BS: Reagan Rapture!

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: beadie
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 04:07 PM

Too true.

Unfortunately, it seems like there are more "gullible" voters than "informed" voters in most elections for higher office than dog-catcher.

This time around, I only hope that the "scared s***less" voters outnumber the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 04:10 PM

How did Reagan ever get to be President when, on the evidence of this and the other Reagan thread, seemingly no-one voted for him? Or is it a case of selective amnesia? (LOL) :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Deckman
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 04:13 PM

Strolling Johnny ... Damned good question. I think the answer lies more with the uninformed voters than with the credentials of the elected. Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST, Pope Pious X
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 04:40 PM

That's a no-brainer. People didn't know he was going to be such a shit until after he was elected. And, to anticipate your next brilliant observation, he got his second term because a wanker was run against him.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Bill Hahn//\\
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 05:04 PM

"Wanker"--perfect--is that not the maiden name of Al Bundy's wife in Married with Children? Ah the symbolism.

I was delighted that there was one radio program today, at least, that had a pro and a con opinion of Reagan---and the callers, in the majority agreed with the person representing the "con" view of The Great Communicater---or, rather, The Great Glimmo of Smoke and Mirror fame.

Bill Hahn

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 06:53 PM

I did hear a bit of a mixed review as three women gave rememberances on All Things Considered, but they're softpedalling most of it.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Jun 04 - 06:56 PM

Excellent, Teresa. As a child, Ender Wiggens, thinking he was playing a computer game, was duped into killing an entire species. He becomes Speaker for the Dead. He gives funeral orations. But he doesn't tell you what you want to hear. He tells you what you need to know.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: saulgoldie
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 01:01 PM

Justa note of thanks, and I didn't want to start a whole nother thread. Between many institutions closing down here in the DC area and the non-stop almost unchallenged love fest--is "haliography" the right word?--I have been feeling a lot like a sane person in a world that is an mental asylum.

However, through emails from a few friends and family and several threads here on Mudcat, I have been reassured that I am not alone. Yes, there is much bellyaching about BS threads and whether they are a legitimate part of this forum. I insist that they are, and this is a perfect reason.

So thanks to many of you 'Catters who have reminded me that my memory of Reagan was real and that I am not alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 01:29 PM

Hagiography--writing the life of a saint.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 01:44 PM

Bill D- I quote historians from mainstream publications like Time and Newsweek magazine.   Vast consensus puts Reagan in the top tier of presidents.   The american public voted him the greatest president every, but what do they know?   

I think 15 years (since he was president) is enough time to wait to review his legacy.    History in that period has been very kind to Reagan.    As stated earlier, he only averaged a 53% approoval rating while in office.   His legacy has grown with each passing year.   I think people admire his firm stance on issues and history (no matter how hard liberals try to rewrite the 80's)has proven Reagan to be a great president.

TV ratings for his funeral are up 30%.   Contrast this to Iraq prison stories which were force fed to the public for weeks straigt despite 15%-20% lower ratings.   No wonder the mainstream media is losing viewers.   The "real America" gets it and loved Reagan.

Someone above compared lines of the Lenin funeral to the Reagan funeral.   Are you comparing the USSR (who were forced to attend the funeral or risk being shot) to the people of the USA who voluntarily are waiting 10 hours to pay their respect?    My guess is that is only wishful thinking on your part.    If only Socialism would have worked we could push it in this country.   My mistake- we already are.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 01:51 PM

ABout half of the people in the United States, given a choice, will choose badly, as has been shown time and time again. Carter, Reagan and Bush fils are all paradigmatic examples of this.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Nerd
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 02:03 PM

Uh, Amos, do you mean we should have elected Ford instead of Carter? You lost me on that one...

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 02:08 PM

Reagan's popularity has risen over time for the same reason Kennedy's popularity has risen over time--nostalgia for the past, and selective memory on the part of the public. That is universal. Reagan is showing huge poll numbers now because he just died, and the media hype has been enormous. And among tv news networks, the picture being painted is incredibly distorted in a way that the print media response to his death hasn't been. But most people don't take the time that some of us do, to read the Washington Post, the NY & LA Times, the Boston Globe, etc. for a balancing of the distortions of tv news.

It really is that simple. Reagan isn't wildly popular today because of him being great. He is just the current focus of our attention.

