The World Mourns Ronald Wilson Reagan

by muckle Sun Jun 06, 2004 01:21

Yippee!

by St Peter Sun Jun 06, 2004 01:55

He was responsible for the terrorist war against Nicaraguan civilians in the 1980s that left tens of thousands murdered and the country ruined. He oversaw state terror campaigns in El Salvador that left 75,000 murdered.

In Guatemala he gave huge support to genocidal campaigns by the military dictatorship there. He supported Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists in Afghanistan. He supported Israel's savage invasion of Lebanon that killed 17,500 innocent civilians.

He gave crucial support to the Apartheid regime in South Africa and its aggression in Southern Africa that left possibly 2 million dead. Then there was the bombing of Libya, supporting dictatorships in Haiti, etc etc...

In the US his administration carried out a massive shift in wealth from ordinary people to the already wealthy, and internationally he carried out aggressive economic policies that crippled dozens of poor countries.

I don't believe in hell but if it exists he is there now, where he will be tormented for all eternity by spectres of the countless hundreds of thousands of tortured and mutilated victims whose lives his reactionary and criminal administration cut short.

by Mark Feehily Sun Jun 06, 2004 02:42

Reagan is one man who truly changed the world. His resolute stance against Communism brought down the Soviet !evil empire" ushering in the era of peace and freedom we now enjoy.

His election also marked a sea-change in American society - a turn away from decandent liberal social experimentation back toward family and Christian values.

A great man of our times, we in Ireland can be proud that he was one of our own.

I gcomhluadar na Naomh go raibh sé.

Míle buíochas!

by Buzzby Sun Jun 06, 2004 04:51

One word people. One word. REX-84.

Reagan was fond of making little plans for dictatorship, plans which Bush, Ashcroft and Rumsfeld are capitalising on today.

However, Lord have Mercy on him.

by jeff Sun Jun 06, 2004 16:18

reagan was neither good nor bad. Negativly, he helped ruin South America. His economic reforms fucked a lot of people, helped the rich, but also helped entrepeneurs, meaning anyone who tries theirt hand at business, either with a small or large amount of capital.

Finally, he brought down communism, which was great.

But his war on drugs was bollocks, as were the other things mentioned.

Good points and bad points, now he is dead. An interesting strategist, if looked at coldly, detachtedly and objectivly. Now he is dead. The End.

by Ronnie Eile Sun Jun 06, 2004 16:32

"greatest leader of the 20th century" ???
Hardly. He was only a figurehead for the criminal class that run Amerika, a bit like Bush Junior, except he seemed more acceptable than Bush. That would be due to having a softer image because of his "Bonzo" days in Hollywood.
In any case I think we should take the precaution of using a wooden stake.
Just to be sure.

As for Hell, it would not be hot enough.

by Red head - SWP Sun Jun 06, 2004 22:48

Ronnie is dead at last.
Can't wait for maggie to kick the bucket.

by Hopeful Mon Jun 07, 2004 07:07

Maggie kicking the bucket?
May it be long, slow, lingering, painful and completely miserable.
Now that is worth waiting for, is it not?
The lads were not lucky even once, as they had hoped. Its probably better this way.

by crimewatch Mon Jun 07, 2004 09:17

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) - Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi expressed regret Sunday that Ronald Reagan died without standing trial for 1986 airstrikes on his country, while other Arabs used the occasion of the former president's death to lambast his Mideast policies.

Gadhafi said he was sorry that Reagan died Saturday before he could stand trial for deadly 1986 airstrikes he ordered that killed Gadhafi's adopted daughter and 36 other people.

"I express my deep regret because Reagan died before facing justice for his ugly crime that he committed in 1986 against the Libyan children," Libya's official JANA news agency quoted Gadhafi as saying.

by Deirdre Clancy Mon Jun 07, 2004 09:45

"reagan was neither good nor bad. Negativly, he helped ruin South America. His economic reforms fucked a lot of people, helped the rich, but also helped entrepeneurs, meaning anyone who tries theirt hand at business, either with a small or large amount of capital."


That''s the longest oxymoronic statement (with the emphasis on the second part of the word) I've seen in my life, "Jeff". How can somebody be "neither good nor bad" in one line and help "ruin" a whole continent (which he did) in the next? Although, I'm sure some Irish-Americans would love the way in which you talk in contradictions and riddles, like those leprechauns of yore.

The man's policies were responsible for the deaths of countless people in Latin America and elsehwhere. He was a dangerous fanatic, whose posse of gangsters and thugs firmly laid the groundwork for the even more extreme thuggery we now witness, wreaking havoc in the Middle East and domestically screwing those US citizens caught in a cycle of poverty (among many other corruptions). Many of his strongest and most ruthless staff members have been recruited by Bush to go into Iraq to wreak similar havoc to suit US big business strategic "needs". So don't give us that bullshit about Reagan being "neither good nor bad". The man was dangerous, murderous, devious and morally bankrupt.

by Lone gunman Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:38

Because he exposed your holy ,totally perfect communist system.He exposed it for what it is/was a total bankrupt fraud and sham.
He finally stood up to pipsqueak third world dictators like Quadaffi duck,who were busilly supplying our homegrown thugs with arms.Pity we missed him.Concentrates the mind wonderfully as to one supporting terrorist groups globally
The world is a sadder place without him.

by iosaf Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:53

I presume, that Ballyporen flew flags, it was 1984 June 1 - 4, when the President visited his forebears' home.
8 presidents of the USA have claimed irish roots.

by - Mon Jun 07, 2004 13:24

The Free Speech Movement was a radical student movement began on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley under the leadership of Mario Savio Mario Savio (December 8, 1942 - November 6, 1996) was an American political activist.
Savio was a mathematics major who became the leader of the Free Speech Movement at University of California, Berkeley in 1964. A proponent of New Left politics, Savio became increasingly disallusioned with the limitations of the movement. By the late 1960s, Savio was immersed in the counterculture.
Quote
"There comes a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part. And you've got to put your bodies on the gears, and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus. And you've got to make it stop."

Savio was a mathematics student. Unprecedented protests by students of the campus demanded that the university administration recognize the students' right to free speech Freedom of speech is the right to freely say what you please, as well as the related right to hear what others have stated. Recently, it has been commonly understood as encompassing full freedom of expression, including the freedom to create and distribute movies, pictures, songs, dances, and all other forms of expressive communication.
Freedom of speech is often regarded as an integral concept in modern democracies, where it is understood to outlaw government censorship.

