Ronald Reagan: Say What You Like Thread

[Pure]

Chomsky on Reagan legacy
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0607-08.htm
-----
Reagan and Guatamala

http://www.consortiumnews.com/1999/052699a1.html

May 26, 1999
Reagan & Guatemala’s Death Files

By Robert Parry

The grisly reality of Central America was most recently revisited on Feb. 25 when a Guatemalan truth commission issued a report on the staggering human rights crimes that occurred during a 34-year civil war.

The Historical Clarification Commission, an independent human rights body, estimated that the conflict claimed the lives of some 200,000 people with the most savage bloodletting occurring in the 1980s.

Based on a review of about 20 percent of the dead, the panel blamed the army for 93 percent of the killings and leftist guerrillas for three percent. Four percent were listed as unresolved.

The report documented that in the 1980s, the army committed 626 massacres against Mayan villages. "The massacres that eliminated entire Mayan villages … are neither perfidious allegations nor figments of the imagination, but an authentic chapter in Guatemala's history," the commission concluded.

The army "completely exterminated Mayan communities, destroyed their livestock and crops," the report said. In the north, the report termed the slaughter a "genocide." [WP, Feb. 26, 1999]

Besides carrying out murder and “disappearances,” the army routinely engaged in torture and rape. "The rape of women, during torture or before being murdered, was a common practice" by the military and paramilitary forces, the report found.

The report added that the "government of the United States, through various agencies including the CIA, provided direct and indirect support for some [of these] state operations." The report concluded that the U.S. government also gave money and training to a Guatemalan military that committed "acts of genocide" against the Mayans.

"Believing that the ends justified everything, the military and the state security forces blindly pursued the anticommunist struggle, without respect for any legal principles or the most elemental ethical and religious values, and in this way, completely lost any semblance of human morals," said the commission chairman, Christian Tomuschat, a German jurist.

"Within the framework of the counterinsurgency operations carried out between 1981 and 1983, in certain regions of the country agents of the Guatemalan state committed acts of genocide against groups of the Mayan people,” he added. [NYT, Feb. 26, 1999]

The report did not single out culpable individuals either in Guatemala or the United States. But the American official most directly responsible for renewing U.S. military aid to Guatemala and encouraging its government during the 1980s was President Reagan.

 

[rgraham666]

You've also got to remember that the head of the Guatamalen government was a born again Christian.

 

[cantdog]

And his domestic policy legacy is as bad.

Killed affirmative action and made racism okay again. Invented the Welfare Queen and destroyed the social safety net. Kicked everyone into the street out of a lot of mental hospitals by simply stopping funding, and then killed the welfare system so they had zero support. And so on.

What a great man.

 

[Guest]

Here's a refreshing voice. - Perdita

Reagan, fact and fantasy - Greg Palast, June 13, 2004, The Observer

You shouldn't speak ill of the dead. But in this case, I have to. Ronald Reagan was a conman. A coward. A killer.

In 1987 I found myself stuck in a little town in Nicaragua named Chaguitillo. The people were kind, though hungry, except for one surly young man. His wife had just died of tuberculosis. People don't die of TB if they get antibiotics. But Reagan had put a embargo on medicine to Nicaragua because he didn't like the government the people had elected.
As Ronnie was cracking those famous jokes, the lungs of that mother of three were filling up and drowning her.

And when Hizbollah terrorists murdered hundreds of United States marines in their sleep in Lebanon, the TV warrior with the B-movie grin ran from the scene like a whipped dog ... then turned around and invaded Grenada. That little Club Med war was a murderous PR stunt so that Ronnie could hold parades for gunning down Cubans building an airport.

I remember Nancy, in designer dresses, some of the 'gifts' that flowed to the Reagans - from hats to million-dollar homes - from cronies well compensated with government loot. It used to be called bribery.

The New York Times wrote that Reagan projected 'faith in small town America' and 'old-time values'. Values, my ass. It was union busting and a declaration of war on the poor and anyone who couldn't buy designer dresses. It was the New Meanness, bringing starvation back to America so that every millionaire could get another million.

And then, in the White House basement he condoned a coup d'état against an elected Congress. Reagan's Defence Secretary, Casper Weinberger, with the crazed colonel, Ollie North, plotted to give guns to the Monster of the Mideast, Ayatollah Khomeini.

Reagan's boys called Jimmy Carter a weenie and a wuss, although Carter wouldn't give an inch to the Ayatollah. Reagan, with that film-fantasy tough-guy con in front of the cameras, went to Khomeini to plead on bended knee for the release of our hostages.

Ollie North flew to Iran with a birthday cake for the maniac - no kidding - in the shape of a key. The key to Ronnie's heart.

