R. Reagan dies at 93

Aqua-chan · Post by **Aqua-chan** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:09 pm

I'm a bit torn between two worlds with Reagan. As a person I admire him, but as a President I don't agree with what he considered acceptable and necessary for America. I liked his humor and the ability to hold his own in political discussions without endlessly slamming his opponent's reputation, which is something that we could use in our political system in the current, I think. He was definetely an intellegent man, but his ideals were not on par with my own. I think I would have prefered him as a Vice-President or sum such, but he was here and there is no changing what he did in the past. I have a respect for the man, but it is by no means a respect that was built upon his career in politics.

All in all I am saddened that he passed away. I hope his family can now move on and live their lives remembering who Ronald was before the deterioration and not as he was in the years after.

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:58 pm

He was IMO a great man, I greatly admired him and was shaken when I found he was suffering from Alzheimer's. I am thankful he is finally at peace. My heart goes out to Nancy for the suffering she endured at his side, and now at his passing, but as anyone who has lost a family member to this disease knows, you loose your loved one long before their actual physical death. He was a great man, and perhaps the greatest President of the 20th century. He was my hero and the first president I was ever old enough to vote for. I would have voted him for a third term if there had been a provision for it. Sadly there was not. I mourn his passing and feel hurt when I read hateful and insensitive things said about him by those who do not.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Mon Jun 07, 2004 9:59 pm

Originally posted by Scayde
He was IMO a great man, I greatly admired him and was shaken when I found he was suffering from Alzheimer's. I am thankful he is finally at peace. My heart goes out to Nancy for the suffering she endured at his side, and now at his passing, but as anyone who has lost a family member to this disease knows, you loose your loved one long before their actual physical death. He was a great man, and perhaps the greatest President of the 20th century. He was my hero and the first president I was ever old enough to vote for. I would have voted him for a third term if there had been a provision for it. Sadly there was not. I mourn his passing and feel hurt when I read hateful and insensitive things said about him by those who do not.

Thank you Scayde.

smass · Post by **smass** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 6:21 am

Thank you Scayde.

Ditto.

A few quotes that sum up Reagan to me:

September 29, 1981: "We who live in free market societies believe that growth, prosperity and ultimately human fulfillment, are created from the bottom up, not the government down. Only when the human spirit is allowed to invent and create, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding economic policies and benefitting from their success -- only then can societies remain economically alive, dynamic, progressive, and free. Trust the people. This is the one irrefutable lesson of the entire postwar period contradicting the notion that rigid government controls are essential to economic development."

He also had some great one liners:

Republican National convention 1992: "When you see all that rhetorical smoke billowing up from the Democrats, well ladies and gentleman, I'd follow the example of their nominee; don't inhale."

To surgeons as he entered the operating room, March 30, 1981: "I hope you're all Rebulicans"

I'll post a few more later if I get some time.

By the way - if you want to argue about these quotes there's another thread - knock yourselves out.

Lazarus · Post by **Lazarus** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:10 am

Reagan was before my time, so I know only little of his policies. Frankly, I have learned more about him in the past few days, I think, than I had previously known. My general ignorance would have kept me from this thread, but some of the comments made here have rather irritated me. I think free speech is cool, and it has no more open target than US presidents. But using the instance of a man’s death to accuse him of killing your friends, and comparing him to Osama bin Laden, I think, is beyond the pale. To quote that great philosopher, Thumper: “Sometimes, if you don’t have anything nice to say, you shouldn’t say anything at all.” I think the occasion of someone’s death is one of those times.

So, for those you in the mood to see some positive in Reagan, I give you one of my favorite bloggers, Pejman Yousefzadeh, who has three nice little snippets about Reagan:

One, a lengthy memoriam, which includes links to others;

Two, which has a number of transcripts of Reagan’s most famous speeches; and,

Three, just a short anecdote.

From one of the speeches that Pejman quotes:

“I am going to talk of controversial things. I make no apology for this.

It's time we asked ourselves if we still know the freedoms intended for us by the Founding Fathers. James Madison said, ‘We base all our experiments on the capacity of mankind for self government.’

This idea - that government was beholden to the people, that it had no other source of power is still the newest, most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream-the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, ‘The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.’

