Check in here if you oppose Reagan AND support thoughtful criticism AND...

[chimpy the poopthrower]

Check in here if you consider yourself as opposed to Reagan's policies as anyone on DU...

AND you have no problem with thoughtful, even harsh criticism against the policies of his administration...

AND you are disgusted by the comments made by (I hope) a minority of DUers who are saying things like they want to piss on his grave, puke on his corpse, and other such ugliness that has nothing to do with intelligent discussion and everything to do with hate-mongering and self-indulgence. I'd like to get a rough headcount.



ONE

[RoundRockD]

1. I agree with your assessment.

I don't agree with Reagan's policies but I try to show respect for the dead. I am also appalled by the media's exploitation of the man and his family.

Maybe I'm being too sensitive because my father, who was a WWII veteran, passed away recently.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

4. You are THREE

because no name no slogan took TWO :)

[no name no slogan]

2. TWO

The man is dead. He was a president. I grieve for his family and friend. Although I worked hard opposing his policies (and those who stood up for them), I can still accept the fact that he was a human being beset with a horrible disease.

However, I REFUSE to stoop to the freeper-level of wishing to "piss on his grave" or something as idiotic as that. Talk like that only brings us down, and gives the Repubs credibility when they whine about things like Wellstone's memorial service.

[Hubert Flottz]

3. Rash Limbo may already have a good count!(pun intended)

Maybe you can contact him and find the sort of truths you seek, weedhopper!

[chimpy the poopthrower]

6. Really?

I didn't know that Rush Limbaugh opposed Reagan.
I didn't know that Rush Limbaugh supported criticism of Reagan.
Learn something new everyday... :eyes:

[Hubert Flottz]

9. Rash would gladly jump in the box with reagan if bush asked!

He loved reagan! But Rash does know EVERY i that's dotted and every t that's crossed here on DU! I'll bet he even knows the number of hairs on John Kerry's head and about every fart the man has ever cut too! In Short there is not a subject known to man that Rash is not the world's foremost expert on! Don't believe me? Just ask him!

Be Well!

[tom_paine]

5. (Raises hand)

For my critical comments, and also for my defense of those who made critical comments (not the gross stuff mentioned by the people in your third paragraph), I have been lumped in with those people who are saying those terrible things!

[supernova]

7. I don't have to piss on his grave

to effectively work against him. I've been doing that since the Reagan years anyway.

I feel for his family and close friends. He was shitty clueless president who most likely was showing signs of Alzheimer's much earlier than 10 years ago when he was finally diagnosed.

[quinnox]

8. Agreed

I am not a hateful person by nature, so I don't share the kind of bottom-of-the-barrel sentiment exhibited by a minority at DU of the kind of juvenile and slimy behavior that is talked about in the post.

I also note that there have been posts that are classy that have appeared at DU in the past few days that are in a similar vein as this one so the loud crass minority is not an accurate reflection of DU.

What kind of pisses me off is when if someone disagrees with this type of crap, then more often than not they get called a freeper or other nonsense. That is stupidity.

[eileen from OH]

10. FOUR (?)

some folks agreed without adding their own headcount.

And self-indulgence is right. It's one thing to remind people of Reagan was a bad President, and correct the revisionist history now going on all over the damn place. It's quite another to use the occasion of the man's death to post hate-filled rhetoric that was as nasty as anything I've seen anywhere - on any site - conserv or lib.

Not only did I find myself avoiding the non-stop Reagan worship going on the tube, I also avoided DU at the same time because of it. Not that anyone cares, but I found it disturbing, disheartening, and unbelievably tacky and crude.

Thanks for posting this. I'm on board.

eileen from OH

[Cleita]

11. I think we can say what is factual, however, I am dismayed

about untruths being said on this board. One of them was a nasty attack on Nancy Reagan, stating that she had broken up his marriage with Jane Wyman and then sealed the deal with an illigitimate child. Jane Wyman was married to Ronald Reagan from 1940 to 1948.

