NationStates Jolt Archive

Just wondering, and making a come back after neglecting NS for so long.

Yes.

not really. doesnt really warant live bbc coverage.

No, he is just another of the few million that die everyday....

I care, but not as much as the news folks here...at 11 AM I want to watch The Price is Right, not Reagan's forty-seventh funeral. One funeral is enough for me, thanks.

As a former president, he deserves to get some air time for his death. However, I fail to see the need for what has been going on all week. It seems as though every channel has found a way to have Reagan on for some reason or another. I'm personally surprised the food channel hasn't had Reagen Crepes or something of the like so they could join in. And having funeral and memorial services each day is overkill. For heaven's sake, JFK didn't have this much publicity.

No. I can't believe that mediocrity got live coverage on Sky News and the BBC. :roll: What is daytime TV coming to?

Reagan Crepes: Immediately satisfying and very tasty, but later your realize they weren't good for you and have left you more hungry than before you ate them.

Reagan died? OMG! Where was all the news covereage!?!?!

ON a more serious note... yes I care that his family is sad to lose him but no I don't think it matters if he is alive or dead. His spirit lives on. he wasn't doing much good suffering with alzheimers and such. I think he is better off this way.

I don't care who dies... whats the big deal? I think this physical existence is the lowest level of hell anyway. You are lucky to get out. And he was lucky to live such a long successful life. I don't think that the way they are making him out to be some sort of hero is valid, but whatever. The replicons in office are deciding to do that because he made them so much money so he really is a hero in their eyes.

Well, you're not gonna stop the gushy media and press from turning his funeral into a 3 day footage replay...but it wouldnt piss me off so much if they werent giving him more attention than D DAY veterans.

Well that one is wierd.

I did not care for the man nor his policies. I was down-sized and lost money during his time.

However, I strangely feel a tiny bit sad. I guess it's a part of your life dying....

As I have said I didn't care for him. However, I will give him the respect of getting buried, etc. and hold my comments....

As a former president, he deserves to get some air time for his death. However, I fail to see the need for what has been going on all week. It seems as though every channel has found a way to have Reagan on for some reason or another. I'm personally surprised the food channel hasn't had Reagen Crepes or something of the like so they could join in. And having funeral and memorial services each day is overkill. For heaven's sake, JFK didn't have this much publicity.JFK had more.

I care that Reagan dies, but I agree that I care no where near as much as the news coverage. The real problem is that everyone and their brother in the media has been waiting for him to die for the last 15 years, so they've all done obits for him. In truth, probably most of the news people are just taking a vacation this week and Reagan's death gives them an excuse to use all the Reagan retrosppective pieces that have been gathering dust for years without bothering about any real reporting. Compare the ammount of effort to cover real news to taking pool footage of the funeral procession while your news anchor does a voice over and sips martinins.

Well that one is wierd.

I did not care for the man nor his policies. I was down-sized and lost money during his time.

However, I strangely feel a tiny bit sad. I guess it's a part of your life dying....

As I have said I didn't care for him. However, I will give him the respect of getting buried, etc. and hold my comments....

You got downsized?...Heck..I found a new job, bigger payraise working for Colt Firearms, and my stock rose exponentially...made out like a bandit when I decided to sell.

No I don't care, but he was a man of importance.

Well that one is wierd.

I did not care for the man nor his policies. I was down-sized and lost money during his time.

However, I strangely feel a tiny bit sad. I guess it's a part of your life dying....

As I have said I didn't care for him. However, I will give him the respect of getting buried, etc. and hold my comments....

You got downsized?...Heck..I found a new job, bigger payraise working for Colt Firearms, and my stock rose exponentially...made out like a bandit when I decided to sell.

You were lucky. Having worked for the Goverment I let my skills get to specialised as such nobody wanted.

Mind you I was only out of work for 6 weeks but the job I did find made significantly less.

It was not until Clinton I started making good money.

My income has declined with the Shrub.....

Reagan Crepes: Immediately satisfying and very tasty, but later your realize they weren't good for you and have left you more hungry than before you ate them.

and it also turns out that getting the secret ingredient makes a large number of foreigners very upset with you.

I do care about Reagan's death, but more so of the historical value of watching this sort of precision for the first time in my life. It's quite fascinating, to me, anyway.

No. I'm mad that I can't pick up an important package from my post office until Monday due to the fact that they're closed today because some fellow who held an office in this country a few years back is being stuck in the ground today.

Blegh :x

It was news worthy a week ago.

I am glad it ends today.

It was news worthy a week ago.

