HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Ronald Reagan was angry. ...

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 08:53 AM

Ronald Reagan was angry. It was October 1986, & his veto against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid...

Ronald Reagan was angry. It was October 1986, and his veto against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act had just been overridden — and by a Republican-controlled Senate, at that…

Conservatives believed the U.S. had no business hectoring the South African government over apartheid. Senator Jesse Helms (R–N.C.), the Senate’s leading race-baiter, took the Senate floor to filibuster on behalf of the apartheid government of South Africa. Helms was an old pro at using the filibuster: he had launched a similar one three years earlier against establishing a national holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr. He was joined by like-minded conservatives including noted segregationist Strom Thurmond (R–S.C.) and future presidential hopeful Phil Gramm (R–Texas) in voting against the bill’s final passage. Over in the House, Representative Dick Cheney (R–Wyo.) joined the minority in opposing the Anti-Apartheid Act. In earlier battles over South Africa, Cheney had denounced Nelson Mandela as a terrorist and argued against his release…



Reagan took his case directly to the people on a live TV broadcast. He echoed Crocker in urging Americans to be patient with South Africa’s apartheid government. Reagan argued that sanctions would disproportionately hurt black South Africans without significantly undermining apartheid, and blamed black extremists for contributing to the violence. Change, if it were to come at all, would happen incrementally. He believed he had sold his case effectively, and considered the matter closed…

Under considerable pressure, Republican moderates rallied. Thirty-seven (37) out of 53 Republican senators joined their Democratic colleagues to pass the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act over Reagan’s veto. Conservatives fumed, but they were powerless to stop the law from passing. It was the first time in the 20th century that a presidential veto on a foreign policy issue had been overturned…

..................

MORE:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/52029/the-surprising-republican-civil-war-that-erupted-over-nelson-mandela-and-apartheid

127 replies, 27343 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 127 replies Author Time Post
Reply Ronald Reagan was angry. It was October 1986, & his veto against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid... (Original post)
kpete Dec 2013 OP
Skidmore Dec 2013 #1
warrant46 Dec 2013 #24
hatrack Dec 2013 #105
jollyreaper2112 Dec 2013 #2
DonViejo Dec 2013 #3
Gidney N Cloyd Dec 2013 #5
PeaceNikki Dec 2013 #74
Cha Dec 2013 #97
Enthusiast Dec 2013 #12
weissmam Dec 2013 #33
cntrygrl Dec 2013 #89
PatrynXX Dec 2013 #123
47of74 Dec 2013 #125
barbtries Dec 2013 #44
Orsino Dec 2013 #53
Octafish Dec 2013 #4
Enthusiast Dec 2013 #14
lapfog_1 Dec 2013 #67
JHB Dec 2013 #20
starroute Dec 2013 #32
Octafish Dec 2013 #57
heaven05 Dec 2013 #95
DrDebug Dec 2013 #50
malthaussen Dec 2013 #49
Octafish Dec 2013 #56
JHB Dec 2013 #63
malthaussen Dec 2013 #65
yellowcanine Dec 2013 #94
Borchkins Dec 2013 #6
iandhr Dec 2013 #7
Cha Dec 2013 #98
iandhr Dec 2013 #99
Cha Dec 2013 #101
Loup Garou Dec 2013 #8
yellowcanine Dec 2013 #93
Fortinbras Armstrong Dec 2013 #112
pangaia Dec 2013 #122
iandhr Dec 2013 #9
Hestia Dec 2013 #108
malaise Dec 2013 #10
RFKHumphreyObama Dec 2013 #11
jollyreaper2112 Dec 2013 #16
Cosmocat Dec 2013 #116
kelliekat44 Dec 2013 #13
marble falls Dec 2013 #15
rustbeltrefugee Dec 2013 #17
LittleGirl Dec 2013 #19
bulloney Dec 2013 #21
fishwax Dec 2013 #86
calimary Dec 2013 #26
The Blue Flower Dec 2013 #66
llmart Dec 2013 #92
mkell33 Dec 2013 #106
calimary Dec 2013 #119
wryter2000 Dec 2013 #41
muntrv Dec 2013 #107
mountain grammy Dec 2013 #18
calimary Dec 2013 #22
kairos12 Dec 2013 #34
Comrade Grumpy Dec 2013 #70
kairos12 Dec 2013 #82
Cha Dec 2013 #100
calimary Dec 2013 #81
kairos12 Dec 2013 #84
calimary Dec 2013 #85
msanthrope Dec 2013 #23
LanternWaste Dec 2013 #45
msanthrope Dec 2013 #52
LanternWaste Dec 2013 #59
msanthrope Dec 2013 #60
malthaussen Dec 2013 #47
msanthrope Dec 2013 #54
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #68
msanthrope Dec 2013 #69
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #71
msanthrope Dec 2013 #75
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #77
msanthrope Dec 2013 #78
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #87
msanthrope Dec 2013 #88
moondust Dec 2013 #25
saynotoplutocrats Dec 2013 #27
northoftheborder Dec 2013 #28
LynnTTT Dec 2013 #29
onenote Dec 2013 #58
libodem Dec 2013 #30
calimary Dec 2013 #31
libodem Dec 2013 #43
freebrew Dec 2013 #39
libodem Dec 2013 #42
upi402 Dec 2013 #35
Stainless Dec 2013 #36
Orsino Dec 2013 #55
blogslut Dec 2013 #79
polly7 Dec 2013 #37
rustbeltvoice Dec 2013 #38
tblue Dec 2013 #40
Johonny Dec 2013 #46
Name removed Dec 2013 #48
Octafish Dec 2013 #64
JimboBillyBubbaBob Dec 2013 #51
young_at_heart Dec 2013 #61
cilla4progress Dec 2013 #62
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2013 #72
Marrah_G Dec 2013 #73
Starry Messenger Dec 2013 #76
obama2terms Dec 2013 #111
catbyte Dec 2013 #80
brett_jv Dec 2013 #83
reddread Dec 2013 #102
woolldog Dec 2013 #117
santamargarita Dec 2013 #90
yellowcanine Dec 2013 #91
Cha Dec 2013 #96
Mosaic Dec 2013 #103
BlancheSplanchnik Dec 2013 #104
Incitatus Dec 2013 #109
RFKHumphreyObama Dec 2013 #110
Vattel Dec 2013 #113
AuntFester Dec 2013 #114
me b zola Dec 2013 #115
suffragette Dec 2013 #118
Old and In the Way Dec 2013 #120
99Forever Dec 2013 #121
Rex Dec 2013 #124
Beacool Dec 2013 #126
Gothmog Dec 2013 #127

Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 08:54 AM

1. K&R so we don't forget and

to teach those who did not know the history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:21 AM

24. A POS like Cheney is an evil Racist with a damaged mind

He is a Racist who longs for the days of Stepin Fetchit and Aunt Jemima when "Uppitty Blacks knew their place"

HISTORY FOR THOSE WHO ARE YOUNG OR NEVER KNEW THE TERMS IN THIS POST

So you can understand the motivations of Cheney, Reagan and the other racists mid 20th century minds (Something that will never be taught any more in PUBLIC SCHOOLS)

Lincoln Theodore Monroe Andrew Perry (May 30, 1902 – November 19, 1985), better known by the stage name Stepin Fetchit, was an American comedian and film actor.Perry parlayed the Fetchit persona into a successful film career, eventually becoming a millionaire, the first black actor in history to do so. He was the first black actor to receive featured screen credit in a film. Perry's typical film persona and stage name have long been controversial, and seen as illustrative of negative stereotypes of African-Americans. Seen through a modern lens, Perry's "laziest man in the world" character can be "painfully racist" but also "subversive".

Aunt Jemima is a brand of pancake mix, syrup, and other breakfast foods currently owned by the Quaker Oats Company of Chicago. The trademark dates to 1893, although Aunt Jemima pancake mix debuted in 1889. The Quaker Oats Company first registered the Aunt Jemima trademark in April 1937. Aunt Jemima originally came from a minstrel show as one of their pantheon of stereotypical African American characters. The term "Aunt Jemima" is sometimes used colloquially as a female version of the derogatory label "Uncle Tom". In this context, the slang term "Aunt Jemima" falls within the "Mammy archetype" and refers to a friendly black woman who is perceived as obsequiously servile or acting in, or protective of, the interests of whites.The 1950s television show Beulah came under fire for depicting a "mammy"-like black maid and cook who was somewhat reminiscent of Aunt Jemima.

uppitty---------

Taking liberties or assuming airs beyond one's station; presumptuous: "was getting a little uppity and needed to be slapped down" (New York Times).


My take:

The few living dinosaurs and the skunks at Fox News are attempting to "white wash" history and promote these RACISTS as the saints and saviors of America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 06:39 PM

105. The history of Reagan as an angry, right-wing asshole.

"Oh, but he was such a great communicator!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:09 AM

2. for fuck's sake

Have the conservatives ever been on the right side of history, on anything?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:11 AM

3. No. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:24 AM

5. Eventually, like 10 or 20 years after everyone else is on board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:12 PM

74. That's not being on the right side. That's being dragged along kicking and screaming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gidney N Cloyd (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:29 PM

97. Only when they're trying to steal if for themselves. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:50 AM

12. They have not.

For much of our history Democrats were the conservative party. When they were the conservative party they were wrong too. Conservative = wrong, every time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:12 AM

33. Pretty much

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 03:47 PM

89. LOL Very good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 8, 2013, 05:25 PM

123. Hence why this guy called Abe Lincoln

is normally called a Democrat. Most republicans failed civics class

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatrynXX (Reply #123)

Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:27 AM

125. Lincoln would've been teabagged right of today's GOP

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:35 AM

44. not to my knowledge.

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:05 PM

53. At least a few of them have been, as this story shows.

Just very, very late in the game.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:21 AM

4. Explains a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:52 AM

14. They have not changed one bit.

But they now know to keep a lid on their bigotry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enthusiast (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:46 PM

67. not really

someone here posted a link to Ted Cruz facebook page... Ted wrote something "nice" (but generic) about Mandela... and you should read the responses from Ted's followers... they aren't very good at hiding the racism.

Ted is now a squish to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:09 AM

20. And just to remind people that Ed Meese is still around...

...and still injecting poison into American politics:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/us/a-federal-budget-crisis-months-in-the-planning.html?_r=0
A Federal Budget Crisis Months in the Planning
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG and MIKE McINTIRE
Published: October 5, 2013

WASHINGTON — Shortly after President Obama started his second term, a loose-knit coalition of conservative activists led by former Attorney General Edwin Meese III gathered in the capital to plot strategy. Their push to repeal Mr. Obama’s health care law was going nowhere, and they desperately needed a new plan.

Out of that session, held one morning in a location the members insist on keeping secret, came a little-noticed “blueprint to defunding Obamacare,” signed by Mr. Meese and leaders of more than three dozen conservative groups.
***
Mr. Meese’s low-profile coalition, the Conservative Action Project, which seeks to find common ground among leaders of an array of fiscally and socially conservative groups, was looking ahead to last Tuesday, when the new online health insurance marketplaces, called exchanges, were set to open. If the law took full effect as planned, many conservatives feared, it would be nearly impossible to repeal — even if a Republican president were elected in 2016.

“I think people realized that with the imminent beginning of Obamacare, that this was a critical time to make every effort to stop something,” Mr. Meese said in an interview. (He has since stepped down as the coalition’s chairman and has been succeeded by David McIntosh, a former congressman from Indiana.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHB (Reply #20)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:10 AM

32. Twenty years earlier, Meese led the crackdown on the Free Speech Movement

Meese has been bad news since December 1964 -- coming up on 50 years now. Here's what The Nation wrote about it at the time:

http://www.thenation.com/article/free-speech-movement

The Free Speech Movement (FSM) at the University of California burst into headlines across the country with the sit-in by 1,000 students in Sproul Hall on Wednesday afternoon, December 2, and with the arrest, on Thursday, of 800 of them. ...

University President Clark Kerr and Gov. Edmund C. Brown were both, a it happened, in Los Angeles. As the sit-in continued in what all witnesses agree was an orderly manner, Edwin Meese, deputy district attorney of Alameda County, phoned Governor Brown that the situation was out of hand and that enforcement action was imperative. Brown consulted with Kerr and with the president of the university's Board of Regents, department-store magnate Edward V. Carter. The three agreed that intervention by the police was necessary, and Brown gave the order.

Meese and the army of policemen moved onto the campus. FSM leaders, who had set up a public-address system inside the building, advised all demonstrators under 18, all foreign students, and one who might be on probation to leave. Meese then pointed out the first arrestee: the attorney, Robert Truehaft. ...

