and anyone else who feels they must address this fact, have EVERY RIGHT TO ADDRESS IT. It seems as if the thought police are saying it is WRONG to TELL THE TRUTH about the Reagan record. This is part of the inoculation against all the lies and bullshit coming from the Reaganites and their enablers in the mainstream American media. I came to DU because I saw it as an antidote to that poison. Unfortnately, there are people who only make that poison more toxic.

That is my opinion, the way I feel, and I have every right to express it. The thought police here and elsewhere who think differently -- too bad. Peace.

[DarkPhenyx]

1. Nor was he Satan.

He should not be treated as such either.

WE aren't telling you to shut up. We're asking you to behave like an adult while the opposition is watching. Have a little bit of class and decorum. IOW, don't act like a jackass and cheer the death of another human being. That's really all we're asking. It isn't a complex concept.

[playahata1]

2. When does pointing up his record equal

regarding him as Satan? I do not give a damn what the other side thinks of me, thank you. I do not need you or anyone else patronizing me, and I especially resent you saying I am not an adult just because I choose to speak my mind.

By the way, how old are you? I am 36, and if you fall anywhere below that age, you do not have any right to tell me what to do or say.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

7. you thread header was good. No apologies necessary.

Very good post. Thanks!

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[playahata1]

14. I repeat: When does pointing out Reagan's record

equal my saying he was Satan? Answer that question. No, you can't. All you can do is resort to personal attacks, as in your assertion that anyone who criticizes Reagan -- personally and politically -- is not "act(ing) like an adult."

[DarkPhenyx]

16. I didn't say you said he was, did I?

Please point out where I did. No, you can't. It really was a simple statement. You said he wasn't a saint, I said he wasn't Satan either. What is so difficult about this concept that I have had to explain it to you twice?

[playahata1]

18. Who the hell are YOU calling an age-ist and a bigot?

All you have to contribute to this thread is to say "JUST SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP," and engage in attacking people personally instead of addressing the issues.

I will speak whenever and about whatever I please, thank you. And you still have no business telling anyone what to think or believe.

[DarkPhenyx]

20. You told me that unless I am 36 yo or older...

...I can't tell you want to do. Since I am not trying to tell you what to do it must be assumed that you believe that anyone younger than you can't have a valid point, or know anything at all. That would be ageism.

Usually where there is one bias there are others. I was just curious which others were in your pshcye.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DarkPhenyx]

29. Oh well.

It was worth a shot.

[Kahuna]

13. Yep. Unless a person is a minority, especially, of African American..

descent they cannot understand the depth of just how hateful the Reagan policies were towards black people. And how Reagan's policies sought to undue and did undue the progress we had just begun to make to become equal citizens in this society. He essentially told us to go to the back to the back of the bus.

I think everybody over a certain age in America knows that Reagan was NOT well thought of by African Americans. So please those of you who would deride for being outspoken about him, give us a break. Reagan did many evil things to a lot of people in different ways. But he did seem to single us (African Americans) as a people in his disdain.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joanne98]

45. He did target blacks

I'm white but I can testify to that. I had black friends and his policies toward them were delibertly cruel. He also turned the upper midwest into the "rust belt". Remember the slashing of the school lunch programs? The "They're not homeless they're campers" smart remark. I hated him them and I hate him now. Why should I change my mind just because he's dead?

[noiretextatique]

56. thank you, kahuna...and playanata!...reagan appealed to bigotry

and white resentment about civil rights gains, and he did so unapologetically. the mood in the country changed when he was elected. in some ways, it was frightening than now.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

4. None, but a few, are CHEERING.

As stated, just not shedding crocodile tears.

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

5. Who is this royal "we"?

speak for yourself.

[mopaul]

8. fuck the opposition

i'm ready for my morning scolding now

[Walt Starr]

22. Satan is a myth

so of course nobody could be Satan.

Reagan was an evil fuck who is directly responsible for the deaths of thousands upon thousands, and possibly millions.

He's WORSE than Saddam Hussein because the evil fuck CREATED Saddam Hussein.

[DarkPhenyx]

25. I believe Carter supported Saddam as well.

He definately didn't make moves against him. Republicans and Democrats alike bear the mantle of that responsibility.

