With all due respect to someone who took a bullet while serving in his role as the leader of our country, former President Ronald Reagan was not the perfect person he is being portrayed to be at this time.

As one of the news commentators said last night, there was good AND bad about the man, and about his presidency....but this is neither the time nor the place to discuss the bad, but only to remember the good. It's about respect, good manners, and not speaking ill of the dead, IMO.

I would be more inclined to be respectful of his passing had he been more respectful and prevented the death of 10,000+ of my fellow gay and lesbian Americans. It's a tiny little fact that many want to gloss over. Where was HIS respect for the lives of those who needlessly contracted the disease? By capitulating to the religous community, President Reagan decided NOT to fund AIDS research and education - in fact, he didn't even mention the word AIDS until 1987! When people respect the rights of ALL, they get the respect they deserve. Former President Reagan is personally and professional responsible for these deaths, that's not respectful is it? In fact, it's pretty much deriliction of duty as I see it. So, thanks for the "manners" lesson - but you'll forgive me if I don't accept them - in honor of the 10,000+ and related family members who aren't going to be as saddened by the passing of Ronald Reagan as you are. I respect his accomplishments, and I celebrate is public service - as I would anyone who is committed to public service. But I do not give up the right to speak out against his irresponsible action -- and do so before the religious right and "compassionate conservatives" rename another federal building or reprint our currency with his mug on it.

Based on the coverage I have seen, I don't think Reagan is being portrayed as "perfect".

someone who had as many failures as he had successes

I think you would be hard-pressed to find a consensus that Reagan's presidency was not a success overall. Issue's like AIDS funding are hardly as important as things like the economy and the cold war.

Rampant unprotected sex had by millions of straight and gay folks *looooong* after the facts of AIDS were publicly known resulted in their deaths not Reagan. Show some sack and let people take responsibility for their own lives for christs sake. Was Reagan supposed to run about strapping condoms onto cocks? Get real.

Just depends on who you're asking. Try asking the African American community or the gay and lesbian community and you'll get a dramatically different issue than the white, well-to-do.

Yes because an intrenched culture of entitlement has been foisted on folks to make them beleive that nothing is *thier* own fault. It is much easier to place the blame for your own STD on a public figure than it is to say that maybe I should have kept it in my pants a bit more often.

"Let's not forget that it was Ronald Reagan that refused to provide funding for AIDS educatioin and research that resulted in tens of thousands of people contracting the disease needlessly - and ultimately allowing the disease to be more globally dominating than it should have been."

Yes... yes... and billions of dollars in research money and almost universal AIDS education has made a huge difference since '87, huh? Perhaps you stopped looking at statistics around '87.

Anyway, no one is saying Reagan was perfect, but when you compare him with, say, Clinton... another 2 term President in our generation... well, the comparison is brutal. Besides, this isn't being "engineered". 100,000 people didn't show up at the Reagan library at gunpoint.

People loved Reagan, and he was a good man. Perfect, no. But good enough to totally eclipse Kerry and the rest, which is what seems to be irking the left so much.

---

P.S. Next time you see a gathering enjoyed by your local "gay and lesbian community ", I think that the majority could easily fall under the heading "white, well-to-do".

This article points out that:

1. The Reagan administration spent millions of dollars on AIDS research.
2. Reagan first mentioned AIDS publicly in 1985.

http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200312030913.asp

Blaming Reagan for the AIDS epidemic is symptomatic of why the gay movement has gotten so little mainstream support. The Reagan administration spent many billions of dollars on AIDS research. Frankly, I would rather have seen that money put into cancer research or other areas that affect more people. AIDS is pretty preventable and it was quite early on known how it spread. Even I, as a kid back then, understood how it was spread.

But more to the point, tryin gto slam Reagan during his funeral is the height of tackyness. Would it kill his opponents to go one week without trashing the man?

Well Draginol, perhaps you should have been an official in the public health industry in America or worldwide, because your infinite wisdom expressed above seems to be far beyond everyone else of that era. And really, Reagan spent "many billions" on AIDS research - care to prove that? This is exactly how people like you spread lies. Congrats!