After about forty arrests had been made, the police saw that the process was taking too long. They withdrew temporarily (the students now call this "the coffee break", and when they returned had apparently decided to get rough. The new plan was to bring women down in the elevator, and men by the narrow marble stairs, although a few unfortunate women also made it down the stairs. Some were brought down by arms or shoulders, but reporters present say that most were hauled by their feet. One conscientious reporter counted the marble steps as he followed a girl whose head jarred sickeningly as she was dragged down. There were ninety.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to starroute (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:11 PM

57. It's how the Actor got to play Governor

Ronald Reagan launched political career using the Berkeley campus as a target

By Jeffery Kahn, NewsCenter | 8 June 2004

BERKELEY – Ronald Reagan launched his political career in 1966 by targeting UC Berkeley's student peace activists, professors, and, to a great extent, the University of California itself. In his successful campaign for governor of California, his first elective office, he attacked the Berkeley campus, cementing what would remain a turbulent relationship between Reagan and California's leading institution for public higher education.

"This was not a happy relationship between the governor and the university — you have to acknowledge it," recalled Neil Smelser, who was a Berkeley professor of sociology during the Reagan years. "As a matter of Reagan's honest convictions but also as a matter of politics, Reagan launched an assault on the university."

As the Vietnam War expanded and the death toll climbed, students at Berkeley launched a determined and, at times, confrontational attempt to stop the war with demonstrations and protests that eventually spread to college campuses across the country. Years later, much of the public came to agree with the students but in 1966, those opposed to the war were a distinct minority in America. Candidate Reagan capitalized on this.

Smelser, assistant chancellor for educational development at the time Reagan ran for office, recalled that "Reagan took aim at the university for being irresponsible for failing to punish these dissident students. He said, 'Get them out of there. Throw them out. They are spoiled and don't deserve the education they are getting. They don't have a right to take advantage of our system of education.'"

Reagan had two themes in his first run for office. The man who later became known as "The Great Communicator" vowed to send "the welfare bums back to work," and "to clean up the mess at Berkeley." The latter became a Reagan mantra.

CONTINUED...

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/06/08_reagan.shtml

PS: And we continue to suffer from his horror show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to starroute (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:02 PM

95. typical RW behavior

 

mean and vicious in 1964, mean and vicious 2013. Nothing different in their mentality toward the anti -1%ers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHB (Reply #20)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:55 AM

50. And a reminder that the "Homeland" security nonsense

was drafted by ... (drum roll) Edwin Meese and Paul Bremer. That fascist Homeland term could have been related to Bremer merger with Versar Inc who were already using homelanddefense.com since 2000-02-16 (http://whois.domaintools.com/homelanddefense.com)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:52 AM

49. Bell appears, however, to be trying to exonerate Reagan.

From what appears, he is blaming the underlings, but implying that the President's hands were clean.

-- Mal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malthaussen (Reply #49)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:08 PM

56. Possibly. However, the guy did shine a spotlight on Pruneface that no PR can shield.

Then, again, Corporate McPravda did shield the public from the modern conservative's mindset:





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malthaussen (Reply #49)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:31 PM

63. Think of Meese as Reagan's Cheney...

...with bits of Rove.

It just shows that even members of the fan club could recognize these guys for the pieces of work that they were (and still are).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JHB (Reply #63)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:35 PM

65. Sure, but it's the blindness about the fellow at the top that intrigues me.

Is it just "coincidence" when a president surrounds himself with assholes as advisors?

-- Mal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malthaussen (Reply #49)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 04:20 PM

94. So the "Underlings" wielded the VETO and made the speech to the American people opposing sanctions?

Interesting take from the "party of personal responsibility"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:29 AM

6. k&R disgusting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:34 AM

7. This was in the Butler

Last edited Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Republican Senators were in the Oval Office saying that if he vetoed the bill it would be over ridden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:31 PM

98. thanks, landhr.. So looking forward to seeing that! nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #98)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:34 PM

99. Sorry

Its no longer in theaters I thought most people would have seen it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #99)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:38 PM

101. No, I'm sorry.. I don't see movies in

theaters anymore. I wait for the DVDs

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:36 AM

8. GOP Mourns Nelson Mandela, Won't Mention Reagan, Cheney, Religious Right Opposed Him

GOP Mourns Nelson Mandela, Won't Mention Reagan, Cheney, Religious Right Opposed Him, Supported Apartheid

The Republican National Committee released a statement on GOP.com:

"On behalf of the Republican Party, I send our deepest sympathies to the Mandela family and to the people of South Africa on the passing of former President Nelson Mandela,” said Chairman Priebus. “The world will always remember the legacy of the man who dedicated his life to freedom and equality.

“An oppressive government, 27 years in prison, and a divided nation – none destroyed his determination to see a more just world. His legacy is defined by doing what others declared impossible, most notably fighting the evil of apartheid and beginning the healing of a nation.”


However, there was no mention about how President Ronald Reagan and conservative Republicans supported apartheid in South Africa and opposed Mandela being freed from a jail cell where he spent 27 years of his life.


http://www.opposingviews.com/i/religion/christianity/gop-mourns-nelson-mandela-wont-mention-reagan-cheney-religious-right-opposed#

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loup Garou (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 04:15 PM

93. Dixicrats turned Repub Jesse Helms and Strom Thurmond

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #93)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 06:34 AM

112. When racism was no longer acceptable in the Democratic Party

Many of the racists, such as Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, became Republicans. The Republicans welcomed them with open arms.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loup Garou (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 8, 2013, 01:52 PM

122. "On behalf of the Republican Party, I send our deepest sympathies to the Mandela family..."

Who the hell says something like that.. On behalf of the republican party. WTF is that?? Has anyone ever said on behalf of the Democratic Party, ......" in such a situation?
I sure hope not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:42 AM

9. This one few times in history...

... where sanctions actually worked to change a regimes behavior.

More often then not sanctions hurt people and not the regimes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:33 PM

108. No, it really didn't. Read the South Africa chapter in "The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein

S.A. still has to pay something like 80% of their GDP to very people who enacted Apartheid because they "deserved" to get repaid for the losses incurred by having to step down as government officials. It is an outrage and abomination what they did to the new country.

Always remember - yes, you have a revolution but always pay attention to what is being negotiated. S.A. admit that they were rushed into negotiations and had absolutely no idea what they were doing.

How's the quote go - What the Large Print Giveth, the Small Print Taketh Away - and S.A. is still paying out the ass for winning their revolution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:47 AM

10. Do you know that it was the first foreign policy veto overruled in the 20th century

The lovers of St Ronnie don't mention this massive defeat but then again they never blame him for those hundreds of dead marines in Lebanon either.