Many things caused the break-up including Jane's Oscar winning career being more stellar than Reagan's. Another thing was Reagan's move from liberal politics to conservative politics, a thing that happened to him while in the military. This last item isn't official but I got it from a movie industry acquaintance of mine who knew them. It is known that Jane kicked him out, not the other way around.

Reagan met Nancy Davis in 1951, while President of the Screen Actor's Guild, and while she was a rising starlet. So they had a "premature" full time baby shortly after they married, but that really could cover half the couples who marry through history.

So if Nancy didn't meet Reagan until 1951 and Jane Wyman divorced him in 1948, how could she have broken up their marriage? There is a lot to criticize Nancy about that is factual, so let's not make up stuff.

[Zero Division]

12. Agree

Infrequent poster here agreeing with your statement. If that makes me "uptight" and "holier-than-thou" so be it.

Of course this doesn't mean I think that obnoxious statements should be censored.

NINE?

[wryter2000]

13. Yup, yup, and yup

The nasty comments don't do us a damned bit of good and are unnecesary.

[playahata1]

14. I am one of those who have no problem with criticizing Reagan's policies.

I am also NOT bothered by those who want to "piss on his grave."

I am, however, offended by those on this board who want to shut down ANY criticism, ANYTHING negative said about Reagan, even the thoughtful, legitimate criticism. These people talk about liberals being inclusive, but they want to deny the Zombies and the MoPauls and the Walt Starrs and the others who say they want to "piss on his grave" a seat at the table.

Good manners alone are not enough to effect social change -- not that DU alone represents a mass movement, and we DUers are only a SMALL part of that growing movement that is fighting like hell to get this country back on track, if not flat-out change things. My point is that few significant changes throughout the world, throughout history, have ever occurred without more than a few people "acting the fool," as my grandparents put it.

Case in point: the Civil Rights/Black Power movements. The efforts of all the church-going, suit-and-tie-and dress-wearing folks who marched and sang and prayed and chanted for and "dreamed" of freedom, justice, and equality paid off early on, as a few racial barriers were lowered. However, singing "We Shall Overcome" and telling the world "I Have a Dream" had its limits: four little girls just getting out of Sunday School were blown to bits weeks after the March on Washington, and the Bull Connors and the Laurie Pritchetts didn't give a damn if you were a good, hard-working, law-abiding Christian man or woman. You were still a NIGGER, and as such needed to be taught a lesson.

Thus, you had the Malcolm Xs and the H. Rap Browns and the Bobby Seales and the Huey Newtons and the Stokely Carmichaels and the Eldridge Cleavers and the Elaine Browns and the Angela Davises and the Ron Karengas. You also had the ordinary people, the street people, the Homeboys and the Homegirls, who just stood up and said "No more!", even if they were burning down their own neighborhoods. These are the ones the more respectable people said were "acting the fool." Even with all the destruction and devastation, it was this element which forced the mainstream, not to mention the hardcore racists, to PAY ATTENTION. The more receptive listeners AT LEAST MADE AN EFFORT to do something in the name of black freedom, justice, and equality. With mixed results, I freely and willingly admit.

I cite this to say that we Democrats, liberals and other progressive types need those people who are willing to "act the fool," as well as those who can discuss the issues and offer and implement solutions in a calm, rational, respectful manner. The Democratic Party is supposed to be "The Big Tent." Let it be true to its word, instead of dissing and dismissing those who "act the fool," for fear of how we might look to the "mainstream," the "swing voters," the "undecided," the Rushes and the Hannitys, and those who just don't give a damn, period. Peace.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

16. I keep hearing this, but no one provides examples.

I keep hearing that there are so many DUers who want to "shut down ANY criticism, ANYTHING negative said about Reagan, even the thoughtful, legitimate criticism" - as you put it, but whenever I ask for examples, no one can provide them.

What I do see are people who are speaking out against the ugliest posts -- posts which don't do anything to enlighten anyone about Reagan's policies. And I see people who speak out against this ugliness being called "Reagan apologists" and "holier than thou".

Perhaps you can provide some examples so I can see what you're talking about? :shrug:

[playahata1]

47. Here's one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1751668#1751746

[kiahzero]

50. How is that shutting down criticism of Reagan? (n/t)

[noiretextatique]

19. thanks for your eloquence, playahata1...i concur

this notion that there is some "right way" to speak about reagan is bullshit. as is the notion that criticizing "presidents" and "dead people" is disrespectful. i also agree with cleita about not spreading myths as truth.

[mopaul]

23. now and then, there's a fool such as I

we've all been made fools of for far too long.

[noiretextatique]

38. baby, you're my kind of fool

:loveya: keep giving 'em hell...they have EARNED it :hi:

[MISSDem]

40. Off the subject - but I have been wanting to ask someone who just

might know - How did H. Rap Brown end up in prison for life. He was living in Georgia (I think it was) living a quiet life doing good stuff and suddenly he was charged with killing a law enforcement office. What's the story there?

[playahata1]

48. Give me a few minutes to find a link to that story.

I can tell you, that I do believe he was framed.

[el_gato]

15. You got a link to the supposed horrible transgressions?

or are you just talking shit?

oh, by the way, reagan was a butcher who not only sold arms to
iraq and iran but supported the bloody murder of countless numbers
of people in Latin America.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

17. I will be glad to provide examples...

...unlike some others. Give me a few minutes.

[playahata1]

20. I have other things to do besides post at DU, if that is what you mean by

"unlike some others." I will gladly dig up those examples when I find the time to do so. Thank you.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

24. I wasn't singling you out.

I said "others" because I meant the plural. Anyone who makes the claim is free to provide supporting examples. I've asked more than one person to do so.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

25. Here are just a few. I'm sure others could provide more.

"RayGoon will be smellin' pretty gamey before they plant him! You could at least cry about the foul smell! Damn they must have packed the old dude in right guard or twenty mule team borax! 6 days on the road and he's a-gonna' make it home tonight! They could name some kinda fly spray after him I guess! Whew!"

"Wouldn't it be funny if somebody puked on him? I wonder if CNN would cover that??
(reply) Funny, yes...but freakin' hilarious if Bush 41 blew his cookies all over the casket."

"flush him"

"I PISS on the grave of Ronald Reagan"

"R.I.P In hell
(reply) On a slow-turning spit"

[MoonRiver]

29. Not that I doubt your examples or veracity,

but it is customary to provide links when arguing a point.

[el_gato]

39. I was asking for links

[chimpy the poopthrower]

43. here

Here's the puking on the corpse comment
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1754663#1754672

Here are two LBN threads with plenty to choose from.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x604894
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x604956

EDIT:
one more
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1760552

[mopaul]

30. oh my....i'm getting vaporish

[Padraig18]

18. That describes me. n/t

[mopaul]

21. count me in

i utterly accept your desires to scold folks like me, and i sincerely support your ideals. i hated him, AND i support thoughtful criticism. AND i've a right to disagree with you, and you with me.

now, i'm ready to read the discussions.

[MoonRiver]

22. Is this the Zell Miller thread?

Just checking (in)! :D

[chimpy the poopthrower]

27. Yes. Because only Zell Miller would object to comments like...

"RayGoon will be smellin' pretty gamey before they plant him! You could at least cry about the foul smell! Damn they must have packed the old dude in right guard or twenty mule team borax! 6 days on the road and he's a-gonna' make it home tonight! They could name some kinda fly spray after him I guess! Whew!"

