Turn Off Ads?
Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 163

Thread: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

  1. #106
    Member GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,974

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by RosieRed
    When exactly, then, would you say one can state opinions and thoughts on Reagan and/or his administration, without being disrespectful?
    RBA started the thread to alert eveyone that Reagan's health had deteriorated, and then, within several hours he died.

    Go back and read the first several responses immediately after it was posted. People were simply paying their condolences immediately after someone dies. There was nothing political being stated or ideology touted. Just people paying their respects to this former President and to his family at their loss.

    For a time being, why can't people set aside their ideological differences and, yes, simply pay respect to a man who regardless of what anyone wants to think, DID accomplish alot of positive and great things during his life.

    I agree with what Randy stated above (and maybe it is because I am older and was brought up differently also); but I do not allow my partisanship/biases to go after and attack (which is exactly what Micheal and others have done) immediately after someone dies. They turned the intent of this thread into a partisan, ideological discussion/argument.

    I simply think that at this particular time it's wrong and very tacky.

    As the article RBA posted above on Kerry... take the high ground.

    You do some things simply out of respect...not ideological/partisan differences.
    Last edited by GAC; 06-08-2004 at 09:56 PM.
    "In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #107
    Member GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,974

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by Rojo
    Stem-cell research might one day lead to a cure for Alzheimers.
    Are you trying to see how tacky you can get on this thread?

    I want to say that this is even beneath you...but it's not.
    "In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)

  4. #108
    Member Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,592

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by GAC
    Are you trying to see how tacky you can get on this thread?

    I want to say that this is even beneath you...but it's not.
    Funny, Nancy Reagan is a big advocate for stem cell research.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3700015.stm

    I guess she's tacky too.
    Because the plain people are able to speak and understand, and even, in many cases, to read and write, it is assumed that they have ideas in their heads, and an appetite for more. This assumption is a folly.
    --H.L. Mencken

  5. #109
    MarsArmyGirl RosieRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    2,783

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by GAC
    RBA started the thread to alert eveyone that Reagan's health had deteriorated, and then, within several hours he died.

    Go back and read the first several responses immediately after it was posted. People were simply paying their condolences immediately after someone dies. There was nothing political being stated or ideology touted. Just people paying their respects to this former President and to his family at their loss.

    For a time being, why can't people set aside their ideological differences and, yes, simply pay respect to a man who regardless of what anyone wants to think, DID accomplish alot of positive and great things during his life.

    I agree with what Randy stated above (and maybe it is because I am older and was brought up differently also); but I do not allow my partisanship/biases to go after and attack (which is exactly what Micheal and others have done) immediately after someone dies. They turned the intent of this thread into a partisan, ideological discussion/argument.

    I simply think that at this particular time it's wrong and very tacky.

    As the article RBA posted above on Kerry... take the high ground.

    You do some things simply out of respect...not ideological/partisan differences.
    GAC, you still didn't answer my question.

    I don't need to go back through this thread; I've read the whole thing. I am the one who posted in this thread that he died. Also, I haven't said anything about Reagan in this thread (oddly enough), except that he did die.

    As an aside: All the comments about "being brought up differently" in this thread crack me up. I'd venture to say we were all brought up differently.

  6. #110
    Kentuckian At Heart WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Mid Ohio Valley
    Posts
    8,456

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by RosieRed
    When exactly, then, would you say one can state opinions and thoughts on Reagan and/or his administration, without being disrespectful?
    I dont really think you can put a time frame. If the threads had been posted about two to six months after Reagans death, you wouldnt see somebody defending it because he had been deceased a while.

    Obviously I think it depends on the event or the person. If this had been Hitler, there would have been no sympathy from anybody on this board. On the other hand, if this was 9/11, and a comment was made five hours later to the extent that the people in the twin towers deserved to die, that person would have been ran out of town on a rail, regardless of freedom of speech or if they had a right to say it.

    Michael and everybody else has a right to freedom of speech(which I dont view it as a "right", more like a "priviledge" compared to other countries), but they also must realize that others have a right to disagree in every facet(whether its Reagans administration or the timing of the post).

    Think of John Rocker, he made comments that are homophobic and racist. Was he protected under freedom of speech? Absolutely. But when he made the comments, he immediately came under fire from others who had freedom of speech as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  7. #111
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern Ky
    Posts
    4,801

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Go back and show me where anyone said that Reagan deserved to die.

    You are reading WAY more into this thread than there is.

    Also, on his last birthday this same topic came up. It apparently was not appropriate to talk about it then either.

