Sorry, but I'm embarrassed by all the Reagan butt kissers here.

[MoonRiver]

I don't relish the fact that the guy is dead, but I sure as hell won't post eulogies and cudos to his 7 day funeral or, especially, his hideous policies while president. Reagan was a father and husband,and I'll respect that, but not what he did while president. The guy should have been impeached. There was far more reason for his impeachment than what drove Nixon to resign, not to mention Clinton's bj.

[bossfish]

1. No butt kissing here...

This week long funeral is disgusting...

[Alpha Wolf]

177. Like or dislike has nothing to do with it...

Whether a president is good or bad, Democrat or Republican, or whether most people hated him or loved him-- part of the prestige of being President of the United States is to have a state funeral with all the pomp and circumstance included, if the family desires it. The last state funeral for a president was Johnson's in 1973, and it was all the same pomp and circumstance (horses, soldiers, 21-gun salutes, etc., etc.)

Still living: Ford, Carter, Clinton, Bush Sr., & Bush Jr.
Each of these will get a state funeral when they die if the family so desires it.


Dead: Nixon, only a few years ago(family did not request a state funeral)

[Ms. Clio]

2. I concur--my keyboard is sticky from all the treacle

:puke:

[chimpy the poopthrower]

176. please point out some of this treacle on DU

I haven't see "all the treacle" you're referring to. All I've seen are people expressing disgust at posts such as the one that says wouldn't it be funny if someone puked on Reagan's corpse. I wouldn't exactly call that "butt-kissing".

[Ms. Clio]

187. You haven't been keeping up, then

All the Harlequin romance novel shit about the Reagans' fairtyale marriage, and I've actually seen posts praising Reagan's economic policies. Not to mention all the sickly-sweet posts by people patting themselves on the back because they are so decent and decorous and classy.

Guess you'll have to change your screen name if that "poop thrower" ever buys it, eh?

[Name removed]

211. Deleted message

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

[Ms. Clio]

214. Since I lived through the 80s, I rather think I do

And here's a tip, although I suspect you won't be around long enough to employ it: Typing in all caps is like shouting, and is considered rude and stupid.

[freetobegay]

3. I totally agree!

[MikeG]

4. We should just start a special thread for them and begin it with THIS

REAGAN MWAH! REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!

[mopaul]

18. REAGAN MWAH! REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!R

REAGAN MWAH! REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!

REAGAN MWAH! REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!REAGAN MWAH!

[Raskolnik]

69. What exactly are you accomplishing by behaving that way?

Ah, that's the well-reasoned and dignified kind of post that inspired me to sign up for an account at DU...

[Forkboy]

73. It pisses uptight people off

which is always a plus.

[Raskolnik]

74. Quite a standard you have...

So your enjoyment is the standard?

[Forkboy]

75. My enjoyment is my enjoyment

methinks you read too much into it.Your standard is your standard...and you're welcome to it.

BTW,I hope when all this clears you'll rag on the right wingers as much as you've been ragging on lefties for not having your decency since you got here.

[Raskolnik]

80. I'm glad your enjoyment is such a high priority.

I'm not upset with lefties, I'm upset with people acting foolishly. When I tell a conservative Republican to go fuck himself because we're better than them, I want to be able to say it with a straight face.

And for the record, I prefer to work to get right wingers out of office rather than just "rag" on them.

(Do I sound really self-righteous? Probably, but I guess that's just the way I'll have to sound for the moment.)

[Forkboy]

88. For the moment?

try since you got here.

And who said my enjoyment was a high priority?If it was would I be responding to this tripe you post.I think not.

[Raskolnik]

97. You sort of implied it

Wow. Arguing for human decency and decorum is "tripe", huh?

That is just...something.

Seriously, what enjoyment/advancement do you get out of behaving that way? You don't seem to be interested in engaging in an honest discussion of Reagan's legacy but instead seem to be focusing entirely on cheerleading on a pathetic old man's grave.

I want to be able to debate Reaganites w/out having those who are more interested in acting the fool make the rest of us look silly.

Thanks.

[MoonRiver]

99. Lame.

:D

[Raskolnik]

106. Um...

Touche...I guess...

Do you disagree with what I posted? I honestly want to know what you think the benefit of acting ghoulishly is at a time like this, other than your own amusement.

[MoonRiver]

107. I'm not being ghoulish. YOU are.

[Raskolnik]

108. Are you being ironic?

Did you actually just go with the "no I'm not...YOU are" line of argument?

(If that was meant in jest, it actually was funny. I don't want you to think I lack a sense of humor just because I'm so morally superior to you ((See! I can be funny!)))

[MoonRiver]

112. You keep presenting the extremely ghoulist imagery, not I, my "friend".

All I said was that Reagan is guilty of impeachable offenses, and I don't like the non-stop coverage of his funeral.

[Raskolnik]

114. I think I won that argument

That is NOT what you were arguing with me and you know it.

I'll accept the fact that you don't appreciate the fawning media coverage of Reagan's legacy. I don't either. I'll also accept the fact that you feel Reagan's policies were not helpful to the majority of Americans. I agree.

My point remains that people (not necessarily you) acting without regard to basic human decency do not help our cause.

Thanks for talking with me friend.
(I'll leave the quotes off of "friend" because I think we are on the same side of the larger issue)

[MoonRiver]

115. We disagree about the winning thing.

But I'm tired and will not argue further tonight.

[Raskolnik]

118. Sleep tight. What with all the bed bugs and all.

WhooHooo! The two sweetest words in the English language: De Fault!...De Fault!...De Fault!

Good night my man.

[Forkboy]

149. No,the two sweetest words are

"dinner time".

[Name removed]

141. Deleted message

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

[ima_sinnic]

155. who gives a #*(& what you think?

try to control the postings of 45,000 people.
"debating" is a useless exercise and I refuse to "behave myself" so that you "look good" in your dumb debates.

[Raskolnik]

157. That was a close one.

Well. Glad to know that you consider debating a usesless exercise. We can all stop trying to advance our positions then.

Whew...I'm glad you let me know before I went and did something stupid like actually trying to convince someone that progressive liberalism is the best course of action. Wouldn't that have looked silly?

[drdigi420]

163. Look, someone has to counter all this Reagan loving crap

That you apologists are spouting

I for one am completely sick of hearing about it.

So what if a lame old guy that hasn't had a brainwave since the beginning of his second term is dead?

That does NOT excuse the EVIL of his ways.

If calling out the racism, sexism, classism, and general stupidity of a racist, sexist, classist, and generally stupid man is wrong, I don't want to be right.

[Raskolnik]

164. Well that's curious...or you might be making it up.

Tell me where I or anyone else have professed love for Reagan or his policies.

[BiggJawn]

169. So let me ask you something in all seriousness...

How poorly did *YOU* do during the era of 1980-1992?

Did you see your good-paying job go away?
Did you have a motorcycle you bought during that good job stolen, and you couldn't replace it because you couldn't afford theft insurance on $98 a week?
Do you know what "Gubbmint Cheez" tastes like?
Do you know what food stamps feel like when you rub them to make sure 2 twentys didn't get stuck togather AGAIN?
did you have rich Yuppie bastards telling you that you were lazy, because "I'm doing just FINE in this Reagan Economy"?

No?

Then, my friend, you have no place to tell those of us who DID experience all that how to feel/behave.

I'm 47 years old, I don't need a "nanny", thank you very much...

Ray-Guns is DEAD and I'm GLAD!

[Forkboy]

204. no answer

suprised?

[Raskolnik]

218. See below

Surprised?

[Raskolnik]

217. Were you asking me those questions?

Forgive me if those weren't directed at me.

You had a motorcycle? Awesome!

If your need to know, my family was solidly lower middle class. I DO know what gov't cheese tastes like, thank you very much. Our family farm faced some hard times during those years. Certainly not as hard as some, just as your experience pales next to some others.

Do I pass your litmus test? Or do only those with your personal experience have any idea what Reagan's policies meant to the U.S.?