Then the Reagan roaches added crime to cowardice: taking cash from the hostage-takers to buy guns for the 'Contras' - the drug runners of Nicaragua posing as freedom fighters.

In Chaguitillo, all night long, farmers stayed awake to guard their children from attack by Reagan's Contra terrorists. The farmers weren't even Sandinistas, those 'commies' that our cracked-brained President told us were 'only a 48-hour drive from Texas'.

Nevertheless, the farmers and their families were Ronnie's targets. And I remember in the deserted darkness of Chaguitillo, a TV blared. Weirdly, it was that third-rate gangster movie Brother Rat. Starring Ronald Reagan. Well, my friends, you can rest easier tonight: the Rat is dead. From me, Ronald Reagan, goodbye and good riddance.

· Greg Palast is author of the The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.

and another

 

[shereads]

And when Hizbollah terrorists murdered hundreds of United States marines in their sleep in Lebanon, the TV warrior with the B-movie grin ran from the scene like a whipped dog ... then turned around and invaded Grenada. That little Club Med war was a murderous PR stunt so that Ronnie could hold parades for gunning down Cubans building an airport.

<snip>

...It was the New Meanness, bringing starvation back to America so that every millionaire could get another million.

And then, in the White House basement he condoned a coup d'état against an elected Congress. Reagan's Defence Secretary, Casper Weinberger, with the crazed colonel, Ollie North, plotted to give guns to the Monster of the Mideast, Ayatollah Khomeini.

Reagan's boys called Jimmy Carter a weenie and a wuss, although Carter wouldn't give an inch to the Ayatollah. Reagan, with that film-fantasy tough-guy con in front of the cameras, went to Khomeini to plead on bended knee for the release of our hostages.

Ollie North flew to Iran with a birthday cake for the maniac - no kidding - in the shape of a key. The key to Ronnie's heart.

Then the Reagan roaches added crime to cowardice: taking cash from the hostage-takers to buy guns for the 'Contras' - the drug runners of Nicaragua posing as freedom fighters.

In Chaguitillo, all night long, farmers stayed awake to guard their children from attack by Reagan's Contra terrorists. The farmers weren't even Sandinistas, those 'commies' that our cracked-brained President told us were 'only a 48-hour drive from Texas'.

Nevertheless, the farmers and their families were Ronnie's targets. And I remember in the deserted darkness of Chaguitillo, a TV blared. Weirdly, it was that third-rate gangster movie Brother Rat. Starring Ronald Reagan. Well, my friends, you can rest easier tonight: the Rat is dead. From me, Ronald Reagan, goodbye and good riddance.

This had to be said. I can't be happy for the suffering and death of an old man, and i cried watchiing the funeral because he reminded me of my dad. But the damage Reagan did was enormous. His legacy is appreciated by those who were either too young or disinterested to understand the implications of Iran-Contra, and for those zealots who continue to believe that the end always justifies the means.

Gorbachev risked his life to weaken the grip of hard-line communists on the Soviet Union. Reagan took no personal risk at all, did business with terrorists, and turned a blind eye to actions by the Contras that were as horrible as anything Stalin could have dreamed up.

In approving Iran-Contra he also ignored the Constitution that he swore an oath to preserve and protect. He had the same problem with that document that Bush/Cheney have: the separation of powers by which the president is prevented from behaving like a king.

 

[Pure]

Reagan and African Americans

Statements that "Reagan sensed the needs, touched the hearts of Americans, and gave them back their dream, a sense of a 'new morning." apply to whites only.

Reagan marked the begining of the GOP's 'win the South strategy.' When RR came to office, the GOP had 40% of the South; when he left it was 60%. Why is that?

I don't usually cite blogs as evidence, but these facts are well attested:

After winning the nomination, Reagan's first stop was Neshoba Mississipi, where the three civil right workers were killed (Schwerner, Goodman, Chaney). There he gave a speech NOT mentioning them, but calling for 'states rights.' This was indeed 'Great Communication' but as slimy as it comes.

Kleiman begins by discussing the Lott and GWB flap of 2002.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2002/12/_lotts_of_disloyalty_the.php

December 12, 2002

LOTTS OF DISLOYALTY

The President, having stood by Trent Lott until the heat got to be too much, now deftly slips him the shiv to win applause from a black audience:

"Any suggestion that the segregated past was acceptable or positive is offensive, and it is wrong. Recent comments by Senator Lott do not reflect the spirit of our country. He has apologized, and rightly so. Every day our nation was segregated was a day that America was unfaithful to our founding ideals. And the founding ideals of our nation and, in fact, the founding ideals of the political party I represent was, and remains today, the equal dignity and equal rights of every American."

And Lott, after days of pretending he'd just been misunderstood, follows the John DiIulio model by making an abject apology when Big Brother says to: "Senator Lott agrees with President Bush that his words were wrong and he is sorry. He repudiates segregation because it is immoral."