The controversy began on September 14, when Dean Katherine Towle announced that existing University regulations prohibiting advocacy of political causes or candidates, signing of members, and collection of funds by student organizations at the intersection of Bancroft and Telegraph Avenues would be "strictly enforced." One student set up a table in defiance of this ban and was arrested. However, a group of students surrounded the car in which the student was to be transported and staged a sit-in
which continued until the charges against that student were dropped. About a month later, the university brought charges against the students who organized the sit-in, resulting in an even larger student protest that all but shut down the university. The center of the protest was Sproul Hall, the campus administration building which protesters took over in a massive sit-in. The sit-in ended on December 3 that year when police arrested over 800 students at Berkeley.

Reagan as Governer of California had been elected on the back of his "anti-communist" speeches, He took the stage and was heavily critical of "students, radicals, communists, ecologists, and pacifists" and gave the order to the police to go in. George Bush (41st President of the USA and father to the current president) was on the stage as well, but did not speak.

This riot / stand-off became a watershed point in modern US civil rights history.

A Younger Reagan with younger Friend. How he will be remembered by friends and others.

by Gipper 2 Mon Jun 07, 2004 15:40

Reagan's best bits were his commitment to anti-drugs work, his Arms limitation treaties (I remember watching him and old Ketchup-head sign Gorbachev sign those live ont he BBC) and his "Gorbachev, tear down this wall" speech.

He was a man who believed in american style capitalism. He was right wing and he was tough when he needed to be.

He was a man full of love and responsibility, and his final letter to America is reproduced here:

November 5th 1994

My fellow Americans, I have recently been told that I am one of the millions of Americans who will be afflicted with Alzheimer's disease.

Upon learning this news, Nancy and I had to decide whether as private citizens we would keep this a private matter or whether we would make this news known in a public way.

In the past, Nancy suffered from breast cancer and I had cancer surgeries. We found through our open disclosures we were able to raise public awareness. We were happy that as a result many more people underwent testing. They were treated in early stages and able to return to normal, healthy lives.

So now we feel it is important to share it with you. In opening our hearts, we hope this might promote greater awareness of this condition. Perhaps it will encourage a clear understanding of the individuals and families who are affected by it.

At the moment, I feel just fine. I intend to live the remainder of the years God gives me on this earth doing the things I have always done. I will continue to share life's journey with my beloved Nancy and my family. I plan to enjoy the great outdoors and stay in touch with my friends and supporters.

Unfortunately, as Alzheimer's disease progresses, the family often bears a heavy burden. I only wish there was some way I could spare Nancy from this painful experience. When the time comes, I am confident that with your help she will face it with faith and courage.

In closing, let me thank you, the American people, for giving me the great honor of allowing me to serve as your president. When the Lord calls me home, whenever that may be, I will leave the greatest love for this country of ours and eternal optimism for its future.

I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead.

Thank you, my friends.

Sincerely,

by ex-Pioneer Mon Jun 07, 2004 16:15

I`m sick and tired of listening to the false notion that Reagan and his buddies brought down communism.Being from one of the ex-communist countries I just have to say that we own nothing to Reagan or America for the fall of communism, it came from inside.
Reagan and US should not be credited with this one positive change in the world.

by Bruno Mon Jun 07, 2004 16:16

No, you're right, old Ronnie was a big softie really.

Err...tell that to the people who suffered at the hands of the contras, or while under the heel of the nasty dictators that he propped up around the world. Tell that to the people...ah never mind, I'm too busy for this nonsense. Must go and forage in the forest.

Bye now.

by Bea Mon Jun 07, 2004 16:17

Ronald Reagan was a mass murderer.

by Ben Mon Jun 07, 2004 16:21

He made life a misery for those on the lowest socio-economic levels within the United States itself.

There's a reason why he was so cuddly with Maggie Thatcher, and it wasn't because of a shared concern for the poor.

Must go forage too. Where's Bruno gone? Bruno!!

by Sean Mon Jun 07, 2004 16:22

A previous comment mentioned ketchup when talking about Gorbachev.
Anyone remember Reagan's move back in 1981? He directed the Department of Agriculture to classify ketchup as a vegetable.
He did this to slash $1.5 billion from the federal school lunch program in the United States.
In relation to recent events in the Mid East, maybe we should also consider other moves by Reagan. Shortly after the ketchup incident, Reagan wanted to take Iraq off the list of nations that sponsored terrorism. Arms manufacturers in the States could not produce weapons fast enough for Saddam.

Let's also not forget the envoy sent to meet with Saddam to repair relations. The envoy gave Saddam a hand-written letter from Reagan, as well as a pair of golden cowboy spurs, which was a present from Reagan. He addressed Saddam as "Mr. President".
This envoy was also back in Iraq, shortly after the United Nations had proof that Iraq used chemical weapons on Iranian soldiers.
He said nothing.

Very different to recent times. The envoy was, of course, Donald Rumsfield.
The links to other current bad guys are also easily found. Reagan should be considered one of the guilty parties behind 911. Pity American media outlets won't touch this.

Jeremy Scahill is one of the many journalists to investigate the Rummy-Saddam connection, if you have further interest in the links.

by Deirdre Clancy Mon Jun 07, 2004 17:58

"Said Reagan was "a dangerous fanatic".
Nope, you're a dangerous fanatic./ Reagan was elected TWICE!!
Who ever elected you, you freakin' nutcase?"

Yes, at least Regan was elected, unlike the current US President. However, we all know how the presidential elections work in the US. The more buddies you have in Big Business to pick up the tab for your campaign expenses, the more chance you have of convincing an electorate - large swathes of whom do not have access to information about the true nature of the candidates - that you're really a well-meaning guy. Then, once you get elected, your tax cuts for the rich at the expense of the poor keeps Big Business happy, and the true extent of THOSE get obscured in obfuscations and lies. Next time around your buddies pour resources into your campaign of lies again, to ensure the domestic fiscal and foreign economic policy they find so advantageous remains in place. That is, however, only one aspect of a tapestry of unethical and morally questionable practices that surround US presidential elections. If that's democracy and freedom, then you can keep it as far as I'm concerned. I am sure the bands of thuggish armies in Central America the Reagan Administration financed and trained in order to overthrow democratically elected left-wing governments are mourning his death; I am sure the families of those 'disappeared', tortured and murdered by those armies in the name of 'democracy', 'freedom' and - ironically and tragically - 'Jesus', are still mourning their loved ones too.

But rest assured that I'm catholic in my cynicism - I wouldn't hold out much hope for a Democratic President changing things too much either.

by Bush'04 Mon Jun 07, 2004 18:22

You and I both know that corporate donations had nothing to do with Reagans two election wins. The American people loved the man! (And in fairness, Jimmy Carter and Walt Mandale weren't exactly the best nominees the Dumbocrats have ever produced).