I guess I'm not really seeing the point you're trying to make with your examples. It seems a bit like you saying that because someone stole your bike and yuppies were dicks that we shouldn't behave like decent human beings.

Are you working under the impression that I'm asking people to forget about the realities of that era? Well I'm not. I'm trying to make a case for the most effective and humane behavior at this rather confusing time.

If I have offended you, then you have my sincerest apologies. My argument remains, however.

[BiggJawn]

219. No apology required.

"Decent human beings"....oh, I give up. I guess there were probably those in this country who said "Aw, isn't that a shame? look, honey, says here in the paper that Stalin is dead...Man, I feel sorry for his family..."

OK, so it is.So if it's a lack of "human decency" to not jump on the grief bandwagan with Peggy Noonan and the rest of the Reaganfarians, then I guess I'm just not a decent human.

At least I'd never give school kids ketchup and try to tell their folks it was a vegetable.

[Raskolnik]

220. That's right, I called you silly.

That is a false dichotomy you are creating and it is rather silly.

There are other, much more effective ways to voice our opinions about Reagan's legacy than behaving like the morons who go with "Burn in Hell" line of reasoning.

ps Did you thing gov't cheese was good? Because to this day I think I do.

[BiggJawn]

221. I'm not creating a false anything.

"There are other, much more effective ways to voice our opinions about Reagan's legacy than behaving like the morons who go with "Burn in Hell" line of reasoning."

OK, so you didn't just lump me in with those "morons"? Because if there was a "Hell", I most certainly HOPE Reagan is burning in it.

I'm not really interested in being "effective", I'm interested in giving my spleen a chance to vent over 20 years of pent-up anger and hatred. Pretty bad when you can't REALLY speak your mind about someone because of fear of a visit from the SS hose-ears, wouldn't you agree?

We can agree on one thing, though. "Gubbmint Cheez" was pretty good. I spent years trying to find a commercial version of it. Anything out there just didn't have the same flavour and texture. The Cheddar-style stuff was as good as anything I've had from England....:-)

[crossroads]

128. Get off with your holier than thou attitude anyway...

You are acting like them, no one appreciates being made to feel guilty, and that is exactly what you sir are trying to do!!!

:eyes:

[playahata1]

136. Exactly. I think the holier-than-thous on this board are indeed PROJECTING

Just as the RW tries to make liberals and other progressives feel guilty about not being Fascists, the holier-than-thous are trying to make those on this board who they consider themselves to be above feel guilty about not showing as much "class" as they claim to have.

I think someone on another thread put it nicely when s/he quoted the saying: "The more you claim to be ladylike, or a Christian, the more I am convinced that you are neither." The same applies to those who shout their "class," and "I like to think I'm better than that," from Mount Everest from all to hear.

[Forkboy]

142. Bengay is making a killing this week

from all the people straining to pat thier backs in thier "I'm more decent than thou" spew.

[bleedingheart]

162. snort...that's a good one..

[Raskolnik]

165. If the shoe fits...

Well. Maybe we ARE behaving more decently than some here. I don't think that's an outrageous proposition.

I am comfortable stating that yes, the people (myself included) here who have not resorted to the low-class, ghoulish behavior ARE acting more decently.

And what makes me irate is that realization that if a prick like me can act like human being for a day or two, it can't really be that difficult. Seriously! I'm a world-class dick, but somehow I managed to not give in to my base emotions in this instance. So how hard could it be if I can do it? Not very.

[noiretextatique]

181. oh stop it already

maybe you should acting decent more often, so the rest of it don't have to hear about it, in this instance.

[Ms. Clio]

188. Really--aren't there some orphans to feed, or some homeless to shelter

Why waste all that goodness and decency on us depraved DUers?

[libhill]

203. I don`t usually weigh in in arguments, but

I don`t think the dude is trying to put anyone on a guilt trip. I think he is stating very succinctly what the fucking Re pukes do to ordinary working class people. What I fail to understand, is why so many people who go through what he has described, are so ready to buy into their fucking propaganda, and vote Re puke. These are the very people the damn Republicans hurt the worst.

[Name removed]

213. Deleted message

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

[Kanary]

No need to be sorry......... it's scary

The man caused thousands and thousands of deaths, yet there are "dems" who want to blow kisses.

GAK

Kanary

[otohara]

5. SayWhat???

DU's been the subject of freeper disgust over the anti-Reagan threads here. Guess you missed the poem thread

[Nlighten1]

29. Yes but...

DU has also been very full of threads by Reagan apologists or at the least..."let's be nice to Reagan".

Fuck Reagan.

[Pithlet]

123. Where?

I've seen no Reagan apologists. All I've seen are people who thought that picking on the man when he died might be a freeperish thing to do (they did it with Wellstone, and all). You may not agree with that, which is okay, but it still doesn't make them apologists. I've also seen that contention drop off some as time goes by and we all get sick of the Reagasm (TM someone, I forget who, sorry :( ) coverage in the media. I don't think there are too many here who thought the guy was great, and did a lot of good for our country.

[RapidCreek]

150. Feigning sadness at the passing of a man who orchestrated

an evil so pernicious that it's effects will be felt for the next century is not being an apologist? Well what, pray tell, is it then? If it's not being and apologist, it is at the very least, being the hand wringing, self serving, disingenuous pantie waists the Republicans claim we are, and so effectively depend upon us being.

RC

[Pithlet]

201. I didn't even see

where anyone is telling anyone else to fake that they're sad. I see no apologists, here, sorry. Some took issue with what they thought was disrespect to the dead. Whether you agree with them or not, it isn't telling you to fake being sad. And it isn't apologizing for Reagan.

[MoonRiver]

42. I know they're here.

We're a magnet to the them. This thread is quite symptomatic of the problem.

[crossroads]

46. Rush spews hate venom all the time... Reagan deserved everything ...

that was said... Freepers never cut Clinton any slack... neither Wellstone... too bad the truth has to come out and they can't handle it!

Reagan got off easy compared to the misery he caused! He was a rotten president...
:headbang:

[progressivebydesign]

91. Umm.. So NOW we're using Rush as our measure of decency? N/T

[libhill]

216. I don`t think that was implied

but it is a good example of throwing rocks when ya live in a glass house.

[RapidCreek]

96. You make a mistake in comparing the propoganda of

fascist con artists with rightful outrage. I would avoid that if I were you. What Republicans did or would do at the death of a Democrat is irrelevant...unless of course that Democrat implemented policies which resulted in the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands...if not millions of people...in which case I'd be screaming about it just as loudly...if not more loudly than they. I think I can safely say that Wellstoned didn't implement such policies....Clinton may be another story.

RC

[Sterling]

6. The weak minded are always efected more by propaganda.

Sorry but it is true. Even some folks you often gree with will fall prey to the assualt on reason that has been unleased on the country.

[ItsMyParty]

7. This is an American circus

It's one thing to say something nice over the coffin. It is another to launch a major propaganda campaign that has little to do with the realities of this man's presidency. He suffered from diminished brain capacity long before it was officially announced. His wife and friends should have removed him from the presidency in an effort to protect the country against what could have been international disaster. It was simply not right to let him function in the capacity as President when he was failing.

[glaeken777]

8. perhaps

Keep in mind that death is the "great equalizer" in the world. I think Reagan has paid sufficient price for his policies... from being rendered a near-vegetable for a decade, to where he is right now.

That said, he deserved a state funeral. Let the dead bury their dead; we can dissect the damage his administration did on Monday. For now, we simply need to hold our heads high and not give in to the kind of despicable behavior conservatives exhibited in the wake of Wellstone's passing.

[Ms. Clio]

14. The only way he would have "paid a sufficient price"

Is if he had been tried and executed.

You know, that's what Americans like to do to MURDERERS. His "policies" killed THOUSANDS.