[Art_from_Ark]

47. Rumsfeld was Reagan's emissary who was sent to Iraq in 1983

to "patch up" relations with Saddam's regime. The US did not have diplomatic relations with Iraq during Carter's term.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0802-01.htm

Carter spent his term promoting human rights, something that Reagan quickly dropped once he was inaugurated.

[DarkPhenyx]

48. I stand corrected.

Thank you.

[Joanne98]

46. Don't forget Osama Bin Laden

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

3. Reagan was a poltical figure with a political legacy.

I have no idea what he was like personally, nor do I care.

Any attempt to eulogize him or remember him will have to take into account his political legacy. And there is no way we can honor him as his political vision and legacy was mostly antithetical to liberalism or progressivism.

Reagan was the front man and enabler of the far right wing in US politics, and his political victory marked a victory for this hard-right tendancy.

So there is no way we can honor or postively eulogize this man, as a political figure.

[Bronco69]

6. Great Post!

I remember the disastrous Reagan years too. I lost my job and had to move back home with my parents. It took years to get myself back together again. I'll be damned if I'll honor the fool with praise. If there truly is a hell he is there and hopefully getting what he deserves!

[Shopaholic]

9. I was happy to see Keith Olbermann on MSNBC last night

bringing up the controversial (to say the least) decision by Reagan to fire the Air Traffic Controllers. Even amidst them trying to preach Reagan into heaven, at least someone was unafraid to mention that he wasn't a saint. BTW-I graduated college in 1987 with dual degrees in English & Poly Sci and couldn't get a decent job until the Clinton Administration!

[Malva Zebrina]

10. good post

I am always suspicious of those whose only contribution to a thread is to criticize the free speech of others simply because they do not approve of what is being said and think they "should" do something else, mainly what they think you "should" do. LOL :eyes:. If one does not like the thread, simply click on the "x" and it will vanish from one's pages.



Many of us do not care what our so called " enemies " are saying either. We have matured to the point where what "freepers" are doing or saying is irrelevant to the posting we are posting. Apparently some are still reacting to freepers, and thereby being controlled by them.

You have articulated your reasons for your feelings about Reagun quite clearly and I respect those opinions.

[playahata1]

11. Thanks, Marianne and all who have responded

and understand and respect where I'm coming from.

Quite a few of the people who have been accused of "insensitivity" and other high crimes are longtime posters here, not some "pimple-faced teenagers," as one poster put it. As far as I am concerned, that fact alone gives them the right to say what they want.

[DarkPhenyx]

Hey...if you don't like what Bush is doing or saying...

...you can ignore him too, right? No more criticism of Bush from you, or any otehr wrongs or injustices you might see. You have advocated the solution of ignoring the issue. One would hop you were willing to follow your own advice.

[playahata1]

33. Excuse me, I did not say a damn thing about ignoring the issue.

Re-read what I had said. Come on!

[DarkPhenyx]

34. I wans't replying to you.

It was Marianne that I was replying to.

[Malva Zebrina]

58. Is Bush posting on these threads?

I did not think so but maybe you have some information I am not privy to.



We are posting and replying to posters on these threads as we see fit--we may have a contribution, we may simply be reading posts in order to gain information we do not have and we may simply have to vent every once in a while. In any event we can be sure most of the time that the posters here are Democrats or progressives in some form or other.

you can be sure if Bush posted here, I would surely reply to him and tell him to go to hell, LOL I would NOT ignore him.

and I would not mince words either.

[Zomby Woof]

15. you have always been one of my DU faves

And your post confirms why. :hi: Playahata! Hope you are doing well!

[salin]

19. I do not disagree with anything you have said about Reagan

but I don't understand why you can express it freely, while if I exert my free speech rights to reflect that giving a modicum of respect to the families for a few days ... is not allowed. That, too, is thought police.

Instead the fact that we can both express these differing opinions (which agree on the bottom line) is something that we should be glad for - especially in the days where movements are growing to try to shut off discourse.

[playahata1]

28. Salin, you are free to speak, just as I am free to speak.

Where did I or anyone else say that you could not speak? Just because I am affirming my rights does not mean that I am infringing on yours. Peace.

[salin]

31. pointing out that in these few days

each sides (per how to handle/address the whole rr thing) outrage at the other sounds like attempts to shut the other down. Calling folks the thought police for expressing their opinions sounds as much to those to whom it is pointed as attempting to shut them down, as the please for a bit of decorum for a few days sounds like attempts to shut down those expressing outrage.

