we are having 3 national days of mourning for the wrong person. they should be for George Martin

[msongs]

not that woman. In 300 years people will still be humming and singing songs George Martin produced and that woman and her husband will be long forgotten as they should be. "everyone knew her as nancy" indeed

[linuxman]

1. That's fairly petty

[BillZBubb]

4. How so?

[linuxman]

6. Because whining about someone being mourned

because your personally preferred person died afterwards during an already active period of mourning seems small?

What does the OP want? A retraction of the half-staff order and a public address to shift focus onto a music producer?

Petty.

[BillZBubb]

8. Why should we be mourning reagan at all?

I never liked her and her death means nothing to me. I'm not a hypocrite and won't pretend she was worth my sympathy.

That's not petty, it's the truth.

Perhaps you felt differently about her?

[linuxman]

10. She was a presidents wife.

Whether you like her or not is irrelevant. Michelle Obama will be afforded the same honors one day, and she is viscerally hated by many.

I don't feel particularly strongly about her one way or the other.

I don't find people disliking her to be petty, just whining that she has a mourning period and your preffered person didn't.

[Orrex]

5. On balance, George Martin was responsible for far less suffering

I won't celebrate her death as I continue to celebrate Scalia's, but I see no reason to grieve for someone so callous to the plight of suffering LGBT people, the mentally ill and the drug-addicted, when she could have had such a major and positive impact.

Or maybe her astrologer told her that it wasn't in the stars.

[linuxman]

9. A first lady not acting on something hardly constitutes responsibility.

She was by no means proactive on certain issues, but then again, she was only the presidents wife in the end, not a policy maker. She chose to focus on drugs, not stuff like LGBT issues which are a much bigger thing today. It was a different time, and our own current president had regressive views on gay marriage until very recently. I think it's nice when first ladies have a thoughtful and productive cause. At the time, we were in a drug fueled nightmare of crime and murders. She felt that was important. AIDs was barely understood at all and was a developing issue. I try not to wear my hindsight goggles too long when examining past figures. You can't have it all. History will remember the drug war as a failed venture. AIDS is an ongoing threat. I'm not sure anyone had perfect 2016 knowledge of that at the time. I just don't see the need to sulk over a president's wife having a mourning period, I suppose.

[Orrex]

11. It's a two-way street

The media venerates her almost as highly as her foul corpse of a husband. And for what?

She had the President's ear and an obedient media's full, loving attention, in an era when old-school media held sway. She was in a position to steer public opinion on multiple social issues of lasting national impact, and steer it she did. But instead of acting with compassion and humanity, she drove society's victims into suffering and destitution.

Let her rot.

[linuxman]

12. You must truly live at peace

Knowing that the views you hold today were exactly the same as 30+years ago, and that you've never questioned your past choices.

Where can I buy a set of hindsight goggles?

[Orrex]

13. I hope that you're not really that simple or naive

Last edited Thu Mar 10, 2016, 05:46 PM - Edit history (1)

I am happy to admit error when I am shown to be incorrect, and I have done so many times on DU. I sure as hell don't have a phalanx of advisers and press-handlers helping me to evolve away from disgusting views, either; I have to work it out on my own, unlike the esteemed Mrs. Dead Reagan. Did she ever recant her positions of 30 years ago? No? Then she's still on the hook for them.

She was an international figure with an unchallenged soapbox for 8 years in the Whitehouse and ever since, and her toxic influence is still felt by anyone who's lost friends, family or loved ones suffered under her grotesque social advocacy.

"Just say no." Yeah, how the fuck did that work out for everybody? Good work, Nancy.

Her apologists in this thread and elsewhere can stuff it.

[KamaAina]

2. To add insult to injury, there are people who thought that it was George R.R. Martin who had died

the Game of Thrones author.

[BillZBubb]

3. Agreed!

Not to speak evil of the dead, but there is no reason to mourn her passing.

[Initech]

7. Amen! Rock music as we know it today wouldn't exist without George Martin.

[malthaussen]

14. Last time I looked, Mr Martin was a British subject.

I understand the sentiment, but it is not really appropriate.

And if, as you say, "300 years" from now people will be humming and singing songs produced by Mr Martin, then not only has he a fitting legacy, I sincerely doubt that 300 years from now, anyone will remember anything about transient memorials.

-- Mal

[Orrex]

15. The polite term is "homeless memorials"

[Albertoo]

16. Most Democrats had good words for Nancy Reagan. As it should be.

we were fortunate to benefit from (Nancy Reagan's) proud example, ..
— President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama.

“Nancy was an extraordinary woman: a gracious first lady, proud mother and devoted wife
.. She leaves a remarkable legacy of good.” — Bill Clinton,

“Nancy Reagan lived a remarkable life and will be remembered for her strength and grace. — Jerry Brown, California governor.

[lonestarnot]

17. Or George Carlin for that matter.