This is good for the country. It would have been better if Bush had spoken out before the sh*tstorm hit, leading the country rather than following the mob. It would have been better if Bush had said those words to an audience of white Southerners rather than black social workers. But it's good for the country nonetheless: the political price of raw racism just went up, and it's not coming back down.

{snipped; Bush as disloyal to his backers}


UPDATE: NESHOBA COUNTY

Josh Marshall reminds us that Lott refused to sponsor a resolution honoring James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, victims of political murder by segregationists. But the Gweilo Diarist -- a Mississippian by birth -- tells me, at least, something that I didn't know, and much more damning:

Lott convinced Ronald Reagan to begin his 1980 campaign in Neshoba County, Mississippi -- the site of the murder of three civil-rights workers in the early 1960 and still a bastion of segregationist sentiment. No intelligent Mississippian can pretend not to understand the symbolism of and history associated with Neshoba.

That speech has always seemed to me a conclusive argument against the proposition that Reagan, whatever you think of his policies, was actually a decent human being: he chose to start his run for President with a gesture to murderers and their friends. (Reagan's speech was all about "states' rights," the seggie battle cry, making no mention of the murder victims.) But I handn't known Lott was the evil genius behind that move.

Posted by Mark Kleiman at 11:51 PM | |

 

[Pure]

For those who say, "it's symbolism only," the Bob Jones incident shows Reagan's support of bigotry. And guess who is a recent speaker at good ole' BJU?


Published on Wednesday, February 9, 2000 in the Boston Globe

http://www.commondreams.org/views/020900-101.htm

At Bob Jones U., A Disturbing Lesson About The Real George W.


by Derrick Jackson
start]
Last week, in a graduation ceremony mysteriously underplayed by the white press, George W. Bush earned his master's degree from the Ronald Reagan Institute of Race Policy and Management.

Reagan established the institute in 1980 by kicking off his presidential campaign at the Neshoba County Fair in Philadelphia, Miss. The Neshoba County Fair for decades had been the legendary gathering spot of segregationists and near the site of the grisly murders of three civil rights workers. Reagan took the microphone and, to the roar of thousands of white fairgoers, said, ''I believe in states' rights.'' Anyone who knows Southern race policy knows that saying ''states' rights'' is like waving a Confederate flag, telling racists they can do whatever they want to black folks.

Reagan was never hounded by the press as to how he could make such a statement and expect to be elected as president. Reagan's handlers slyly scheduled a speech two days later before the Urban League. At the Urban League speech, Reagan said: ''For too many people, conservative has come to mean antipoor, antiblack, and antidisadvantaged. Perhaps some of you question whether a conservative really feels sympathy and compassion for the victims of social and economic misfortune and of racial discrimination.... If you think of me as the caricatured conservative, then I ask you to listen carefully and maybe you'll be surprised by our broad areas of agreement.''

History shows that the real Reagan was the one who spoke at the Neshoba County Fair and not the one at the Urban League.

His presidency quickly became the most antipoor, antiblack, and antidisadvantaged in the latter half of the 20th century. Now, 20 years later, here comes George W. Bush. Stung by his defeat in the New Hampshire primary, Bush needed a trump card in the South Carolina Republican primary. This was a problem, since he and John McCain are running neck-and-redneck on issues dear to racists. Both have chickened out on saying it is time to stop flying the Confederate flag over the state capitol.

Bush may have found his ace. He kicked off his homestretch drive in South Carolina by speaking at Bob Jones University. Bob Jones represents one of Reagan's early signs of being antiblack. Reagan fought to revoke the Internal Revenue Service's authority to deny charitable tax exemptions to the school. The denial was over the school's ban on interracial dating.

The Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, rebuked Reagan, saying schools that practice racial segregation can indeed be denied tax exemptions. Reagan would later appoint the lone dissenter, William Rehnquist, to chief justice. Bob Jones University still bans interracial dating. George W.'s brother Jeb, the Florida governor who is married to a Latina, could not have graduated. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has a white wife and who was appointed by George W.'s father, could not have graduated.

Bob Jones also practices homophobia. Two years ago, when a gay, 60-year-old alum asked if he could come back to visit the school, the dean of students wrote back, ''With grief we must tell you that as long as you are living as a homosexual, you, of course, would not be welcome on the campus and would be arrested for trespassing if you did. We take no delight in that action. Our greatest delight would be in your return to the Lord.''

George W. took delight in validating this perverted version of Christianity, telling 6,000 students, almost all white, ''I look forward to publicly defending our conservative philosophy.'' He said he would seek ''compassionate results.''