Stand off - both hearing the same exact things from the other side.

Leaving at - I will say my piece and what back down... works. Adding the "thought police" point is an ironic touch that seems to convey the thought police sentiment - in the other direction - and leaves us pointlessly sniping at one another.

edit (can't type today)... replace for clarification in the last paragraph: "I will say my piece and NOT back down..." (refering to your powerful essay)... works.

[chelsea0011]

21. Reagan was simply the most overrated President ever

He is the darling of the right for his determination to "make government smaller" and decrease taxes. But at what cost? His government was never streamlines as much as tinkered with and the tax cuts were very small (I remember getting dollar and change more in my paycheck) with enormous deficits which cost billions to the government. But where are the discussions this morning about his failures. Iran/Contra, Lebanon, and right wing intrusions into personal lives. I saw the news this morning state he brought us "Morning in America". WTF? That was a campaign ad. History can now show that his mind was going in his second term and we as a nation can ask why this wasn't considered a major problem having a less-than-100% man running the country. We as a nation elected him President, but the last years appeared to have been run bu his cabinet. Where is the outrage? All I know is that when Clinton dies sometime, the news will harp on the bad. Reagan gets a pass.

[DarkPhenyx]

23. I agree Reagan shouldn't get a pass.

His entire record definately needs to be told, good and bad. A time, place, and way for everything though.

[salin]

24. I would go a step further

he is also beloved for making being rude, prejudice, and capitalizing on those things to be "okay" again. He pandered to the racists and made that seem (to the party) to be legitimate - rather than continuing to lead our nation to a higher ground where equity is valued. I think that for many the particularly damaging economic policies that benefited those who already benefit at the intentional and direct expense of others is part of what made him so beloved. In short, he made an art of pandering to the worst within us while claiming that this was "morning again in America."

That said, I do believe that the counter stories and coverage will bubble up in the coming months. Probably for the first time there may be the opportuntiy for honest discourse about the Reagan Legacy.. especially since we are in an election cycle and have had to live through 3 years to see the extension of that legacy applied - brutally and viciously. More people have first hand experience with it these days.

I do think, however, that the press fears that it would be excoriated if it ran these stories within days of his death. Let's see what the coverage is in a month.

[playahata1]

35. But by us remaining silent now,

they can and will get away with all their lies. You know the old saying: "Give them an inch, they will take an ell."

[salin]

37. Actually, I disagree, I think that we are about to move into a time

where for the FIRST time since he became ill, criticizing Reagan and his legacy will not only gain momentum but it will become common place.

I think that the media - fearing a valent outrage if it were airing critical pieces now (or while Reagan had alzheimers) - is playing the decorum game. But as the campaign heats up, and the failed bush policies and the failed bush players both which have their strongest roots as part of the Reagan Legacy, the door will open up for much more honest discourse and coverage per the legacy of Reagan. I think that the muzzles are about to be lifted. Not sure that would be the case without the bushjunior juggernaut - but the daily examples of failed Reaganism, without the perceived restraint of not speaking ill of the man during his suffering - will allow discussions that have been silenced since he left office.

Remember, he wasn't so popular when he left office. The teflon was wearing thin and the rose colored glasses were getting a patina green tinge. That falling out of love sense of the public almost resulted in Bushsr's defeat - and were it not for the Atwater dirty tactics - the Reagan era would have ended with his popularity only lasting among the diehards.

He was somehow reinvented by the right through their frustrations with Sr (if only he had been Reagan...) ... and even more so in the ascension of popularity of Bill Clinton. It was a superficial two-fold effort tear down bill and rehabilitate ron - with a silent press out of respect for the now addled, alzheimered reagan.

I could be wrong - but I think that there will be more thoughtful/critical reflection on Reagan and his legacy in the summer and in the future. And if it doesn't happen naturally, we should push it - and tie it in to todays growingly unpopular administration. This tiem it will be OUR two-fold effort - tying the ABYSMAL failures of BUSH and the whole neocon gang to their precursor roots in the Reagan years.

[playahata1]

39. Can we TRUST the (mainstream) media to do the right thing, though?

I, for one, am quite skeptical about that, given what has happened the last three-plus years.