I dont think the left's vitriol is actually aimed at President Reagan per se. As he has shaken these mortal coils, nothing they say or do will lessen his life and accomplishments. Rather it is by spreading lies and distortions they hope to quell what they perceive to be a sympathy vote for George W. Bush. They are so insecure in their own candidate (find one that even knows what Kerry Stands for - if such a thing even exists), that their only recourse is to spew hate and hope for simple souls will pick up their mantra and not vote for Bush.

I think several people have already refuted this Blog. There is nothing more to say, other than Vaya con Dios, President Reagan. YOu were the best president of my life time, bar none.

Why would you put words into my mouth? I said nothing of McDonalds? Please continue to elaborate on topics that I didn't mention, your attempt to obfuscate the matter proves my point that you'll do anything to run from the truth.

Reply By: little_whip Posted: Thursday, June 10, 2004
Rampant unprotected sex had by millions of straight and gay folks *looooong* after the facts of AIDS were publicly known resulted in their deaths not Reagan. Show some sack and let people take responsibility for their own lives for christs sake


Bravo, greywar! Geo's stance is "victimhood" in its purest form, akin to blaming McD's for being fat, never mind the fact that you shoved thousands of their tasty grease burgers down your own throat.

As far as all the good things being said about Reagan right now, thats simply tradition, doH. We dont deliver eulogies in order to detail what a son-of-a-bitch so and so was, and how we are glad he's dead now.

Just depends on who you're asking. Try asking the African American community or the gay and lesbian community and you'll get a dramatically different issue than the white, well-to-do.


And that, my dear, is a sweeping generalization and a racist stereotype, because it assumes that all well-to-do whites are heartless, uncaring bastards and only gays, lesbians, and blacks can "see the light" and agree with you. (I refuse to call them African-Americans, btw, unless they were born in Africa and immigrated here, theres nothing African about a 5th or 6th generation american black, just as theres nothing German or Irish about me, other than the fact that some great-great-grandparent or another hailed from there, and race is not the same as nationality.)

Why is it ok for homosexuals and american blacks to make hateful stereotypical remarks like that towards heterosexuals, caucasians, and christians, while at the same time shouting "TOLERANCE" from every rooftop?

Tolerance for you, perhaps. But not for those who disagree with you. We're just "well to do whites" and as such, are worthy of contempt and dismissal.

Hmmm... wow, talk about sweepting generalizations. That's a pretty rascist remark there. Yeah, I've reached the intolerace and bigotry room!

Reply By: greywar Posted: Thursday, June 10, 2004
Yes because an intrenched culture of entitlement has been foisted on folks to make them beleive that nothing is *thier* own fault. It is much easier to place the blame for your own STD on a public figure than it is to say that maybe I should have kept it in my pants a bit more often.

Your facts are clearly wrong.

http://www.forward.com/issues/2003/03.11.14/news.extra.reagans.html

This "vitriol"? Hmm.. I think you should re-read the thread above and tell me who the vitriol is coming from. I'm merely stating, and the public record speaks for it's self that early in the epidimiology of AIDS, there was a clear lack of information as to how the disease was spreading. It's painfully easy to see how it was spreading now, but it simply was not known during the critical years of the early to mid 80's. But I can see the clear record of number of infected, number of dead, and the lack of funding isn't the real issue. I'm apparently communicating with those who agree with Reagan as he sided with the religious community that there wasn't anything that should be done. Here's to hoping you don't contract a deadly disease or illness. My remarks started with just a little request for some rationality behind the hysteria of this State Funeral. I clearly indicated my respect for Reagan's service to his country. After you finishing watching CNN and dry your eyes from the pomp and circumstance, and regain your sense of rational behavior, let's talk. Until then, keep your "vitriol" to yourself. Regards. And by the way, your hateful, rascist, homophobic vitriol does nothing but encourage me to continue the call for tolerance.