I am glad it ends today.

*blink*

Whether you like his politics or not you have to admit he had guts, ability and did a lot of good, just like Thatcher.

Whether you like his politics or not you have to admit he had guts, ability and did a lot of good, just like Thatcher.
Guts? His energy policy record is a clear example of following the cheap populist path of least resistance.

Ability? What use is that if you fail to employ it? Unproven.

Did a lot of good? With the amount of foreign civillian blood on his hands, his questionable claim to the destruction of the Soviet Union rings hollow.

My opinion is, not only did his politics suck, but he wasn't much of a man either.

Okay, this is getting ridiculous. Reagan's marathon funeral is starting to resemble a sequel to Weekend at Bernie's. This corpse now has more frequent flier miles than I do.

Enough already. Let the man rest in peace.

No one should feel guilty about not caring about his death. Hell, Clinton didn't care enough to stay awake during the funeral today, so why should any of you care.

I only care in as much as i care if anyone dies...it is the end of a life.

What really got to me was having his riding boots facing backwards on a horse at the front of the parade.

Boy did that look strange...and kinda spooky.

actually that's not quite true...

i find that i care very much how much money was squandered on the funeral of one person when so many people have nothing, less than nothing cos there are kids starving in Africa

It was news worthy a week ago.

I am glad it ends today.

*blink*

Whether you like his politics or not you have to admit he had guts, ability and did a lot of good, just like Thatcher.

I don't have to admit any thing :wink:

He wasn't the worse president, then again he wasn't the best the USA has ever had either. I think we all know in modern times who the worse president has been *coughGWBcough*

Well, I'm not going to insult the guy on the day that he's buried, but I will make one comment about something that keeps coming up. That is the whole "saved the world from communism" argument. Who was the head honcho of the soviets at that time? Gorbachev. The most liberal leader of the soviet union. You think he would have had the same effect on Stalin? Come on. Gorbachev didn't want the communist government any more. Reagan was in the right place at the right time. It's good political thinking to claim the victory, but to perpetuate this lie on his death, well, to me it detracts from what he did do.

<-- not a fanatical anti-Reaganist.

Also, Steph, are you alright? You seem to have a nasty cough.

I agree. The Soviet Union died gracefully, without the apocalyptic blaze of glory one might expect from the US in similar circumstances. That speaks favourably of the efforts of the people within. To say that Reagan had any significant bearing on that is a stunning exaggeration.

Well, I'm not going to insult the guy on the day that he's buried, but I will make one comment about something that keeps coming up. That is the whole "saved the world from communism" argument. Who was the head honcho of the soviets at that time? Gorbachev. The most liberal leader of the soviet union. You think he would have had the same effect on Stalin? Come on. Gorbachev didn't want the communist government any more. Reagan was in the right place at the right time. It's good political thinking to claim the victory, but to perpetuate this lie on his death, well, to me it detracts from what he did do.

<-- not a fanatical anti-Reaganist.

Also, Steph, are you alright? You seem to have a nasty cough.

Actually Gorbachev tried to preserve Communism in the USSR. He wanted to liberalise and free up the system in order to promote growth. However, Gorbachev was discredited after the attempted coup by the security forces in 1991 and Yeltsin cemented Unions demise by disbanding it altogether.

Actually Gorbachev tried to preserve Communism in the USSR. He wanted to liberalise and free up the system in order to promote growth. However, Gorbachev was discredited after the attempted coup by the security forces in 1991 and Yeltsin cemented Unions demise by disbanding it altogether.
He had the right idea, he wanted gradual change. Representative democracy and property rights do not happen overnight in a country which has never had them. That was similar to the thinking of some of the early communists, who believed that a period of capitalism was necessary before a transition from feudalism to communism was possible.

Yeltsin was a nutcase who wrecked the country.

Communism is not the great evil, however, it was the men that lead, and still lead, the regimes today. Gorbachevs "Glasnost and Perestroika" Were great advances for the nation. Preservation of communism (ideally) is not a bad thing. Preservation of Stalinism was the bad thing. By beginning Glasnost and Perestroika (Glasnost is "openness", I can't remember what Perestroika means) it proves that Gorbachev was not one of the bad guys.

Also, Tactical, what you say about the period of Capitalism. Exactly. That is what I point out as the sole failing of most (if not every) communist regime. They go from beginning to end in one step. There are several. By not getting the infrastructure in place, they sabotage themselves later on. Gorbachev attempted to put the infrastructure in place.

But, if I remember correctly, this is a thread about Reagan, so back on topic after this?