No Deirdre, Reagan was beloved, in a way you or your kook mates never will be.

by Sean Mon Jun 07, 2004 18:32

Remember, this is the man who said that
"Facts are stupid things", and that
"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do".
I'm not surprised his followers are so ready to provide weak, flabby arguments to support him.
Minority groups didn't love him. Blacks in the states voted roughly 9 to 1 against reagan, and with good reason.
The medical establishment didn't support him. Remember his delayed reaction to the spread of Aids in the 80's. His religious convictions caused him to ignore a serious health issue, on false grounds, and led to many people losing their life.

Leave it to someone who supports Reagan and Bush to speak broadly, and falsely, for American voters.

by moonwolf Mon Jun 07, 2004 19:25

Just wait for it......the next "actor" and former governor of good old california to get into the oval office ...ARNIE...
You see when one dies there's always another waiting to take his place...

Remember Christy Moore's song at the gates of that castle in the west when the U.S S.S refused to let him in to play for good old Ronny...
"Hey Ronnie Regan,I'm Black and I'm Pagan, I'm Gay and I'm Left and I'm Free, I'm a Non Fundamentalist Environmentalist, What U gonna do 'bout me?

only JohnPaul the second left.....hope he follows his co conspirator in the VERY near future........

by Lone gunman Mon Jun 07, 2004 23:09

Arnie cant become prez.Not a US citizen by birth.He is naturalised US citizen so he can only go up as far as senator.Unless the entire US congress is wiped out by somthing,and even then it would fall back to the joint cheifs of staff.Unlike us who will let anyone become prez or a TD at the drop of a PC hat.His son could tho.Hey !maybe thats the plan.A Kennedy Scharzenegger dynasty?Not as dumb as he looks.
Unlike your good self who will now hopefully read up abit on the US govt workings,not to make you look like a complete ejit.
The sooner Christy Moore departs the music scene andt his world .The better for music and gutter politics.Who cares what the old hasbeen fart sings.

by Bush'04 Mon Jun 07, 2004 23:41

You know, they say that when someone who has lived just a wonderful life, a full life in every way, that sadness upon that person's death is inappropriate, that it's not necessary. Yet, I have to tell you, I'm sad today.

President Reagan has basically been out of the public eye for at least ten years, and everyone knew this day was coming, Saturday's day was coming, but nevertheless, since Saturday afternoon at four o'clock Eastern time, I have felt like a part of me died as well. I never met Reagan, but it wasn't necessary to have met him in order to love him, which I do, and that's as great a measure of greatness as I know. People say that greatness doesn't need to be explained, and that's true for those people who are paying attention at the time. But sadly, most people's historical perspective traces back only to the day they were born.

Millions of People under the age of 30 have no concrete memory of Ronald Reagan's presidency, and yet we are, or should be, all touched by his greatness. I'd like to take a moment here to explain to those of you who have no direct relationship with Ronald Reagan, you weren't old enough or even born during his presidency to have understood it or to have known how you have been affected by it, because the simple fact is that now in death, Ronald Reagan once again defines the utter beauty and blessing that is America and reminds us all of our destiny. You know, Reagan's greatness is not all about a single speech or a single phrase in a speech or a single memory. Ronald Reagan was great because he was a man. He was a great man, and he knew who he was. He was comfortable in his skin.

He was optimistic and happy. He was infectious. He dared to embrace big ideas. He dared to do big things to overcome huge obstacles in the midst of all kinds of experts telling him it couldn't be done, in the midst of all kinds of criticism, in the midst of all kinds of personal insults. I must tell you, I have been in awe this weekend watching some of the coverage, listening to some of the people who I remember explicitly insulting this man every bit as much as they insult George W. Bush today, now singing his praises, and I look interestingly and curiously at the TV set when I see this, and I say, "Well, which is it, then? Was he great? If he was great, he was great THEN." I've seen some of the most incredible testaments to his policies, and I've seen the usual digs. I mean, it's all out there, but you expect the digs in this current climate, and they're here, mainly on this site.

But the idea that people who routinely did everything they could to diminish Ronald Reagan in the eyes of a nation who loved him, now the fact that they do not dare come forth and be honest at this point in time about their true beliefs and feelings of Ronald Reagan, is another testament to his greatness. They don't dare, because they know the love this country has for Ronald Reagan. (Of course the same is not true for the usual suspects on this site) They know it would be suicide to practice their politics as usual during this period. Ronald Reagan was great because he never gave up on his country, and the reason he never gave up on his country, ladies and gentlemen, is because he never doubted for a moment any of us. Never doubted our wisdom. He never doubted our judgment. He never doubted our ability to do the right thing. He never doubted our ability to rise to necessary challenges. Ronald Reagan never doubted the people of his country at all. That made him a huge threat, because Reagan's enemies had no threat, no confidence and no faith in the American people. They still don't. Their view of the American people is one of incompetence, lack of judgment, inability, basic averageness -- and, of course, they must think that, for if they don't, there's no reason for them. There's no reason for Left Wing Politics if you trust people to manage their own lives.

You know, some people forget that in the late 70s and the early 80s, the Washington establishment, which is what Reagan would later call, "The iron triangle of the liberal media, liberal special interest groups and the massive bureaucracy." Some forget that in the late seventies and early eighties the Washington establish want was talking about of America's inevitable decline. Jimmy Carter's presidency was looked at by the American left, "Well, gee, if our best and brightest can't make anything out of this, maybe there's something wrong with this." Never thought there was anything wrong with them, never thought there was anything wrong with their ideas, never thought there was anything wrong with their president, and so rather than question their own role in bringing the nation to the point it was in in 1979 and '80 -- the worst economy since the Great Depression, Soviet Union on the march throughout the world -- the elites of liberalism questioned the fortitude of the American people.

He rejected Washington elitism and connected directly with the American people who adored him. He didn't need the press to spin what he was or what he said. He had the ability to connect individually with each American who saw him. That is an incredible -- I don't even want to say "talent", - It's a characteristic that so few people have, but he was able to do it. He brought confidence; he brought vigor, and he brought humility to the presidency, which had been missing for years, and this profoundly upset his political and media adversaries to no end, and Reagan enjoyed that. Ronald Reagan rejected socialism; he rejected big government. He insisted on returning as much government back to the people as was possible. He cut taxes so deeply that even some on his own staff became disbelievers and wrote books about it. They were wrong. He was right. Our lives today are a testament to how right Ronald Reagan was.

Reagan created the greatest economic expansion in American history, and certainly since World War II. He wasn't always successful in cutting government programs, but he tried. He slowed the growth of domestic spending by vetoing spending bills and by shutting down the federal bureaucracy. But in the end, in the US constitutional system, it's Congress that controls the purse strings and they made deals with him they didn't keep, but he tried. In fact, Ronald Reagan proved something that to this day economists, elite economists do not believe. Ronald Reagan lowered inflation during the midst of one of the most unbridled economies and its growth period in history. No economist thought that possible, but he did. He brought inflation down to 4.8% from its double-digit figure when he took office. People said it was impossible, but he did it.