A couple of weeks ago, it was American Idol.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 02:10 PM

I dunno about that -- they were a pair of fumblers. Carter has done many good things since his presidency, and I mean no disrespect but I believe he was a bit ineffectual while on the post. I guess Ford being chosen in the primaries was inevitable, but surely the Demos could have come up with someone better than Jimmy. Thanks for blowing the whistle, though, I was writing faster than I was thinking, and ended up offsides as a result! :>)



A

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 03:41 PM

As to Reagan being the Supreme Cold Warrior Commander in Chief heroicizing going on in the American tv media, here are some excerpts from bit more objective interpretation, in today's Globe and Mail:

By LAWRENCE MARTIN
Thursday, June 10, 2004 - Page A23

Fiction has its place -- especially at the time of one's passing...It was his arms buildup, Republican admirers say, and his menacing rhetoric that brought the Soviets to their knees and changed the world forever...Truth be known, however, the Iron Curtain's collapse was hardly Ronald Reagan's doing.

It was Mikhail Gorbachev, who with a sweeping democratic revolution at home and one peace initiative after another abroad, backed the Gipper into a corner, leaving him little choice -- actors don't like to be upstaged -- but to concede there was a whole new world opening up over there.

As a journalist based first in Washington, then in Moscow, I was fortunate to witness the intriguing drama from both ends.

In R.R., the Soviet leader knew he was dealing with an archetype Cold Warrior. To bring him around to "new thinking" would require a rather wondrous set of works. And so the Gorbachev charm offensive began. The first offering, in 1985, was the Kremlin's unilateral moratorium on nuclear tests. "Propaganda!" the White House declared.

Then Mr. Gorbachev announced a grandiose plan to rid the world of nuclear weapons by 2000. Just another hoax, the Reagan men cried. More Commie flim-flam.

Then came another concession -- Kremlin permission for on-site arms inspections on Soviet land -- and then the Reykjavik summit. In Iceland, Mr. Gorbachev put his far-reaching arms-reduction package on the table and Mr. Reagan, to global condemnation, walked away, offering nothing in return.

Glasnost and perestroika became the new vernacular. For those in the White House like Richard Perle, the prince of darkness who still thought it was all a sham, Gorby now began a withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan. He released the dissident icon Andrei Sakharov and hundreds of other political prisoners. He made big strides on freedom of the press, immigration and religion. He told East European leaders that the massive Soviet military machine would no longer prop up their creaking dictatorships. He began the process of something unheard of in Soviet history -- democratic elections.

By now, the U.S. administration was reeling. Polls were beginning to show that, of all things unimaginable, a Soviet leader was the greatest force for world peace. An embarrassed Mr. Reagan finally responded in kind. Nearing the end of his presidency, he came to Moscow and he signed a major arms-control agreement and warmly embraced Mr. Gorbachev. A journalist asked the president if he still thought it was the evil empire. "No," he replied, "I was talking about another time, another era."

Full story can be read here:

"Gorby had the lead role, not Gipper"

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Deckman
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 05:41 PM

I've been reading this thread frequantly ... after all, I started it! My perception of the whole thing, as already captured by some, is this: Us Americans are looking for a hero. We've had a few, even recently. JFK comes to mind, for one.

There is no doubt that the late R. Reagan was very popular. Whether or not he deserves that popularity is just a matter of opinion. And like most things on the internet, I always value my opinion more than your opinion.

It's always sad when someone dies. But here, I think that R. Reagan is perhaps a symbol of our lost heros. Many, perhaps most of us, are truly struggling with what our country has done in Iraq.

To be able to submerge ourselves in some kind of 'grief' for R. Reagan's passing is maybe salve for our souls. I 'dunno! Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 06:00 PM

well, Larry K., in between all the glorious rhetoric all week, I have been hearing well-respected journalists (like the one just noted above) say about the same thing. Reagan was a charming ideologe--but he did NOT have a command of the issues and implications...not NEARLY as much as Clinton did..(whether you like Clinton or not!)

You have to read some of those articles VERY closely...saying he will be remembered and 'thought of' as great is not the same as saying he WAS great.

I saw an interview with some guy in line for the homage who had driven down from Pennsylvania. When asked what he admired about Ronnie, he said it was his 'charisma, character and optimism' and that "he made us feel good about ourselves"...NOT that his policies were effective...etc.
I gotta grant what the guy said, Ronnie had a way of putting a good face on things and smiling disarmingly as he raised my taxes and spent money like there was no tomorrow....and sadly, that is all it takes to sway a lot of folks these days who don't study issues, but go with image and smoke & mirrors.

