An alternative account of the Reagan death
This is a tad frothy at the mouth, but it goes to show that Ronald Reagan was by no means the wonderful president everyone is gushing about post-mortem. In fact, he was a terrible president who ended up showing GW Bush all there is to know about running a country into the ground.
I know it's a campaign necessity, but it saddens me that Kerry feels obligated to pay tribute to the B-movie creep. Senator Kerry, rest assured Bush isn't taking a break for a week from gathering money for his "war chest." Perhaps you might think about taking the same approach.
Comments
Hey man - Give the guy a break...he is dead after all...and suffered 10+ years of alzheimers. Maybe he was a good president, maybe not but even if you did things that others didn't agree with during your life (an impossibility I know ;) wouldn't you want to have people pay their respects to you and your family when you passed on? Just because Bush is not going to take a break from "gathering money for his "war chest." doesn't mean that is the right approach....and anyway he is giving a ulogoy as is his father. OK I am done on my soap box...almost. Your karma will be better if you respect the dead and ignore politics.
Posted by: Michelle | June 8, 2004 7:49 PM
You're definitely talking to the wrong person about that :)
1) I don't believe in Karma
2) I believe that once I'm dead, I'm dead, I won't care what people do with my body or say about me (hence my desire to be cremated).
3) I didn't write the really mean article, I just said Reagan was a bad president (which he was). Point blank, it's fine if he is respected as one who has passed away, as a person. It's quite another thing for everyone to be gushing about what a great legacy he had when what did he leave us? The idea of "trickle down economics," a crushed economy, an enormous nuclear arsenal, and the Oliver North baloney.
I can and will respect anybody who has passed on as a person. I will not, however, respect a "legacy" that was a sham. Death doesn't change that, unfortunately ...
Posted by: Justin | June 8, 2004 10:37 PM
Ditto to Justin's comments.
So, the guy was probably a great guy and loved by most who knew him. That doesn't mean he was a great president.
I came across a great concept in reading the book "Speaker for the Dead" by Orson Scott Card--speak the objective truth about a person after they die and people will probably respect them even more so, simply for being human. Strengths come with weaknesses, and the sum total of a person is what should be honored when they die.
That still does not excuse anyone distorting the picture of a person after their death just to make them seem better at something than they really were. That doesn't honor or help anyone in the long run.
I guess on a personal level, I just respect people for being people, not for what they are or aren't, or for what they accomplish or obtain.
The guy deserves a good honorable funeral, and the very fact that he served in one of the most difficult jobs in existence is enough for me to justify that. But that doesn't mean we have to all say that he was a great president and that we all love what he did for the country.
Posted by: realon | June 10, 2004 12:17 AM
amen, justin
Posted by: dad | June 10, 2004 7:43 PM