But compassion could not have been foremost on Bush's mind, since it was only after the speech that he criticized the school's racial policies, not during it and not directly to the students. His compassion is irrelevant when out of all the colleges in South Carolina, he chose the most racist and homophobic, a venue more discriminatory on paper than even the Neshoba County Fair. [...]

By going to Bob Jones, Bush showed that he will be so compassionate to conservatives he will be every bit as antipoor, antiblack, and antidisadvantaged as Reagan was. Having earned his masters in Reagan race policy, by speaking at Bob Jones University George W. Bush is well on his way to his PhD: philosopher of demagoguery. Derrick Z. Jackson is a Globe columnist. ### [end excerpts]

 

[shereads]

You're wrong in saying that Bob Jones University still bans interracial dating. When GWB was criticized for choosing BJU for one of his campaign rallies, the university released a statement saying that students only need a parent's written permission to date a person of another race. A writer for New York Magazine responded with a series of satirical "notes from home." Something along these lines:

"Dear Bob Jones University,

Please allow our son Edward to date his African-American girlfriend. We are somewhat liberal in our views on race, and as long as he doesn't become engaged to this girl, we support the relationship.

Regards,

Mrs. and Mrs. Edward Reynolds, Sr.

~ ~ ~

"Dear Bob Jones University,

Please allow our daugher, Elaine, to hold hands with her lesbian girlfriend. Her mother and I are convinced that Elaine is just going through a rebellious phase, and the sooner she gets it out of her system, the better.

Sincerely,

Her parents."

 

[Guest]

Anecdote: On a BBC site I read online letters from readers re. the passing of Ray Charles. More than one said he should have received (and deservedly so) a state funeral. P.

 

[Pure]

S: "You're wrong in saying that Bob Jones University still bans interracial dating."

Not sure who's being addressed, but Derrick Jackson said it, in February 2000.

The 'parental note' strategy is a hoot. Thanks for bringing it up.

J.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

..******* letters from readers ...[say]...Ray Charles...should have received... a state funeral.)

You Got The Right One Baby.

Ray Charles did much for the good (even if you only count his music) and very little for ill (Pepsi Cola has too much sugar to be truly 'good.') which is something Reagan supporters can't say.

( Well they CAN and they DO but that only makes them right, not CORRECT. )

 

[juanjsojr]

he was a good man for our contry

he was a good presdent and a good man he did many good stuff and some bad but I read alot about him and he was good he did good actor too it's sad he died

 

[Guest]

IMO, Ray Charles paid his dues; I don't care who or what he got paid to sing about. Now Bob Dylan is another story, the man's had enough money for decades and passed himself off as a gentile for years. P.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Reagan and African Americans

Statements that "Reagan sensed the needs, touched the hearts of Americans, and gave them back their dream, a sense of a 'new morning." apply to whites only.

Reagan marked the begining of the GOP's 'win the South strategy.' When RR came to office, the GOP had 40% of the South; when he left it was 60%. Why is that?

I don't usually cite blogs as evidence, but these facts are well attested:

After winning the nomination, Reagan's first stop was Neshoba Mississipi, where the three civil right workers were killed (Schwerner, Goodman, Chaney). There he gave a speech NOT mentioning them, but calling for 'states rights.' This was indeed 'Great Communication' but as slimy as it comes.

Kleiman begins by discussing the Lott and GWB flap of 2002.

http://www.markarkleiman.com/archives/_/2002/12/_lotts_of_disloyalty_the.php

December 12, 2002

LOTTS OF DISLOYALTY

The President, having stood by Trent Lott until the heat got to be too much, now deftly slips him the shiv to win applause from a black audience:

"Any suggestion that the segregated past was acceptable or positive is offensive, and it is wrong. Recent comments by Senator Lott do not reflect the spirit of our country. He has apologized, and rightly so. Every day our nation was segregated was a day that America was unfaithful to our founding ideals. And the founding ideals of our nation and, in fact, the founding ideals of the political party I represent was, and remains today, the equal dignity and equal rights of every American."

And Lott, after days of pretending he'd just been misunderstood, follows the John DiIulio model by making an abject apology when Big Brother says to: "Senator Lott agrees with President Bush that his words were wrong and he is sorry. He repudiates segregation because it is immoral."

This is good for the country. It would have been better if Bush had spoken out before the sh*tstorm hit, leading the country rather than following the mob. It would have been better if Bush had said those words to an audience of white Southerners rather than black social workers. But it's good for the country nonetheless: the political price of raw racism just went up, and it's not coming back down.