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/10/03/politics/03REAG.html
<snip>
Senate, 78 to 21, Overrides Reagan’s Veto and Imposes Sanctions on South Africa
By STEVEN V. ROBERTS, Special to the New York Times
Published: October 3, 1986

WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 — The Senate voted today to override President Reagan's veto of legislation imposing stiff economic sanctions on South Africa. In doing so it rejected his pleas for support as he prepares to meet Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, in Iceland.

The vote was 78 to 21, or 12 votes more than the two-thirds vote necessary to override. Since the House also voted to rebuff the President earlier this week, the sanctions bill became law as soon as the Senate voted to override the President's veto.

After the vote, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said: ''The Senate's action today expressed the best ideals of the American people. The message to countries all over the world is, the United States will lead, and we're proud to lead.''

The sanctions, indeed, go further than those enacted Sept. 16 by the European Community. Those ban new investment and imports of gold coins, iron and steel from South Africa, but do not include a ban on coal imports. The European Community had already banned military and police cooperation, as well as oil sales and cooperation in nuclear development.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:47 AM

11. Reagan was a disastrous, reactionary President and we are still cleaning up his mess

His hateful attitude toward on this attitude was entirely in character.

What amazed -and somewhat heartened me- me was, how many the right-wing Reaganite conservatives swept in with the Reagan tide in 1980s who were reactionary in most other ways, several of them bucked the President and did the right thing in supporting the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act. I wonder whether we'd get the same result with today's Republican Congress




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RFKHumphreyObama (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:58 AM

16. The funny thing

I was going to say you would never see a rebellion like that today but actually we are but it's not for good but for stupid. The GOP can't enforce the party discipline to keep from doubling down on stupid. Boner didn't want the shutdown fight but couldn't avoid it so acted like he owned it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jollyreaper2112 (Reply #16)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 08:36 AM

116. We have actually lost ground

Significantly.

This would NEVER happen in this day and age - not a single republican would break ranks and the democrats would have no belly for the fight.

I can't imagine that I will ever see congress situated to be able to act like this again in my life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:50 AM

13. Sometimes, most people get it right. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:53 AM

15. A bright moment in time when conscience over rode businss interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:59 AM

17. He was a racist.

Throughout the seventies we made a lot of progress in the area of race, but when Ronnie got up and blamed our problems on "welfare queens" it was a dog whistle, as if he was saying that "its ok to be prejudiced,we all are" I have tried to explain this before and people look at me like I am crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustbeltrefugee (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:08 AM

19. welcome to DU

rustbeltrefugee...I am one too...refugee.

It was a dog whistle! You are not crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustbeltrefugee (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:12 AM

21. Don't forget that Reagan's first campaign speech after the 1980 nomination was near Philadelphia, MS

site of one of the darkest moments in the civil rights movement of the 1960s when 3 civil rights workers were murdered by some "good ole boys."

Don't tell me that wasn't a dog whistle for the racists that made up a lot of the Republican base.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bulloney (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 02:00 PM

86. and at that speech he played up the states rights dog whistle

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustbeltrefugee (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:30 AM

26. Welcome to DU, rustbeltrefugee!

Glad you're here! And YES it was a dog-whistle. Remember, he had people like lee atwater and david gergen and roger ailes and richard viguerie with his well-refined and tested mailing-list shakedown schemes, and other master manipulators of the media and the public zeitgeist working for him. And fiends like kkkarl rove were eager young up-n-coming students. And the rise of the evangelicals like jerry falwell and pat robertson and too many others were on the rise, with their empires building and their takeover of America was metastasizing like a fucking cancer! Pirates On Parade. YOU BET YOUR BIPPY they knew about this kind of mind-game. And don't forget - the 1980 election also brought newt gingrich into Congress - with his GOPAC and his little black book - his sneaky-ass and soon-to-be-famous lexicon, in which he issued lists of words and phrases to use to, well, "decorate effectively." As in - adding the meanings and inferences and subtle suggestions of your choice to multiple concepts. There were lists of negative words and phrases to use when talking about Democrats and liberals, and there were comparable lists of positive words and phrases to use when talking about all things republi-CON and CONservative.

Words were POWERFUL!!!! They made a science of this. frank luntz was busy warming up in the bullpen and refining his version of this with his focus-group testing of people's reaction to words and phrases and the impressions they'd come away with, upon hearing this stuff. Words like "family" and "faith" and "patriotic" and other stuff were always attached to CON subjects, topics, and people. You weren't supposed to attach those words to anything regarding the Dems. That way you could VERY subtly paint a picture - and add a taint to what you didn't like (like the Dems) and you could make Democrats and liberals look and sound un-American and unpatriotic and godless and Communistic, while all things republi-CON were painted with apple pie and Mom and red-white-and-blue America colors, and it was all under-the-radar. And it worked. And YES, "welfare queens" was used to slam an entire demographic group = blacks.

Then on top of that, reagan was such a smooth talker and so congenial with his aw-shucks schtick. Lovable and amiable and harmless, just a nice-friendly-old-uncle. Reminded me of the manipulative "Friendly Angel" monster in one of the original "Star Trek" series episodes. It was all schtick. And straight outta Hollywood, no less! What a salesman - WORLD CLASS. And it worked. The ground was all nicely softened and ready for planting seeds. People were already favorably predisposed towards nice, kindly "Old Dutch" and "The Gipper" and all this other cosmetic crap that was spewed all the time. And it worked. Mind games and mind control EVERYWHERE. They managed every molecule carefully and meticulously, and had their once-in-a-lifetime salesman out there selling it to America, and damned effectively, too. As silky and subtle and sneaky-ass as hell. They left no fingerprints. DAYUM those bastards were good. That's how so much of the shit we're now wading through got started and imbedded and implanted in the backs of gullible voters everywhere who yearned for some hero, some Captain America type - and they were given it with all the empty calories of whipped cream and a cherry on top.

To this day I despise ronald reagan. I think he was the worst thing to happen to the United States of America in modern times. It all got started on his watch. All the demons and cockroaches and snakes and rats and other political vermin were unleashed on his watch. The foxes were unleashed on the henhouses, and the theft and gorging and gouging were unrestrained. The damage he did, that he caused, that he begat - LONG-TERM damage that in some cases is so deeply imbedded and ingested that it'll take generations to undo - was damn near criminal. Hell, it was FLAT-OUT criminal when it came to things like Iran/Contra. What a bleak decade. The only good thing I can say about ronald reagan, to this day, is that he's dead.

