Reagan-Haters: Bitterness and Hate from the Left

[valkyrie]

Originally posted by Munchkin03
Why you gotta bring LUDACRIS into this?

I got HOES!

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally posted by valkyrie
I got HOES!

In different area codes, area codes...

HOES HOES HOES!

[AlphaSigOU]

Originally posted by Munchkin03
The 1980s AIDS discussions in the government were the work of C. Everett Koop.

Not only was he Surgeon General of the United States, but he is an Alpha Sigma Phi (Dartmouth chapter).

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Pike1483
I'll be the first to admit that I'm a bad speller. That's why I'm a chemistry major, not an English one.

What more do you think Reagan should have done with the AIDS crisis?

Okay, I'm going to double post this, but it's relevant in both threads.

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) 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.

[Munchkin03]

Originally posted by ktsnake

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.

That's funny...I've never seen that TV movie. In fact, I don't really watch much network TV, other than the news. I don't base my historical and political views on TV specials--that should be obvious at this point. If that's what you were trying to insinuate, well, bully on you.

Reagan's administration did as much as they could at that time--and a lot of the major push to even discuss the disease was because of Dr. Koop. Koop, not Reagan, deserves that credit. I'm sure that's true for any Surgeon General, regardless of political position and administration--in the way that he informs the administration on certain health issues that need to be discussed. The question wasn't "how much," it was "why so late." By the time that Reagan delivered his first speech on the AIDS crisis (it was AIDS by that point, not gay cancer or GRID), it was in response to the fact that much of "middle America" was becoming affected more and more.

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by ktsnake
Okay, I'm going to double post this, but it's relevant in both threads.

If anyone remembers that far back (okay, I was like 5, but I watch the History Channel) we didn't even have a name for it at first. No one knew what it was.

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.

I remember that far back pretty well. Hell, I televised the 1980 Republican Convention from Detroit when I worked there.

AIDS wasn't on anyone's radar scope back then. Nobody had even heard of it.

As I posted on another thread, Reagan didn't even know what it was until one of his Hollywood friends died of it and he asked the White House Physician about it according to one of his top aides at the time.

While there are a number of things Ronald Reagan can be taken to task for, I don't think this is one of them. Six Billion Dollars doesn't seem like much in today's government spending -- but it was pretty substantial then.

Remember, the US budget used to be counted in Billions -- not Trillions.

[Pike1483]

I agree that Reagan did all he could to combat AIDS, especially when there was so little known about it. The fact is, it was gonna spread no matter who was President, and a cure hasn't been found yet and it's 2004.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Pike1483
I agree that Reagan did all he could to combat AIDS, especially when there was so little known about it. The fact is, it was gonna spread no matter who was President, and a cure hasn't been found yet and it's 2004.

What gets me is that 'news' and propaganda sources that are just a bit left of center have been spreading the lie that he ignored the AIDS epidemic. And other complete and outright lies -- this is right after the man died by the way. Did anyone watch that joke of a TV special that Frank Gifford produced for CBS?

[DeltAlum]

The only place I've heard the AIDS debate is from a caller (as oppossed to a guest or host) on NPR's "Talk of the Nation." The host and guest pretty well explained that Reagan simply wasn't aware of the disease at first.

As has been mentioned above, it's important to remember the historical context and basic ignorance (even in the medical community to some extent) of AIDS in the early 80's.