{snipped; Bush as disloyal to his backers}


UPDATE: NESHOBA COUNTY

Josh Marshall reminds us that Lott refused to sponsor a resolution honoring James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, victims of political murder by segregationists. But the Gweilo Diarist -- a Mississippian by birth -- tells me, at least, something that I didn't know, and much more damning:

Lott convinced Ronald Reagan to begin his 1980 campaign in Neshoba County, Mississippi -- the site of the murder of three civil-rights workers in the early 1960 and still a bastion of segregationist sentiment. No intelligent Mississippian can pretend not to understand the symbolism of and history associated with Neshoba.

That speech has always seemed to me a conclusive argument against the proposition that Reagan, whatever you think of his policies, was actually a decent human being: he chose to start his run for President with a gesture to murderers and their friends. (Reagan's speech was all about "states' rights," the seggie battle cry, making no mention of the murder victims.) But I handn't known Lott was the evil genius behind that move.

Posted by Mark Kleiman at 11:51 PM | |

I was born & raised in Mississippi. I was in Neshoba county for Mr. Reagan's speech. What this person dosen't mention is that an annual event called the Neshoba County Fair is where it took place. It's an old fashioned county fair and draws people from miles around. In fact, is you want to speak to rural Mississippians, a speech at the fair will get to more of them than 2 months of stumping through tiny towns & farming communities.

Whoever wrote that little piece is the racist. Not Mississippians. Twisting a speech that was in time and place simply the best way to reach several rual counties worth of voters in a personal way as some kind of racist agenda.

-Colly

-Colly

 

[smutpen]

Yep. That has me stymied too. "Support our troops" as a mantra of the right has been used to serve two purposes: to stifle criticism of the war and the president, and accuse anyone who questions the military budget of being unpatriotic. But when the super-rich are asked by a Democrat to give up a tiny fraction of their tax cut for the sake of soldiers, veterans and military families, Republicans circle the wagons and guard that 5-grand-per-million as if they're guarding the last of their dwindling food ration.

Your major beefs with Reagan are trickle-down economics and that he opened the door of mainstream politics to religious fundamentalists. Those are big ones, with far-reaching implications, but the Reagan products that I loathed most were Iran-Contra and James Watt.

Watt as Secretary of the Interior was a precursor of what Dubya would do to Nixon's one most postiive legacy, the EPA. Of course, James Watt also represented the religious right. He's famous for having said that the inevitability of the Second Coming makes it pointless to protect the environment for future generations.

As for Iran-Contra, it's hard for me to understand why more people haven't understood the implications of that, since 9/11 brought terrorism into the national consciousness in a major way. The Reagan/Bush administration supported terrorism, pure and simple. That's what Iran-Contra was about. Reagan's crusade against Communism took a sick twist whose implications we have only begun to fully experience. In his determination to fund Contra death squads (or freedom fighters, depending on whether or not you are on the receiving end of the rape, execution or bombing in question) he not only lied to Congress and subverted the constitutional separation of powers; he rewarded Iranian kidnappers and turned hostage-taking into a profit center. He also eliminated whatever credibility we had built up in refusiing to negotiate with terrorists.

Imagine the Republican outcry if Jimmy Carter had announced that he was going to negotiate for the release of the hostages who were taken under his watch, by selling missiles to Iran.

And that he was going to use the money to fund a project of his choosing, one that Congress had already disapproved.

Reagan's charisma, combined with the charming habit of simply saying, "gosh, I don't remember" when confronted with evidence of criminal wrongdoing, saved him from impeachment. That, and the fact that Oliver North enjoyed the role of martyr.

As for Bush I, when people in the forum compare him favorably to his son, I'm reminded of his assertion during Iran Contra that he was "never in the loop." A proven lie. He was at the table in meetings with North and Reagan and a few other key people when the arms-for-hostages trade was discussed. He was a former head of the CIA, for god's sake, but all he had to do was follow Reagan's lead and pretend that he was simply too naive and too nice a guy to have been involved in such a thing.

I'm still waiting to hear a single comment from the right about the prioritization of tax breaks for millionaires over combat pay and family housing of soldiers.

Anybody?

Sher, I agree about Iran-Contra and Watt, but I think of them as symptoms rather than causes. I was trying to identify more general trends of the Reagan legacy.

With Watt, you've reminded me of a trend which affects our entire society, but is most pronounced (predictably) in the religious extremists who so thoroughly infest the Republican-conservative power structure.

This is the ignorant, belligerent, fearful attitude toward science and scientists. Scientists have a tendency to be godless, and therefore commies. Scientists have an annoying habit of thinking more long-term than this quarter's profit statement, which makes them odious to the corporate cronies of all politicians. Scientists fail to recognize the validity of the concept of race, since it is biologically meaningless. This is an affront to all racists, black, white or otherwise. The white ones have the most power, though.

The ironic thing is that all of the economic and military advantages this nation enjoys flow directly from science and technology. One inevitable result, if the Christian neo-cons have their way, would be a precipitous drop in our scientific and technical infrastructure capabilities, and thus in our economy and power.