On edit - ...and NO, you're NOT crazy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #26)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:35 PM

66. Very well put

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #26)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 04:08 PM

92. Spot on analysis of the Reagan years.....

Even as a 30-something I could never understand how so many people bought into the crap. I totally agree with you that I can pinpoint the decline in modern life to when he was elected. We need to NEVER let people forget how much damage he and his troupe did to the middle class in this country. He was a total sham just like W - a puppet for those behind the scenes people who were calling the shots, and many of them were part of both administrations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #26)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 06:54 PM

106. What a relief

Thank YOU! It is so nice to see people that lived through the bs still willing to speak up. RR was a disgrace. I find the glorification of those guys to be utterly disgusting. When I see polls with young people down on OCA, I think, really? You want the Reagan offspring approach to the world? Stupid Fs. Almost makes you want to let them learn the hard way. But then we would have to be witness and that is not worth it for any price.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mkell33 (Reply #106)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 03:34 PM

119. Welcome to DU, mkell33!

Good to have you with us! Yeah, old fart here, I'm afraid. I'm 60 this year. Tried to "hip it up" a little by redefining it as "Miss 60" riffing off the younger-skewed fashion line.

But yeah, I think we HAVE to speak up! We HAVE to tell the truth when so many elements around us are relentlessly not. And the media certainly isn't. Nowadays it's filled with the chuck todds who think it's not their job to straighten out the crooked lies and misleading talking points, or set the record straight. NO WONDER the electorate is so mis-informed. Nobody's willing to shed light anymore. I cling to the Rachel Maddow show and for the next few weeks also to Randi Rhodes on the radio - because KTLK here in Los Angeles will cease to be as of the new year. ClearChannel is shoving limbaugh and that-guy-whose-name-rhymes-with-VANITY and a whole bunch of sewer dwellers down our throats in a big programming change. HAH - they're packaging it as "The Patriot." What a joke.

I read somewhere that there's this approximate 80-year cycle in the national mindset or zeitgeist or whatever you want to call it. Eighty years. Things like Great Depressions and Great Recessions and Great Economic Collapses and Downturns happen approximately every 80 years. And it's thought to be mainly because nobody's around who remembers what happened that long ago. Nobody's around to remember, for example, how bad it was during the Great Depression, or what brought it on beforehand - the "Roaring 20s" when it was the free market on parade and sharks and pirates were running amok and there were no restrictions or controls or curbs to speak of, and it was hands-off big business and don't DARE do anything to stand in its way - let Big Business BE Big Business. (Kinda like the moldy oldie from the 80s - "Let reagan be reagan!". And that led to the biggest economic disaster in our history.

And THAT, in turn, led to people beginning to wake up. And it started to dawn on at least some of 'em, back then, that regulations and restrictions and curbs on Wall Street and Big Capitalism so they could NOT be reckless and greedy and opportunistic with America's money anymore. And that, in turn, led to government stepping in and clamping down, and rescuing the foundering ship. THAT, in turn, led to the problems beginning to be solved, and the trouble beginning to ebb away. And you get long enough of that and soon THAT, in turn, leads to a sense of complacency that starts to build over the ensuing decades among those who DO want to be reckless and don't like being restricted. Then THEY, in turn, AND those around them who are just watching from the sidelines, start wondering WHY we gotta have somebody telling us what to do and government getting in our way and why do we need all these regulations and restrictions and limitations when things are just fine! Hey, nothing to see here! The problems are fixed. Solved! No worries! So why are we still restricted? Can't we get rid of these stupid laws that don't apply anymore because the issues that ruled when they were implemented no longer are there? Whaddo we need all this government interference for? Let's undo some of this shit! We don't need it anymore! Problem's solved! Take the shackles off! Let the free market go free again! Free market! Free market!

SOOOooooo... you ultimately start hearing the yowling and whining about how the government is bad and we should get the government off our backs and it isn't needed and it isn't necessary and the government is the problem and blah-blah-blah. And the general population starts to believe it because A) it sounds good and it seems to make sense; and B) THAT is mainly what they're hearing as the advocates start to rise in power and prominence.

Unfortunately for all of us, the late 70s became a perfect storm that begat the rise of ronald reagan. He rode in on this nauseating movement that started, I'm sorry to say, here in California with Prop 13, in 1978. I was working at the time and had ol' Howard Jarvis on the radio the election morning-after when it passed, which was a lucky break for a little ol' morning news lady like me to nab him after he was headed down the hall from the morning TV interview he'd just done (even though I realized I was only helping to spread the infection). And like a virus or drug-resistant flesh-eating bacteria, it spread across the country from here. }=(

It provided the surfboard ronald reagan rode in - on this huge tidal wave of CONservative trickle-down crap, and we have yet to pull ourselves out of it. I mean, look at the shit people are giving Pope Francis now, after he dared to denounce trickle-down. But he's absolutely correct. And it's about time my poor misguided church started taking a stand on what the REAL Jesus taught, as opposed to the Supply-Side Jesus abomination that these assholes cooked up for us.

It's gonna take us a generation to undo all the damage. scalia happened during ronald reagan. I remember covering it and thinking "what the hell is an 'Antonin'? Isn't it supposed to be Antoine or Antonio?" And anthony kennedy happened on reagan's watch, too - he who can pretty much always be counted on to be the swing (to the so-called "right" vote.

We have SUCH a huge reeducation and rehabilitation job ahead of us, to pull this misguided nation back from the extreme wrong-wing. And for so long our side was just absolutely asleep at the switch. A lot of times I've posted here talking about how important it is to protect the ground we've gained, build upon the gains we've made in whatever election just went our way. Because I've noticed that there's a very bad tendency on our side to get complacent, and assume that once we've started moving things toward the better, then that's all that's needed and it'll just somehow magically keep up that way. So we then can relax and go back to sleep. We let the ERA slip through our fingers. We let the peace movement slip through our fingers. Now we're at risk of letting a woman's right to choose slip through our fingers - look what's happening on THAT front these days?

