I really don't see how I made your points seem more relevant, but whatever.

I never said anything about a popularity contest. The "majority" of Americans TODAY feel nostalgic about Reagan and his passing, even kids who weren't even born yet. During his presidency, however, particularly during the Iran contra situation, he wasn't very popular and people were actually concerned. He had to even make an apologetic speech where he had to admit that he had lied and prior to that he was very unpopular. Despite this, what I said was that his policies and decisions did not positively affect everybody. Don't put words in my mouth.

Show me a lie.

"Ronald Reagan
I heard on the news this morning that he may have weeks maybe months left until he dies as his health has taken a really serious turn for the worst. CNN said The White House has confirmed this.... really sad the way he has lived the last 10 yrs of his life. 93 and has hung on this far is truly amazing."

This was the initial post and the title of this thread is simply Ronald Reagan. Some folks chose to remember him through praise, but that wasn't a requirement, as far as I can tell for posting in THIS thread. In any case, I felt compelled to respond to the posts that I did and in the manner that I did. End of story.

That may be true but there is a high school opening in Winston-Salem, NC in Fall 2005 named Ronald W. Reagan. I am guessing it will be the 2nd public school named after him unless another one opens before then.

1) You tried to sideline me by saying I didn't even live through Reagan's administration. I said I lived through his policies domestically and abroad. I wouldn't tell people their argument is irrelevant if they're young or didn't live in America during his administration but you would. Using that argument, the opposite has to hold that since I lived through it domestically and experienced it abroad, I can sideline you. But again, I wouldn't use your argument.

2) I didn't put words in your mouth. You said facts and figures don't matter, it's only how people feel in their hearts. I see that as a popularity contest. You can call it whatever. Semantics. In the end, you ignore the fact and figures.

3) When I said lies, I wasn't referencing you. Iwas talking about what Reds had posted.

4) Remember him how you wish. I don't try and take that from you. I respect your right to. In fact I didn't come onto the "ave" and call you all morons. People went on there calling Reagan supporters insulting names. Who are they? A bunch of losers. People came on seriously attacking Reagan. So what? Did I even respond to the girl who knew nothing about economics and was posting about what works and doesn't? No. I left it be. I switched the channel. I respected the other side's opinions and didn't even come on to insult or to correct anyone.

-Rudey

"Yeah that's right, I banned ChaosDST. I liked it too. Now what?"

Are you serious about this?

No. I think it's funny. You know better. I'm not even a moderator let alone an administrator.

-Rudey

Calm down you guys!!! CD!!! The man hasn't begun to have the worms work through his veins...

No really, the fact is and I am just gonna put it out here, many African Americans did not like Ronald Reagan from the days Reagan was Governor of California.

There was a shoot out between the Black Panthers and the Cops and Reagan side stepped the issue. This happened in 1972?

Ever since then there were many of those in the 'hood that did not like Reagan. And it got worse after he became president...

Ironically, even though Reagan cut social programs in the 80s, and did not like the idea of affirmative action, some of his leading programs and initiatives in the the sciences included serving underserved populations, which at the time were more African American than immigrant. The influx of immigration did not become a hot topic until the mid 80's and even then, most of those folks did not vote...

It only became relevant after 1992 Rodney King Verdict and LA riots...

Also, Reagan signed MLK Day into law. And that may be a small consolation for the whole schema of things, but it did bring into the foray a slough of persons of color within the Republican party--namely, Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice and Clarence Thomas...

So in some respects he started the elimination of not "pigeon holeing" folks into neat little boxes that one can mark for one's racial identity...

However, the rich got richer and the poor poorer and many po' folks were persons of color... So that just made matters worse.

By the time GHB became president, racial politics was about to burst, then in 1991, Rodney King happened...

That was what was going on at the time from a real time perspective...

When did the Rap Group N.W.A. visit the president?

are you kidding??
 

And this wasn't an unnecessary and unwarranted comment on the poster rather than the material posted?

Mr. Reagan
 

I too can see the pros and the cons of his presidency, but I would like to take a moment to express my sincerest condolences to his family and all the people who cared for him in his final years. I know firsthand what it's like to care for someone with a terminal illness. I saw my grandmother die of Alzheimer's last year and only a few short months later, my Great Aunt (also my Godmother) whom I was very close to died of cancer. These women were sisters. It is a stressful experience for anyone!

Mr. Reagan, may you rest in peace.

As President Reagan is laid to rest, let us remember him:

(Four 'Ruffles and Flourishes')

Hail to the Chief we have chosen for the nation,
Hail to the Chief! We salute him, one and all.
Hail to the Chief, as we pledge cooperation
In proud fulfillment of a great, noble call.

Yours is the aim to make this grand country grander,
This you will do, That's our strong, firm belief.
Hail to the one we selected as commander,
Hail to the President! Hail to the Chief!

(Yes, these ARE the lyrics to 'Hail to the Chief'; it's been the Presidential entrance song since 1815. More info at http://www.marineband.usmc.mil/abt_tl_1828_more.html)

Reagan's government spent almost 6 billion on AIDS research. It would seem to me that the assertion that he just let people die is a myth. If anyone remembers that far back (okay, I was like 5, but I watch the History Channel:p ) we didn't even have a name for it at first. No one knew what it was. I've seen news footage where someone with "GRID" had a car wreck and there was blood on the ground, so HAZMAT was called!

Yes, there were (and are) depictions of Ronnie in the media that show him being darth-vaderesque in his approach to gays and AIDS. On that fairly recent CBS special written by Frank Gifford and later showed on Showtime, it had Mr Reagan saying "If you live in sin, you should die in sin" (or something to that effect) when Nancy was trying to convince him to do something about AIDS. And outright, complete, total fabrication.

The truth is that since the disease was discovered in 1982, Reagan gave it a fairly large amount of funding (considering the fact that at the beginning, the disease was not widespread and not very well known). During his administration, 5.727 BILLION dollars were spent on AIDS research. In 1986, he put AIDS In February 1986, President Reagan's blueprint for the next fiscal year stated: "[T]his budget provides funds for maintaining — and in some cases expanding — high priority programs in crucial areas of national interest…including drug enforcement, AIDS research, the space program, nonmilitary research and national security."

In 1989, he had ratcheted the AIDS budget up to 2.32 Billion dollars. I think Frank Gifford's CBS special on Reagan is a good example of why we shouldn't believe everything we see on TV.

The Reagan Administration, between 1982 and 1989, spent $5.727 billion on HIV/AIDS.

I have played this song more times than you can imagine and never once did I know that it had words. Much less did I know what the words were. Thanks!

Thanks moe.ron and ktsnake for posting the amount the Reagan administration spent on AIDS research. I thought it was around $6 billion but wasn't really sure where I had heard that.

Quickly, regarding Reagan and AIDS research.

According to a former high ranking aide (wish I could remember who it was and where I heard it) pointed out that Reagan didn't object to putting money into AIDS research -- it simply wasn't on his radar screen until a hollywood friend (you can speculate who) died of the disease and the President asked the White House Physician to explain it to him.

Then he began funding.

Basically he did something but people said he didn't. Then when they see he did, he did something but not enough.

What would have been enough?

Would someone else have done more? Let's look at Carter who commanded the largest Christian movement - would he have?

How new was this disease? How much was known about it?

People picked AIDS. Why didn't they pick Alzheimers? Reagan didn't do enough to help out alzheimers. He didn't do enough to help out people with the common cold.

-Rudey