 

[smutpen]

I was born & raised in Mississippi. I was in Neshoba county for Mr. Reagan's speech. What this person dosen't mention is that an annual event called the Neshoba County Fair is where it took place. It's an old fashioned county fair and draws people from miles around. In fact, is you want to speak to rural Mississippians, a speech at the fair will get to more of them than 2 months of stumping through tiny towns & farming communities.

Whoever wrote that little piece is the racist. Not Mississippians. Twisting a speech that was in time and place simply the best way to reach several rual counties worth of voters in a personal way as some kind of racist agenda.

-Colly

-Colly

Colleen,

We've never discussed or debated before, but I've seen your posts, and been impressed with your eloquence, and with what seemed to me a much more intelligent, egalitarian and compassionate conservatism than that practiced by Dubya et al.

That's why your remarks in this thread are so surprising to me.

Your response earlier, dismissing the 9% of of the Black vote Reagan received in his re-election bid as a mere artifact of the general tendency of African-Americans to vote Democratic seemed disingenuous to me; why, do you suppose, does that voting pattern exist? Are Blacks dupes of the "Liberal Media?"

Your response above is similarly puzzling. I expect that there are many county fairs in Mississippi which do not take place at the site of a notorious and grisly murder perpetrated by the Ku Klux Klan, are there not?

The choice of this one, combined with the complete absence of any mention of the event, if not specifically intended to inflame racist White Southern voters, would seem to be at least a hideously insensitive mistake.

You also completely ignore the justifiably infamous "States' rights" remark; do you disagree that it was the verbal equivalent of waving a confederate flag?

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colleen,

We've never discussed or debated before, but I've seen your posts, and been impressed with your eloquence, and with what seemed to me a much more intelligent, egalitarian and compassionate conservatism than that practiced by Dubya et al.

That's why your remarks in this thread are so surprising to me.

Your response earlier, dismissing the 9% of of the Black vote Reagan received in his re-election bid as a mere artifact of the general tendency of African-Americans to vote Democratic seemed disingenuous to me; why, do you suppose, does that voting pattern exist? Are Blacks dupes of the "Liberal Media?"

Your response above is similarly puzzling. I expect that there are many county fairs in Mississippi which do not take place at the site of a notorious and grisly murder perpetrated by the Ku Klux Klan, are there not?

The choice of this one, combined with the complete absence of any mention of the event, if not specifically intended to inflame racist White Southern voters, would seem to be at least a hideously insensitive mistake.

You also completely ignore the justifiably infamous "States' rights" remark; do you disagree that it was the verbal equivalent of waving a confederate flag?

Smutty,

I was born & raised in Mississippi. I am in some ways a lot more worldly than your average Mississippian. I've traveled widely, across the U.S., lived in several states and long long ago gave up the racisim that was delivered to me as a child in ways both subtle & overt. I have read extensively and kept an open mind.

Yet, to this day, I need only mention my birthplace & the closet racists where ever I am feel it means they can tell me their favorite off color joke.

My remark to the lack of the black vote he garnered was not at all meant to portray anyone as dupes. Blacks, minorities of all stripes really, whether based on color, orientation or national origin have good reason to fear the GOP and it's policies. Only a fool, or a blind person would dispute that. Quoting the lack of black support for RR was, in my opinion, not called for from what I quoted. I felt it was baiting me, into an argument over race, an argument I wasnot preprared to have.

There is no fair like the Neshoba county fair. There really isn't. I suppose there are others, but I never heard of them. In fact I was not at the fair to hear Reagan, but to hear a blue grass band that was playing and to get some honest to God home made apple cider.

I do not mind the concentration on what the author sees as overt racism in the Reagan administration. I don't mind the attack aimed at Trent Lott. I don't mind the rememberance of things that happened in the past either. But I am terribly weary of the intimation that being Mississippian and white means you are a racist.

Is is so wrong of me to mention that there was an extremely good reason, politically, to open in Neshoba, at the fair, that had nothing to do with skin color? Or to take offense to the fact that being from Mississippi, it hurts that people who fight for equality manage to tar us all with the same brush, intentionally or no?

-Colly

 

[cloudy]

Smutty,

I was born & raised in Mississippi. I am in some ways a lot more worldly than your average Mississippian. I've traveled widely, across the U.S., lived in several states and long long ago gave up the racisim that was delivered to me as a child in ways both subtle & overt. I have read extensively and kept an open mind.

Yet, to this day, I need only mention my birthplace & the closet racists where ever I am feel it means they can tell me their favorite off color joke.

