I've had it up to HERE.

[kellinator]

All right. All week I've been quiet about the Reagan media circus, not wishing to court the drama. But fuck it. I'm not going to take it anymore.

How fucking sad am I supposed to be that Reagan died? Look, people die. It happens. A peaceful death at 93 after a long full life is the best that any of us can hope for. And when that death is preceded by the living hell known as Alzheimer's disease -- well, that's a blessing.

Not that Reagan was exactly interested in providing funds for Alzheimer's research during his time in office. Maybe if that had been more important to him than tax cuts for the rich, he wouldn't have had to suffer through that long death -- and neither would have millions of innocents, including my grandmother.

Not to mention all the other diseases that Reagan ignored -- AIDS, anyone?

Despite his own recollections to the contrary, Ronald Reagan spent World War II in Hollywood making movies. Jimmy Stewart took time out from his film career to be a fighter pilot -- and had a clause in his contract that if the film studio tried to get publicity out of that, he'd walk off the set.

Last Sunday should have been dedicated to celebrating and remembering the brave troops who stormed the beaches on D-Day, not Reagan. Don't insult real heroes by comparing them to this man.

What's with all this misguided 80's nostalgia? See if shawnj refreshes your memory. The '80s sucked, and Reagan was a big part of why.

And for those who are convinced that Reagan was a genius -- well, gaiagurl helped me out with this link to some of Reagan's more bizarre quotations.

What set me off to the point of no return was hearing someone say that it won't be as big a deal when Jimmy Carter dies, he won't be as "well-remembered or missed." Whether or not you like his politics, Jimmy Carter has dedicated his life to helping the less fortunate. He is one of my personal heroes and is respected around the world. If people think Ronald Reagan is a better man that Jimmy Carter -- well, maybe the United States is in even worse shape than I thought.

Go ahead. Have your bread and media circuses devised to get Dubya reelected. You get the America you deserve.

(Just wish I'd had the balls to post this earlier in the week. Nobody reads LiveJournal on Friday.)

Comments

[poprockgrrl.livejournal.com]

amen.

and what about people wanting to put his mug on the $10?

people are so dumb.

[stevietee.livejournal.com]

Yeah, let's kick Hamilton off the $10 -- it's not like he had anything to do with setting up the financial structure of the entire fucking country or anything...

(And, really, if we're going to boot someone off our currency, can't we get rid of Andrew "Never Met An Indian I Didn't Want To Slaughter" Jackson???)

[blark.livejournal.com]

I completely agree with you.

It seemed that from Sunday until Wednesday, according to the major US news outlets, nothing occured in the entire world except for Reagan's death, and gee, we knew that was going to happen at some point for 10 years now. But no, really, the media is controlled by liberals. Shhhh!

[dwivian]

Yes it is. Which is why we're hearing a lot of the negative things about Reagan along with the coverage of the processions and funeral. The media recognizes that Kerry had to take a week off because of this, and Bush can only gain from it, so they're limiting the Rah-Rah attitude that they could have given it (ala Fox News, which is tedious after 15 minutes of watching).

Media, because they are an investigatory function, necessarily cannot be conservative in tendency, which advocates status quo. Their very existance requires a left-of-center position.

But, in contradiction, I learned of a chinese coal mine catastrophe, the loss of Ray Charles, and the killing of construction workers in Afghanistan, all on the media that was only talking about Reagan. Shhhh!

[deza.livejournal.com]

Reagan didn't ignore AIDS. He relied on it to reduce the populations of homosexuals and African-Americans.

[elizabethf.livejournal.com]

That's bullshit. And conservatives get called conspiracy-theorists?

When he fitst took office, AIDS had not yet become an epidemic. He spent plenty of money on AIDS research... http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200312030913.asp (take a gander and notice the picture of the gentelman who wrote this article...he's definitely not a white male looking to eradicate the blacks and the gays) and this bluushit about how he never said the word "AIDS" in office is a lie too...it's documented!

Blame Reagan all you want but the fact is that the reason AIDS went beyond a "bad thing" and into an epidemic is because too many people were irresponsible and now refuse to take personal responsibility for their own actions.

[legolastn.livejournal.com]

You go, girl!

[ariedana.livejournal.com]

Until it happens and it's proved otherwise, I think that the Republicans will honor Carter just as much as the Democrats have honored Reagan (and they have - after all, Kerry cancelled all appearances this week and attended the funeral.) That is, if Carter chooses to have the state funeral hoopla. My feeling is that he may elect to be eulogized and buried quietly at the Carter Center. After all, this is the first state funeral in almost 30 years, and ones like Reagan's are even rarer.

