The Death of Ronald Reagan

DO you want a leader whom is feared by your enemies or a Leader whom is ridiculed and held in contempt by your enemies?

Hmmm.... If I want to former, I'll vote Kerry... the Latter.. it's gotta be a vote for George!


On topic, you can yahoo/google
the Regan Library and sign the condolance book.

 

...the Latter.. it's gotta be a vote for George!

Yep. Considering I've never met a non-American who has had anything good to say about him...and I'm talking Europeans, not Bin Laden-type terrorists...I think it's time to vote him out.

 

You should read more books and study the international political process. Call it a hunch.

I can say the same to you.

Yep. Considering I've never met a non-American who has had anything good to say about him...and I'm talking Europeans, not Bin Laden-type terrorists...I think it's time to vote him out.

Why do you care about what other people outside of America think of him? He's not their president after all. They certainly don't vote for our president. Their opinion doesn't matter IMO.

 

Why do you care about what other people outside of America think of him? He's not their president after all. They certainly don't vote for our president. Their opinion doesn't matter IMO.

Yes, it certainly does matter, especially when everyone hates us and thinks we're imperialistic arrogant jerks. Is that the kind of impression we want to leave on the world?

Like it or not, we need other countries and their cooperation.

I don't think we should have to get the approval of every country in the world when we elect a leader--that would be impossible and ridiculous--however, the approval of some of the citizens of UN countries would be prudent in the spirit of cooperation. We in America need to learn that we are part of a planet and not an entity in and of ourselves. We are a good country, but we certainly need to keep in mind that we are far from perfect.

 

Vezner: At least Diz has shown a bit more respect than you did back then.

How is that? Because diz's post was shorter?

Seriously. Here's a better example than a political one. It is an artistic one:

Elvin Jones died last week. He was a jazz drummer. His life was full of sharing his soul through percussion. He died very old and after a long bout with a very painful illness. His work lives on through recordings and the influence he left on all of us drummers who heard him. I am all about this guy, really, and I am still glad he is dead.

You want to know why? Because I am glad that he lived. When one lives, death must always follow. Death just means your body leaves behind all of the consequences of the actions (energies) you took while in this world.

I agreee with the idea that our condolences should be directed to those who Ronnie left behind. (i.e. his loved ones)

But know this: Ronnie doesn't give a rat's a$$ what we think about him now, nor it is likely he has (cared what we, his adoring, or otherwise, fans) for the past few years, because he has had a hard enough time going to the bathroom and eating.

It is clear to me that, in your perspective, Vezner, one's political actions/opinions are more important than their humanity, and I am sorry to you for that because it must dampen your relationships with those who love you.

I am also sorry to you for the fact that you have lost an adored leader and powerful symbol of your beliefs. My sincerest condolences to you.

...however,

I also think that your beliefs associated with your memory if Ronnie are alive and well, and I know that Reagans ideologies all still in play in the US government. I am sorry for these things as well, but not only to you, but to all humanity who has, or ever will, suffer(ed) due to them.

 

We in America need to learn that we are part of a planet and not an entity in and of ourselves. We are a good country, but we certainly need to keep in mind that we are far from perfect.

Well I agree that we are not perfect and that the world does need to become a better place and all. However I don't think that countries who hate us should have any say in who we pick as our leader. I don't have a say in who they pick as theirs, so they shouldn't have a say in who we pick for ours.

Of course I think that dictator tyrants that rape, torture, and murder their citizens are a different story, but I doubt many people would argue with me there. Saddam had to go. Wouldn't you say?

 

Of course I think that dictator tyrants that rape, torture, and murder their citizens are a different story, but I doubt many people would argue with me there.

I wasn't talking about Saddam when I was saying other countries shouldn't hate us. I'm talking about other countries who have, up until recently, always cooperated with us and have been part of the UN.

Also, there are other dictators in the world who rape, torture and murder their citizens. There are tribal leaders in Africa who circumscise females on a regular basis. Why are we only doing something about Saddam?

And BTW, where the hell is Bin Laden? Are we going to find him on Halloween or what?

 

Vezner: Of course I think that dictator tyrants that rape, torture, and murder their citizens are a different story, but I doubt many people would argue with me there. Saddam had to go. Wouldn't you say?

This is what I would say:

They (innocent Iraqis) are still getting raped, murdered, and tortured, and the proof is in the pictures, my friends...

Now who do you think needs to go?

--------------------------------------------

And I know I'm way off topic, but I had to say it.

 

Yes, it certainly does matter, especially when everyone hates us and thinks we're imperialistic arrogant jerks.

huh..

There are many people who I know from other countries who like President Bush..

Oh well, I guess they don't matter.

