Are you sick of the seemingly nonstop coverage of "national mourning?" Yeah, me too. Thank the goddess for "Elimidate." Funeral? Procession? Watching the plane carrying his remains fly into DeeCee? No thanks, I pass.
As previously stated, I am all for folks injecting truth about Ronald Reagan into the ongoing one-sided lovefest. An accurate portrayal of the man must include good and bad, and if there are those who see more bad than good, well, they have the right and duty to speak their truth.
Into this arena comes commentator and cartoonist Ted Rall. I like much of Rall's work — his published opinions are sometimes incendiary (which can be a good thing), and more often than not (such as in the case of his controversial and perhaps-too-harsh May 3 take on the granting of "hero" status to football star-turned-friendly-fire-casualty Pat Tillman), he is dead right. Most of the positions in Rall's take on Mr. Iran-Contra are in line with mine. Check out this excerpt from his June 9 commentary, "Reagan's Shameful Legacy":
Reagan's defenders, people who don't know the facts or choose to ignore them, claim that "everybody" admired Reagan's ebullient personality even if some disagreed with his politics. That, like the Gipper's tall tales about welfare queens and "homeless by choice" urban campers, is a lie. Millions of Americans cringed at Reagan's simplistic rhetoric, were terrified that his anti-Soviet "evil empire" posturing would provoke World War III, and thought that his appeal to selfishness and greed--a bastardized blend of Adam Smith and Ayn Rand--brought out the worst in us. We rolled our eyes when Reagan quipped "There you go again"; what the hell did that mean? Given that he made flying a living hell (by firing the air traffic controllers and regulating the airlines), I'm not the only one who refuses to call Washington National Airport by its new name. His clown-like dyed hair and rouged cheeks disgusted us. We hated him during the dark days he made so hideous, and, with all due respect, we hate him still.
Stop tape: Rall had me until the last sentence. While I can't say I liked the man and I certainly didn't admire him or find inspiration or optimism in him, I emphatically do not hate Reagan. Then again, I don't hate any person. Rall, here, is expressing his emotions truthfully; he has that right. But it is important for folks on the Left to stand against hate in any form — trust me, the Right will hold all libs accountable for the publicly expressed hatred of a few, so we must speak against hate.
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
Very brave and important, Nat - I admire as always your consistency and honesty. I think the whole hagiography thing is weird too, as I tred to say in my post.
2 - Aaron, Duke De Mondo
Nat, i very rarely comment on the "political" pieces, not because i don't have an opinion, but because, whilst many are incredibly well-written and argued, i don't identify with the hatred they espouse. Your post was fantastic, and whilst, at a time, i too had slogans about "Assasinate" written on textbooks and what-not, you grow up and realise that hatred in any form is corrosive and contrary to anything we "lefties" might believe in.
Thanks Nat. You made The Duke feel good right now.
3 - boomcrashbaby
But it is important for folks on the Left to stand against hate in any form -- trust me, the Right will hold all libs accountable for the publicly expressed hatred of a few, so we must speak against hate.
Yes, they do. They also hold all African Americans accountable for the actions of a few. They also hold all gay people accountable for the actions of a few. Depending on how extreme right you wanna go, only more get added to the list; they'll hold all people of a specific religion accountable for the actions of a few, etc.
Listen to O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Carlson, Coulter et al, if you can stomach them: They insist that the Left is all about hatred.
Hell, you don't even have to go to them, just read some comments from the Right, right here on BlogCritics. If I feel a commander in chief wasn't there when needed, then I'm 'slandering', 'pissing on his grave', etc. ad nauseum. How does saying someone let you down equal hate? The answer is only when it originally comes from the Right, Natalie, not the Left. Don't let them twist your perception. When Coulter or Novak or O'Reilly talk about the hatred from the Left, can't you just feel the venom in their voice? You can just see it in their expressions. I certainly can. If I can see through it, then I know plenty of others can too. Not everybody will be fooled. Talking negatively, with such hate, about a group that is 'all about hate' is the speciality of the Right. It's been the 'soup du jour' ever since Reagan died, right here at BC.
If you are opposed to hate, you should oppose it when it comes from the Right and the Left.
Can you elaborate? Are you opposed to the feeling of hate? or acting on hatred? or speaking with hate? Eliminating hatred from the human race is going to be a toughie, hon.
Still, there is a huge difference between pointing out a dead president's sins and envisioning him burning in Hell.
What is the difference? If someone does not share your perspective of what Hell is, then maybe there isn't such a huge difference for them.
But speaking for myself, I believe the Creator is a merciful deity.