I think that, in a sense, the country is mourning the loss of an era more than they're actually mourning the man. A long time ago, I wrote about leaders who could really speak in a way that moves you profoundly in your soul (unlike Dubya, who turns my stomach.) At the time, I was told that Americans don't like to be preached to. But seeing all the speeches this week and his way of speaking (yes, I'm aware he didn't write his speeches) made me realize that he moved people in a way that no one does today. And he also had that air of old, dapper Hollywood and John Wayne and all that stuff in him.

I think that a lot of his policies stunk, and someday I feel sure that history will continue to bear that out. But I don't discredit Americans for showing respect to a dead leader. I don't think Americans respect each other enough, personally.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Respect is one thing. Canonization is another.

And no, I don't think the Republicans will respect Carter. I'm bitter.

[adgy.livejournal.com]

Here here!!

Re: Just my two cents

[sempereadem.livejournal.com]

Jimmy Carter is a great man, but was a crappy president. That's exactly what can and should be said of Reagan.

And before anyone bashes me and says what a great president Jimmy Carter was, please read this Encarta entry that covers it.

And it says exactly that - Yes, Carter is a great man, but his presidential record was as miserable as any other president's.

Re: Just my two cents

[gaiagurl.livejournal.com]

from what i have read about carter, his problem seemed to be that he was a good man but a bad politician. he wouldn't play the political games that others wanted him to play. a lot of the reason he wasn't a "good president" was that he spent a lot of time fighting with congress.

i went into encarta's entry about reagan and it's interesting--whoever wrote those entries obviously has some economic biases in favor of reagan and against carter, and doesn't even get into the role congress plays in passing government budgets, nor points out that running up a government deficit is generally a Bad Idea (tm).

[blistermoth.livejournal.com]

i read it on fridays!

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Thank you. That makes me feel a little better :)

[harleen.livejournal.com]

*applauds*

as for the $10 bill debate...Alexander Hamilton did *way more* for the US than Reagan ever did!! just because Hamilton was never a President...*sigh*

if I were old enough to vote when Reagan was up for election, I would never have voted for him.

Re: funny thought i just had, even though it's pocky...

[ilexx.livejournal.com]

maybe the $10 bill thing is part of a bigger conspiracy to get more people away from using cash altogether so we can eventually all participate blidful and willingly in that whole revelations "mark of the beast" stuff....

ehhh... don't mind me. i'm on a low blood sugar brainfuzz right now...

[ilexx.livejournal.com]

*I* read it.

i'm glad you spoke your mind.

i just personally am peeved that the whole thing is overshadowing the loss of Ray Charles.

[piratejenny.livejournal.com]

Hey, I read lj on Friday, and I totally agree with you. I'm so damn sick of hearing about Reagan. I'm far more sad that Ray Charles died--*that*'s cause for a national day of mourning.

[jesshelga.livejournal.com]

Damn, girl, I read LJ on Friday, and that was ass-kicking. And THANK YOU for standing up for Jimmy Carter, who remains proof that a one-term president can mean more to politics and causes than any stagnant-ass Brylcreemed actor-turned-politician ever did.

[malinaldarose.livejournal.com]

I read on Fridays. I read all the time.

I don't have much to say about Reagan -- I was a teenager when he was president, and I haven't ever been really politically minded, until recently.

I graduated from high school in 1985, so I get a big kick out of the 80's remembrance shows (is that what you meant there?), just because, hey, I do remember that stuff, and I did enjoy some of those movies and that music.

[jack-mccoy-fan1.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the insightful entry. You spoke volumes and you speak for many here. I just hope that more people would speak their minds and remember those "good old days' weren't that great for us that were in the lower middle class. Screwed us over royally, but I digress. thanks again.

[football-swan.livejournal.com]

From what I understand, the President plans his (or one day, her) funeral shortly after the Inaugaration. A "just in case" deal.

Every President has fans and detractors. Reagan wasn't my favorite president - I've not lived long enough to have a favorite, ask me the day before I die. However, he, and 39 men before and three men hence, have had the courage to take on an office that I could never do myself. It's not much, but it's something everyone should remember.