Ronald Reagan not only rejected socialism and big government, but he also rejected communism. He defeated it ultimately. So many elites, so many on the left in Reagan's era, said then what's being said today about militant Islam, and what Chamberlain said about Nazism. "Well, it's there. We can't do anything about it. We've just got to try to manage it, have to try to get along with it. We have to try to make sure that we don't destroy each other," and Reagan figuratively scratched his head and said, 'What's that? Get along with this? Look at what they're doing to people. Look at what they're doing to their people. Get along with this? They're on the march. Their stated objectives were as plain as day." Those of you who weren't around during all of this, the era of the Cold War and Soviet expansionism, it is imperative you find out. It is imperative you understand what this man did. It is imperative you understand how he did it.

It's not just that he did it without firing a shot. He did it because he refused to accept it, all alone amongst those at his leadership level. So he set the US out on a course to win, not "manage," the Cold War, and I consider that to be the final battle of the Second World War. He freed tens of millions of people who had been imprisoned behind the Iron Curtain for nearly five decades. Those people survive Ronald Reagan today. In his obituary they should be mentioned as "survivors," and I noticed some liberal commentators now contend that the fall of the Soviet Union was "inevitable" just as they once considered the decline of American greatness inevitable. They still don't get it and they never will.

Reagan had the fortitude to propose SDI. At the time, again -- and a lot of what I'm saying today, most of you on this site will deride it -- but I'm hoping to reach people who have no concrete, direct memory or relationship with President Reagan because of your age or because you weren't paying attention. (lefties never pay attention). SDI was regarded much as the whole war in Iraq is today. SDI was treated was treated as a joke; SDI was dangerous; SDI was going to blow up the world; SDI was impossible. It was typical left liberalism: greatness couldn't be done. Greatness can't happen. "This is only going to kill us all! This is just the meanderings of a B-actor." I mean, you people have forgotten how absolutely mean-spirited the critics of Reagan were about him and to him personally. He never flinched, never cared. He smiled at it. They were all saying things like this because they hated Ronald Reagan, and don't let anybody tell you differently. They feared him, which was the reason for their hate. They could not outflank him. They couldn't relate to people as he could -- and they were the people who "had the common touch," they told us. They were the people who had the ability to understand what life was like for the average guy, and here's Ronald Reagan running circles around them. Of course they didn't like him. He posed a great threat. Reagan was accused of sexism; he was accused of racism; he was accused of heartlessness. They said he was responsible for homelessness and AIDS. They said he was going to start World War III and destroy the social safety net, including Social Security, the school lunch program. Sound familiar? See how the left never changes? But Reagan was none of those things and did none of those things. He was wiser, he was smarter, and bigger than his detractors.

You know, I wondered what Reagan would say to us about this new war, this war on terrorism, liberation of Iraq. So I went to his Pointe-Du-Hoc speech back in 1984, D-Day.

He said it was "the deep knowledge -- and pray God we've not lost it -- that there is a profound moral difference between the use of force for liberation and the use of force for conquest." He said to the surviving Rangers who scaled the cliffs at Pointe-Du-Hoc on D-Day, "You were here to liberate, not to conquer and so you and those others did not doubt your cause and you were right not to doubt. We in America have learned bitter lessons from two world wars. It is better to be here ready to protect the peace than to take blind shelter across the sea rushing to respond only after freedom is lost. We've learned that isolationism never was, never will be an acceptable response to tyrannical governments with an expansionist intent but we try always to be prepared for peace, prepared to deter aggression, prepared to negotiate the reduction of arms, and, yes, prepared to reach out again in the spirit of reconciliation." Reagan was right just as George W. Bush is today, and I really believe that if Reagan had been able he would have put his hand on Bush's shoulder and say to him, "Stay the course, George."

That was the Ronald Reagan I remember, an inspirational, wonderful man, who touched the hearts of all who knew him. A man who at last, inhis own words, has "slipped the surly bonds of earth to touch the face of god".

Even though I knew it was coming, we all knew it was coming, I was surprised at how deeply the act of his passing had on me, despite knowing it was coming, and I was comforted all the remainder of the weekend by the reality and the realization that I know that Ronald Reagan lives on in my heart, always will, and in the hearts of all of those who believe in Freedom. I never met him. Wasn't necessary. It was not necessary to have met Ronald Reagan in order to love him as I do, and that is as good a measure of greatness which does not need to be explained as I know. So God bless Ronald Reagan, and as he never failed to say, God bless America.

by Deirdre Clancy Mon Jun 07, 2004 23:54

"No Deirdre, Reagan was beloved, in a way you or your kook mates never will be."

That's really great, because I would hate to be "beloved" in the way Reagan was "beloved"; through an image based on pure spin. I am sure my "kook mates" would feel the same. Stalin was also "beloved" by millions of Russians, and Mussolini by millions of Italians. That argument means nothing at all. You studiously avoid hard facts when you are making your fatuous statements, in favour of empty, emotive, rhetoric. You're entitled to your opinions, but I'd have more respect for you if you had the guts to fully identify yourself, and if your arguments at least had some pretense of being backed up by factual evidence. The fact that Reagan was popular among certain sectors of the American populous proves absolutely nothing except that he was a good spindoctor.

by Deirdre Clancy Tue Jun 08, 2004 00:03

"You and I both know that corporate donations had nothing to do with Reagans two election wins."

No, I do not know this, actually. Please do not presume to know what I think. Reagan's election wins had a lot to do with the powerful people who were backing him. And incidentally, if you are so passionate about your conservative beliefs, why are you so timid about identifying yourself on Indymedia? Afraid of actually standing up for what you believe in? Not surprised. Peddlers of tosh like this usually are. I've seen writing by conservative thinkers that is at least textured, intellectually consistent, and free from sentiment based around personalities. This is neither.

by Bush'04 Tue Jun 08, 2004 00:19

1) Reagans average approval rating over 8 years: 67% (Reagan Institute)

2)Reagan's approval ratings on leaving office in January 1989 : 83% (reagan institute)

3)ReaganBush'80 Campaign Spending in 1980 $37million (Atlas Archive of US Presidential Campaigns, MacMillan, 1997)

4)CarterMondale spending in same year: $39million (same source)

5)ReaganBush Spending in 1984 :$41million (same source)

6)MondaleFerraro'84 $40.5million (same source again)

Thus, we can see that in both 1980 and in 1984 Reagan's spending was roughly equal to that of his opponant. (It is usual for an incumbent to be able to spend more, as he does not have to go through a primary battle, which of course was not the case for Carter in 1980, so it is arguable that Carters spending is underestimated)

With regard to his popularity, Deirdre, argue all you like that Minorities hated the man, but you cannot deny those approvalratings, or for that matter 45 and 49 state landslide election victories.