    No one here is happy the man is dead (at least I don't think anyone is, I know I am not).

    He has not been in the public eye for 10 years. He *died* along time ago as far as that is concerned. I feel bad for his family. Some of you are acting as if this were a personal friend or relative of yours. And discussing it here at RZ is no different than any other discussion that goes on here. It is not like the Reagan family visit here or are members here. Also, I would imagine they have heard all these things before...over and over again. Give them some credit, they grew up in the public eye, they know what its like and can handle it. And for every person that has any criticism of his job there is another person to offer them complete support for his time in office.

    He was a public figure and is fair game to have his performance performing his service to this country examined be it 6 months ago, now or 6 months from now.

    Funny thing though, the people that want to honor his memory continue to post in this thread instead of the one RFA went to the trouble of setting up. Michael already said he would not post in that one. I have no intentions of posting there....so go for it!!! (Not saying you can't post here, please do not take it that way...just saying it is there, use it along with this one).



    Quote Originally Posted by WVRed
    I dont really think you can put a time frame. If the threads had been posted about two to six months after Reagans death, you wouldnt see somebody defending it because he had been deceased a while.

    Obviously I think it depends on the event or the person. If this had been Hitler, there would have been no sympathy from anybody on this board. On the other hand, if this was 9/11, and a comment was made five hours later to the extent that the people in the twin towers deserved to die, that person would have been ran out of town on a rail, regardless of freedom of speech or if they had a right to say it.

    Michael and everybody else has a right to freedom of speech(which I dont view it as a "right", more like a "priviledge" compared to other countries), but they also must realize that others have a right to disagree in every facet(whether its Reagans administration or the timing of the post).

    Think of John Rocker, he made comments that are homophobic and racist. Was he protected under freedom of speech? Absolutely. But when he made the comments, he immediately came under fire from others who had freedom of speech as well.

  8. #112
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern Ky
    Posts
    4,801

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    And one more thing. Reagan passing away due to a disease/age is nothing compared to people that were MURDERED on 9/11.

    How about we not even use them in any examples in this thread because they are a FAR stretch and have nothing to do with Reagan's political decisions.

  9. #113
    Kentuckian At Heart WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Mid Ohio Valley
    Posts
    8,456

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by TeamDunn
    Go back and show me where anyone said that Reagan deserved to die.

    You are reading WAY more into this thread than there is.
    I wasnt likening the 9/11 post with Reagan, or saying that anybody said Reagan deserved to die. I was merely answering RosieReds question about timing.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  10. #114
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Northern Ky
    Posts
    4,801

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by WVRed
    I wasnt likening the 9/11 post with Reagan, or saying that anybody said Reagan deserved to die. I was merely answering RosieReds question about timing.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding.
    Gotcha!

    Thanks for the clarification!

    Now, I turn into a pumpkin shortly so I am heading to bed.

    Hope to see all of you in the morning, I have no ill will towards any of you that are currently disagreeing with me. :GAC:

  11. #115
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    376

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by GAC
    Exactly LGJ!

    No one is attempting to "deify" Reagan or say he was a saint. A former President has died, and people simply want to pay their respects (or in some cases... disrespect ).
    Nobody is trying to "deify" Reagan? Have you even been watching the news?

    Let me put it this way folks... the next time someone you know, or were close to (maybe a family member, friend, whatever) dies, then lets see you go to the funeral or the wake and start "highlighting" all their faults and weaknesses and see what it gets you.
    Yet another comparison between a baseball forum and a funeral. I don't get it.

    There is a time and place....but this isn't want of them IMO.

    There is, and will be, plenty of time to discuss the Reagan "legacy".
    For the 3rd...4th (I forget how many times now) I've asked this and nobody has answered.....just when exactly *should* people be "allowed" to discuss Reagan? Care to answer that?

  12. #116
    Kentuckian At Heart WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Mid Ohio Valley
    Posts
    8,456

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Allred
    For the 3rd...4th (I forget how many times now) I've asked this and nobody has answered.....just when exactly *should* people be "allowed" to discuss Reagan? Care to answer that?
    I just answered that. Technically you are able right now, just be prepared for the backlash that will follow.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  13. #117
    MarsArmyGirl RosieRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    2,783

    Re: President Reagan’s health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by WVRed
    I just answered that. Technically you are able right now, just be prepared for the backlash that will follow.
    Why do I think there would be "backlash" anytime Reagan is/was criticized, even if it's a year from now? I kinda think now is as good a time as any to talk about any and all facets of his presidency.