[kk1raven.livejournal.com]

I agree. I am so sick of all this hoopla over Reagan. One of our city police officers died over the weekend in a shootout. He deserves to be mourned with much to-do. He died protecting us. He left a daughter who is not quite two. Reagan was 93. He lived a good long life. It was probably a kindness for him to die. Alzheimer's is not a nice thing to have. Even if I'd liked the things he did, I'm not sure I'd mourn much under those circumstances. When Carter dies, I will mourn. He may not have been good at being president, but he is a great man who does what he believes in instead of just talking about it.

[wyvernfriend.livejournal.com]

Hey, tho person to admire is the Irish Tenor who sang at the funeral, Ronan Tynan, A doctor who lost his legs at 20 due to a car accident! see http://www.theirishtenors.com/biographies/ronan.html

[dwivian]

I think Carter is very underrated as a President. His work in ending war in the Middle East was unprecidented, and I only wish that Mr. Arafat had continued to be worthy of his Nobel Peace Prize.

Reagan got credit, rightfully so, for turning around the economy by leaving money in the hands of consumers. If Congress had cut some spending, we'd never have seen the deficits, but then again, I'd have had no job in 1985, as I was a federal employee in a survey study job.... So, I guess I won't complain overmuch. :)

[nos4a2no9.livejournal.com]

Great points! You really cyrstalized a lot what I was thinking about the Regan circus. That Jimmy Carter comparison bugged the hell out of me too.

[fanagle.livejournal.com]

I would chime in with a "Hey I read this on Fridays!", but well, I read when I'm not dead tired, the day of the week is not an issue.

I can't say I'm sad about his dying. I mean, like you said, he was 93, lived a full life, and everybody dies. Yes, I'm callous when it comes to death of the elderly.

I am cautiously optimistic that this wont help Dubya's campaign, but that's my own naivete showing. I'm still hoping to wake up to find that his being president is a horrible, Pam-waking-up-to-Bobby-in-the-shower kind of a dream.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

I'm still hoping to wake up to find that his being president is a horrible, Pam-waking-up-to-Bobby-in-the-shower kind of a dream.

I wish...

[orfeo517.livejournal.com]

Amen, sistah! One of my best friends sent me this. Sorry about the length.

"Reagan's taxing legacy:

The Reaganomics doctrine that tax cuts would pay for themselves has caused
lasting damage, says William Keegan

Tuesday June 8, 2004

Amongst the BBC coverage of the death of the former US president Ronald
Reagan, there was an interesting item about the relationship between Reagan
and Margaret Thatcher.
We all know how much Mrs Thatcher admired Reagan and that, from the latter's
arrival in office in 1981, they formed a powerful mutual admiration society.

But one BBC correspondent recalled sitting on a haystack in California with
Reagan during a campaign interval in 1980, and learning how much - even
before he became president - he admired her.

Specifically, he said he wanted to emulate what she was doing by "getting
the government off the backs of the people".

A few years later, in an interview with the London Director magazine, Mrs
Thatcher told the late George Bull that her ambition was to transform the
British political scene and make the leading parties more like Republicans
and Democrats - implying a decisive and permanent shift of the centre of
gravity to the right.

Well, she certainly achieved a decisive shift. Whether it is permanent will
be for future historians to decide. For better or worse - and, in my
unfashionable view, it was for worse - Reagan and Thatcher made such an
impact on their respective societies that their names were given to
Reaganomics and Thatcherism.

The anti-government rhetoric of both leaders did a lot of damage to the very
concept of public service. In front of cabinet ministers and officials, Mrs
Thatcher used to rail against government as though she were an outsider from
another planet, not at the head of it.

And the anti-government rhetoric of both was overdone. Of course,
governments and officialdom have to be watched at every turn. But it is
impossible to run large democratic societies without a considerable degree
of government - the real point being that the emphasis should be on good
government, not no government.

There was a fundamental flaw at the heart of Reagonomics, namely the idea -
epitomised by the famous Laffer Curve - that tax cuts would pay for
themselves via greater incentives.

The truth was that the supply side doctrine was a crude and intellectually
shabby attempt to justify tax cuts for the rich. For those with incomes
above $250,000 (£135,879) a year, taxes as a percentage of income came down
from 48.6% to 38.9% between 1980 and 1984.

The way in which certain tax exemptions were removed actually led to a rise
in the proportion of income paid in tax by the lowest income groups. In most
of the eulogies for Reagan this week, all those cuts in government
expenditure on food stamps, school lunches, welfare Medicaid and subsidised
housing have been forgotten.