[RapidCreek]

45. 9 or 10 years laying in a comfy hospital bed

with the finest medical care my tax dollar can buy him, followed with a painless death, is hardly a sufficient price. Jesus H. Christ, the fucker helped murder a quarter of a million Central Americans...not to mention those killed by the Iranian terrorists he sold arms and ammunition too...not to mention his fellow Americans who died on cold wet streets because he kicked them out of mental institutions, not to mention those who died of or are dying of AIDS, a disease in his eyes, which only affected godless homos, not to mention those who died of or are addicted to drugs which he helped Nicaraguan drug lords bring to market, not to mention those who died at the hands of the Taliban and Al Queda which he funded, trained and brought to power..etc. etc. etc.

The man will not have paid a sufficient price until he has lived a million lives as miserable as his victims and died a million deaths as horrible as the same.

God, your insensitivity makes me want to hurl.

RC

[crossroads]

52. Hear Hear! Well Said! n/t

n/t

[MoonRiver]

55. And numbers DO mean something.

[Skittles]

113. Wellstone didn't trash America

nt

[mopaul]

153. so glaeken, on the 14th, it's o.k. to call him a rotten bastard?

but not until? sorry, i know that's how many think one is 'supposed' to behave. but many have given up the silly tradition that one MUST show respect to the dead, no matter what kind of scum they were in life.

[tnlefty]

9. Let me see if I can find that butt kissing mopaul somewhere...

;-) might get a new cartoon.

[mopaul]

15. i'm not a butt kisser, ....

i'm a tomb pisser

[tnlefty]

19. Is that anything like pissin' on a flat rock?

Please just don't become a tomb raider!!!

[Jose Diablo]

148. Say thats a idea

A polished skull in my glass cabinet.

[crossroads]

50. LOL... your image is great! n/t

n/t

[northofdenali]

10. My letter to the editor of the Melbourne (Australia) Age:

"America" no more mourns Ronald Reagan than we "support" George W. Bush, Iraq, the Patriot Act or the evil men in our top government.

Your headline suggests a national grief. The only grief I recall ever feeling for Reagan was when Reagan's "legacy" became Iran-Contra, arming Saddam and the Taliban, killing thousands in South America, trickle-down economics, huge budget deficits, growing throngs of homeless, complete indifference to AIDS, and cutting benefits for those who made a mistake - growing old and developing Alzheimer's Disease.

Not all of America mourns - believe me, look at the letters to the editor section of any major newspaper in the US.

He DID, however, leave a legacy that most Australians will recognize - George W. Bush.

[RapidCreek]

98. Great letter

Very nicely done.

RC

[pennylane100]

11. I agree that he was a terrible president

and I agree that he should have been impeached.

I am so fed up with all the media talking up his presidency all the time. I have decided not to watch any talk shows or live TV until he is in the ground but I just heard someone on Air American say that if she could, Judy Woodruff would jump in the coffin with Reagan so I know it must be bad out there.

I also thought it would be a good idea to have a petition circulating that would impeach him posthumously. I would definitely sign it.

[glaeken777]

16. aside from self-satisfaction,

what would the impeachment of a dead man accomplish? Do tell.

Recall that Clinton, when eulogzing Nixon... a man far less deserving of compassion than even Reagan... stressed that it was time to put behind the scandal of his administration and put the man's entire life in perspective. If Clinton could muster that toward a man he didn't care much for, why can't we toward Reagan.

The man is dead. Let him rest. Do not give in to the tactics of the Other Side.

[Kanary]

20. WHY?

There's a small matter of *history*.

Y'know, something about those who forget it are bound to repeat it.

This glossing over of the horrendous effects of his presidency will rebound time and time again, until we can FINALLY speak it for what it was.... a National Tragedy.

Kanary

[glaeken777]

22. of course his policies were tragic, but..

He's not going to be impeached posthumously, not even the most liberal congressmen would consider such a thing, now or ever.

Put away your tube sock and pull yourself together, for Chrissakes. I can understand anger at Reagan's policies and sober consideration of the bad effects they had. Calling for his posthumous impeachment is more fanciful than a Tolkien novel.

[Kanary]

26. Pull your own tube sox, buster

I don't know what sparked your nastiness, but you must be reading cross-eyed. I said NOTHING about impeachment.

Your fuming and frothing make me wonder.........

Kanary

[RapidCreek]

90. His policies weren't tragic...they were evil.

What is tragic is you're marginalization of the suffering those policies caused and will continue to cause, if they and those who designed and implemented them, past and present, are not identified and very publicly and purposefully, excised from the American lexicon.

RC

[pennylane100]

23. It is that kind of "we are better than them so let's act it" attitude

that has led to the domination of the Republican Party in all branches of government. I want to be worse than them, more nasty
and more vengefull and most of all I want them to know it.

[glaeken777]

25. dolee,

I agree with you that liberals haven't fought hard enough when they should have. Regardless, choosing battles that can be won is essential. THAT is why the conservatives have been so successful. They haven't swung at the fences like a bunch of maniacs, they have been very calculating. Posthumous impeachment, I repeat again, is something only a lunatic would seriously consider as possible, regardless of whether or not it would be appropriate. This one ain't a winner, folks.

[pennylane100]

27. Actually, I was only joking,

but I am surprised how seriously everyone is taking it.

[MoonRiver]

47. Shows how the level of hysteria about this issue has truly gone overboard.

I can hardly believe how much attention is being given to this guy!

[glaeken777]

53. What's hard to believe?

Saywhat, Reagan was a two-term president; well-liked by a majority of the electorate. According to the 2001 Washington Post survey, his accumulated goodwill upon exiting the Oval Office was second only to Clinton.

Those are the facts. We don't have to like them, but there they are just the same. This state funeral and the attention is all happening for a reason, and it's neither a sinister nor frivolous one. When Clinton goes, our grandchildren will hopefully see a lavish send-off for him, too.

[MoonRiver]

59. Clinton was a 2 term president, well liked by a majority of the electorate

Like you said about Reagan: "his accumulated goodwill upon exiting the Oval Office was SECOND ONLY TO CLINTON". Do you honestly think that Clinton would/will get a week long funeral from coast to coast if the Repukes are in charge of things. Give me a break. This is all a Repuke PR stunt. Nothing more. Nothing less. The Repukes are the ones dancing on Reagan's grave, not Dems!

[glaeken777]

64. i'd hope so...

Saywhat, you are assuming that when Clinton goes, that the conservatives will be in charge as they are today. I'm more optimistic that in time, the pendulum will once again overwhelmingly swing our way... as it did for eight wonderful years. It happened once; it **will** happen again. And when it does, Clinton will indeed get a full-on funeral, as he would deserve. He is well liked to this day, and I see no logical reason why his star will fade in the eyes of the public.

[crossroads]

85. You got that right!!!

Hear hear!!!
:thumbsup:

[crossroads]

62. Houston, we may have a problem...

:eyes:

[glaeken777]

49. I accept your explanation...

... but it didn't seem like a joke, given the statements you prefaced it with, plus the overall tone of similar posts as of late.

We'll just agree to disagree. I am ready and willing to criticize a dead man's politics, but I am not ready to criticize a dead man as a person. Whether the Republicans choose to deify him is their own business. I'm not being forced to join them, and they'd have to force me, besides.

[RapidCreek]

56. Choosing battles?

Since when is refusing to kiss evils ass a battle?

It's hardly a battle...it's indifference.

Conservatives do swing at fences....with a conviction matched by none....and when no fences exist they manufacture them.

RC

[glaeken777]

61. exactly

Rapidcreek:

How are we kissing evil's ass? He's dead, Jim!

You actually hit on the point I was making abut choosing battles. Conservatives indeed manufacture fences to swing at. Mimicking the worst behaviors of conservatives is not going to help us win anything in the long run... it will give us a brief burst of vicariousness, and then we'll be left holding nothing. I don't want that; do you?

[Raskolnik]

71. Agree

Well said.

[RapidCreek]

81. He's dead, but the evil he brought upon us lives on

Due to the tacit acceptance of this evil by people like yourself...it has been allowed to fester in the soul of our nation...and it has once again oozed to the surface in the visage of George W. Bush.