My remark to the lack of the black vote he garnered was not at all meant to portray anyone as dupes. Blacks, minorities of all stripes really, whether based on color, orientation or national origin have good reason to fear the GOP and it's policies. Only a fool, or a blind person would dispute that. Quoting the lack of black support for RR was, in my opinion, not called for from what I quoted. I felt it was baiting me, into an argument over race, an argument I wasnot preprared to have.

There is no fair like the Neshoba county fair. There really isn't. I suppose there are others, but I never heard of them. In fact I was not at the fair to hear Reagan, but to hear a blue grass band that was playing and to get some honest to God home made apple cider.

I do not mind the concentration on what the author sees as overt racism in the Reagan administration. I don't mind the attack aimed at Trent Lott. I don't mind the rememberance of things that happened in the past either. But I am terribly weary of the intimation that being Mississippian and white means you are a racist.

Is is so wrong of me to mention that there was an extremely good reason, politically, to open in Neshoba, at the fair, that had nothing to do with skin color? Or to take offense to the fact that being from Mississippi, it hurts that people who fight for equality manage to tar us all with the same brush, intentionally or no?

-Colly

Quite.

I'm so glad you answered this, Colly, because I wanted to, but I don't have the political acumen you do.

The only comment I can come up with is that you can pick any major location in Mississippi, or Alabama, for that matter, and place it as the scene of some part of the civil rights struggle.....does that mean that no one should campaign here in the south?

And, as you said, just because you live in/are from the south, does not mean that you are automatically a racist. I'm a perfect example of that - my daughter has so many different races in her heritage that she checks "other" on questionnaires when it asks for race.

I, for one, am really, really exhausted to death of the southern=racist thing.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I appreciate the sentiment, Pure, but I have a hard time keeping a civil tongue in my head (or, er, fingers on my hands) when it comes to Reagan.

I will only say that I really wish people would develop a much better understanding of the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe before giving Reagan credit for "ending" the Cold War or "bringing down communism".

~M (historian of Things Soviet)

I think everbody realizes there were many more people to be credited, tens of millions, maybe even hundreds of millions, counting all those who served in the military services of the West during the cold war. Some of them, such as Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon are usually looked on as villains but their contributions were positive. Even so, if there is one person who is deserving of more credit than anybody else, it is Ronald Reagan.

If the good but weak Jimmy Carter had been re-elected in 1980, who knows what the situation would be right now. I might now be a radioactive corpse or a citizen of the California Soviet Socialist Republic. Those are the results the cold war prevented.

 

[smutpen]

Smutty,

I was born & raised in Mississippi. I am in some ways a lot more worldly than your average Mississippian. I've traveled widely, across the U.S., lived in several states and long long ago gave up the racisim that was delivered to me as a child in ways both subtle & overt. I have read extensively and kept an open mind.

Yet, to this day, I need only mention my birthplace & the closet racists where ever I am feel it means they can tell me their favorite off color joke.

My remark to the lack of the black vote he garnered was not at all meant to portray anyone as dupes. Blacks, minorities of all stripes really, whether based on color, orientation or national origin have good reason to fear the GOP and it's policies. Only a fool, or a blind person would dispute that. Quoting the lack of black support for RR was, in my opinion, not called for from what I quoted. I felt it was baiting me, into an argument over race, an argument I wasnot preprared to have.

There is no fair like the Neshoba county fair. There really isn't. I suppose there are others, but I never heard of them. In fact I was not at the fair to hear Reagan, but to hear a blue grass band that was playing and to get some honest to God home made apple cider.

I do not mind the concentration on what the author sees as overt racism in the Reagan administration. I don't mind the attack aimed at Trent Lott. I don't mind the rememberance of things that happened in the past either. But I am terribly weary of the intimation that being Mississippian and white means you are a racist.

Is is so wrong of me to mention that there was an extremely good reason, politically, to open in Neshoba, at the fair, that had nothing to do with skin color? Or to take offense to the fact that being from Mississippi, it hurts that people who fight for equality manage to tar us all with the same brush, intentionally or no?

-Colly

Well, I think I understand a little better.

I don't envy the position you're in; your origins have made you subject to an unfair characterization, and now political conservatives and the Republican party, as the neo-cons have consolidated and tightened their grip, have moved to isolate and alienate people like you within their own ranks, and cause more of the same unfair tarring.


But I think your response here was (understandably) somewhat reflexive.

The Neshoba county fair may have been a politically valid choice, but the failure to mention the events that took place there, and the statement of support for 'states rights' -- the popular Confederate euphemism for the right of the states to enslave people with dark skin -- should, I would think, arouse just as much or more ire in you than in a liberal Democrat.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Well, I think I understand a little better.

I don't envy the position you're in; your origins have made you subject to an unfair characterization, and now political conservatives and the Republican party, as the neo-cons have consolidated and tightened their grip, have moved to isolate and alienate people like you within their own ranks, and cause more of the same unfair tarring.


