Why All The Reagan Postings ?

[stewert]

I thought this was a liberal message board ?

Personally I do not want to come here and see a hundred postings about
Reagan. I get enough of that from the unwatchable corporate media. I
thought I would be able to come here and get away from all the Reagan
coverage.

I was wrong.

I do not want to see any postings about Reagan, none, zip, nada, they do
not belong here. One person posted a Reagan message on my board, I deleted
it. It was not offensive or anything, I just don't want to see it, or have it on my
message board.

I have nothing to say about Reagan, bad or good, I just don't care about him enough
to discuss his life or his death. I will not say anything good or bad about him, I just
ignore it. I think that is what we should do here, just ignore him and stop filling the
board with Reagan threads.

If I owned DU.com I would have just deleted ALL the Reagan threads. Or maybe set up
a forum for Reagan postings so the people that wanted to see them could have without turning
GD into a nightmare full of Reagan threads. I am a little surprised at the freeper type insults about
Reagan here, but when you have a public message board you get the good and the bad from
the public. I also suspect some of the negative threads were posted by freeper plants to make us
look bad.

That's my worthless board filling rant for the day, lol.

[Vickers]

1. *woop!* *woop!* IRONY ALERT! *woop!* *woop!* IRONY ALERT!

:spank:

Seriously though, folks like Reagan (and Clinton) cast such a large shadow that on a political board of the OTHER party they are sure to garner some comments.

Not all positive, btw.

:)

[H2O Man]

2. It's interesting to note

that you just posted a message about Reagan. Before you or anyone else responds that it wasn't about Reagan, look closer -- you gave your opinion ("i have nothing to say about Reagan, good or bad, I just don't care enough about him .....). Perhaps it's not him as an individual, but what he represented. Pretending he did not exist is one option, but that would require not mentioning him at all. I prefer to focus on the differences between him and bush (he was friends with Tip O'Neill, etc) and how Nancy holds george w. in distain for allowing his narrow & rigid religious views to stop stem cell research. We can rob bush of the opportunity to try to take political advantage of Reagan's death.

[NoPasaran]

3. Oops! Another one! n/t

[Enraged_Ape]

4. I counted nine "Reagan"s in your post.

You are too funny!

[Mr_Scarecrow]

5. I'm not going to mention Reagan either

Oops.

[fujiyama]

6. LOL

I can't blame you...

But at the same time, for a relatively younger person like myself that wasn't informed during Reagan's time in office, I'm using his death as an opportunity to learn how bad he was...and how many of the problems we face today have their origin with his two terms in office.

That said, I'm not interested in pissing on his grave or cheering or toasting to his death. That just seems...really distateful...and I really think the number of those posts has been exagerrated...I see more anti cheering threads, than actual cheering threads.

Most have been substantive and have discussed his terrible policies.

[BeFree]

7. There you are!

Another member of the Conduct & Content Police.

Get a job. We don't need anyone telling us what we should or shouldn't be writing about, especially when it concerns someone who affected all of our lives in such a profound way.

You don't like what you see here? Suggestion: Quit DU.

[rocktivity]

8. The majority of us took an honest look at the Reagan legacy

and didn't allow the prospect of a right wing media backlash to intimidate us into covering him with glory simply because he had died. And it was impossible not to draw paralells between what went on then and what Bush is doing now. That took REAL moral courage that could have easily been smothered under the mantle of "respect for the dead." I think we did the right thing, and in that regard, I salute DU.

:headbang:
rocknation

[bushgottago]

9. Agreed - lets gat back to Abu Graib

and other bush scandals.