Originally posted by rnrgirl76:
Originally posted by Celeste:
Originally posted by Bollocks:
If I was president instead of him, I would've taken money from Starwars and put it in aids research...I wouldn't have given those massive tax cuts to the very wealthy while cutting education programs...and I wouldn't have sold arms to Iran, or invaded Grenada.
It's very easy to make these observations after the fact. Also, it's important to note that these guys (presidents) don't operate in a vaccuum... [/b]
I think this is one of the best observations in this entire thread. It's easy to criticize the President and his administration but more difficult to actually become involved in the political process itself.
Whether or not you liked Reagan, he was still the Commander in Chief and the President. Both of these titles deserve respect and honor because of the level of responsibility involved. The biggest aspect of the Reagan funeral I find interesting is Nancy's ability to hold herself together. Considering how long they were together, I am sure this is has to be one of the hardest times in her life since she is saying goodbye to the person she said started her life the day she met him. [/b]
I haven't read the whole thread so I may be missing something. Although I agree that being president of the US might be the most difficult job in the world, this doesn't mean that I have to respect and honor a president, no way. I am not going to toast for his death neither, however, look at what governmnets the Reagan administration supported in Guatemala, El Salvador or look at the atrocities in Nicaragua figthing the sandinistas. Come on, look for example at the deaths of innocent civilians in el Mozote in El Salvador, more than 750 people killed by the Salvadorean Army with the US support. Please read this book. I have been there, I tell you, you can lose respect for anybody, even for the US president once you visit such places. And this is not an invention of lefties in the US, you can read articles in the NYT or Washington Post.
<img src="http://i5.ebayimg.com/03/c/00/c0/55/80_8.JPG" alt=" - " />
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/067975525X/qid=1086828438/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-4127835-2245744 From Publishers Weekly
Based in large part on his extensive account published in the December 6, 1993, issue of the New Yorker , National Magazine Award winner Danner's engrossing study reconstructs events that took place some dozen years before. In December 1981, over 750 men, women and children were killed in El Mozote, El Salvador, and the surrounding hamlets. Although at the time it was covered on the front pages of both the New York Times and the Washington Post , the reports were not enough to derail Ronald Reagan's push to prove that the El Salvadoran government was "making a concerted and significant effort to comply with internationally recognized human rights." Why the government chose to ignore stories in the nation's two leading newspapers is one part of Danner's sad, well-researched book. The other is why El Mozote was attacked at all. Populated by evangelical Christians who, unlike Catholic neighbors fed on liberation theology, did not abet the rebel FMLN, the people of El Mozote believed they would be spared when the army decided to wipe out insurgents and their supporters. After several days of brutal rapes and murders, a handful of people managed to escape to the rebels, setting in motion press reports and the under-investigated, coyly couched American embassy reply that allowed the U.S. to continue its massive subsidies. Danner has disinterred an event that is an equal indictment of Salvadoran brutality and American blindness.
Copyright 1994 Reed Business Information, Inc.