Maybe it isn't accurate to use a single viewpoint to characterize how everyone thinks?

Although, I could have sworn that concern has been brought up before...

 

Mr44: Maybe it isn't accurate to use a single viewpoint to characterize how everyone thinks?

It seems you criticize the emotional tone (read: hyperbole) of the language that was being used, rather than the content.

Why don't you address the content, rather than the tone? I'm interested in your REAL response, thank you!

 

Garth, you know I'll answer anything you ask.

What exactly was the content of the statement in question?

 

Maybe it isn't accurate to use a single viewpoint to characterize how everyone thinks?

Although, I could have sworn that concern has been brought up before...

And this, fellow posters, is what we commonly term a "bait".

Garth: He's just trying to piss me off, that's all. Fortunately I have better things to do right now, so when this conversation comes back to a discussion of the topic at hand rather than a "Let's poke a_g and see if she yells, since we'd rather do that than actually discuss the topic", I'll return to it.

 

Of course I think that dictator tyrants that rape, torture, and murder their citizens are a different story

But I take it Vietnam was perfectly acceptable to you. Makes a lot of sense there. I'd also guess you're in support of Bush, Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft allowing all that to go on in Iraq. Yea, can you say hypocrite.

 

Be fair, Mr44, you have acknowledged there is less goodwill towards the US under the current President.

And for those out there wanting to make some remark, asisine or otherwise, I'm not casting judgement, just making an observation...

[pb]Vez[/b], I agree, you should read more and better books.

E_S

 

And I stand by that statement, E_S.

However, there is a world of difference between:

"some of Bush's policies have resulted in increased international criticism."

and

"Everyone I talk to hates Bush, so everyone must hate Bush."

One is a valid starting point to discuss specific policy, the other is simply a invalid conclusion.

How many times have you come in and posted "post hoc ego hoc" when someone draws an incorrect assumption?

Your main purpose isn't attacking the person, but to illustrate where their logic may have broken down.

If I were to come into a thread and hypothetically post "I know a lazy teacher, so all teachers muct be lazy."

I'm sure some hypothetical teacher would try and show me that my single example does not represent reality.

Just because I may know a lazy teacher, doesn't mean that all teachers are lazy.

I shouldn't take personal offense when someone points that fact out, that's how we learn.

 

Why is it almost every thread turns to bashing Bush at one stage or another?

Does anyone think the deifying of Reagan after his death reflects the negative perceptions of the state of the current presidency?

Are people longing for a prez like Reagan and rueing the way the incumbent is running things?

 

I shouldn't take personal offense when someone points that fact out, that's how we learn.

For the record, it was the way it was pointed out.

 

I hope that he can rest in peace.
He was an honorable man, who died in a terrible way.

I find it very disgusting that some of you are turning his death into a political arument. I am a Liberal, and a democrat but that does not mean that I will argue over whether Mr. Reagan did a great job as president. Whether I disagree with his policies or not, I think he was a good and honest man, and I feel very bad for the family, especially Nancy...she is indeed a great woman.

When I read the post by Triple B, or whatever his name is on the first page I became disgusted. His whole sun shining on the world speech. The former President did many good things and was a caring individual. I felt badly when I found out he died.

Why debate him?
Why point fingers at the opposite party?
He was an American President, and a good man.
May he rest in peace.

-Seldon

 

Are people longing for a prez like Reagan and rueing the way the incumbent is running things?

That's a good question, actually.

Certainly, Reagan was a statesman in a mold I don't think you could put many modern leaders in...

E_S

 

It didn't turn into a bashing-Bush thread--hell, someone was bashing Great Britain a few pages back.

I don't think anyone disputes that Reagan was a nice person or that he should rest in peace, however, I was under the impression that this thread was to discuss his impact on the world.

 

Why debate him?

Because I, for one, do not wish to see history re-written at such a politically critical time. You must realize that the media blitz surrounding Reagan's death is simply an attention grab towards Bush's campaign, added together with the whole D-Day thing, for two reasons:

Bush associates himself with Reagan very significantly

and

Bush wishes to paint the "need" for the war in Iraq to look just like (in retrospect, of course) WW2.

The timing could not have been more fortuitous for the Bushies.

 

As I said earlier, if you can be aware of his flaws as well, and still admire him as a leader, then you've touched upon the true strength of his character.

We shouldn't shy away from being aware, fully, of his place in history.

E_S

 

Actually, Schmader, Reagan should have waited to closer to November.

 

Well said, Ender_Sai.

 

ES: As I said earlier, if you can be aware of his flaws as well, and still admire him as a leader, then you've touched upon the true strength of his character.

I would actually argue that if you can do that you touching your own strength of character by being a more tolerant individual...but that's just me!