[salin]

50. I wouldn't call it trust

but more mainstream (particularly network) sources have started being much more critical of team bush in the past couple of months. If it is vogue to do so - they will do so. That is our job - keep pushing the critiques *but tie them to bushjr policies - which is getting more and more vogue to critique* til the noise gets loud enough that it seems vogue. We have been able to do this more recently (starting with Moore pushing the AWOL thing, the RNC attacking and blending it into a surprise attack on Clark at a debate, and boom the media pileon got so fast and furious bushjr had to go on Face the Nation to respond - and it just served to wound him more!)

I remain skeptical - but have seen more and more signs that tides, including some news coverage, are ever so slightly turning.

[charlie]

40. I'm not so optimistic

Reagan veneration is nearly instinctual in the media. It's been going on so long, it's a habitual groove. And the conservative apologists embedded in the media are a formidable barrier to any objective assessments leaking out unmolested.

Also, the soft grandfatherly image of Reagan is the perfect salve for current conservatism run amok. He's a safety net -- "Things were good then, it was Morning in America" -- against the thorough repudiation of modern conservatism that Dubya's administration could cause. They need Ronnie's warm visage, and they'll fight like hell to see that it's not sullied.

[salin]

51. it is such an interesting study in myth making

because he was suddenly not so beloved and warm and fuzzy at the end of his term. Even on the Hill repubs were glad his term was over. He was percieved to be losing touch, and very much responsible for the Iran Iraq debacle (followed by the S&L crash to which his policies were very much tied). The myth making started midway through Bushsr.s term. Perhaps in an effort to try to recapture the initial loveaffair with Reagan and try to transfer it to Bushsr (fat chance.)

I take great comfort in remembering that there were a number of years where the myth was NOT operational. Thus the knowledge that it had been tarnished - and can be tarnished again - especially if it becomes closely allied with the current bushteam and their ideology/policies.

[charlie]

54. Of course, I hope you're right

But assessments of Reagan were tempered by the immediacy of his policies back then. This time around Reagan hagiography benefits from time, distance, and the vagaries of memory. His shortcomings can be blunted now because they're historic, academic, nearly a generation removed. Harry Truman left office with approvals comparable to Nixon's, but over decades reassessments of his administration elevated his reputation into the near-great category. Reagan can enjoy likewise benefits, especially with the institutional apparatus primed to make it happen. Just call me a Gloomy Gus :(

[salin]

60. That would be true if they were in the past... but the neocons behind

bush pushed the same policies but in an even more extreme form - so they are VERY operational. Only way he looks good at closer look, is if suddently he is viewed positively as having had more RESTRAINT than bushjr's boys. Which doesn't fit with the myth - the strong visionary who changed America... doesnt fit with "the man who showed restraint and put some cautionary breaks on the policies..." (actually the breaks were forced by the democratic congress).

[TankLV]

63. And don't forget the same assholes are on this time around, too.

Nofacts, and noonan and krystal and all the other scum.

Same ones they have whenever they "discuss" Clinton or Kerry.

It's disgusting.

Always the same conservative repuke assholes.

Fair and balanced and liberal media my ass.

[mitchum]

27. He was a pitchman and a shill

[The Zanti Regent]

30. Reagan screwed everyone who was poor

Ol Pruneface uttered the Right to Life bullshit to stupid voters in Western PA who marked their ballots for him and his GOP cronies.

In return, Reagan let foreign countries flood American markets with cheap steel and the mills closed down. Millions of families lives were destroyed, but that was OK with Pruneface, he had them brainwashed with the Right TO Life bullshit

[indigobusiness]

32. I believe in respecting the dead.

But after a grace period, I will return to my usual mode of reminding people that Reagan was a hollow puppet of the war machine that engineered the bloodbaths in Central America and Iraq.


typo edit

[Astarho]

36. Neither cheering nor mourning

I remember when my grandfather died from the same disease, so I have an idea of what his family is going through (which is why I don't care for the cheering, grave pissing and "may the fucker rot in hell" posts). The deeds of a person's life come out after they die (in the case of my grandfather, many people saying how much he helped them. Reagan will not be so fortunate).

That is not to say his record should be ignored. He set race relations back a good two decades and made it acceptable to be greedy, selfish and rude. His policies created problems that we are still dealing with today, namely poverty, and the war in Iraq.

But ultimately, I don't care. Reagans death is just another event for me, like the first 100 degree day or the price of gas going up. My mind is on other things, mainly my job in a right-to-work state outside in the AZ summer and partialy because it does not affect my personal life. The policies and culture he helped create have shaped the fact that now he's dead and I don't care.