And My Name, Deirdre, is Andrew Ferris, 41 years of age, from Castleblayney in Co. Monaghan.
I have short brown hair, am 6'6 in height, and am currently single, though waiting for the right girl!

by Malatesta Tue Jun 08, 2004 03:53

Ha! "The people" elected him?
This is ofcoruse forgetting that only about 50% of the population votes at all in the states. And that is a high % for them. That means that about 27% of the American populatuion voted for him, and that is again counting high!

Polls are bullshit that can be easily rigged.

by redjade Tue Jun 08, 2004 10:23

AMY GOODMAN: Noam Chomsky, can you talk about this, the people that are now running the administration are some of the very people who ran the Reagan administration more than 20 years ago?

NOAM CHOMSKY: That's quite true. The Reagan administration is either the same people or their immediate mentors for the most part. I think one can say that the current administration is a selection of the more extremist and arrogant and violent and dangerous elements of the Reagan administration. So on things like - I mean, that is true on domestic and international policy they are, both in the Reagan years and now, they are committed to dismantling the components of the government that serve the general population -- social security, public schools and so on and so forth, but in a more extreme fashion now. Partly because they think they have achieved a sort of higher stage from which to launch the attack, and internationally it's pretty obvious.

In fact, many of the older Reaganites and Bush, number one people have been concerned, even appalled by the extremism of the current administration in the international domain. That's why there was unprecedented elite criticism of the national security strategy and the implementation in Iraq - narrow criticism, but significant. So, yes, they're there, in fact, you cannot -- some of the examples are remarkable, including the ones that you mentioned. And very timely they picked Negroponte, who of course has just been appointed, the new ambassador to Iraq where he will head the biggest diplomatic mission in the world. The pretense is that we need this huge diplomatic mission to transfer full sovereignty to Iraqis and that's so close to self-contradiction that you have to admire commentators who sort of pretend not to notice what it means, also to overlook, consciously, what his role was in the Reagan administration. He also provided -- he was an ambassador in the Reagan years, ambassador to Honduras where he presided over the biggest C.I.A. station in the world, and the second largest embassy in Latin America, not because Honduras was of any particular significance to the U.S., but because he was responsible for supervising the bases from which the U.S. mercenary army was attacking in Nicaragua, and which ended up practically destroying it. By now, Nicaragua is lucky to survive a few generations.

That was one part of the massive international terrorist campaign that the Reaganites carried out in the 1980's under the pretense they were fighting a war on terror. They declared a war on terror in 1981 with pretty much the same rhetoric that they used when they re-declared it in September 2001. It was a murderous terrorist war. It devastated Central America, had horrendous effects elsewhere in the world. In the case of Nicaragua, it was so extreme that they were condemned by the World Court, by two supporting Security Council Resolutions that the U.S. had to veto, after which, of course, they rejected the court judgment and then escalated the war to the point where finally the effects were extraordinary. By the analysis of their own specialists, the per capita deaths in Nicaragua would be comparable to about 2.5 million in the United States, which as they have pointed out is greater than the total number of casualties in all U.S. wars, including the Civil War and all wars in the 20th century, and what's left of the society is a wreck. Since the U.S. took over again, it's gone even more downhill.

Now the second poorest in the hemisphere after Haiti and not coincidentally, the second major target of U.S. intervention in the 20th century after Haiti, which is first. The recent health administration statistics show that about 60% of children under two are suffering from severe anemia caused by malnutrition and probable brain damage. Costa Rica, the United States is trying to - doing enough low-level work so that they can send back some remittances to keep the families alive. It's a real victory. You can understand why Colin Powell and others are so proud of it. But Negroponte was charge of it in the first half the decade directly, and in the second half more indirectly in the State Department and National Security staff where he was Powell's adviser. And now he is -- he is supposed to undertake the same role and similar role in Iraq. He was called in Nicaragua "The Proconsul," and the "Wall Street Journal" was honest enough to run an article in which they headlined "Modern Proconsul" on which they mentioned his background in Nicaragua without going into it much and said, yes he will be the proconsul of Iraq.

Now, that's a direct continuity, but there's a lot more than that. What you mentioned is correct. Elliot Abrams is an extreme case. I mean, he's now the head of the Middle East section of the National Security Council. He was -- as you know, he was sentenced for lying to Congress. He got a presidential pardon, but he was one of the most -- he was in charge in the State Department of the Central American atrocities, and on the Middle East, he is way out at the extreme end of the spectrum. This does reflect the -- in a way the continuity of policies, but also the shift towards extremism within that continuity.

more at...

by Monty Burns Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:41

He illuminated what was good about America
On Saturday Ronald Reagan had his rendezvous with eternity. This week we recollect what his life has meant to our nation. Since 1980, the40th president has so dominated politics in the United States that the last quarter century could be called the Age of Reagan.
If that sounds grandiose, recall what the US was like before Reagan became president. Americans, in the late 1960s and '70s, learned to accommodate themselves to chaos and decline. There were the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy. There were the race riots in our great cities. There were legions of youth who neither tuned in nor turned on but definitely dropped out.

America had experienced wrenching reversals since World War II. The military had been triumphant over the most vicious war machines in human history, that of the Nazis and Japanese imperialists...only to find themselves undone by a third-world cauldron in Southeast Asia.

The US economy grew into the world's most prosperous in the 1940s and '50s and '60s...only to be racked by energy crises, high unemployment, and stagflation in the '70s.

Through moral suasion as much as armed might, America had become the leader of the free world...only to fall from grace when a president resigned in disgrace. The word "Watergate" entered the vocabulary of Western languages and became synonymous with cynicism toward government and even public service.

All the while, the American elite adjusted its idealism downward, and Jimmy Carter — the last president of the Age of Decline — went on national TV to tell Americans they suffered from a malaise of the spirit.

That was the gloomy backdrop when Ronald Reagan sauntered onto the American political stage, confident and grinning and quipping. He not only attracted the spotlight; he illuminated what was good about the country. He told Americans they were poised for a new birth of freedom, a veritable Golden Age, if only they believed in themselves and were true to their Founders' hopes for the republic. That had been his message all along — in the GE Theater talks of the 1950s, in "The Time for Choosing" (the 1964 speech in San Francisco on Goldwater's behalf), in his impromptu remarks at the Kansas City convention in 1976, in his acceptance speech in Detroit in 1980, and in many other speeches on the road to the White House.

Along the way, Ronald Reagan put the romance back into politics. He wooed Americans and made them believe, once again, that "We the People" could do anything we set their minds to. They were, after all, Americans. And America was the greatest adventure ever undertaken by the human spirit.