The evil of Ronald Reagan was manufactured by Ronald Reagan....not by Democrats. It is an evil which lives on. It is not a fence or a windmill, it is a reality, as pervasive as malignant cancer, one which for some strange reason, you seek to ignore. Such ignorance condemns us to be victims of that evil until it kills us.

Pointing out evil is not mimicking the behavior of conservatives...quite the contrary. Hatching evil and conspiring to hide it is the behavior of conservatives...ignoring it is the behavior of their victims. And yes...pointing out evil for what it is...and making those who use it accountable, dead or alive, will win us quite a bit in the long run. It is, in fact. THE ONLY way we will win in the long run.

RC

[crossroads]

134. Amen, Brother... n/t

n/t

[noiretextatique]

182. ***applause**** for RapidCreek

Pointing out evil is not mimicking the behavior of conservatives...quite the contrary. Hatching evil and conspiring to hide it is the behavior of conservatives...ignoring it is the behavior of their victims.

it's more important to speak the truth NOW than ever, since bush plans to use reagan's death to boost his campaign...not what i'd call "decency and decorum" :eyes:

[RapidCreek]

51. Holding people accountable for crimes against humanity is

not a tactic of the "other side", quite the contrary.

Impeaching him posthumously sends a message...one which makes quite plain that sins against ones fellow human beings shall not be forgotten.

Those who forget past evils are condemned to be victimized by it's future perpetrators....as interestingly, we are right now.

RC

[crossroads]

57. That other side showed no mercy on Clinton or sympathy for Wellstone!

IMO, Nixon was better than Reagan! This man caused so many to suffer and die horrible deaths... They forget your star?
:eyes:

[Vladimir]

158. Satisfaction for all his victims

Ronald Reagan presided over the deaths of more people throughout the third world, as a direct or indirect result of the US's policies, as many a 'tin-pot' dictator. The Iran-Iraq war, support for Pol Pot's government, funding the mujahedeen in Afganistan, the contras, I could go on... St. Ronnie was one of the more notable war criminals of the late 20th century.

[CharlesGroce]

12. right on

The guy was a war criminal, check out:

http://www.democracynow.org

They've been doing a weeklong special on his legacy from the Central American point-of-view, interesting stuff on the Gipper.

[Ms. Clio]

17. I've been watching some of that--as much as I can bear

Democracy Now calls it, most appropriately and with tragic irony, "Remembering the Dead."

[mopaul]

13. if they weren't reagan democrats before, they are now that he's croaked

i too, who have been the magnet for a lot of scolding, among others, am shocked and embarrassed by any praise or sympathy for him or nancy. oh, and i hate michael reagan, cause he's a prick.

just like elvis before him, all sins and transgressions are forgiven in the sweet bye and bye.

[Erika]

21. Reagan/W: Puppets of the NeoCons

I'm contacting my D.C. Reps over this death/funeral circus. We taxpayers are being stuck for paying for this lavish politicised GOP extravaganza!

[Vickers]

24. I'm not embarrassed...I'm bewildered

Like :wtf: over.

[wellstone_democrat]

28. My most ardent Reagan fan Republican agrees with you!

To my surprise my most conservative (thinking) colleague thinks that the funeral is "excessive" (he doesn't believe Reagan would have wanted all of this ...but that's another issue) and, he said: "actually, there were more grounds to impeach Reagan than Clinton"

This from someone who detests Clinton. Amazing. Then I come to DU and find that it is full of "he was bad sort of but...." posts. Friggin' amazing.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[Forkboy]

32. I thought it was masturbation that seperated us from animals

oh wait,monkies do it to...nevermind.

[Armstead]

33. Dogs do it too

You ever had one attack your leg?

[Forkboy]

35. I thought they just really liked me

:)

[Armstead]

37. They like you as a masterbatory fantasy

[Forkboy]

39. I can accept that

:D

[JI7]

38. right, it's like when right wingers accuse us of supporting terrorists

because we feel they deserve certain rights and should not be tortured.when it has nothing to do with supporting them or what they do but it's about human rights and justice. much of this reminded me of right wing senator inhofes "outraged by the outrage" speech. people try to make it seem as if we supported reagan or the things he did just because we don't want to take joy in his death.

[RapidCreek]

151. Tell you what cheif...you throw Reagan's dead body in a jail yard

cemetery and Bush in a cell overlooking his final resting place and we can talk about their human rights and justice, ok?

RC

[MoonRiver]

41. Give ME a f'n break!

This is not a "brief period of respect". It is way over the normal limit. Plus the kowtowing by some here on DU is, well, I won't go there.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[glaeken777]

78. give me a break

Your suggestion that a wholly evil man is due respect at his death...marginalizes the suffering of his many, many, many, many, victims. It is a rationalization of the evil he committed and a slap in the face to those he made miserable....and that is hardly decent or courteous.

So what do you have to say the Democrats who attended the funeral today? Do they all sicken you, too? Levin, Kennedy, Daschle, Schumer, et al? Obviously they think differently than you do... or perhaps they lack your superior "moral clarity"?

[RapidCreek]

101. Yes they do sicken me....and yes they lack my moral clarity

RC

[Raskolnik]

111. Are there any apartments opening up there?

Good to know that you live in such a world where every decision is morally clear and has one right and one wrong answer.



All right, on re-reading above, I sound snotty. That is not what I intend. I should just ask you: do you think that there may be considerations that these people who "lack moral clarity" have to take into account that aren't always black and white?

[RapidCreek]

119. Certainly....and this isn't one of them

One never bows in the face of clear and pernicious evil or to it's memory...NEVER. To do so you give it your stamp of approval...you give it the appearance of acceptablity

One does not accept a malignant tumor...one identifies it for what it is and removes it.

RC

[Raskolnik]

131. I guess that answers my question,

doesn't it?

[Forkboy]

143. Yes,it does

[smirkymonkey]

207. Ever hear of a little something called "PR"?

[Armstead]

31. I hate burning bridges -- But Kiss My Butt!!!

Don't mistake a certain respect for America and common decency as being a Reagan butt kisser.

I didn't like Reagan or his policies. I will certainly have no problems criticizing either. And I think this week long cannonization is over the top.

But I find the notion of being deliberately offensive about it to be totally offensive. Traditions like a brief perioid of respect for the dead may seem corny to you. But to me it is basic decency and courtesy....And such "stupid" notions are also what seperaste us from animals, and have held the glue of democracy togeether when it gets frayed.

[CubsFan1982]

36. Amen to that!

I know I'm inviting flames by saying this, but I just don't have it in me to be as mean-spirited and vengeful as to deliberately insult a dead man's widow and children. When it comes to the nitty gritty of it all, that's what this situation is. My conscience won't let me be that mean. That said, I sure as hell will be glad when this hagiographic, maudlin, choreographed pageant of mourning is over on Saturday.

[Raskolnik]

40. Couldn't agree more, Armstead

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Human decency isn't "butt kissing", its simply acting in the way we know in our hearts we should be acting. Sure its easier to call him names and make tasteless jokes, but easier is rarely better.

At the end of the day, I want to be BETTER than the people I think are steering this country down the wrong path. This is one simple way to do it.

[diamond14]

43. there is SO MANY reTHUGlican reaguns butt-kissers on DU lately

those who praise reaguns policies are traitors to America....

in addition, those who praise reaguns himself, the ultimate traitor to OUR soldiers, to America's children and to the poor...a KILLER of MILLIONS are just real un-American....

you would never praise hitler, so why praise and honor reaguns, who also KILLED MILLIONS in Iran, Iraq and Central America....and ATTACKED Grenada...a third world country with NO MILITARY, where even police officers carry NO guns...yet reagun attacked Granada with a whole navy fleet, missiles, air force planes....LOTS of bombs...lobbed missiles right through a children's hospital and a mental ward....KILLED thousands just for fun....