   It's REALLY hard to say bad things about a guy who waves & smiles like that, so even his critics often feel awkward pointing out that such a sweet, charming Emperor has no clothes.

We shall see what history ultimately says once the hoopla is over.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Greg F.
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 06:48 PM

Hero, Deckman? Where's the difference worth the name between Iran/Contra, Grenada, the October Surprise & the current Iraq debacle?

Pretty poor choice for hero status.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 07:20 PM

Please don't include me among the Americans seeking nationalist heros, or to buy into the nationalist mythologizing currently playing itself out on national television like a Spielberg movie.

A couple of things, Deckman. First, I believe you when you say you long for American heroes. But what you perhaps don't understand, is not all of us are looking for heroes to worship and admire, either on a personal level, a celebrity level, or a nationalist level.

Some of us just don't need or want to play that game. I understand there are many who say they NEED heroes, but they don't really. What is truer and more accurate is that they WANT AND DESIRE the emotional gratification they get from the psychological fix of identifying with and playing out these nationalist dramas. It is very seductive for those who feel little to no connection to a community beyond themselves, their friends, their families, and their co-workers.

If we live an honorable and decent life of integrity ourselves, take some reasonable risks at doing things we love, make the concerted effort to climb out of the safety of our social shells and be a contributing member of one or more communities that exist beyond our personal spheres, then there is no need to play these psychological games, and people aren't as easily preyed upon by politicians, ideologues, advertisers, religious zealots, etc. who easily manipulate our emotions, increase our wants and desires by giving us what we think we need and must have, because we let them.

Why do we allow ourselves to be manipulated by these sorts of fairy tale nationalist dramas? Because it is much easier than doing the hard work of living a life of passion, meaning, and integrity. It is easier to stand in line in sweltering heat for untold hours, to be able to get the little Reagan remembrance card to prove "I was part of the nationalist drama as it unfolded--I was a PLAYER on the stage".

There is an interesting article about this phenomenon of public mourning for national figures, celebrities, notorious persons, etc. in today's NY Times here:

"Good Grief: The Appeal of Public Sorrow"

I keep hearing again and again when the mourners are asked what was so great about Reagan, or what made him such a great leader, they all respond, when you strip their inarticulate wordiness down, to this: he made ME feel good. That is and isn't a recommendation for what we should look for in our political leaders.

One thing I work with teenagers on year in and year out, are biography research projects on famous people. Inevitably, they start out thinking that Gandhi was a religious leader, and Martin Luther King was a political leader. Ironic, that. But it does speak to the national mythologizing we do, especially when we conflate nationalist and religious myths. It is something we do all the time, and teach that to our children through the media, through our holidays, and through our rituals of mourning and memorializing famous people.

There is one group in particular that is easily seduced by this sort of mythologizing and dramatization of events like this, regardless of their race, class, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation: culturally conservative types who are comforted by the myths of a strong national patriarchy, be it political, religious, or military.

Just my .02 worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Big Mick
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 07:32 PM

Does your honor and integrity include the language and accusations you have made elsewhere, GUEST? I know many people of honor and integrity. They don't use the kind of sexual innuendo and language you do.

I find this whole Reagan Rapture business to be an accurate description of what is going on. Typical of a media created kind of thing, and seconded by the Reaganites. Fact is that this man, in the long view, will be remembered as being an also ran among the great Presidents. It is true that he communicated well, and even among his adversaries he was known as a nice fellow. But when the history is written he will be remembered for creating some of the greatest deficits in history, and for Iran Contra. The bunk about his ending the Cold War is just that. He was a player, to be sure. But what he really was was a closer. The Cold War ended because the Soviet Union was built on an economic house of cards. I will give him credit for some fair moves in the end game, but the outcome was predetermined.

I find the hoopla and short memory of my fellow Yanks to be very disturbing.

Mick

P.S. GUEST, I know you will think I am just stalking you, but I just happened to read the thread. Honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 07:58 PM

Well, I'm beginning to think that the RNC should be footing the bill for a share of this extravaganza which is quickly becoming a daily nonstop political ad... I reckon if one were to add up the TV time and actual costs for this circle jerk one could certianly fund the "No Child Left Behind" legislation that Bush signed into law but won't write the checks to pay for it... And I reckon a few hospitals could be built with the left over change...