The great economist, John Kenneth Galbraith, put it in a nutshell when he
said there was something strange about a doctrine holding that the rich
would work harder if they had more money and the poor would if they had
less.

In Britain, Mrs Thatcher and her chancellor, Lord Lawson, also tried to
justify tax cuts as self-financing - with similar results to those in the
US.

But whatever one's left/right views about the distribution of income and tax
strategy, the lasting damage of Reaganomics was illustrated recently when
the sacked US treasury secretary, Paul O'Neill, revealed that Dick Cheney
told him Reagan had proved "deficits don't matter".

The present president's father ought to know that they do. After George Bush
senior had promised "Read my lips - no new taxes", he had to eat his words
and raise taxes when confronted with the deficits inherited from the Reagan
era.

The budgetary chickens have yet to come home to roost in his son's US.
Reaganomics never was quite what it seemed.

· William Keegan, from The Observer"

[dwivian]

William Keegan should do better research.

Net taxes gained by the government, in fact, DID rise during Reagan's administration, largely attributable to a shift in money usage (people weren't scheming to protect money, but to spread it around into areas where taxes could be gained). It takes almost NO work at all to find that online.

Tax rates fell from 90% to 38.9%. Realize that there was a point at which making more money was like making no money at all, leading to the idea of a limited salary but non-taxable benefits like corporate jets, cars, houses, golf memberships, and other shelters, again limiting the ability of the government to charge for use.

All weird tax laws do is change behaviour (thus taxes on vices like tobacco and alcohol). I will always believe in a proportional tax scheme over a progressive one, with a simple progressive shift in the basis to prevent taxing the poor, because everyone should bear an even responsibility for the even opportunity of our country.

The reason Bush-the-elder had to blink and raise taxes is he didn't have the kohones to do what Clinton did, and shut down Government to get a better budget. Deficits come from spending more than you have, not from taking in less. Ever since FDR there has been an expansion of per-capita spending, with the exception of Clinton's years. Bush-the-miniscule and his GOP congress is trying to correct that by spending even more to get us back on track. Idiots.

And, the rich DO work more at making money when they get to keep it. The poor do, too, if you require they work to get the money instead of give it to them with weirdly managed tax credits (it is possible to end up with a larger refund than you actually paid, making it welfare instead of a refund).

Reagan had his problems, but his economic policy moved America out of a recession. I remember the fuel lines under Carter, and all the gardens and government cheese necessary to make ends meet. The total GNP rose well under Reagan, though it couldn't self-sustain without Government rising to the challenge of reducing expenditures. Alas.....

Re: Amen.

[scarcrest.livejournal.com]

Jimmy Carter was not a great president -- he was too good, too decent, too moral a man to accomplish what needed to be accomplished at that time. However, those same qualities have made him quite possibly the greatest ex-president in America's history.

Reagan: He played a movie cowboy while millions died, sanctioned dictatorships and put us in debt. That's only marginally better than the idiot who's currently playing real-life cowboy in the oval office.

[dwivian]

Don't know if you saw it, but the lie that Reagan left AIDS out to dry has been answered:

"In a Congressional Research Service study titled AIDS Funding for Federal Government Programs: FY1981-FY1999, author Judith Johnson found that overall, the federal government spent $5.727 billion on AIDS under Ronald Reagan. This higher number reflects President Reagan's proposals as well as additional expenditures approved by Congress that he later signed." -- Deroy Murdock

Apparently Reagan proposed about $3 Billion across the end of his administration, which cooresponds to the time at which we started seeing AIDS as the crisis it was. The lesson from that delay has been applied to other health concerns, leading to early warning analysis and risk assessment, like the rapid response to West Nile and various Flu outbreaks.

[kelvinator.livejournal.com]

It's rants like these that give us - the ones inhabiting that scary country 'the rest of the world' - some hope that the US might be ok afterall. Just please don't elect Dubya again willya ...

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Thank you for the lovely compliment. And trust me, I'm doing what I can to stop that from happening -- which reminds me, I need to volunteer for Kerry's campaign.

[maida-mac.livejournal.com]

Bravo!

Beautifully written and you explained why the hoopla bothers you so much without dancing on Reagan's grave. That seems to be a rarity the past few days. As much as I didn't like the man or his presidency, some people's attitudes have been scaring me lately.

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

Thanks, hon!