The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing…

Are you willing to spend time studying the issues, making yourself aware, and then conveying that information to family and friends? Will you resist the temptation to get a government handout for your community? Realize that the doctor's fight against socialized medicine is your fight. We can't socialize the doctors without socializing the patients. Recognize that government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business. If some among you fear taking a stand because you are afraid of reprisals from customers, clients, or even government, recognize that you are just feeding the crocodile hoping he'll eat you last…”

As I say: I know little of Reagan, but that is a fine speech. As is this:

“In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: ‘We will bury you.’ But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.

And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control.

Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

fable · Post by **fable** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:37 am

Originally posted by Lazarus
But using the instance of a man’s death to accuse him of killing your friends...

Roughly one-third of all patients in government-funded mental institutions. I don't think I knew more than two. If I'd known none of 'em personally, that wouldn't make the crime any less hideous. As much can be said for other presidents--Clinton is one of those who bear primary responsibility for the genocide in Rwanda, for example, since he instructed the US delegate to the UN to manuever behind the scenes against both troops and a Security Council statement mentioning genocide. But Clinton's not been mentioned, here. Reagan is. And the legislation I mentioned was deeply immoral. Cutting national budgets should never made be made at the expense of lives.

I'm getting into a sensitive area for those who really like Reagan. Please note that I'm trying to be fair, here, and that I've not condemned the man. If anyone does feel personally insulted by my comments, I apologize. I was intending to express my emotional ambivalence, not enter a political debate about his accomplishments. Perhaps, if this thread was intended to be a tribute, it should have been labeled as such, instead of appearing to be a "give your reactions to" sort of thing.

As I say: I know little of Reagan, but that is a fine speech.

Yes, it is. But Reagan (according to his own staff) never wrote his own speeches, or had any input other than the most general "give me this feeling" kind of thing. I don't think he deserves either praise or blame for those speeches, as a result. (When he spoke off-the-cuff, he could be embarassing. His celebrated remark, "Trees cause more air pollution than automobiles do," was this kind of comment. This is neither here nor there. Some politicians simply don't have the gift to ad lib glibly. However, Reagan wasn't an idiot like Dan Quayle.)

Few politicians actually do write their speeches any longer, though at one time it was considered something of an art. Clinton *did* write some of his own speeches, and they were miserable, long-winded things. The last American politician I can think of who wrote effective speeches was Adlai Stevenson. Today, Pat Buchanan is an effective speechwriter, but his political experience is nil despite his frequent attempts to start up a third party.

There was an excellent book published a number of years ago on speechwriting politicians, along with some wonderful examples. It's buried currently in our garage, but I'll see if I can find the name and author, and determine whether it's still in print. Hell, if I can find the thing, I'll post some examples.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 5:55 pm

Originally posted by T'lainya
@ Everyone, I know that many people on here disagreed with Reagans policies, but I ask you all to have some sensitivity for those who admired him. Perhaps a different thread could be started if people want to talk about his policies.

Of course I respect a requests from a Mod and I will elaborate on this subject in Dottie's thread "Sensitivity or not in politics" later on, but I must say here that I do think it's a fundamental error that we should not be allowed to critise a public person for public acts because it may hurt somebody's feelings.

Whatever opinions one might have, there is always somebody who will feel hurt at a personal level. If Saddam or Osama died and I critisised their acts, there would be somebody who admired and liked them who would feel hurt because I disagreed with them. Yet, we have seen many posts where many members critise those two persons heavily without any Mods limiting this.
Certainly I don't belong to the followers of Saddam or Osama even if Dubbayh believes that critising US and UK foreign politics is equals that, but it makes no sense to me that Osama and Saddam are allowed as targets for critisism whereas Reagan is not?

In my opinion, public acts that affects many people outside that person's private sphere, do consequentially not belong to that person's private sphere and are therefore open to public critisism. Reagan was the president of the US, and it is as a former president we who have critisised him, have commented in this thread. There was no notion that the thread was aimed solely for admiration or personal condolences. Weasel's OP was simply a statement that Reagan had died.

So I think it is inconsequente that we are allowed to critise the likes of Osama, Saddam, Sharon and other people endlessly, but not Reagan. Is the reason for this inconsequence that some members have expressed they have got hurt feelings at a personal level, whereas no SYM-members have expressed hurt feelings regarding the other 3 people I mentioned?

Ultimately this is a question of whether to give priority to people expressing their opinions, and people feeling hurt because you don't share their opinion. When it concerns racism or other discrimination, there is a principle that should be followed regardless of whether people are hurt or not - for instance, shall we tolerate racism against Mongolianpeople simply because there are no Mongolian citizens on SYM who will feel personally hurt? My answer to this is obviously no - and by that I hope you get my point, that IMO the posting rules at SYM should be determined by general principles and not by what single individuals feel hurt about and not.