Wonder if we'd be seeing such a circus if it was Jimmy Carter?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:06 PM

Guest and Big Mick are both absolutely right in my estimation. Reagan happened to be in the White House when Gorbachev ended the Cold War. Gorbachev was a great man, Reagan was an opportunist.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST,Desdemona
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:06 PM

All I can say is, they did the same thing to Nixon (ie, retroactively bestowing a halo simply because the man got old, sick and then died!), so can we really be surprised??

It was awfully obliging of Ronnie to finally pop off ("Ronald Reagan has Alzheimer's", the single most anticlimactic "news" story of the 20th century...to quote Austin Powers: "and Liberace was gay; I never saw that one coming!") just when the Republicans are so covered in shite in an election year that ANYTHING will do to boost morale, even if it's just the reinvention of a warmongering conservative whose "effectiveness" is measured by his ability to spend millions of tax dollars in the arms race.

Yeesh. For my part, I'll be glad when it's all over & the wee little communal attention span of what appears to be the vast majority of my countrymen can return to whatever happens to be the mind-numbing reality TV show of the moment.

D

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST,Art Thieme
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:17 PM

Here is an ironic little sound bite from ol' Art that fits this me thinks:

Even a dead whale on a flatcar draws crowds.

Art

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:17 PM

"I reckon if one were to add up the TV time and actual costs for this circle jerk one could certianly fund the "No Child Left Behind" legislation that Bush signed into law but won't write the checks to pay for it..."

Excellent one there Bobert!!! You gave me a belly laugh with that one.

I think it is also legitimate to call this sort of three ring circus "public mourning period" a la Princess Di, "recreational grieving". I stole that one from the Brits. Here, read this excerpt from a British website I ripped off, and put in the appropriate Americanisms to make it fit. It will make you feel better, and bring that blood pressure down:

"America is suffering a severe bout of "mourning sickness", a collective condition characterised by ostentatious, recreational grieving for dead celebrities and murder victims.

The nation has replaced the social ties of church and family with the rites of conspicuous compassion - mounds of rotting flowers and sodden teddy bears and the "lapel loutism" of empathy ribbons. This unflattering portrait of British (ed: and American! we need it too!) society is offered in a new booklet published by the think tank Civitas, the Institute for the Study of Civil Society. Patrick West, a freelance writer and author of the 80-page polemic, argues that cynical and selfish motives lie at the root of all recent public displays of grief. "To today's collective 'carers', the fate of the homeless, starving Africans or dead celebrities is not actually of principal importance," West writes. "What really drives their behaviour is the need to be seen to care. And they want to be seen displaying compassion because they want to be loved themselves."

West identifies the emergence of mass mourning for people we do not know as a late 20th-century trend. Following the Hungerford shootings of 1987, when Michael Ryan killed 16 people, there was no national outpouring of sympathy. The Hillsborough football disaster of 1989 saw public grief largely localised on Merseyside, where most of the 95 dead had lived.

But by 1996, the murders of 16 children in a primary school in Dunblane brought a stream of politicians and a flood of cards and flowers to the Scottish town. The death of Diana, Princess of Wales, the next year produced "ghoulish" displays of weeping and countless bouquets of flowers were piled up outside Kensington Palace.

West writes: "It was not surprising that the mood of ostentatious caring ran so high at this time. Diana was herself an icon of conspicuous compassion. . . She was a professional 'victim' - of infidelity and eating disorders - and wore her heart on her sleeve." Further mass displays of grieving followed the death of Linda McCartney, wife of former Beatle Sir Paul and the murder of television presenter Jill Dando. This "grief lite" was, says West, "an enjoyable event" for many, much like going to a sports event or concert.

Yet the spread of shows of compassion have not been accompanied by a growth in charitable giving. Between 1995 and 1999, donations to good causes dropped 31 per cent. West says the phenomenon reached a "fearsome" peak in August 2002 when thousands of "grief tourists" descended on the Cambridgeshire town of Soham to leave flowers and cuddly toys in memory of the murdered schoolgirls Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman.

On the anniversary of the murders the girls' families asked people to stay away. The appeal may not have been necessary, because the compassion caravan has a tendency to move on quickly.