During Ronald Reagan's eight years in the White House, America renewed herself and in the process recast the world. It started at home with the American people, who rediscovered their power as individuals and their pride as a nation. Our economy surged, opening the way to prosperity for millions of citizens. Our national resolve stiffened to take freedom to the farthest corners of the world as we fought the last bloodless battles of the Cold War.

No event symbolizes Reagan's victory over Communism more powerfully than the fall of the Berlin Wall on November 9, 1989. The collapse of this obscene barrier — just ten months after Reagan left office — became a metaphor for the many barriers our 40th president tried to tear down — economic, political, geopolitical. The economic barriers had piled up formidably by the late 1970s. The so-called misery index (calculated by adding the unemployment and inflation rates) was at a record high in Carter's term. Reaganomics stood for the deconstruction of all that held back the entrepreneurial talents of the American people — hence his crusade for lower taxes, less regulation, low inflation, and limited government. Reagan's economic agenda resulted in the creation of nearly 20 million jobs in the 1980s. As a formula for broadening and strengthening the middle class, it inspires economic policy to this day.

Then there were the political barriers. Reagan, himself a former FDR man, knew that countless Democrats were uncomfortable with the leftward drift of their party. On the outskirts of Detroit, for instance, autoworkers known as Macomb County Democrats had little in common with newly hatched McGovern Democrats. Reagan had the vision to reach out to these Democrats and persuade many of them that he understood their hopes and needs. To do so, he had to overhaul the perception that the Republican party was more of an East Coast country club than a Main Street movement. Reagan's gambit succeeded. His great political achievement was to transform the Republican party from the minority party into the majority party that it is today.

Finally there were the geopolitical barriers that endangered world peace. Reagan bristled at a notion of containment that merely agreed to a stalemate with the Soviet Union. That policy hadn't worked. The Soviets invaded Afghanistan and deployed hundreds of medium-range nuclear missiles aimed at Western Europe. Reagan did not sit passively by while the Soviet juggernaut rolled over the West's good will. He declared that the U.S.S.R. was an Evil Empire and launched an arms buildup that ultimately bankrupted Moscow. The result was the end of the Cold War — without firing a shot, as Margaret Thatcher likes to point out — and the 1990s peace dividend.

The legacy of Ronald Reagan lives on in significant ways. The fact that Reaganomics influences economic debate to this day; the fact that Republicans are the majority party; the fact that the United States defeated the Soviet Union — all justify our calling the last quarter century the Age of Reagan.

Is the epithet justified in the post 9/11 world? Yes — perhaps now more than ever. It is telling that after September 11th, the American people did not look to resurrect just any past president as a model for George W. Bush. In our national tragedy, we looked to a man we identified as one of our own, to the lifeguard from Dixon, Illinois — Ronald Reagan. A Google search of past presidents reveals that Reagan's name was summoned more than any other postwar commander in chief. Citizens found reassurance in a leader who soberly assessed the dangers we face.

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We will preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness. If we fail, at least let our children and our children's children say of us we justified our brief moment here. We did all that could be done

by Tsk thsk Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:42

EDITOR'S NOTE: Below is the text of Michael Novak's speech at the celebration of President Reagan's 88th birthday, delivered on February 5, 1999, before the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation, in Simi Valley, Calif.
This has been the best birthday celebration I have ever attended. The stories, the memories, and the visions for the future remaining to be built have been more than touching — deeply stirring.




Aristotle said that what binds a political community together is a form of love — amicitia, friendship — a friendship among citizens. What I have observed this week among Ronald Reagan's closest associates is something more than admiration for this man, or loyalty — it is a kind of love. The way we all tell stories of him shows that. We love the guy.

One of my favorites involves that awful day when he was almost taken from us. It was the night of the NCAA basketball final game, to be played in Philadelphia. While we were horror-struck, waiting minute by minute for news of his condition, television said there was discussion about whether the championship would be canceled; the president was undergoing an operation to try to save his life. Early in the evening a report came over the television from the hospital. Asked how he was feeling, the president — so very near to death — flashed that mischievous look in his eyes and said: "On the whole, I'd rather be in Philadelphia."

The game went on that night in Philadelphia. The name of that city means "love of brothers." It is the most distinctive name of America — our whole country should have been called "Philadelphia"!


AN 18TH-CENTURY THINKER
For sure, these last three days prove again, we here have been — to cite Shakespeare — "a band of brothers. We few. We happy few." And hundreds of millions with us.

One other story that I like was told to Karen and me by Clare Boothe Luce at dinner in our home. "One thing no one has noticed," Mrs. Luce said, "is where the president gets his equanimity in face of criticism, especially from the media. That's an occupational advantage he gained from Hollywood. Early an actor learns the difference between the box office and the critics. If you have box office, it's astonishing how kind you can be to critics."

Larry Arnns yesterday asked us to think of President Reagan in the context of Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln. The president himself once said (I paraphrase): "I've been accused by my critics of having 19th-century ideas. They're wrong. I have 18th-century ideas. I learned them from our founders. I believe in them."

The best way to understand Ronald Reagan, I believe, is to steep yourself in America's heritage. Again and again and again, he sounds like America speaking — like John Adams, or James Madison.

Let me test you on this. Do you remember the president saying these words, and on what occasion?



Entertaining a due sense of our equal right to the use of our own faculties, to the acquisitions of our own industry, to honor and confidence from our fellow citizens, resulting not from birth, but from our actions and their sense of them; enlightened by a benign religion, professed, indeed, and practiced in various forms, yet all of them inculcating honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man; acknowledging and adoring an overruling Providence ... With all these blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one more thing, fellow citizens — wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities.

These are the words of Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural. But don't they sound like Ronald Reagan?


THE REAGAN RE-VOLVERE
Compare Jefferson's words to Ronald Reagan's own First Inaugural:

...We are a nation that has a government — not the other way around. And this makes us special among the nations of the earth. Our government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government, which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed...
...[I]t's not my intention to do away with government. It is rather to make it work — work with us, not over us; to stand by our side, not ride on our back....

If we look to the answer as to why for so many years we achieved so much, prospered as no other people on earth, it was because here in this land we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before.... [W]ith all the creative energy at our command, let us begin an era of national renewal.


Back in 1988, I had the occasion to call these two passages to President Reagan's attention. I said the following words:

Mr. President, taking Thomas Jefferson's words as your own, you made "a new beginning," and not only for the United States. Many nations are now imitating your policies. As the main source of hope for the world's poor, they too are turning from government activists to economic activists, that is, to all the people.
Historians tell us that what our framers meant by "revolution" was a turning back to founding principles — in Latin, a re-volvere — a going back to true beginnings.