MILLIONS are being spent on this WAR CRIMINAL's funeral...yet over twelve thousand HOMELESS VETERANS are begging for food out in the streets around the casket...

what holds us as human beings is that we WILL NOT HONOR WAR CRIMINALS and KILLERS OF MILLIONS...we WILL stand against them always, so as not to fuel the ideas that will create many more of these ghastly creatures, who will follow for the HONOR and KILL MANY MORE....it was reaguns cheap-labor-conservatism that took FOOD AWAY FROM SCHOOL CHILDREN'S LUNCHES, that KILLEd Millions....that's what made it OK for bush* to do even MORE...to KILL MORE...to take away MORE of our rights...WE MUST STOP IT NOW, and the ONLY way to succeed is to take away the GLORY of IT....stop the glory for the war criminals....SAVE AMERICA....

[Raskolnik]

48. Um...did you bother reading what we posted?

Because if you did, you would see that no one is praising his policies, we're arguing for basic human decency.

And that whole "if you disagree with me you are a traitor to America" bullshit is EXACTLY the kind of thing we should be fighting against.

Pure bullshit.

[diamond14]

93. Basic Human Decency means STANDING UP for reaguns VICTIMS

and NOT defending the perpetrator, reaguns...

IMO, it's wrong to support and defend criminal reaguns: a KILLER, a con-man and a coward....

[Raskolnik]

103. Quite a stand you take...

Good lord man, do you see ONE ARGUMENT here that is supporting Reagan's legacy? No, you do not.

What you see is people arguing for the most effective and decent way to act during the immediate aftermath of his death. Vitriol and hatred are NOT those ways.

[Raskolnik]

104. Posted in the Wrong Place!!! Dammit!

[RapidCreek]

152. In honoring a man in death you are honoring what he did in life

Do you listen to the guy standing at the front of the church when you go to a funeral...or do you wear a walkman and pick you nose?

RC

[Pithlet]

126. Where do you see anyone here

who is praising Reagan's policies? Am I missing a whole boatload of posts or something? I keep seeing that posted, and I'm not seeing it. :shrug:

[progressivebydesign]

89. Kiss My Butt, too!

I agree with Armstead! I will NOT apologize for being a decent person, who has enough class to respect the grief of a deceased person's loved ones.

I don't like Reagan. Didn't like his policies. But I'm not a pig, (no offense to pigs everywhere), and refuse to participate in an embarrassing pissing contest on DU to see who can come up with the absolutely most offensive remark about Reagan's death.

[fishnfla]

34. very original post!

not

[SlingBlade]

44. No, It's a very Good

Post and long overdue .

[TankLV]

54. Here here! I couldn't agree more.

I'm a proud member of the DEMOCRATIC wing of the Democratic Party.

I am so nauseated by these Vichi Dems. Too bad short haircuts are a popular style nowadays.

[Raskolnik]

58. Maybe I didn't get the memo.

Since when does being from the "DEMOCRATIC" wing of the Democratic party mean that you must behave without an ounce of decorum or human dignity?

Those arguing for respectful behavior are not arguing for giving up the fight against radical conservatism (which is what I believe you were implying with the "Vichy Dems" line), they are arguing for the most effective and humane behavior at a difficult time.

[MoonRiver]

60. So, let me get this straight.

TELLING THE TRUTH, in your opinion, equals being disrespectful and undignified?

[Raskolnik]

66. There are ways to present the truth that ARE respectful...

In my opinion it is neither appropriate nor effective to do what many here at DU have done in the days following Reagan's death.

Saying "Fuck Reagan he was just as bad as Hitler" or "I'll piss on his grave" does little in the way of advancing progressive liberal ideas. And its just plain ghoulish.

I'm not saying that we don't debate Reagan's legacy and policies in a spirited way. I'm saying we don't act like jackasses that turn off half the country with our vitriol. At the end of the day, what good does shouting "Fuck Reagan" on the day he dies accomplish?

[The Blue Knight]

67. So it's okay to disrespect Reagan but not somebody like Wellstone?

You don't see the hypocrisy in this?

[MoonRiver]

70. I don't disrespect Wellstone!!

[glaeken777]

68. thank you

Raskolnik, thank you. You said it very well. There are far more important fights to be picking... Reagan's bones aren't among them. Let's keep our eyes on the Prize... ousting Bush from the White House in November. Reagan is gone. Let's work hard enough to be able to happily say in 2005, "Shrub is gone".

[crossroads]

72. Some of us just don't see eye to eye... on Reagan, eh?

:eyes:

[Raskolnik]

76. I don't think its even ABOUT Reagan

I think its a larger issue about the way we as progressive liberals act. I would be arguing the same position if it was Bush41, Ford, or Clinton who died.

[MoonRiver]

77. Exactly what are you arguing? That people should LIE to preserve the

myth of an imperial presidency? If so, forget it, Rove and Asscrack have tried that and their ploy is falling apart, AS WE SPEAK.

[Raskolnik]

83. When did I advocate lying?

Perhaps I fell asleep and my forehead typed accidently, but I don't think so. (see? I'm lightening the mood!)

So you don't think there is any practical middle ground between lionization of Reagan and his legacy and shouting "Fuck Reagan, I hope he's rotting in Hell!"?

Personally, I believe that a spirited, *respectful* debate of his legacy is the best course of action, but maybe you can convince me of the "Fuck...Hell" tactic's merits.

[MoonRiver]

92. For the record, those words you used:

"Fuck Reagan, I hope he's rotting in Hell!" are YOURS, not mine.

[Raskolnik]

100. Those are the things I am arguing AGAINST

All of those statement and many others like them can be found in several different threads here. As well as quite a few people arguing in favor of my position, so I'm comforted that I'm not a complete crank.

I know you didn't make those statements personally, but you are defending those that did. I have NO problem with people making rational, respectful criticisms of the man's legacy. Lord knows there are plenty to be made. I am ONLY arguing against ghoulish, low-class behavior that does not serve our cause well.

(And I believe Caliphoto is arguing the same thing for the record)

[crossroads]

133. But I... am arguing *against* your position...

You are the one to bring up who is on whose side...I am for freedom of speech and defend that right for everyone here, no matter what is said, and this person as well as myself never said what you said! So this puts me on their side...

[kiahzero]

144. Freedom of speech has nothing to do with anything

The question is whether people should say what they are saying, not whether they should have the right to say what they are saying.

Some people never can seem to trot out this logical fallacy, though.

[crossroads]

147. And just who, may I ask, is in such a high position as to be the judge?

Hmmmm?
:shrug:

[progressivebydesign]

86. No..

I think reasonable people are saying that we've had decades to debate Reagan's failings as a President. When his family and friends are grieving the loss of a husband, father, uncle, etc.. is NOT the time to post things about "pissing on his grave", "rot in hell", "satan awaits you", or "I've waited 24 years for this day, and I'm celebrating!".

It's called CLASS. It means keeping some things to yourself when saying those things out loud will only hurt other people. When I hear people on DU talking about the fact that the Freeps do it, then I think we've sunk to the lowest of lows. Is Free Republic and Lucianne now our bellweather of class and decency?

NO ONE has spoken glowingly of Reagan. What they HAVE done, is shown some decency and empathy to his loved ones. I suggest that posters like yourself refrain from accepting a job as a grief counselor. Bad career move.

[MoonRiver]

94. Exactly when and where did I make the following statements of YOURS:

"pissing on his grave", "rot in hell", "satan awaits you", or "I've waited 24 years for this day, and I'm celebrating!".

Me thinks you doth protest too much.

[crossroads]

139. You are no peace maker either...

You are the one fueling the fire arguing with everybody with your constant beratings... Get a job as a preacher!

[progressivebydesign]

82. Raskolnik... I agree with you..

I really don't understand why some people think it's necessary to act without an ounce of human decency. I notice the Democratic leaders, ALL of them, have responded to the death with dignified statements. They have enough class to keep their opinions of the man's politics to themselves right now.. as a mark of class, and as the mark of intelligent people, who know that those types of slurs only hurt the Democratic Party. The Party that is continually being defined, in the eyes of average America, by the screaming right wing. Why give them ammo?