The bad guys never dose off. They NEVER take their eye off the ball. They NEVER let down their guard and figure they've got this so they can relax for a little bit. WE'RE the ones that do that. It drives me CRAZY!!!!! WE'RE the ones who naively believe "the American people will see! They'll see what the truth is. They'll KNOW!" And the answer is "WRONG!!!!!!!!" They WON'T! Especially when there's such a virulent and powerful and never-ending pushback - in the now-powerful and entrenched wrong-wing media (that owns pretty much the whole game now) and big money backing all the bad guys, to make sure the general public stays blind. We're STILL there, what with the Dems ONLY NOW starting a PR offensive about the Affordable Care Act. SHIT! You guys just figured that out NOW??????? WHERE THE FUCK HAVE YOU BEEN????? That should have been undertaken several YEARS ago!!!!!! What were you thinking??? That just because this problem exists and people need affordable health care they'll just somehow magically SEE? FUCK THAT!!!

Something else I find myself posting a lot: I quote from Mad-Eye Moody in the Harry Potter books. Remember what he always warned Harry Potter? "CONSTANT VIGILANCE!!!!"

Sigh... enough. I've fulminated enough. Sorry to rant on. It's just that kind of day...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustbeltrefugee (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:23 AM

41. Welcome to DU

You're so right. He started that crap when he was governor of CA. What an utter waste of protoplasm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rustbeltrefugee (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 07:09 PM

107. Reagan opposed the Rumford Act, which banned discrimination in housing in CA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:08 AM

18. K & R for history! Thank you.

I remember this very well. The great (gag) communicator confirming what we already knew; he was a racist, along with most Republicans.. but Mitch McConnell, wow, never saw that coming. No memory of him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:14 AM

22. This gives me TREMENDOUS satisfaction. SWEET as hell to read and savor!

SOOOOO satisfying! I was working on-air during that bleak period in American history. Covering it was just a little bit o' misery every day - and there were weeks - even months on end where every damn story I wrote and/or anchored, or heard my other colleagues on the network writing and/or anchoring - about government doings and legislation and other stuff - had some inevitable wording in it about "... if President reagan gets his way..."

And it just GRATED. It was nauseating. WAVES of nauseating! He just steamrolled everything. Made me wonder sometimes whether he'd made some secret pact with the Devil - maybe selling his soul to get the green light and the all-clear on everything he did in the White House. It just seemed as though he just ramrodded every doggone thing he wanted into reality and, again and again and again, Congress just fell on its collective knees (the blighted years of bush/cheney took me back to that shitty time). But there WERE rare and wonderful occasions when the ol' fart did NOT get his way. Rare occasions. Occasions that I secretly celebrated even while trying to sound objective and non-partisan on the air (believed that was part of my job).

The rare moments when that bastard did NOT get his way renewed my faith that things weren't always quite as hopeless as they seemed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:12 AM

34. And the public is still naming everything done in concrete after him--pardon me while I retch.

Last edited Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:46 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kairos12 (Reply #34)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:06 PM

70. Pedantry alert: You "retch;" Reagan is a "wretch." That is all.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #70)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:44 PM

82. Thanks for the correction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #70)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:35 PM

100. The Wretch that makes you Retch. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kairos12 (Reply #34)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:41 PM

81. Well MY particular fantasy, if I were in office in DC, would be about adding amendments

to EVERY bill that came up - to start undoing and dismantling that. Such a stupid, foolish campaign - a true fool's errand. Maybe a dam (for the pun) or a sewage treatment plant. That'd be fitting. But I still refer to Washington National Airport, and the Simi Valley Freeway. Don't expect me to join in the nauseating glorification of that monster!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #81)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:49 PM

84. I would name one thing after him--that reactor at Chernobyl because of the all out destruction

he did to the U.S. landscape. Raygun made nuclear desolation of the middle-class and poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kairos12 (Reply #84)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:59 PM

85. That would be fitting.

Remember during the last round of republi-CON presidential campaign debates? Remember how every one of those jerk-bots kept invoking ronald reagan. Over and over. ronaldreagan ronaldreagan ronaldreagan ronaldreagan... Started sounding like their stomachs were growling. I thought that was pretty fitting, too.

You're nothing but a rude noise at this point, ronnie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:17 AM

23. And remember...the SA government were Nazi allies. Unrepentant ones. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:38 AM

45. South Africa was a member of the British Commonwealth during WW2

 

South Africa was a member of the British Commonwealth during WW2, declaring war upon Germany when Smuts came to office in Sept of '39.

So let's not remember biased and petulant fiction... but rather history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #45)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:00 PM

52. Yes--let's look at the actual history. The National Party was allied with the Nazis. The National

 

Party, if you remember, was quite vocal in its support of the Nazis during World War II. These were the guys who came into power in 1948 and were still in power when Mr. Reagan decided to 'constructively engage' them. The Nazi supporters. The Apartheid Architects. Where do you think all the Greyshirts went?

That's why I wrote "the SA government."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #52)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:16 PM

59. Vocal support is quite different than an Alliance.

 

Vocal support is quite different than an Alliance. The one is one specific thing, the other is a rather different thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:23 PM

60. Are we forgetting the Greyshirts? The SS Stuttgart? The Broederbond?

 

Smuts just barely kept a lid on these animals, but these Nazi allies came to power in 1948.....and they were who Reagan bargained with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:44 AM

47. You mean Hertzog and company? They didn't last long.

SA declared war promptly enough after Hitler invaded Poland, and some 11,000 SA military personnel were killed during WW II.

-- Mal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malthaussen (Reply #47)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:07 PM

54. No--I mean the The National Party. The Nazi sympathizers who were barely kept under control

 

during WWII by Smuts, and then, who took power in 1948 and were still in power when Reagan decided to 'constructively engage' them.

Let's not kid ourselves here---the racial policy of 'apartheid' didn't magically appear in 1948 out of no where. You'd be surprised where a lot of old Nazis and their ideas ended up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:47 PM

68. Yes, a of Old Nazis ended up right here in the US among other places.

And a few pretty powerful Americans were happy to deal, for businesses purposes only I'm sure, with the Nazis.

So what's your point about SA having some Nazi sympathizers and/or collaborators? They were everywhere. Just like our support to this day for some of the world's worst dictatorships, such as Uzbekistan eg.

And that isn't even history yet, but it will be, one day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #68)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:02 PM

69. I am intrigued at your defense of Reagan's attempts to engage the Nazi-sympathizing National Party.

 

Please, keep explaining. You might want to include an apologia for Prescott Bush in your historical analysis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #69)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:11 PM

71. You are often intrigued by your own fantasies. Pointing fingers at others while supporting

policies, eg the continuing support for brutal regimes right here was the issue, which I'm sure everyone else understands.