But I think your response here was (understandably) somewhat reflexive.

The Neshoba county fair may have been a politically valid choice, but the failure to mention the events that took place there, and the statement of support for 'states rights' -- the popular Confederate euphemism for the right of the states to enslave people with dark skin -- should, I would think, arouse just as much or more ire in you than in a liberal Democrat.

Racism dosen't just hurt those being discriminated against. And my response was reflexive. If I offended anyone with my seeming indifference, I do sincerely apologize.

-Colly

 

[rgraham666]

Not me Colleen.

You explained your position quite well.

 

[smutpen]

I think everbody realizes there were many more people to be credited, tens of millions, maybe even hundreds of millions, counting all those who served in the military services of the West during the cold war. Some of them, such as Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon are usually looked on as villains but their contributions were positive. Even so, if there is one person who is deserving of more credit than anybody else, it is Ronald Reagan.

If the good but weak Jimmy Carter had been re-elected in 1980, who knows what the situation would be right now. I might now be a radioactive corpse or a citizen of the California Soviet Socialist Republic. Those are the results the cold war prevented.

So, Joe McCarthy was "looked upon" as a villain, but
his "contributions were positive."

Amazing, the things we can learn in internet forums.

For the record, I believe the collapse of Communism was caused a lot more by MTV than by the efforts of rabid American anti-communists.

It also had a lot to do with the fact that Communism is naive and unworkable as and economic and political system, and that the ideals of Marxism (even if they had been workable) were thoroughly betrayed by the totalitarian governments that were inevitably spawned by it.

 

[Boxlicker101]

So, Joe McCarthy was "looked upon" as a villain, but
his "contributions were positive."

Amazing, the things we can learn in internet forums.

For the record, I believe the collapse of Communism was caused a lot more by MTV than by the efforts of rabid American anti-communists.

It also had a lot to do with the fact that Communism is naive and unworkable as and economic and political system, and that the ideals of Marxism (even if they had been workable) were thoroughly betrayed by the totalitarian governments that were inevitably spawned by it.

All in all, I would say that McCarthy's contributions were positive although I certainly don't approve of his methods or of him personally. He was one of those who loudly warned the US of the dangers of the Soviet menace. It really was a menace, as the inhabitants of Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Finland and Poland, as victims of Soviet aggression can tell you. I didn't say "Communist aggression" because Communism was just a schtick being used in the Soviet effort at world domination. However, there were some fatheads, sometimes highly-educated, who didn't realize just how unworkable Communism is, and they were trying to help out the Soviets, although they may not have thought of themselves as traitors, that is what they essentially were. In the long run, McCarthy's efforts kept such persons from being more effective than they were.

I will readily concede that the inherent weaknesses of the soviet system probably caused its collapse more than anything any one person did, but it took the effort of tens of millions to keep it from early victory and let it collapse on its own.

 

[shereads]

S: "You're wrong in saying that Bob Jones University still bans interracial dating."

Not sure who's being addressed, but Derrick Jackson said it, in February 2000.

The 'parental note' strategy is a hoot. Thanks for bringing it up.

J.

I can't remember whether it was Rove or Lee Atwater who told a conservative newspaper, later quoted at Salon, that the reason Bob Jones University was chosen even though they knew there would be some noise about rasicm, was that "we needed to send a message, and that was the fastest way to send it."

Got it. Loud and clear.

It's true that not everyone in the South is a racist. But GWB's people knew there were enough of those voters to sway the primaries, and that a tough Vietnam vet like McCain might have a lot of appeal.

Still, it may not have been enough to send a message by holding a rally at Bob Jones...

South Carolina during the primaries was also home to this episode: an "independent polling company" contacted thousands of voters to ask this question, "If you knew that Senator John McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child, would you be more or less likely to vote for him?" There was no polling company, of course, but McCain and his wife do have a dark-skinned adopted child who appeared with them throughout the campaign. Cute prank, huh?

This is called "push polling," and Lee Atwater took credit for having "invented" it but the Bush camp vehemently denied having had anything to do with this particular smear campaign. It was just some anonymous prankster with enough money to fund a phone bank for a few days.

Karl Rove, the man believed to have the most influence over GWB, famously admitted to this incident during his early career: The day before his candidate was to participate in a broadcast debate, Rove discovered that his office had been bugged and called the police. Naturally, it was the chief topic of the panel's questions to the opposing candidate that night, and naturally he denied having anything to do with spying on Rove...The police investigation confirmed his denial; the bugging device had a battery life of only a few hours, and would have had to be placed and activated while Rove was alone at his office. Rove refers to the incident as a "youthful prank." This bunch seems pretty tolerant of youthful hijinx, for such staunch believers in traditional values.