T'lainya · Post by **T'lainya** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 7:29 pm

CE I merely asked that the discussions be moved to another thread, not that people not debate or criticize his presidency. I'm sorry that some of you disagree with this. If it's that big of an issue or you feel that censored then feel free to contact Buck about it.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 7:37 pm

No problem T', I conform to what you or other Mods wish, and it's not a question of feeling personally censored. What I wanted to point out was the basis for my disagreement since I think this is a principal question. I usually agree with the SYM rules, but this time I don't and I will of follow your request because it is a request from you as a Mod, not because I agree with the principle. However, I have continued discussing this topic in the "Sensitivity and politics"-thread and if you would like to post something there about how you view the issue, as a Mod and/or as a member, it would be interesting to discuss further there.

Chanak · Post by **Chanak** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:08 pm

Originally posted by C Elegans
Just two words: Iran-Contra.

I loathed Reagan, and I thought he was an ignorant, paranoid, delusional politician. His politics were destructive both for the US and abroad. I have nothing good at all to say about the guy. To me, he personifies the mystery of how Americans vote, what characteristics they value and how modern American politicians seem to be empty headed media paperdolls.

I'd say you've gone far beyond expressing your feelings about Reagan and his policies. The above is a great example why some people didn't like what you posted at all, beyond mere disagreement.

Aqua-chan · Post by **Aqua-chan** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 8:20 pm

Not to throw myself in the line of fire, but please, you guys. Let's not turn this into an arguement. This thread was intended to be for those who cared to say something on par with Reagan's death, not his political career. Dottie made a seperate thread for that, so can we please just drop it here before this becomes into something that doesn't have to be? Lainy meant nothing when she redirected CE's post - most certainly not censorship - and CE was within her right to say as she felt even if somebody else felt it extreme. But now there is another thread for those kinds of posts to the posted in and there is no need to drag this on here. Let's just let it go.

smass · Post by **smass** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 9:51 pm

Okay some more quotes in between the vitriol...

"I've always believed that a lot of the trouble in the world would disappear if we were talking to each other instead of about each other."

...Oddly appropriate...

" Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence." Republican National Convention, 1992

"How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin." Remarks in Arlington, Virginia, September 25, 1987

"In an ironic sense, Karl Marx was right. We are witnessing today a great revolutionary crisis -- a crisis where the demands of the economic order are colliding directly with those of the political order. But the crisis is happening not in the free, non-Marxist West, but in the home of Marxism-Leninism, the Soviet Union.... [Communism will be] left on the ash heap of history." June 1982

You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream -- the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order -- or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, "The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits." October 27, 1964

"Public servants say, always with the best of intentions, "What greater service we could render if only we had a little more money and a little more power." But the truth is that outside of its legitimate function, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector." October 27, 1964

Kind of a catch all group of quotes. But they sum up who Reagan was to me. He restored the nations faith in itself, championed capitalism, battled endlessly against big government, and ended the cold war with an exclamation point.

Of course he was an uncaring bastard who killed women and children and deserves to be mentioned in the same breathe as Hitler, Stalin, and Hussein. Apples and apples - or so I have been told.

Armycardinal · Post by **Armycardinal** » Tue Jun 08, 2004 10:15 pm

My 2 cents

One of the great things I remember of the President is that he made it OK for us (Americans) to feel good about ourselves again.

(Yes, the arrogant American speaks)

My grandfather had Alzheimers too. I can understand why people decide to take matters into their own hands. At the end there was nothing remaining of the wonderful man my Grandfather was - much like President Reagan.

You go Chanak - I got your back.

AC

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 7:18 pm

deleted

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:14 pm

So...

Does this mean the thread is once again open for debate, or should I move any criticism to another thread, wich wont be read? Or is Scyades post itself untouchable and may not be criticised anywhere?

Please enlighten me.

If you percived it to be any kind of bitterness in this post, you might very well be correct.

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:38 pm

deleted

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:40 pm

deleted, too!

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:42 pm

Sorry Fable, it was from my point of view a tribute to President Regan...I didn't mean to initiate a debate...please excuse the mistake.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 9:44 pm

Not a problem, Scayde. I removed my post, as well.

T'lainya · Post by **T'lainya** » Thu Jun 10, 2004 10:55 pm

It seems Fable beat me to it, (I was antivirusing and updating, there's another nasty worm making the rounds

) Thank you Scayde and Fable.