Reagan was a racist moron who caused incalculable harm to this and other countries, just for the record.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #71)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:18 PM

75. Sabrina, I do not know what Uzbeckistan has to do with this thread, but I like

 

your sense of foreign policy.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #75)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:29 PM

77. I don't understand your opposition to support for dictators by others, but silence on

on our historical and ongoing support for dictators right here.

If you lived in some of those dictatorships we support, still, with our tax dollars, you would understand what Uzbekistan (just one example) has to do with this.

Sometimes it's a good thing to focus on cleaning up one's house rather pointing fingers elsewhere. History tends to repeat itself when ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #77)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:34 PM

78. So...in the thread where I pointed out that Reagan constructively engaged with Nazi sympathizers,

 

I'm somehow supporting the dictatorship of Ukbeckistan????


You crack me up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msanthrope (Reply #78)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 02:09 PM

87. Reagan constructively engaged every dictator he could find, in South America, the ME

etc.

Again, what's your point?

Do you support our current support of Uzbeckistan and all the other dictatorships we support, Bahrain eg?

Otherwise your position on supporting bad guys is pretty inconsistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #87)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 02:16 PM

88. Oh, Sabrina, you know I don't answer your questions. Uzbeckstan!!! Benghazi!!!..or wait...

 

we are on to Bahrain?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:30 AM

25. No moral compass.

It's the old states' rights argument: If you wanna keep slaves and stuff it's nobody else's business.

I shudder to think what might have been had a Republican been in the White House in the late 1930s and 1940s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:34 AM

27. Ronald the Racist Reagan

 

Thanks for posting this, it is an important part of history to remember. When republicans talk about their lovable old grandpa figure and how the nation needs another Ronald Reagan, they usually forget to mention he was the worst Whitehouse racist in the 20th century. Reagan's veto of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act was so extreme that it was overridden by a REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED SENATE, by a vote of 78 to 21. Only 67 votes are needed to override, but lots of Republicans wanted to go on record as not being part of the Ronald the Racist wing of the party. The bipartisan override of Reagan’s veto created a law that may well have directly caused the release of Nelson Mandela from prison in 1990.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:40 AM

28. Thanks for reminding us of that history - very important -

Sanctification of Reagan must not be allowed to happen. Also, Cheney's past must be kept up to date, I can see his life being whitewashed in the future..........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:46 AM

29. Anyone who voted with Reagan still in office?

McConnell, Lugar and others did the right thing back then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LynnTTT (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:13 PM

58. Of those serving in the Senate at the time and now

Only Hatch voted to sustain Reagan's veto. The other two then and now repub Senators, McConnell and Grassley, both voted to override.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:52 AM

30. If I could lower my opinion

Of Dick Cheney, I would. It's already in the basement. He has absolutely zero redeeming qualities. I don't think anyone on Earth is as evil. Maybe in the past. But for this time period, history will judge him for his basic hate of humanity, destruction of our middle class, and a world of never ending war. Hope he enjoys watching it from, Hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:10 AM

31. Well, just remember what Hugo Chavez said -

about the smell of sulfur. He made that comment, I believe, at the UN after dubya the White House Squatter spoke there one day.

I think when cheney finally goes to his "final reward" we will likely smell a faint whiff of sulfur wafting through the air from coast-to-coast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:34 AM

43. It's why he is so afraid of death

If there is an afterlife he will be floating over the crib wards in Faluja. He will reincarnate as a Muslim mutant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:20 AM

39. Don't ever forget....

cheney learned his ruthlessness from the BFEE.

Reagan was bad, but he was only the frontman.

HW, the father, was veep.

There are few families in this country that have stolen so much from the American people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freebrew (Reply #39)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:25 AM

42. So true

A real culture of corruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:14 AM

35. Saint Ronald was a sack of shit

Cheney even worse. I hope there really IS a hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:15 AM

36. Ronald Wilson Reagan truly was an evil POS

Many ignorant people think he was a great President because racism, hatred and bigotry are deeply woven into the fabric of American Conservatism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stainless (Reply #36)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:08 PM

55. Or was just the first president to be forced to take official notice of apartheid.

Let's recall the failure of previous administrations to do more than mention it in passing.

Of course a numbskull like Reagan was going to botch it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orsino (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:40 PM

79. Carter imposed military sanctions on South Africa

Reagan revoked them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:16 AM

37. sorry ... wrong spot. nt.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:17 AM

38. what can i say about Ronnie?

The esteem, sometimes foggy nostalgia, that encompasses many in regards to Ronnie Reagan is curious. Goldwater lost the presidency, primarily because the majority of people thought he was nuts. Ronnie, was often moreso than Barry. When Ronnie was in the Executive Mansion, i would often think, and say, "No, that can not be. I was dreaming something stupid".

Ronnie had no respect for history, and therefore, truth. He pitched falsity, but he pitched it well. He played Grover Cleveland Alexander, The Winning Team; perhaps he learned something; but for many of us he was the fellow who acted with a chimp, Bedtime for Bonzo.

With something (about Norman Thomas) he said fifty years ago, whether it originated with him or not, people will quote as true. He would later refer to events in a movie as an historical occurrence. Here is my question: did Reagan cleverly lie to promote his agenda? or did reality and fantasy blur in his mind? or what he wished to be true, became true?

Now granted, that when John Kennedy was president, Reagan was against civil rights, and therefore, human rights. Did a feeling against non-whites erupt with him then? or was it longstanding?

Reagan was a disaster for the United States, and very little correction has been accomplished. His legend only grows among idiots, conservatives, and Republicans. O, excuse me, i was getting redundant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:21 AM

40. The most overrated POTUS ever. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:40 AM

46. Whoa Mitch McConnell's quote at the end is great

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #48)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:34 PM

64. Nice story.

Who really ran Washington all those years?



Through a Glass Darkly

Alexander Cockburn
Lies Of Our Times (p. 12-13)
November 1991

What was surprising to me was Reagan’s condition. He was exhausted to the point of incoherence throughout much ofthe interview and could not remember the substance of any subject that had been discussed apart from Mitterrand’s expression of anticommunism. I had not seen Reagan at such close rangesince the assassination attempt nearly four months earlier, and was shocked at his condition.... Reagan simply was unable to recall the contents of the talks in which he had just participated.... The interview concluded at a signal from Deaver,who did not seem to find the president’s condition unusual.”