I do believe Reagan was a good president. I think he hastened the fall of Communism, which was his best achievement. He also stabilized the economy and brightened up the country after the horribly depressing "malaise" era of Jimmy Carter.

Perestroika means Reconstruction.

As the words suggest, Openness and Reconstruction were meant to be a gradual move to a market economy, and a sorting out of political and legal stuff. Gorbachev did indeed attempt to put the necessary infrastructure in place. What Yeltsin did was the capitalist equivalent of what the communists had tried to do - make the transition in one jump, without preparing the ground. Like the communists, he failed, so now you have a sort of capitalist Stalinism.

To remain on topic, Reagan's contribution to this was precisely nothing. A progressive political elite had come to prominence in the USSR through its own efforts, and tried to pursue a policy of its own devising. Reagan did little to help the situation with his populist attempts to increase the pressure on the USSR - on the contrary, it can be argued that at this point it needed room and freedom of maneuvre to change under its own steam. Reagan was downright irresponsible, applying pressure to an unstable nuclear superpower in the middle of a war. In the event, the pragmatic elements of the Soviet hierarchy briefly carried the day before being deposed by libertarians. Had Reagan managed to provoke hard-line communist elements, he could have ended up with a superpower bent on exiting in a blaze of glory rather than a peaceful disbanding.

So yes, the man played with nuclear fire when he did not have to, just to look good. Irresponsible.

I do believe Reagan was a good president. I think he hastened the fall of Communism, which was his best achievement.

I think you are forgetting Mr. Hasellhoff's roll in it.

apologies for spelling

In Germany, he is seen as something of a hero in the reunification. I never did understand that. Something to do with his singing career? :?

yeah, what is it with that? I have a recording of a love song by David Hasselhoff, and he is doing a duet with a 14 year old. We all know how liberal continental Europe is, famously. Perhaps she was the daughter of one of the more prominent East Germans, and their unification in love helped unite the nation?

(oh yeah, that's BS. But I think it's funny.)

The "singing career" of David Hassellhoff is the single greatest threat to world peace and stability that has ever existed.

Except for, maybe, Madonna.

As a former president, he deserves to get some air time for his death. However, I fail to see the need for what has been going on all week. It seems as though every channel has found a way to have Reagan on for some reason or another. I'm personally surprised the food channel hasn't had Reagen Crepes or something of the like so they could join in. And having funeral and memorial services each day is overkill. For heaven's sake, JFK didn't have this much publicity.

That's because JFK did nothing as president except look good and die. Reagan influenced America in ways unheard of until then and his influence is still felt. As a Republican, I love the man, but even a Democrat or and independant must recognize his contribution to the world. Fall of the soviet union, anyone?

Me and TG have already mentioned Reagans input into the downfall of the soviet union. Perhaps you may comment on our views?

It was news worthy a week ago.

I am glad it ends today.

*blink*

Whether you like his politics or not you have to admit he had guts, ability and did a lot of good, just like Thatcher.

You funny. :lol:

Ah yes, which reminds me - cultural note: in the UK, Margaret Thatcher is viewed with near-universal contempt of uncommon passion. Even that afforded to Saddam Hussein is of a comparatively banal nature.

Americans always seem to assume the British like her, for some reason. :?

Perestroika means Reconstruction.

As the words suggest, Openness and Reconstruction were meant to be a gradual move to a market economy, and a sorting out of political and legal stuff. Gorbachev did indeed attempt to put the necessary infrastructure in place. What Yeltsin did was the capitalist equivalent of what the communists had tried to do - make the transition in one jump, without preparing the ground. Like the communists, he failed, so now you have a sort of capitalist Stalinism.

To remain on topic, Reagan's contribution to this was precisely nothing. A progressive political elite had come to prominence in the USSR through its own efforts, and tried to pursue a policy of its own devising. Reagan did little to help the situation with his populist attempts to increase the pressure on the USSR - on the contrary, it can be argued that at this point it needed room and freedom of maneuvre to change under its own steam. Reagan was downright irresponsible, applying pressure to an unstable nuclear superpower in the middle of a war. In the event, the pragmatic elements of the Soviet hierarchy briefly carried the day before being deposed by libertarians. Had Reagan managed to provoke hard-line communist elements, he could have ended up with a superpower bent on exiting in a blaze of glory rather than a peaceful disbanding.