West says: "Today Diana is a mostly forgotten individual. Judging by the 'outpourings of grief' in late 1997, one would have thought her memory would have remained etched on the public's consciousness.

"Yet on the fifth anniversary of her death, the gardens of Althorp and Kensington Palace were deserted . . . The public had moved on. They were now too busy 'never forgetting' other people."

______________________________________


Ya know--those lines at the Capitol sure look like a bunch of those 'grief tourists' in DC on summer vacation, don't they? And they don't seem so sad at all. It looks like kind of a party atmosphere, doesn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: beadie
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:24 PM

A friend of mine who was visiting in Australia during the 1984 campaign tells me that the Aussies were incredulous that we would even consider electing a President who so obviously had dementia.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Deckman
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 08:56 PM

To "GUEST". I'll make this brief and hopefully very clear. I have decided that I will NEVER RESPOND to any comments by anyone who signs in just as a "guest." This also means that I will not even read any threads opened up by a "guest." Have a good life. Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 09:07 PM

Hmmmm. Could it be the "recreational grieving" label fits you too well, Deckman?

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 09:11 PM

What an interesting and sardonic article!! But I think there is some truth to it.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 09:29 PM

There's more than just that one. The essay that is being referred to was published last February in the UK, is called 'Conspicuous Compassion: why sometimes it really is cruel to be kind, ' by Patrick West, written on behalf of the UK think-tank Civitas - the Institute for the Study of Civil Society.

The author asserts that cynical and selfish motives lie at the root of all recent public displays of grief. The press release at the Civitas website can be found here:

http://www.civitas.org.uk/hwu/prcs34.php

We live in an age of conspicuous compassion. We sport empathy ribbons, send flowers to recently deceased celebrities, weep in public over murdered children, apologize for historical misdemeanors, wear red noses for the starving, go on demonstrations to proclaim 'Drop the Debt' or 'Not in My Name.'

We feel each other's pain. We desperately seek a common identity and new social bonds to replace those that have withered in the post-war era - the family, the church, the nation and neighborhood. Mourning sickness is a religion for the lonely crowd that no longer subscribes to orthodox churches. Its flowers and teddies are its rites, its collective minutes' silences its liturgy and mass.

This book's thesis is that such displays of empathy do not change the world for the better: they do not help the poor, diseased, dispossessed or bereaved. Our culture of ostentatious caring is about projecting your ego, and informing others what a deeply caring individual you are. It is about feeling good, not doing good, and illustrates not how altruistic we have become, but how selfish. And, as Patrick West shows in this witty but incisive monograph, sometimes it can be cruel.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 10 Jun 04 - 11:34 PM

Just a reminder for those who haven't bothered to go back to the first post. Deckman said:

Just now at the supper table, I think I invented a new phrase: "Reagan Rapture." At least I don't remember hearing it any where else.

I explained to "Bride Judy" that us folks in America are so hungry to find a president to look up to, to admire, that we'll even try to reserect, or claim, admirable qualities that are quite questionable.

The clue to where Bob is coming from is that phrase "claim admirable qualities that are quite questionable." Americans without a real good grip on history are a phalanx, lining up behind the mavens of right-wing rhetoric. It's like mass hypnosis. There's an inability to evaluate what happened over the years Reagan was in office--the hollywood glow and charisma have blinded them.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Deckman
Date: 11 Jun 04 - 12:19 AM

SRS ... well said. Bob

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: beadie
Date: 11 Jun 04 - 10:48 AM

Some posts back, our esteemed Guest opined that the public's opinion of all presidents has a tendency to rise with the passage of time. Absence may, indeed, cause the heart to grow fonder in some cases, but I am suspicious that this is not always the case in the public arena. Aside from the events and speeches immediately surrounding the funereal ceremonies of his death, Mr. Nixon has not seemed to gain a whole lot of stature from that which he had at the time of his resignation. More recently, how many critics have softened their disdain of Mr. Clinton. Guest seems to imply that Mr. Kennedy's stock has risen in the four decades since his passing. To the contrary, I think. The 70% average approval rate reported by Gallup during his term is likely substantially above what might be currently polled in light of recent revelations of his deceit about numerous things (his health, his family life, foreign policy decisions).

All in all, though, the "fog of time" effect on the country's recollection may just be another indicator of how much we, as a people, never quite lose our hatred of the study of history.