Thus ran Lou Cannon’s recollections of an interview with the Commander-in-Chief in 1981, as set forth in his book President Reagan: The Role of a Lifetime (New York: Simon & Schuster,1991), published earlier this year. But how did Cannon describe Reagan’s condition to the readers of the Washington Post when he wrote up his interview? In the July 23, 1981, Washington Post,Cannon’s story appeared under the headline “Reagan Describes Summit Meeting as ‘Worth Its Weight in Gold.’ ” Cannon’s report gives the impression of a lucid chief executive returning home after a fruitful colloquy with other western leaders at the economic summit held in Ottawa in mid-July. Cannon did mention in the tenth paragraph that “Reagan appeared tired to the point of near-exhaustion,” but this observation was quickly qualified by the opinion of “aides” that the president had been doing a lot of prep for the conference and was also worried about the Middle East.

Cannon shared his brief session with Reagan aboard Air Force One with Hedrick Smith of the New York Times, who similarly gave his readers the impression of a president in touch with things rather than the incoherent old man they had actually encountered. As did Cannon, Smith wove the few quotable remarks from Reagan into a tapestry of attributed presidential dicta passed on — and no doubt confected— by Meese, Deaver,and Speakes. It is clear from Cannon’s account of the conference itself that Reagan was fogged up throughout the actual conference, occasionally interjecting trivial observations or homely jokes into the proceedings and then relapsing into bemused silence. Cannon’s memoir is one more indication of the cover-up that took place in the wake of Hinckley’s assassination bid on March 30, 1981. At the time of the shooting, the press was full of phrases like “bouncing back,” “iron constitution,” and other terms indicating that Reagan had emerged from the ordeal in good shape. In fact Reagan very nearly died on the operating table and was a dotard afterwards. He never fully recovered.

Conclusion: Unless a president is actually dead, the WhiteHouse press corps can be relied upon to present him as both sentient and sapient, no matter how decrepit his physical and mental condition.

SOURCE:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:TDRhVP5cMkEJ:liesofourtimes.org/public_html/1991/Nov1991%2520V2%2520N10/Nov1991%2520V2%2520N10.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

PS: Welcome to DU, happyfunball!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 11:57 AM

51. Raygun,

what a stooge!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:25 PM

61. These are words to remember....they are a window into his soul

'It was the first time in the 20th century that a presidential veto on a foreign policy issue had been overturned…'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 12:28 PM

62. Wow

DIdn't know this history. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:11 PM

72. Change, if it were to come at all, would happen incrementally." Now, where have I heard this lately?

 

Their rhetoric never matches reality, does it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:11 PM

73. They are always on the wrong side of history

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:28 PM

76. Reagan laid a wreath on Nazi graves at Bitburg.

Why this isn't more of a scandal, I'll never understand. He was an infamous ally of fascism.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0003_0_03029.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #76)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 10:30 PM

111. It's stuff like this that makes me wonder

Why people even bother to ask why most American Jews are liberal. A few simple google searches tells all. Thanks for the post

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:41 PM

80. Ted Cruz's Facebook page is filled with the most hateful, despicable comments I've read in a while

They're even pouncing on Cruz for complimenting them. They are the scum of the earth. I usually don't say I hate anyone, but I hate their hate. How can people like like that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 01:48 PM

83. Here's one to take y'all back to the day ...

... back when it seemed like maybe Music actually could help to change the world ... Tons of great Cameo's in this one, Enjoy!


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brett_jv (Reply #83)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:42 PM

102. love that album

 

i post bits of it regularly. just posted every piece less than an hour ago.
cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brett_jv (Reply #83)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 09:23 AM

117. wow, that was awful.

 

Heart was in the right place but terrible music.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 03:58 PM

90. I doubt many of these hate filled right-wing assholes

will live to see 95.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 04:03 PM

91. Yeah well some of us were pretty pissed also.

That we actually had a President who was defending the South African racist regime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 05:28 PM

96. Wow! Good on America.. I didn't know it had been

"overturned".. just that reagun had vetoed it!

thanks kpete.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 06:10 PM

103. Nothing but a crap actor

He was an idiot. Everything was run by his ultra conservative handlers. Fuck him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 06:30 PM

104. thank you--good read k&r.

I learn so much here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:36 PM

109. I wasn't aware of this. Reagan was a sicker man than I thought., nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri Dec 6, 2013, 09:49 PM

110. And on an unfortunate side note

Let's not forget the -thankfully very few -Boll Weevil Democrats who joined the racist Republicans in voting against the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act. Shame on them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 07:17 AM

113. He was a hateful, stupid man

 

Another piece of history we should remember is this: Had his bigotry not prevented him from taking the rise of AIDs seriously, many lives could have been spared in Africa and the rest of the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 07:21 AM

114. I think one of those who voted to override was Mitch McConnell.

 

Can you imagine how today's Republicans would vote on a similar bill today?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 07:54 AM

115. "Change, if it were to come at all, would happen incrementally. "

Yeah, thought I heard that before...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sat Dec 7, 2013, 01:45 PM

118. The real history of racist Reagan and shows that by terrorist, Cheney means people

With whom he and his like-minded neo-conservatives disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2013, 12:36 PM

120. Reagan was wrong on just about everything.

Energy policy, the Mid-east, South America, South Africa. He was a stage managed President. Without someone providing the words, I think he'd have been exposed as a Sarah Palin -type intellectual lightweight. I'm convinced that Meese, Deaver, and his various CoS were the real powers behind the throne. Reagan simply played President for 8 years. Conspiring with Iran to withhold the hostages should have been enough to convince the American people of the treachery that the Republican Party represents in its core principles - they will always do whatever it takes to maintain power for themselves...the majority of Americans can pound sand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2013, 12:44 PM

121. And these are the people "centrists" think we should play nice with.

Gawd, I detest DINOs, almost as much as Teabaggers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Dec 8, 2013, 05:35 PM

124. Reagan was a racist asshole and an evil man that loved to watch people suffer.

 

Like Dick Cheney and his spud Dubya Cheney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Mon Dec 9, 2013, 09:51 AM

126. If there ever was a guy more appropriately named.............

Over in the House, Representative Dick Cheney (R–Wyo.) joined the minority in opposing the Anti-Apartheid Act. In earlier battles over South Africa, Cheney had denounced Nelson Mandela as a terrorist and argued against his release…






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Mon Dec 9, 2013, 12:15 PM

127. James Baker is trying to spin this story and is not succeeding

Baker was trying to spin this story but the only people buying this crap are the same people attacking Cruz on his facebook page

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread