Morning in America, and there's a homeless man on my doorstep

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Tom57, Jun 10, 2004.

  1. Tom57

    Tom57 Member

    Not surprisingly, here's an alternative view of Reagan's presidency (you would expect anything less?).

    First, there's no question that he inspired a new generation (or two) of conservatives. There was something infectious about him that resonated with many (not me, though).


    This "pride" in America that so many speak of in connection with his presidency, begs a further question: For whom? Certainly, the poor and disenfranchised had little inspiration from his presidency.

    The S.F. Chronicle described his presidency (I'm paraphrasing) as essentially legitimizing indifference towards the lower class. Reagan's budget cuts started the modern homeless problem in the U.S. If you don't live in a major urban city, you haven't seen it except on television. If you do, you know what I'm talking about.

    He made it ok to ignore poor people and the less fortunate. I think many wanted just that – a way to forget about the poor and the minorities and not feel guilty about it.

    He ignored AIDS until it was brought to the doorsteps of the White House.

    He nearly bankrupted the country with deficit spending.

    His trickle-down economic theory trickled down about as far as the upper middle class.

    Today there are more living below the poverty line than ever before, and the percentages are growing. Reagan was the primary force that set this in motion. To his credit, he understood that if he fed the rich, and pacified the conservative middle class with meaningless tax cuts, he could gain a majority vote. It worked beautifully twice.

    He did not end the Cold War. Yes he spoke fervently against it, but Communism was imploding under its own weight for years. Like the Iran hostage crisis, it was resolved on his watch, more due to luck than anything else. One could argue that he needlessly cost the country billions in the Cold War "effort". Eighteen billion for Star Wars (can we say boondoggle) - an ill-posed, ill conceived and worthless project, is a perfect example.

    Ironically, stem cell research might reveal the answer to Alzheimer’s. Unfortuntely, one of the Reagan "progeny", George Bush, sets policy based on the religious right, so we may never know.

    So give the man and his family their due. Life has been tough for his wife for the last ten years. I don't believe he was evil, just ignorant. But his "morning in America" was bright only for the few. Lots of bad things were set in place with his presidency that the country still deals with today. That's his legacy for the growing lower class.
  2. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Can't you give it a rest until at least the man is buried? Show a little respect for the Presidency itself, if nothing else.

    The liberals who are taking shots at Reagan this week have proven once and for all how little class they have, and highlight how much Reagan did.
  3. GENO

    GENO New Member

    He was a pretty good actor also. Should have received an Oscar for his portrayal of governor and president. Kidding!!
    I liked him during his 2nd term as President- grandfatherly type. Certainly far more likeable and charismatic than the 3 bozos who followed him in office. One out of touch with reality, one in touch with the opposite sex and the other on a personal mission for God to right all of the wrongs in world. So Ronnie wasn't that bad.
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Of course, 100% of what was set in place during the 1992-2000 presidency was "good." Perhaps the US will not have to "deal with" the ramifications of those years........:eek:
  5. Tom57

    Tom57 Member

    I'm giving him the same amount of respect (actually more) that he gave minorities, the poor, and people with AIDS.

    Reagan, I'm sure, is getting the same sorts of questions at the pearly gates from all the poor and those with AIDS who went before him. I wonder what his answer is? "Sorry, you just didn't fit my definition of human, and at the time I felt you got what you deserved."

    It's interesting how money and privilege don't make one immune to suffering. It's an equal opportunity affliction, eventually.
  6. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Tom, you're really making yourself look crass by pushing this, give it a break. Even though we are miles apart politically, I at least always respected you. That's really starting to change.

    I despised Bill Clinton as President, but when his time comes, I'm not going to take cheap shots at the man the week of his state funeral.
  7. Lawrie Miller

    Lawrie Miller New Member

    Then you need not fear their diatribes. Let them express opinion confident in the knowledge that you are right and they are wrong.

  8. Deb

    Deb New Member


    So, we are to sit quietly until after the funeral when no further notice will be given the subject. In the meantime every conservative on TV / radio / newspaper gets to blow the "wasn't-he-great horn?