[Raskolnik]

84. Thanks dogg

Right back at ya'.

(I'm trying to hip up my image for the teens...hence the "dogg"...how's it working?)

[Pithlet]

127. Because

That's being a Reagan apologist, apparently. No, I don't get it either. One can agree or disagree with what you just said, but they can't call it apologizing.

[crossroads]

138. This thread would only be half as long and certainly not burning...

if you and your like had not come here to admonish everyone else about what they think. Just call in the thought police or the morality squad.
:nuke:
It really would have died, like Reagan by now! Think about it.

[Raskolnik]

160. One kind.

That certainly is one kind of logic.

Shouldn't YOU stop posting then to avoid promoting the argument?


Maybe you and your like should put some of that energy you spend arguing with me and plant a tree, or read to a homeless person, or read to a tree and plant a homeless person. Its all good.

[MoonRiver]

167. And exactly what have you done this week to help your fellow human being,

or sentient creatures of this earth in general? Your righteous smugness is really irritating, and as crossroads stated keeps fanning the embers of this thread into a raging fire.

Most of us on this board have been working hard for years trying to undo the damage caused by Reagan and bush* I. That gives us the right, imho, to complain about Reagan's bogus legacy that is being propagandized all over the media this week. Emperor Reagan, like emperor wannabe jr. *, is buck naked. I'm not going to pretend otherwise, thank you.

[Raskolnik]

168. The homeless don't even enjoy being planted.

Um, that was supposed to be a little joke (or were you actually planning to plant a homeless person?)

Tell exactly where I argued against fighting Reagan's bogus legacy? I want to do that EFFECTIVELY, not like 15yr olds.

Do you think that the "Fuck Reagan I hope he's burning in Hell" type of posts here undo one bit of the damage you point to? I don't. I just think its wankery that actually sets us back.

[MoonRiver]

170. Sadly, I repeat ad nauseum, you are the only person on this thread

using that language, try as you may to spin otherwise.

[Raskolnik]

171. Don't be sad.

So there ISN'T that type of language being used on DU? I thought we were discussing the situation in whole, not just this thread.

Perhaps I was wrong.

Do you honestly feel that the type of language and behavior I pointed to is appropriate and/or effective? Who exactly does it get to climb on board our cause?

[MoonRiver]

174. That's what YOU'RE discussing.

I'm discussing Reagan butt kissing on DU, which I don't like. Not liking that does not equate with dancing on Reagan's grave! Death is tragic to a person's family, even when that person is a veritable vegetable and 93 years old. I sympathize with the family and wish them the best in dealing with their grief. Basically I think it's much more important to discuss and analyze Reagan's life rather than his death. And again, it's ridiculous for us to be forced into silence about this for an entire week! Does it become OK to speak honestly about Reagan's policies in office after he's buried tomorrow, or does the "respect" need to continue on and on? :crazy:

[TankLV]

206. It's all abour righteous anger and well earned anger.

I will never stand for some idiots telling me how to behave, when I am entirely justified in behaving that way.

Would you honor Hitler?

[struggle4progress]

63. From now on, just tell the truth about him.

[progressivebydesign]

79. What's the point of stirring shit up again?

I think DU has mellowed on out both sides. I don't see ANY Reagan butt kissers. Why are you trying to inflame things again?

[MoonRiver]

87. I cannot believe you made that statement!

I have seen numerous posts in support of Reagan today, yesterday, the day before.... What's the point of that? This is the Democratic Underground, fer God's sake. I would be more than happy to let this issue go if I did not have to put up with so many, probably freeper, Reagan apologists here. And, for the record, I am NOT putting you in the category of freeper.

[progressivebydesign]

95. I haven't seen any supportive Reagan posts..

.. I have seen posts that criticize his presidency, but refuse to participate in the ghoulish attacks on a man that is being mourned by loved ones, or posters here think the over-the-top posts about his death are just immature outbursts by people who didn't get enough attention growing up. That's just sick, and so beneath us as Democrats.

Hey.. I think Reagan completely SUCKED as a president. I couldn't wait till he got out of office. He was a disaster that should have been impeached! However.. I would not sink to the level of ghoulish behavior that has been on DU lately. Someone loves most everyone that dies.. and it's against my own beliefs to negate that by being so vicious about it. I just think that some people here are so worked up that they are attacking people for simply asking for some decency around here... I like DU, I've been here over 3 years now.. I'm just really disturbed by the actions of some people this week, and sad that some people can't see how truly bad the things posted here were.

[MoonRiver]

102. Who knows what you really think.

If you haven't seen the smoozing Raygun posts here you haven't been paying attention. Maybe you just made a wrong turn and are confused? :shrug:

[Raskolnik]

109. Where?

If there are Reagan schmoozing posts here that the mods haven't deleted, I would be grateful if you would point them out to me so I could argue with the poster.

Thanks.

[crossroads]

121. Half the thread is made of people admonishing others for their opinions...

and comments against/about Reagan... for instance, IMO - posts #16,22,25,53,58,67,68,11,40,103,89, and so on... reek of being...
O8)

[Raskolnik]

135. You're not being intellectually honest here.

So they don't actually defend Reagan, they just don't excoriate him in the fashion you like, thereby "reek" of being pro-Reagan.

Are there any actual words that you can quote or is it all assumption and insinuation on your part?

Sorry if I'm being a dick about this, but if you want your words to mean things, you better back them up.

[crossroads]

137. You are jumping around like a one legged rooster

on everybodys back! Just your attitude galls me! Maybe because you never suffered under Reagans rule... you never walked a mile... but you'll never get those who *have* suffered to not get it out of their systems.
Quit trying to tell others what to say! Makes you look like a freeper.
My back is up now, and that is all the back-up I need! Wellstone was a better man than I am...

[Raskolnik]

156. Why not try?

Why not try to be a man like Wellstone?

[smirkymonkey]

209. God, your self-righteousness is SO tiresome!

I get the feeling you are just here to annoy people.



"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

[Forkboy]

145. I dont think you're you're Pro reagan

I think you're caught up in being "better than thou".

You have your opinion,we have ours.Stop acting like a nanny because we're not as good as you obviously are.You sound like my friggin dad,and that's NOT a compliment,trust me.

[Raskolnik]

159. So we shouldn't tell each other what to do?

Where's the fun in that?

Do you find it ironic then that you're posting on an thread that originally chastised people for their "butt kissing" of Reagan? Why didn't you tell him to stop telling people what to do?

That person, and many others evidently, feel that only by behaving in a crass fashion can we truly understand what Reagan's policies meant. I simply and emphatically disagree.

[Name removed]

192. Deleted message

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

[Raskolnik]

215. Shame on all of us.

I'd rather act like a pain in the ass than be acting like some of the ghouls here. I have no problem with that label.

Let me ask you a pointed question: which do you think is more appropriate, "Fuck Reagan I hope he burns in Hell" (which you haven't posted, but has been posted here in variations) OR "I sympathize with Reagan's family, but wholeheartedly disagree with the majority of his policies."?

You keep insinuating again and again that I am somehow defending Reagan when I call bullshit on people behaving poorly. That is rather lame, when you know damn well that is not what I'm doing.

And if you care to put up your Democratic creds against mine, I would be more than willing to do that. Personally, I guess I'm more concerned with doing what will help us get W the hell out in November rather than just engaging in masturbatory gloating over a man's death.

[Pithlet]

129. Whole lotta confused people here, then.

I don't know what you're talking about, either. We can't be the only two people out of the thousands that come here every day.

[RapidCreek]

105. someone loved the hundreds of thousands of people

whose deaths Reagan is responsible for.....Guess they don't count eh?

Hey, if I paid some guy to rape your wife and kill your kids would you mourn my death? Would you extole my virtues? Guess so.

RC

[crossroads]

116. You haven't? Looks like you are defending the guy at every turn...

If this thread is offensive, why post on it, it said in message #1 they were tired of all the pro-Reagan posts?! BTW - How can you possibly know what Reagan's policys did to me or some of my loved ones???
:argh:

[Raskolnik]

120. Where?

Where has Caliphoto defended a Reagan policy?

So you think you have some special knowledge of Reagan policies that those of us arguing for decency shomehow lack? Well I respectfully say that is ridiculous.

Of course Reagan's policies hurt people. Of course they have repurcussions that we must work against today and in the future. THAT is why we should engage in substantive debate about the reality of those policies rather than spend our energies with the "Fuck Reagan I hope he burns in Hell" crap that is/was permeating this forum.

THAT is what we're arguing for: effective, respectful behavior that will benefit us in the long run.

[crossroads]

125. Where did I use that kind of language?

Point it out to me!
:eyes:

[Raskolnik]

130. You never did. Many others did.

I didn't say you used that language. You do, however, defend those that are saying those things by dismissing calls for decency and restraint as somehow pro-Reagan.

I hate get all WWPWD on you, but do you think that Paul Wellstone would be advocating the sort of vitriol and hatred that some have displayed here, or would he argue for decorum and respect? I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that following his example of grace and human decency at a time like this would serve us well.

Thanks.

[Skittles]

110. it sickens me too

they need a good history lesson

[kiahzero]

117. What butt kissing?

The closest I've seen to "butt kissing" is people asking for a little respect for his family.

[Raskolnik]

124. You luuuv Republicans, don't you?

But don't you see that showing human decency is THE SAME THING as kissing his butt.

If you don't pour enough vitriol out against a pathetic old man, it MUST mean you love his policies, right?

We must have a strategy based on alienating regular Americans with our hatred!

*sigh*

[kiahzero]

132. Of course I do!

Actually, I'm guilty of alienating people from time to time.

Actual quote from my AIM profile:
If you're planning on voting for Bush, you're a fucking moron. I'm sorry, there's just no other way to say it. You've got Stockholm syndrome, and have fallen in love with your captor - he keeps slapping you around, and yet you still blindly follow.

You're a sheep, and you're going to follow your shepard to the slaughter. Congratulations.

[Blue-Jay]

122. I really haven't noticed that much butt-kissing here.

True, I don't rejoice at his passing or anyone else's. That said, I think he was a horrible president, and a big fat phony. If I've gained a tiny bit of respect for anyone, it's been Nancy.

I hope I don't ever have to see his face on my currency. I suppose I'll get my favorite devil-horns pen out if it ever happens, though.

[VOX]

140. What "butt-kissing?" I don't care to showboat in the end zone, that's all.

I could do a whole infantile whoop-de-doo about how Reagan was the anti-Christ, but what the hell good would it do now?

Reagan has been virtually dead for ten years, but the right wing (very much alive) still has control of all three branches of our government right now -- what's to celebrate? As bad as Reagan was, and he was plenty bad, he is not the enemy now. But what honor (not to mention practical value) is there in figuratively pissing on his corpse at this late date? I know exactly what he did to (not *for*) this country, and I resent it like hell, but he's gone. I prefer to fight with live enemies.

I'm not on some noble "take the high road" kick. I just think that the progressive cause is better served by showing a little discipline by not dancing over a corpse that, in effect, has been dead for a decade. I'd prefer to save my fighting energy for the right-wing scum that's in power **now**. There's an election ahead that must be won.

If there's any anger to be shown over Reagan's death, it's about how the right wing is attempting to deify him, and is trying to rewrite history in the process. That's occurring now, and it is something to be pissed off about.

[Gore1FL]

146. YES YES YES

You have said in one post what I have tried to say in 1000.

Interstingly, I have been called an apologist.

On Edit: the Reagan "all hate all the time" messages distrub me as well.

[Dees]

154. Dutch

For me, it's extremely difficult to separate Reagan the President from good ol' Ronnie the likable, amiable good guy. I think his hate bating anti people policies reflect the intra human he really was. How do you separate the two? I respect there is genuine sorrow and tears for the man from worshipers and family. And, I'm trying my damnedest to keep a line drawn between a man who brought so much anguish to so many and a man who was loved for his charm and compassion. It's tough. He was a rotten president.

[mopaul]

161. here's one for the fucking gipper

[chimpy the poopthrower]

166. Can you please point out some specific examples of butt-kissing?

We must have thousands of posts about Reagan by now. Can you find ten examples of butt-kissing by "Reagan apologists" that consist of more than a plea against the "I want to piss on his grave" comments? Show me the people who are defending his policies or administration. I'm sure it won't take you long. I'm just curious as to how you are defining "butt-kissing".

And regarding the "holier than thou" attitude that is being associated with anyone asking for a little bit of toning down, the only "holier than thou" attitude I see is the one coming from those who say that if you don't join in the Reagan hate-fest, you must be some kind of right-wing sympathizer.

Have you considered the possibility that many of us would just like to get back to focusing on the current administration instead of on an individual who has not played a role in American politics in many years?

[MoonRiver]

173. I don't have time to wade through every post on every thread!

As you stated there are thousands of Reagan posts by now. I am pleased to note that the butt kissing momentum has definitely slowed down since I first started this thread. "Butt kissing" doesn't necessarily mean supporting Reagan's policies, although there has been at least one thread dedicated to that. I've been upset by the attitude of "hush, hush", mustn't say anything about the gipper or some elusive people might get mad at us. The fact that we're supposed to be mum for an entire week, and then, magically, its ok again, is absurd, imo. I haven't said anything about wanting him dead or relishing the family's anguish, because I have neither of those feelings. I just will not be silenced about the truth surrounding this man's presidency.

Anyway, I'm expressing MY opinion, which plenty of DUers on this thread and others apparently agree with. You're entitled to YOUR opinion however.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

175. I could find 10 posts bashing Reagan in about 2 minutes.

But you don't have time to find any Reagan "butt-kissing" posts. If there are so many, they shouldn't be that hard to find. But you're basically admitting that what you term "butt-kissing" is really people who are expressing disgust at posts that say things like wouldn't it be funny if someone puked on his corpse (an actual post). It is possible to be critical of Reagan's policies without resorting to posts like that, which do nothing to enlighten or educate anyone, but only serves to turn people off DU.

[MoonRiver]

180. Trying to silence discussion about a very bad person's actions

is equivalent to "butt kissing" that bad person, aka RR, imho. I'm sure you'll agree there have been dozens, if not hundreds, of these on DU over the last 5 days. On the day I posted my original message there seemed to be an inordinate number. There are less now, but many many, including yours, exist right here on this thread.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

183. This original message?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1735486#1735508

I found that in the archives and it seems to be the one you're referring to, although I'm not sure. Please point the many posts on that thread trying to suppress criticism of Reagan. The closest thing I see is a single comment saying "There is a time for truth......and a decent way to present it. A few days of silence costs us nothing. Sure it won't win over any die hard republicans nor will ugly criticism no matter how true, but it definitely won't turn off any fence sitters."

The rest of the posters all seemed to be asking merely for civility:

"There is a fine line between being critical and being ugly and uncivil. Many have crossed it."

"One can be civil and still forcefully call out opponents on their attacks (and disprove them). The problem isn't civility (Watch Senator Byrd, he is very civil but gives scathing attacks)."

"Incidentally, criticizing the presidency of this dead man is perfectly reasonable. Dancing on his grave, or otherwise celebrating a human death is not necessary, and is not anywhere near as effective as a more measured critique of Reagan's administration when it comes to explaining to others WHY some of us do not mourn his death."

"I think one can be devastatingly critical of Reagan without celebrating his death."

"Nor am I saying there is no place for criticism of Reagan, of the myth and of the heroism now taking place in the media. Again apples and oranges. Because one can say those things powerfully - but civilly - and in ways that actually work to counter the lovefest - becuase of phrasing in ways that make things think. Unless one believes that the only way to fight is to say Fuck twenty times through out a single paragraph, then how does being civil in presentation of ideas have ANYTHING to do with "implanting spines" or "fighting back"?"