Extremist Muslims believe God condones terrorism. Everybody has a different perception of heaven and hell. You are taking offense at his remarks because you are applying them to what you know/believe of the afterlife. Ted Rall has no control over how you interpret what you hear.
So, please forgive me if I borrow a question from -- of all people -- El Rushbo: Where's the love, Ted?
Ted's doing what all people do. Reserving love for those they feel earned it. You're boiling it down to love OR hate. That's a tactic of the Right, don't get swept in, hon. Go towards the light. Go towards the light! (somebody quick! Throw the tennis ball marked number 1!)
There's love, there's hate, there's indifference. There's respect and caring for another life form, but there can also be no love there at the same time. It's not possible to love everybody. Then love has no meaning.
4 - Natalie Davis
BCB, as I said, I am speaking for myself. Of course my statements are filtered through my personal belief system.
"How does saying someone let you down equal hate?"
It doesn't, IMO. Equating the two is ludicrous.
"Don't let them twist your perception. When Coulter or Novak or O'Reilly talk about the hatred from the Left, can't you just feel the venom in their voice?"
My perception isn't twisted -- I believe Coulter and Co. are as guilty of hatred as Rall is. I've said so many times. What is the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment but the codification of anti-GLBT hatred? Trust me, I get that Rush dishes out hatred at least as often as he calls the Left on its hatred.
"Can you elaborate? Are you opposed to the feeling of hate? or acting on hatred? or speaking with hate? Eliminating hatred from the human race is going to be a toughie, hon."
All of the above. And you are correct about the difficulty involved in trying to eradicate hatred. Gandhi gave it the proverbial college try; all I can do is to give it my best effort. And yes, it starts with me.
"If someone does not share your perspective of what Hell is, then maybe there isn't such a huge difference for them."
That is a good point.
"Ted Rall has no control over how you interpret what you hear."
Very true. Nor does he have control over anyone's reactions and expressions of same. If he has the right to muse about Reagan in Hell, I have the right to opine that his statement is hateful and horrible. As I said, I speak for myself.
"It's not possible to love everybody. Then love has no meaning."
This is probably where our belief systems diverge, BCB. I believe I am called to love all of my neighbors as myself. Some people are more difficult to love, but it is in the effort that meaning is found.
5 - boomcrashbaby
the Right will hold all libs accountable for the publicly expressed hatred of a few, so we must speak against hate.
Natalie, change the word hate in that sentence to debt, or taxes, or anything else. Then you'll see you want to change something to placate the Right. By the time you're done, you'll have changed so much, you'll be ON the Right.
I see hatred on the Left and the Right. I see the Right bitching about it more though. I also think that 90% of America falls somewhere in the middle.
6 - boomcrashbaby
(I didn't mean your perception was twisted, I meant don't let them twist your perception).
7 - Natalie Davis
Honey, I change nothing to placate anyone, much less right-wingers. :)
As for the Wrong twisting my perception, not a chance.
My statements are not about placating the Right; they are about doing what I believe is the right thing to do. Big difference.
8 - Natalie Davis
And this needs saying as well: If someone on the Right says something that happens to be correct or happens to be a statement with which I agree (as rarely as that happens), there is nothing wrong with my saying so.
9 - Joe
Thanks for sharing this, it's a refreshing perspective that both sides could gain from considering.
10 - Mark Saleski
very nice.
i watched the whole thing on the tube yesterday from the transfer of the casket to the caissson, the riderless horse, the boots.... all the way to the speeches in the rotunda.
i was no fan of reagan's policy's but this was one extremely moving ceremony.
11 - JR
i was no fan of reagan's policy's but this was one extremely moving ceremony.
Looks a bit too much like monarchy for my taste.
12 - jack e. jett
does anyone have any thoughts on what a ceremony like this might cost?
jack e. jett
13 - Natalie Davis
Too much?
14 - Shark
jack e jett: "...does anyone have any thoughts on what a ceremony like this might cost?"
Suffice it to say the smart money will invest in Kleenex (KMB @ NYSE) first thing Monday morning.
Yer welcome!
15 - RJ Elliott
The federal government likely spends more money studying grasshoppers than it did on Reagan's funeral.
Which kinda proves his point...
16 - Natalie Davis
I would prefer that my tax dollars go toward studying grasshoppers.
17 - JR
Grasshoppers sometimes turn into locusts, which destroy crops, which leads to famines. Considering the impact they can have on public health and geopolitics, grasshoppers are probably worth studying.
But I guess some people think it's more important to haul a corpse around the country to "show respect" for a politician noted for promoting symbolism over substantive policy.
Yep, that kinda proves his point.