I'm trying to figure out the recent rash of anti-Reagan sentiment. Most of the hostility, including the letter above, seems focused on the administration, rather than the man:
No, Steven, I do not presume to judge Ronald Reagan's soul or heart. He may very well have been a nice guy. In fact, I don't think that Reagan hated gay people -- I'm sure some of his and Nancy's best friends were gay. But I do know that the Reagan administration's policies on AIDS and anything gay-related resulted - and continue to result - in despair and death.
However, even if President Reagan is to be held completely responsible for all of the governmental acts committed during his presidency, why focus so myopically on the negative? For example, the Reagan administration also ended the cold war.
But the man is the administration. We should ask that our leaders take responsibility for the actions of those they choose as their subordinates. I expect that of any mature adult in any leadership position, so I certainly expect that of the President
( ... )
I think what you are focusing on is partially a reaction to a myopic, hagiographic positive focus as much as hatred toward the man.
I think you're right; I haven't experienced much of the media's recent spin on Reagan-era politics. Maybe the anti-Reagan sentiment I see on LJ wouldn't be nearly as strong if the real world wasn't awash with pro-Reagan propaganda.
However, I don't agree that the man is the administration. I'm not expressing that Reagan was any kind of saint, whose brilliant leadership was unfortunately marred by a few sneaky cabinet members. I think any individual in public office should be held accountable for what that office has done. However, I'm suggesting that there should be a conceptual division between the man and the administration. Reagan's life was more than his presidency.
Well sure. He was only President for eight years out of... what, 93?
But its because of those eight years that most of us even know who he is. And it's because of those eight years that that letter was written.
I wouldn't call the man's life evil because of what he did as President, but I will blame him for not doing what he could and should have done during that time to at least demonstrate that he knew AIDS was a real crisis, and that gay men were real citizens.
Whoa whoa whoa...baciodelrospoJune 10 2004, 19:35:55 UTC
Well, first of all, who are you people? I'm glad you're reading my journal, but not if your only reason is to be hostile toward me (this last is directed only at those being hostile
( ... )
Re: Cake...uh...jobbaciodelrospoJune 10 2004, 18:53:02 UTC
Well, my interview lasted about 1.5 minutes. It consisted of the three members of the managing staff asking me if my being partially finished with college meant that I was only looking for summer work, listening to my answer (yes), and thanking me for my time. They regretted my status as a summer worker, as they had otherwise wanted to hire me. Oy.
So, no cake. Sad. However, as I'll say in my next actual entry, I just got offered a job at Dog-Eared Books (used/new bookstore), which is excellent. So I'm going to see about that on Saturday, as I'm babysitting the Younger Monster tomorrow (the Elder Monster was today).
Comments 8
No, Steven, I do not presume to judge Ronald Reagan's soul or heart. He
may very well have been a nice guy. In fact, I don't think that Reagan
hated gay people -- I'm sure some of his and Nancy's best friends were
gay. But I do know that the Reagan administration's policies on AIDS and
anything gay-related resulted - and continue to result - in despair and
death.
However, even if President Reagan is to be held completely responsible for all of the governmental acts committed during his presidency, why focus so myopically on the negative? For example, the Reagan administration also ended the cold war.
Reply
Reply
I think you're right; I haven't experienced much of the media's recent spin on Reagan-era politics. Maybe the anti-Reagan sentiment I see on LJ wouldn't be nearly as strong if the real world wasn't awash with pro-Reagan propaganda.
However, I don't agree that the man is the administration. I'm not expressing that Reagan was any kind of saint, whose brilliant leadership was unfortunately marred by a few sneaky cabinet members. I think any individual in public office should be held accountable for what that office has done. However, I'm suggesting that there should be a conceptual division between the man and the administration. Reagan's life was more than his presidency.
Reply
But its because of those eight years that most of us even know who he is. And it's because of those eight years that that letter was written.
I wouldn't call the man's life evil because of what he did as President, but I will blame him for not doing what he could and should have done during that time to at least demonstrate that he knew AIDS was a real crisis, and that gay men were real citizens.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
So, no cake. Sad. However, as I'll say in my next actual entry, I just got offered a job at Dog-Eared Books (used/new bookstore), which is excellent. So I'm going to see about that on Saturday, as I'm babysitting the Younger Monster tomorrow (the Elder Monster was today).
Reply
Leave a comment