All of us DUers who are turned off by such comments are really secret Zell Miller supporters. :eyes:

[MoonRiver]

32. Watch it! Your pomposity is showing!

:eyes:

[LittleApple81]

26. I support all of these things. But I equally defend the right of other

people to vent their anger. Let me tell you, I have noticed that I have become more of a potty-mouthed-maniac as the week has gone on. I have not expressed any desire to piss on anybody's grave (eeewww) but I expressed my opinion that Wolfowitz's arms be cut (when he shamelessly used a poor kid (soldier) who has lost his arms in Iraq to walk with him around the cadaver-du-jour). I would never have said something like this before. BUT THESE PEOPLE ARE THE CREATIONS OF SOME TWISTED MIND and they are in control.

[chimpy the poopthrower]

33. This isn't about rights.

People can say whatever they want on this message board as long as they don't violate the rules. It's possible to spew ugly, hateful rhetoric that does not violate any rules. And I can say that I think it is ugly and hateful. I think it lowers the quality of the board when people say such things. But what I object to even more is being called a "Reagan apologist" or being accused of "butt-kissing" simply because I express the belief that opinions can be expressed forcefully without all the ugliness and that comments about puking on corpses hurt us in the long run.

[LittleApple81]

36. In this I agree with you, as I said. And that is what I love about DU.

I select what threads I participate in. Some of the ones that were so aggressive I didn't at all. Actually, at the beginning (Saturday) I thought we should just SAY NOTHING.... ABSOLUTE SILENCE ABOUT REAGAN and continue our struggle to get his creations out of OUR government. But as the week goes by I am getting more and more upset.
But thanks for expressing your (and other DUers') point of view.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

28. Pissing on his grave would be wrong.

Now if someone were to fart next to it. Wold that be so wrong?

:evilgrin: :evilgrin:

[redqueen]

31. Checking in

n/t

[Raskolnik]

34. Count me in.

Absolutely agree, from one (evidently) self-righteous closet-freeper to another.

Human decency shouldn't be such a crazy concept.

[Auntie Bush]

35. Check me in!

We have a right to say what we want..but, I'm not proud. We sound like Rush and Annie. Rushananni...hey, I like that word!

[Athletic Grrl]

37. Hated the man

with the red hot passion of a thousand suns due to his policies. He'd probably be a decent guy to have over for dinner.

Age and experience have taught me the two can be separated after a certain period of time. I'm not there with our current RIC, though. I'll give him about 20 years. :evilgrin:

[phoebe]

41. Reagan policies and Bush policies are one and the same, only differing in

order of magnitude. Similarities between the two are striking, beginning with the behind-the-scenes manipulation of Reagan's election: the Iran hostage deal. There are so many points of comparison that one would have to be blind not to see them.
Republicans who are trying to distance themselves from Bush's policies by escaping into the past will find little comfort. Re-writing that past will be the order of the day.

[TexasSissy]

42. Opposed to his policies. Think he was honest man. Respect is in order

for a man who has died after a long, terrible ordeal. Respect should be given to a former President who has died, esp. under such circumstances, and in deference to his wife and loved ones.

But his policies were all wrong, I do NOT think he caused Russia to collapse or that he tore down the Berlin wall. I think his economic policies caused great harm to many Americans.

But I think the man was honest at his core (unlike many politicians). And I admire Nancy, who was pretty gutsy and strong-willed.

[redqueen]

44. You think he was honest?

I guess you missed this, somehow.

[republicansareevil]

45. Count me in.

What number are we up to? Oh well.

[kiahzero]

46. Count me in as well (n/t)

[scrotim]

49. Checking in n/t

[Mountainman]

51. What do you mean by respect for the dead?

Does that mean you respect the fact that the family is grieving so you won't do anything to make their suffering worse? Or does it mean that now that Reagan is dead you no longer feel the need to criticize him?

I don't understand why Reagan should be thought of in a different light because he is dead than when he was alive.

For me he was bad for the world and this country as a whole. Being dead doesn't change my opinion of him. I don't respect him now because he died. I can't let him rest in peace because what comes after his death for him is not anything I have control over.

[RememberTheCoup]

52. checking in.