Was there a Reagan Revolution? Mr. President, it was not exactly a "Reagan" revolution. It was "the American Revolution," now well into its third century, reestablished by you upon our founding principles.

As the founders humbly dared to hope, Mr. President, this American Revolution heralded "a new order" of basic rights for all humanity and for all the ages. This novus ordo seclorum was conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that every man and every woman everywhere is created equal. All around the world today — even in Mr. Gorbachev's USSR, if glacially — whole peoples are turning toward these shining principles.

May this revolution last forever, Mr. President, and may your name be linked with its renewal, at this time, in this age, for as many generations yet to come as God sees fit to bless America.

For beginning anew the American Revolution, Mr. President, the revolution of natural liberty, the revolution that belongs to all humanity, we thank you.


It gave me great pleasure on that occasion to see that there were tears in his eyes.


THE PILLARS OF HIS LEGACY
That is the first pillar of Ronald Reagan's legacy for the future: A love for the American creed, a reverence for her heritage, an awe before the work that Providence has wrought on these shores, among this people. It does not belong to us, this work, it is God's work, this nation's history.

John Adams, our second president, noted two further foundational pillars to the American adventure: hence, to Ronald Reagan's great adventure. He called one of these "the spirit of liberty"; the other, "the architecture of government."

No need to tell this audience: Ronald Reagan loved liberty. He believed, with Thomas Jefferson, that "the God who made us made us free at the same time." Our Creator made every woman and every man not only free, but responsible. And each of us is unique, different from every other. The name of each of us is written in the mind of God, the Good Book tells us — God knows us one by one, calls us by name. Individual liberty is, then, the second pillar of the Reagan legacy. This is not merely given to us, however. Each of us must awaken to it, live up to it, not allow our inner liberty to slumber. (People can be free in principle, but asleep to it.) Isn't it true Ronald Reagan called each of us in this room — all Americans — to be better, freer, than we might have been? Those of us who remember the 1970s know that it was so.

The third pillar — or at least its roundabout name — is "the architecture of liberty." Better: opportunity. John Adams said that republics require a higher level of virtue than monarchies. But republics lack an aristocracy to remind them what ambition is and what nobility is like. So they must make up for this by inciting individuals everywhere with opportunity to better their condition, to discipline themselves, to learn sound habits.

Worldwide, opportunity today means a new approach through universal capital ownership. During the 20th century, nations pursued a receding mirage of income maintenance. In the 21st century, we should switch the emphasis to capital accumulation for all families. For example, if social security is privately owned, it will become a capital fund inheritable by one's descendants — instead of dissolving with death as Social Security does today. In the same way, individual medical accounts can become inheritable assets, so that unused portions stay in the family. The opportunity to own capital should be made universal. Estate taxes should be abolished. Worldwide, universal capital ownership is the meaning of opportunity today.

Opportunity is the greatest teacher of virtue nature affords — when rules are just, rewards are fair, and government does not distort by favoritism the open field of opportunity.

Opportunity to discover and to use our God-given potential is the third pillar.

The fourth pillar is the most challenging of all.

The fourth pillar is to spread democracy around the world. That is a far more difficult and complicated job then it may seem.

Now it so happens that on or about January 21, 1981, the newly Honorable Jeane Kirkpatrick approached me and said that President Reagan needed a new Ambassador in Geneva for the Human Rights Commission. I said, "When?" She said, "January 31." "Can I have until tomorrow to decide?" "No, but go ahead and take it."

Thus it happened that I found myself in Geneva ten days later, thoroughly unprepared in U.N. jargon or institutional tradition; I was not even a lawyer. I was the first living Reaganaut to arrive in Europe. My fellow ambassadors regarded me with intense curiosity — looked to see if I was wearing sidearms and cowboy boots.

On the airplane over I read my briefing books — huge, prepared by the Carter-administration team. But I was able to predict to my fellow ambassadors what Ronald Reagan expected of me and, in general, what my future voting instructions would be.

I knew Jeane Kirkpatrick, and I believed I knew what Ronald Reagan expected of me. Here is what he said in his inaugural address. He quoted from Dr. Joseph Warren of Massachusetts, who fought at Lexington and died on Bunker Hill in 1775:

Our country is in danger, but not to be despaired of... On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important questions upon which rest the happiness and the liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of yourselves.
Isn't that 18th-century? Isn't that Ronald Reagan? That is why he belongs with Washington and Jefferson and Lincoln — on Mt. Rushmore. He renewed the American Revolution.


GREAT MEN'S MONUMENTS
I knew the United States under Ronald Reagan clings to three principles: We stand for the human rights of all (that is why we came to America). We know that rights do not exist as words on paper ("parchment barriers"), but in the habits and institutions of living peoples. Therefore, we concentrate on institutions. Third, the key institution is democracy — not just majority rule, but separated powers, checks and balances, protections of minorities, the rule of law, free speech and free association — a whole complicated set of ideas. Including such difficult ideas as "coalitions" and "compromise." (In many languages there is not even a word for "compromise" in the good sense.)

Democracy is a very long school. Looking into the future, we need a much more detailed understanding of the complex set of habits and institutions needed to make democracy more than a word. In Russia, today. In China. In the Islamic world.

One last point. Ask yourself, why did our founders say that "the price of liberty is everlasting vigilance"? Because liberty is the most precarious of all regimes. People can freely give it away, allow it to be corrupted, squander it. That is why it can only be saved by re-volvere — turning back to first principles. Our nation needs constant rebirths of freedom — constant Reagan Revolutions.

Clare Boothe Luce said that every great man gets a single line on his monument — "Father of his country", "Freed the slaves." I don't know about that for Ronald Reagan. But in the memorial I will build in my own mind, the words will always be:

"Ronald Reagan — He defeated Communism — He led a new American Revolution — He awoke the better angels of our nature." And if I had to reduce it to one single line, I would write it in marble in my mind:

He awoke the better angels of our nature.

— Michael Novak is the winner of the 1994 Templeton Prize for progress in religion and the George Frederick Jewett Scholar in Religion, Philosophy, and Public Policy at the American Enterprise Institute

by fran Tue Jun 08, 2004 12:04

...Irangate, support for narco-terrorism, mining El salvador's ports, support for fascist regimes in central America, billions wasted on "star wars"...god bless him indeed

by Starstruck - UCD Left Tue Jun 08, 2004 13:01

Looks like the war on terror is working then.
Fuck you Ronald Reagan-
A man responsible for mass murder.
Another one down.
Lets hope Gee Dubya is next for the sake of the planet.

by Joe Tue Jun 08, 2004 13:04

The headlines that 'The world mournes' Reagan is an odd one for such a controversal and dare I say it hated figure. Perhaps the author meant 'mournes' in the sense of Gadaffis words that it is unfortunate he is dead as he will never stand trial for his crimes. I could see that point of view being shared across the Middle East, Asia and Southern and Central America as well as a fair bit of Europe.