So yes, the man played with nuclear fire when he did not have to, just to look good. Irresponsible.
Reagan, perhaps, was not the singal biggest figure in the downfall of the Soviet Union. However, he was a big figure.
Reagan did many things that raised the thermostat a few degrees on the USSR. The arms build-up was a major factor. The Soviets were unable to keep up with the rapid pace of the US, and our military spending was only 6% of our GDP, and we were just starting. Theirs was 30%. The other factor was SDI. It didn't work, but don't pass it off. The Soviets certainly don't. At the time, they believed the most that the US could build a missile shield. If that happened, Moscow would be at its knees, and they knew it. It was a bluff, but one damn good one.
There was another factor, however, that was important. Previous presidents followed a policy of containing communism, but all the while, it was trying to spread. Reagan reversed that trend. Those that were already communist were stopped. He helped drive communism out of our backyard, in Latin America. It strangled the Cubans to death, and effectively ended the Soviet's death grip on the US. Moving arms to Europe wasn't a bad idea, either.
When reform did come, he encouraged it. He signed several arms reducing agreements with Gorbachev, and urged him to follow his policies of perastroika and glasnost. Now, even Gorbachev acknowledges that Reagan played a part in tearing the Soviet Union apart. The Soviet Union was very weak internally, but, with the exception of the Pope, Lech Walesa, and a few others, Reagan helped to clear the gloss they wore, and expose the fact that the Soviets were, in fact, very weak.

Ah yes, which reminds me - cultural note: in the UK, Margaret Thatcher is viewed with near-universal contempt of uncommon passion. Even that afforded to Saddam Hussein is of a comparatively banal nature.

Americans always seem to assume the British like her, for some reason. :?

Well, she did manage to stay in power for quite a long time....

I doubt Reagan can take credit for all that. And driving communism out of South America - it was more than just Cuba that suffered, and worse.

Well, she did manage to stay in power for quite a long time....
Abusive relationships are the hardest to quit.

Well, she did manage to stay in power for quite a long time....
Abusive relationships are the hardest to quit.

HA! :D

Tell me about it.

Every time I see Bush's face on TV, I can't help but hear him say, "LOOK WHAT YOU MADE ME DO!!!"

You know that if you say her name three times into a mirror, she'll come and get you?

You know that if you say her name three times into a mirror, she'll come and get you?

Laura Bush.

Laura Bush.

Laura Bush.

*waits patiently*

*doorbell rings*

Crap, it's Jenna.

You know that if you say her name three times into a mirror, she'll come and get you?
:shock:

I doubt Reagan can take credit for all that. And driving communism out of South America - it was more than just Cuba that suffered, and worse.
Perhaps the methods didn't work as good as we hoped, but it did get the job done. Besides, those death squads that are talked about were once actually soldiers of democratic militias and/or governments. It's unfortunate, however, that they choose to use their training and arms from the US to murder. I guess, however, that even though it was deplorable, it was no where near the evils they were about to be consumed in.

I don't particularly care that Reagan is dead now. I just wish he died, or at least could have been declared clinically insane, before he got into office...and yes the news coverage still continuing is ridiculous. Oh no! We lost a 93 year old geriatric, who was almost as dim before he showed symptoms of Alzheimers!

When Margaret Thatcher dies, it will be one of those funerals where the priest asks for volunteers to say a few words, and there is a quilty silence and exchange of looks as everyone realises that no-one has enough good things to say to make a speech.

Luckily, or not, we can draft in a few Americans to make up the numbers.

When Margaret Thatcher dies, it will be one of those funerals where the priest asks for volunteers to say a few words, and there is a quilty silence and exchange of looks as everyone realises that no-one has enough good things to say to make a speech.

Exactly.

I don't particularly care that Reagan is dead now. I just wish he died, or at least could have been declared clinically insane, before he got into office...and yes the news coverage still continuing is ridiculous. Oh no! We lost a 93 year old geriatric, who was almost as dim before he showed symptoms of Alzheimers!

And this is why people hate Americans...because we have too many bastards shielding themselves and reaping the benefits of the flag while at the same time denying and burning it in disgust.

Whether you like his politics or not you have to admit he had guts, ability and did a lot of good, just like Thatcher.

I need admit nothing of the sort. Reagan was the beginning of the end as far as U.S. government is concerned. I mourn for my country, not the scumbag Reagan.

Seeing as that I never knew the guy, no.

But perhaps a movie marathon is in order. Although the last time I said that about a movie celebrity I never actually did it.

Reagan died a long time ago. For a while there he was just a shell of carbon molecules.

Reagan died a long time ago. For a while there he was just a shell of carbon molecules.
Yes, but it took a while for certain parts of his body to realize that.