    Speaking of which, I came across this article earlier. For anyone interested in reading it, it has to do with Reagan's handling of the AIDS crisis. I wonder how many people actually know what went on his administration during that time? It isn't pretty.

    (Warning: The following article could be perceived as being "negative" toward or "disrespectful" of former President Reagan. In fact, it completely supports Michael Allred's ever-so-controversial first post in this thread. So please read it at your own risk.)

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...DG777163F1.DTL

  14. #118
    Kentuckian At Heart WVRed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Mid Ohio Valley
    Posts
    8,456

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by RosieRed
    Why do I think there would be "backlash" anytime Reagan is/was criticized
    I was referring to right now.
    Quote Originally Posted by savafan View Post
    I've read books about sparkling vampires who walk around in the daylight that were written better than a John Fay article.

  15. #119
    Member GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,974

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by Redsfaithful
    Funny, Nancy Reagan is a big advocate for stem cell research.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3700015.stm

    I guess she's tacky too.
    I know that Nancy is an advocate of stem cell research. You're not telling us anything new or shocking here.

    Her husband was the conservative in the family... not Nancy so much.

    I just got the impression that Rojo was basically trying to show some sort of irony (or sarcasm) to the fact that Reagan, who opposed stem cell research for various diseases as Alzheimers, died of the disease.

    And yes, I think it was tacky, and not appropriate for the intent of this thread.

    And maybe that goes back to the simple fact that Reagan's conviction's, and millions of others too, concerning the sanctity of life (even of the unborn), saw it as immoral to harvest human beings simply for the purpose of medical experiments/research? Reagan had his faults; but I dont think he would have changed his stance to one of self-serving on this issue. Even if the end result is for something good, the end does not always justify the means. And that is simply the way alot of people feel in this country, me included, and I don't feel ashamed over that stance one bit.

    IMO... it's bad enough, and immoral, that we are murdering our unborn...so now lets utilize them for medical research/experimentation?

    Are there any limitations at all as to how far we take this? Do we start marketing the "positive side" of abortions now, and all the good we can make from them? Do we now start cloning humans soley for the purpose of harvesting their organs, etc., for medical research?

    I sometimes wonder if so many people, who are huge animal rights advocates, and cringe at the thought of how animals are used (whether raising for food or medical experimentation), hold the same feelings of outrage towards stem cell research and abortion on human beings? They probably don't see any hypocrisy at all in that stance if they do, as they value animal life more precious and worthy of protection over a human life in this particular case.
    "In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)

  16. #120
    Member GAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Bellefontaine, Ohio
    Posts
    26,974

    Re: President Reaganís health said to have deteriorated

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Allred
    Nobody is trying to "deify" Reagan? Have you even been watching the news?
    Gee Michael. When any of the other past Presidents, or even world leaders or people of great prominence, passed away, society (including the media) took the time to cover the event of the funeral and everything else that surrounded it. There has always been alot of pomp and ceremony surrounding these situations. It was very similar with the Kennedys, DeGaulle, Johnson, Nixon, Princess Di, and many other famous people of note.

    They are not doing anything out of the unusual for Reagan. And yes, I have been watching it on most of the networks.

    But don't worry Michael...it'll all die down soon. But for the week following any death of someone as notable (especially a former President), you are going to get this kind of coverage, which is pretty routine, and is simply society paying their last respects while reflecting on that individual's life and accomplishments.

    I'm sorry, but Reagan was a very popular President. And there is nothing you can do to change that.

    And they'll do the same for the next Prez who dies, and anyone else of notability, who was seen by so many in this country/world as being a great influence on our society.

    Now that may upset liberals as yourself; but I guess you'll just have to find some way to get over it. Because society is not gonna stop doing it.


    For the 3rd...4th (I forget how many times now) I've asked this and nobody has answered.....just when exactly *should* people be "allowed" to discuss Reagan? Care to answer that?
    and for the 3rd...4th... and final time...I simply said that the intent of this thread was for people to basically pay their last respects to a former President that passed away. Not politicize it, nor use it for a partisan rant. There is always a time and place for it; but this thread was not started for that purpose, and IMO, I feel it is inappropriate.

    The guy can't hurt you anymore Michael. HE'S DEAD!

    Start a new thread if you feel so strongly about it. Then take all the "digs" you want at this deceased President. I don't think the Gipper will mind.

    He frustrated the hell out of liberals when he was alive with his communication skills and quick whit. Now that he can't respond back, I guess it's only appropriate for you to want to respond. So fire away!
    "In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | cumberlandreds | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | RedsfaninMT | redsfan1995 | The Operator