Its so irritating when those pesky facts intrude on our blissful memories and reverie.

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Jun 04 - 11:29 AM

Larry K--

Your "observations" are such an easy target, it's pathetic. --" The public voted him the greated (sic) president in history (per time (sic) magazine)"   Better than Washington, Lincoln, FDR?   We should take this seriously?

I suspect this Time quote is taken from the Feb 2001 Gallup poll on the subject. From a Wall St. Journal column recently:   "When the firm (Gallup) asked the same question in May 2003, 51% of respondents named a post-1960 president. Among Democrats, 46% picked either John F. Kennedy or Bill Clinton, while 41% of Republicans chose either Mr. Reagan or George W. Bush." As the column puts it: "Whatever the merits of these four men, it seems premature at best to declare them greater than the likes of Washington and Lincoln".

Subject: RE: BS: Reagan Rapture!
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Jul 04 - 11:01 AM

Collective Amnesia or Collective Alzheimer's: America 'Remembers' Ronald Reagan
by Paul Douglas Newman

To remember Ronald Reagan as one of the greatest Presidents of the twentieth century, to replace FDR on the dime with Reagan's profile as Republicans wish to do, we are being asked to forget too much. We are asked to forget Lebanon, where Reagan decided to "cut and run" after hundreds of Marines perished when a suicide bomber invaded their compound. We are asked to forget the arms for hostages deal. We are asked to forget El Salvador, where the right wing ARENA, armed with Reagan money, Reagan weapons, and Reagan military training from the School of the America's at Fort Benning, Georgia slaughtered more than 80,000 civilians in the "War on Communism."

We are asked to forget the Iran-Contra Scandal, an event that he evidently "could not recall" in response to more than one hundred questions during the Congressional hearings. We are asked to forget the groundwork laid for nuclear disarmament by Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Nixon. We are asked to forget the Strategic Arms Limitations Treaties I and II.

We are asked to forget the re-freezing of the Cold War following the Nixon thaw, when Reagan bellicosely denounced the Soviets as the "Evil Empire," and then joked on his weekly radio address that our missiles were ready to launch. We are asked to forget the silly invasion of Grenada following the Lebanon disaster, and the reversal of goodwill gestures made to the Caribbean made by previous administrations, including the return of the Panama Canal. We are asked to forget the Soviet Union's internal move to Perestroika, a groundswell that occurred over decades resulting in a generation of new Communists by 1985 who were not manufactured by Reagan's bravado, but were products of the "Evil Empire."

We are asked to forget that Reagan presided over the worst recession since the Great Depression. We are asked to forget the enormous cuts to social welfare programs and the Veterans Administration, moves that led to such an enormous rise in the homeless population, especially evident on the streets of Washington, D.C., that even comedians felt that they had to do something to stop the bleeding with "Comic Relief." We are asked to forget the policies that enriched agri-business at the expense of small farmers, continuing the decline of the family farm to the point that recording artists were the only ones left to uphold the Populists' mantle with "Farm-Aid."

We are asked to forget that he slashed taxes for the wealthiest, raised taxes on the poor, and then bailed out the corrupt Savings and Loan industry at taxpayer expense. We are asked to forget that his SEC presided over such a corrupt and over-inflated stock market that the Dow saw the largest one-day crash in its history, greater than in 1929. We are asked to forget that Reagan's economic policies effected a reversal in the trend toward greater distribution of wealth begun by Progressive Republican, Democratic, and Socialist politicians in the early twentieth centuries, and have led us to the greatest concentration of wealth today since the days of Andrew Carnegie and James Pierpont Morgan.

We are asked to forget the enormous and outrageous military contracts, for which American taxpayers paid hundreds of dollars for nuts, bolts, and toilet seats, and the nation saw defense-spending rise to astronomical heights. We are asked to forget the Reagan Administration's opposition to the Civil Rights movement, their blocking of busing programs and cuts to Head Start meant to bring equality of opportunity to American education. We are asked to forget that Reagan considered ketchup to be a vegetable in federal school lunch programs.

We are asked to forget "government cheese." We are asked to forget jelly beans, splitting wood, bad b-movies, McCarthy-ite participation in Hollywood blacklisting.
We are asked to forget our history.

Full article at http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0607-10.htm
…Paul Douglas Newman is Associate Professor of American History at the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown, PA