[indigobusiness]

41. Very well said.

But the heat of summer kicks my ass, personally.

[Darth_Kitten]

38. I applaud you.........

I truly feel so sorry for all the people hurt by Reagan and his administration, good people like your grandparents and so many others.
I don't care if Reagan was a puppet, or a mere figurehead, or whatever. I don't care if others pulled his strings, he knew what he was doing. :(

Maybe the price of being intentionally cruel to so many people, of being greedy and self-serving, of dismissing the contributions of so many good, hard-working americans is that nobody will shed too many tears at your passing. The man STILL has it easy. Goodbye.....

[indigobusiness]

42. I don't the he did know what he was doing...

I think he was deluded, became demented, and was blind to the impact of his deeds.

Sound familiar?

[noiretextatique]

57. please don't excuse reagan, or bush

reagan was, at the very least, an advocate (just as george bush is an advocate) for a dangerous rw aganda. even he though he doesn't grasp the details, bush is as responsible for his actions as was reagan.

[indigobusiness]

59. I never said he wasn't. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Aren't people able to read for comprehension around here?

If you think I might be an apologist, read my blog.

http://sludgereport.blogspot.com/

[noiretextatique]

62. Sound Familiar

you wrote: "I think he was deluded, became demented, and was blind to the impact of his deeds. Sound familiar?"

i did not say you are an apologist, i said don't excuse these people, as you do in the above quote.

[indigobusiness]

64. I didn't excuse anyone, but that's my right if I choose to

I don't do your bidding, but if you could read comprehensively you would realize this was an analysis and there was no excuse-making involved.

What country are you from? I'm in America, where freedom of speech is a sacred right. In Weimar Germany some people could tell others what to say or not say. Not here.

[noiretextatique]

65. LOOK...i read what you wrote, and it was an EXCUSE

i read it, and i understood it as YOUR WROTE IT. if you meant something other than WHAT YOU WROTE, you can't expect anyone to read your mind...not in america or in germany :eyes: so...you want to make excuses for fascists...go right ahead, it's your choice.

just be clear about :wtf: you are writing, and stop whining when you are challenged on WHAT YOU WROTE.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Joanne98]

43. Here here

I'm not shutting up. He devasted this country and there are alot of dead people who are not here anymore to testify to that. He was a horrible person. Cold as ice. Let's not forget that crack cocaine funded the contras. The only good thing I can say about Ronald Reagan is that he created Michael Moore. I'm sure Flint Michigan is celebrating today. As they should be.

[Lars39]

44. We need to be shouting the truth of Reagan's accomplishments

loudly, to counteract the rw's hold on the media. Yes, you have the right to express your opinions RIGHT NOW.

[Carolina]

49. I hear ya, I agree with ya

I will never forget his post-convention Philadelphia, Mississippi stop to let the good folks there know that he stood for states rights. He left Detroit MI (high electoral votes) for MS (low electoral count) because of the importance of that message in that place to the southern electorate in general. He put an amiable face on racism and made it fashionable again. 'Nuff said.

PS: love your screen name

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

52. People who disagree with your method have every right to disagree too

Isn't that the grand thing about free speech.

For the record, I've seen more people ganging up on me and telling me to STFU than the other way around...all defenders of free speech as long as it's theirs we are referencing and not mine.

I have no issue with people criticizing his policies...statements about him drooling and shitting his pants are beyond the pale for those of us who had his disease touch our lives through our own family members.

For the record, I haven't made a single critical statement towards those who abhored his policies..only those so ignorant as to use his disease to dance on his grave.

I've always been a liberal because I regarded us as the more thoughtful party that took the high road rather than resorting to ugliness to make our point.

[indigobusiness]

53. Hypocrisy is ramapant on all sides...

it seems.


http://sludgereport.blogspot.com/

[buddhamama]

55. the Man was not dumb.He was an avid reader of history and philosophy

I have read it here too much today. ARGGHHHH!!!

Like all men of his ilk (Leo Strauss)
he believed in keeping the public fat dumb and ignorant
so the learned Men, the great Men, could rule without interference.
He had a Role to play and he played it "the dumb president" because it endeared the public to HIM.
The MAN could speak, no doubt, and used his skills wisely to
manipulate and propagandize.

[JVS]

61. Where are they burying him?