"We can be powerful, impactful and inspirational without being vitriolic."

"There is a smart way and a stupid way: Gore's fiery speech - good and smart; Using all legal means to stop Nader - good and smart; Kerry using surrogates to attack Bush - good and smart; Pissing on Reagan's grave - bad and stupid."

Are these the comments you describe as trying to "silence discussion"?

[MoonRiver]

185. You and the other posters you quote use hyperbole and exaggeration

in an attempt to silence any discussion of Reagan's bad policies and disastrous administration. Over and over I have tried to point this out. But you people never let up in your efforts to "pin" your own outrageous language on we DU Democrats who won't kowtow to the rightwing agenda of squelching any investigation into Reagan's REAL legacy. You continually and falsely impute such language to myself or others who DARE to give our anti-Reagan opinions, but it keeps boomeranging back at ya. Give it up. DU is a free speech zone whether you like it or not.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

186. You can't provide examples.

It's not "discussion of Reagan's bad policies and disastrous administration" that most of us object to. It's the posts saying wouldn't it be funny if someone puked on Reagan's body. Do you classify such a comment under the heading of "discussion of Reagan's policies and administration"? I don't. You claimed that there is a great deal of Reagan "butt-kissing" going on at DU. Then when I ask you to provide examples, you explain that by "butt-kissing" you mean people who "attempt to silence any discussion of Reagan's bad policies and disastrous administration" but you cannot provide examples of people doing that either. All I've seen are the people who, like me, are disgusted by the puking-on-the-corpse comments. I haven't seen this "inordinate number" of DUers who you claim are asking others to withhold real criticism of Reagan, and you haven't been able to show them to me.

[MoonRiver]

189. You provided the examples.

Your most recent hate projection: "puking-on-the-corpse" says it all! :D

I think it's clear to everybody where you're coming from. I don't want to get deleted so I will not elaborate further.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

193. That's an actual post.

I didn't make that up. Somebody really said they thought it would be funny if someone puked on Reagan's corpse. And none of the examples I provided were of people trying to shut down discussion or criticism. But at least I understand now what you call "butt-kissing."

[MoonRiver]

194. Will you PLEASE start pasting the URLs to these quotes?

It would be most appreciated.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

195. Here you go. First reply in this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1754663

[MoonRiver]

196. That's mopaul, fer God's sake!

He's probably made most of the statements you quote. Lots of us don't go along with such excessive imagery, but he's an artist so we tolerate him :D! Hi mopaul, love ya! :pals:

That particular one was tongue in cheek I'm quite sure.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

197. no, it was his thread, but not his post.

I said the first reply.

[MoonRiver]

198. OK chimpy, I see now.

Like I've said many times I don't condone those statements or indulge in them. I don't see the point of them except to vent long pent up emotions. I also don't care if people post them, however. If you are thin skinned about extremely negative and graphic attacks on Repubs, you will not last long here. The adms. will never censure any of these posts either. As long as we don't go after individuals on the board (except to click the Alert button), its a free for all regarding attacks on Pukes. I can guarantee you you're not going to change anything.

on edit: Direct physical threats to anybody, including Repubs, aren't tolerated by the administration, and usually get zapped asap. I've rarely seen any of these but that is what happens if they pop up.

[ILREP.]

172. Question for all you Democrats

I have a important question for all of you, I'm a republican, but to young to remember anything that Reagan did in his 8 yrs. in office, but he most not of been hated by SO many people like you guys make it out to be if he won 49 states his second time running. also being the second most loved pres. of the century behind FDR. but thats not why I'm here. I'm here to ask u a moral question. There are fellow Democrats of yours, who I'm going to assume prob. have more power then most of you, reporters and what not. but when Greg Palast write articles with headlines. "KILLER, COWARD, CON-MAN GOOD RIDDANCE, GIPPER ...
MORE PROOF ONLY THE GOOD DIE YOUNG" make comments like "He should be turning a nice golden-brown right now" Well, my friends, you can rest easier tonight: the Rat is dead". now i know this guy didn't like Reagan, and there are people i don't like that i would like to punch in the face, but don't u think he should of had the respect to Reagan's family and friends not to write that stuff, to be published in national newspapers? you guys have to be a little bit embarrassed? Also when another famous democratic columnist was on a talk show, and was asked about his cartoon describing Pat Tillman, an American hero, a stupid sap, the comic-strip writer Ted Rall replied if he really wanted to help out his country he should of kept the millions of dollars and join the Democratic party. tell me thats not disrespectful. I would just like to see how your side think about these two guys and comments,

[MoonRiver]

178. Why don't you start a new thread.

Your comments are really not germain to my original message.

[ILREP.]

179. alrght

[Ms. Clio]

190. Not only not germane, they weren't even coherent

Another shining example of freeper intellect.

[MoonRiver]

191. Do you think the big words scared him off?

Seemed a little too easy! :D

[Maeve]

199. Scared him to death

[oldcoot]

184. It is important not to gloss over Reagan's record

I understand that you are too young to remember much (if anything) about the Reagan administration. I also suspect that you have not had much exposure to Reagan in history class because I know that it can be a struggle for history teachers to get to Watergate (because of time restraints). Because individuals like yourself may not have much exposure to the history of the 1980s, it is important that we not gloss over Reagan's record.

Many like to give credit to Reagan (while totally ignoring Gorbachev's contributions) for ending the Cold War. However, we should not ignore the negative and brutal aspects of Ronald Reagan's foreign policy. If you want to understand why many of us hate Reagan, I suggest that you start by reading about his policies in El Salvador and Nicaragua. In El Salvador, the Reagan administration supported a brutal right-wing government which "disappeared" thousands of people. If you had lived in El Salvador at the time and lost a loved one, you would probably agree with Palast's headline.

In Nicaragua, the Reagan administration supported the Contras. The Contras were trying to overthrow the leftist Sandinistas. The CIA even mined a harbor in Nicaragua. The Nicaraguan government sued the United States and won in the World Court, but the Reagan administration ignored the verdict demonstrating U.S. arrogance.

Reagan even ignored the 1984 Boland Amendment, which was a law passed by Congress and prohibited the government from supporting the Contras. One of the best things about the U.S. Constitution is that it provides for a series of checks and balances on the different branches of the U.S. government. Reagan's willingness to ignore federal law endangered this precious system.

Unfortunately, the Reagan administration devised a plan to aid the Contras which led to the Iran-Contra scandal. In 1986, Reagan's advisors had started secret negotiations with the Iranian government to secure the release of American citizens who were held hostage by radical Muslims in Lebanon. This plan involved selling weapons to the Iranians to use against the Iraqis during the Iran-Iraq War. Some of the money obtained from the sales was diverted to the Contras. Realize that if a private citizen had done what the Reagan administration had done, that private citizen would have probably been charged with and convicted of treason because Iran was enemy of the United States. Indeed, we are very lucky that the Iranians did not get a chance to use these weapons on American soldiers. However, Reagan gets a free pass because the Democratic Congress thought impeaching a president so soon after Watergate would damage the nation. President Bush (Sr.) would even pardon key figures in the Iran-Contra scandal.

Now there are questions about how much Reagan actually knew about this mess. Some believed that he was out-of-touch while others believe he knew about the whole thing. In either case, we should not view him as a great president. Yes, we can show sympathy for his family. However, we should be careful not to turn Reagan into a saint or a hero.

[crossroads]

200. Good post!

:thumbsup:

[sam sarrha]

202. lets just call this 'Planet Reagan' and leave it at that. that will cover

it all.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

205. Good post.

Good thread.
I've been busy lately but glad to see DU churning through this all in a healthy manner.
We Democrats are the best.

[MoonRiver]

208. Thanks!

This thread has taken on a life of its own, and is beyond the control of we mere DUers now! Cyberspace rules!

[Name removed]

210. Deleted message

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

[MoonRiver]

212. Hi, bye!

See ya! :hi:

[mopaul]

222. .......