I suspect though that this simply the point of view of one of those types for whom 'the world' stretches from Niagra to the Rio Grande and from the Atlantic shore westwards to the Pacific shore. Even in that world though while the 27% who voted for him may have mourned him many others would have hated him including the victims of McCarthy and the 20,000 or so Air Traffic Controllers he sacked. Reagan destroyed the lives of millions of US citizens to make the rich richer.

by Joe Tue Jun 08, 2004 13:23

I see even in the US 'the world' does not mourne him. See

by steve bell Tue Jun 08, 2004 14:08

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,7371,1233866,00.html

by conor (wsm personal capacity) Tue Jun 08, 2004 15:19

California Uber Alles
Dead Kennedys:

WE’VE GOT A BIGGER PROBLEM NOW
Last call for alcohol. Last call for your freedom of speech. Drink up. Happy hour is now enforced by law. Don't forget our house special, it's called a Trickie Dickie Screwdriver. It's got one part Jack Daniels, two parts purple Kool-Aid, and a jigger of formaldehyde from the jar with Hitler's brain in it we got in the back storeroom. Happy trails to you. Happy trails to you.
I am Emperor Ronald Reagan / Born again with sweetheart cravings / Still, you made me president / Human rights will soon go ‘way / I am now you Shah today / Now I command all of you / Now you’re gonna pray in school / I’ll make sure they’re Christian too / Chorus: California Uber alles / Uber alles California / Ku Klux Klan will control you / Still you think it’s natural / Nigger knockin’ for the master race / Still you wear the happy face / You closed your eyes, can’t happen here / Alexander Haig is near / Vietnam won’t come back you say / Join the army or you will pay / (Chorus)
Yeah, that's it. Just relax. Have another drink, few more pretzels, little more MSG. Turn on those Dallas Cowboys on your TV. Lock your doors. Close your mind. It's time for the two-minute warning.
Welcome to 1984 / Are you ready for the Third World War?!? / You too will meet the secret police / They’ll draft you and they’ll jail your niece / You’ll go quietly to boot camp / They’ll shoot you dead, make you a man / Don’t you worry, it’s for a cause / Feeding global corporations’ claws / Die on our brand new poison gas / El Salvador or Afghanistan / Making money for President Reagan / And all the friends of President Reagan / (Chorus)

by :-) - pirates Tue Jun 08, 2004 15:42

The eternal soul of Ronald Wilson Reagan is confined to the WW2 Memorial between 17th street and the Mall of Washington District of Colombia.
He will be confined till the next passing of Venus Nepthys between Sol and Terra, in 2127.

I will not waste precious resourves by uploading the heiroglyphs here is the stelle transliteration:-

xr nH.k r mdw r-Dd
tw.i anx.kwi r tA mdw n nA sSw nty wAH tA at r-a rdwy
xr m-di nA sSw i.Hw tA pt r.w m tA at n sS Hr-Sri pAy.i
iw.k in.w r-bnr
iw.n gm.w r-Dd bw pwy ft
iw.i Dd n.k iw.i sfx.w an
iw.k int.w r-Xry
iw.n wAH m tA at maHat imn-nxt pAy.i it
nHt.k r-Dd tw.i anx.kwi

'Now you wished to say,
"I am alive to the matter of the writings which were placed in the staircase chamber".
Well, about the writings that were rained on in the chamber of the scribe Horsheri of my family,
you brought them out,
and we found that they hadn't been washed off -
I told you I would untie them again.
You brought them down below,
and we placed (them) in the chamber of the chapel of Amennakht my forefather.
And you wished to say "I am alive (to it)".'

= You never escape us.

In Memoria. Recqueiscat in Pace.
though it sounded like Urdu.
odd that.

by 40 Tue Jun 08, 2004 20:15

40th president is DEAD.
- how you feel now Ronnie?
- you feel dead.
- can you move anything Ronnie?
- no.
- can anyone hear you Ronnie?
- they're organising a sceance in the oval room, it's just like Teddy Roosevelt's time.
- have you anything left to knock with?
- no
- oh well, you're knocking on Heaven's Door.

Knock Knock Knock Knock.
it is truly harder for a richman to knock.

-you have any problem waiting a while Ronnie?
-it's just loads of people were sent ahead too soon on your orders, and you did get over 90 years, and an airforce carrier, and a school, and an airport.
-I can't see them now.
-oh well. don't suppose you know how to get back?
- i don't feel well.

by moonwolf Wed Jun 09, 2004 01:04

Sure maybe they will have a REFERENDUM to change their constitution in order to allow naturalised citizens become president! possible ? yes of course.
Oh and thanks for the politics lesson, it's most kind of you, where did you study? School of the Americas?

by agnes Wed Jun 09, 2004 09:19

...was a reference to Ronald reagan, whenever he was president, back in the bad old 1980s. And indeed the Presidents brain was missing because the miserable tin pot old bastard had alzheimers disease, and was becoming increasing irrational and senile, but yet was still able to be president.
Good riddance to bad rubbish, is now muttered on hearing of the senile old despots demise.

People all over the world are crying with joy, that el predidente has at last kicked the bucket.

What would really cause more joyous mass hysteria would be if we heard the news that the other decrepit old warmonger battle axe Maggie Thatcher had also kicked the bucket.

by Good news Wed Jun 09, 2004 09:27

All the plastic surgery in the world could not disguise El presidentes rotten insides.

All the money, possessions, power and wealth in the world couldn't stop Ronald Reagan dying a prolonged, slow drawn out tortuous death, losing his mind and looks. Serves the bastard right.

by Gaillimhed Wed Jun 09, 2004 16:46

and did he really paint his hair on every morning?

by Hotplate Wed Jun 23, 2004 15:50

Most of you kids were probably too young to remember Reagan and to realise how great a man he was.

Go on, have a listen, do it for the Gipper.

by Shannen Thu Jun 24, 2004 04:36

I had no idea that Reagan was such a charming, funny man. No wonder people voted for him. I always had this image of him as a stern Cold Warrior.

by Peter Murray Thu Jun 24, 2004 07:27

Buy one for the Gipper!!

by Reagan Fan Fri Jun 25, 2004 02:27

A great leader, a great man and a Son of Erin too.

by Tom Doohan Fri Jun 25, 2004 21:32

They're brilliiant. Reagan was such a great President.

George W Bush is almost as great, but not quite.

Welcome to Ireland, Mr President.

Céad mile fáilte!!!

by Ghaled Wed Jul 14, 2004 02:10

He killed Communism. He saved the Free World. Thanks Gipper !!!!