    If now is the time to evalulate Reagan's presidency, then it should be an evaluation from both sides, good and bad.
  9. Lawrie Miller

    Lawrie Miller New Member

    And that is your privilege and with respect to good taste, you may be right. However, others may reasonably hold contrary opinion, and conceive different standards of taste. That they do does not per se, evidence inferior class or flawed character.

    Is it ever justifiable in a free society that we should require others to suspend free expression of their opinion for some arbitrary period on the grounds of our good taste?

  10. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    I don't fear them, I just think it's extremely poor taste.
  11. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Timing

    Yes, the same way that conservatives should keep their mouths shut when Ted Kennedy or Bill Clinton dies. It's called respect.

    Maybe it's the way I was raised, but I think it's extremely poor taste to criticize someone the week of their state funeral, regardless of their political leanings.
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    It does in my book, although I know that courtesy & manners are becoming a lost art.
  13. GENO

    GENO New Member

    I wonder if there would be this much tribute if there were a Democrat in the White House?

    As an un-partisan observer it seems as though there is as much or more pomp displayed for Reagan, who is 16 years removed from the office, then JFK who was in office at the time of his death.

    All ex-presidents warrant public acclaim for their service to the nation whether you agree with their policies and actions or not, but isn't this a little bit much?
  14. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    When JFK was killed in 1963, there was no such thing as cable TV, talk radio, or the Internet. I think it was a sign of the times more than anything else.
  15. Reagan....

    I didn't much care for Reagan when he first took office, and found it hard to admit I sort of liked him when he left office. But now, after all these years, it is clear even to a fairly liberal guy like me that he was one of the greatest presidents we ever had. However, like everybody who ever lived, he had flaws.

    Is it in bad taste for political opponents to point out those flaws during the week of his state funeral? Maybe. Is it their right and duty to do so? Possibly. Do conservatives over-react when their "god" is questioned? Definitely.

    Anyway, that's my two cents. May Ronald Reagan rest in peace, and thank God he had the will to do what he did during his term of office. There is no question that Reagan's fortitude defeated the Soviet Union, although that process was already underway and what he did was give the whole rotten infrastructure a good hard shove.
  16. Dennis Ruhl

    Dennis Ruhl member

    The pit-bull should take care of that.
  17. Tireman4

    Tireman4 member

    Dear Fellow Board Members

    Ok here is my take on this. I am a liberal. I have not bashed President Reagan. I respect him a the great communicator. I respect him because he was very honorable. I disliked many of his programs. The S and L crisis was horrible. I am not going to go after the man. I am respectful of he and Mrs Reagan. I wish their family well during this time of sorrow.I respect him for at one time he was a New Dealer. I respect him because he respected Roosevelt. I also respect him because after all was said and done, he was friends with Tip O'Neill. For that, I thank you Mr President. This is from a lifelong Democrat.
  18. Tom57

    Tom57 Member

    This is a public forum, for heaven's sake. We are not in the company of his family, where negative criticism would be unquestionably in bad taste. I trust that President Reagan cares not a whit that we discuss him now, or wait until after Friday. One would hope he is now on to much better things. If he sees what goes on now from where he is, he understands better than anyone the mistakes he made, and his genuine accomplishments.

    My respect for him is evidenced in the fact that, since his death, I have thought long and hard about his presidency, both good and bad. I have watched good portions of the coverage on television, and I sincerely sympathize with his wife, and the rest of his family for the hardships that the last 10 years have brought on them.

    However, this is a time of reflection upon the man and his presidency. As a public figure, he subjects himself, even in death, to public debate.

    Amid the hoopla about his greatness, there is a forgotten segment of this society that doesn't have much of a voice - then or now. Those people were profoundly affected (adversely) by his policies. That perspective needs to be represented. He was a great president to many; he was an awful president to many. Read it now, or read it Monday. The fact remains.
  19. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Not true.
  20. Casey

    Casey New Member

    Experts say that stem cell research will do nothing to advance a cure for Alzheimer’s. Even Nancy Reagan acknowledges this. Alzheimer’s experts say that stem cell research will not help because Alzheimer’s affects the connections bewteen cells, not the cells themselves. I have no idea what this means, but I take their word for it.

Share This Page