A GREAT ARTIST HAS DIED

[SouthBeachBtm]

>>A true musical genius and great artist. Society and man

>kind

>>will miss his contributions.

>

>Oh please - speak for yourself.

>

>Amazing - an American President who is re-elected with one of

>the greatest landslides ever and frees the entire Eastern bloc

>dies, and they celebrate his death, dance over his body, and

>cackle about how he's burning in hell.

>

>But some blind guy blows into a metal tube, and they put on

>their serious humanist face and act like his death is cause

>for solemn grieving.

>

>Could someone lend me a barf bag?

>

 

Your response to my tribute to Mr. Ray Charles is extremely bitter. While I have never been a fan of Reagan, mostly for his well known racism, his economic policies which served to help the rich at the expense of the poor and for the crimes he committed while at the helm of our great nation. Reagan funded the Contras illegally after Congress said he couldn't. He then lied about it and offered up Oliver North as the sacrificial lamb. He took the cowards way out. He is a man who publically used the "N" word. He was a man who didn't care about the least of us, only the well to do. His Presidency was one of the darkest times in our nation's history.

 

After saying all of that, I would not wish death on anyone, even him. I prayed for his family today even though I never supported the man they loss. But I will not get caught up in all the media hooplah painting a distorted picture of him and his presidency. He was a cancer on our society, millions fell prey to his charm and charisma as he lead our nation down an ultra conservative, Un-American road.

 

Ray Charles was indeed a great man. And while you probably cannot comprehend the importance of Art to the health of a society, I would argue that Ray Charles, with all his flaws was a better man, a better American and made a more possitive contribution to the fabric of our nation than Reagan ever could.

[SouthBeachBtm]

Rick, you know I forgot about that. Thanks for reminding me. Yes he was wonderful on that show. I miss the Nany.

[Guest showme43]

......I'm thinking REPUBLICAN?

[Boston Guy]

>I agree. That's why it's so interesting how you didn't feel a

>need to trot out your little sermon when your ideological

>comrades said the most vicious, disgusting things about Ronald

>Reagan - how great it is that he's dead, how he's burning

>deservedly in hell, good riddance to bad filth -- that I have

>ever read. You participtaed in those threads, piled on with

>criticism, but said nothing about what you read. Your concern

>for humanity only suddenly arose when someone refused to

>pretend that Ray Charles was some patron saint of greatness.

>

 

You are right.

 

Many of the comments posted about Ronald Reagan crossed over the line from discussions about policy to ad hominem attacks on the man himself. It's possible that they're most properly viewed in light of the general political atmosphere of discord that characterizes our national politics today. But they were repugnant, especially during the time of the National Funeral. Such comments should be rejected, even by those who opposed Reagan's policies. And I speak as one who lost many friends to AIDS and has decried the Reagan/Bush policies in that area.

 

I found the comments you refer to as distasteful and unacceptable but I did not say so publicly. I should have.

 

You are right. I was wrong.

 

BG

[Boston Guy]

>I agree. That's why it's so interesting how you didn't feel a

>need to trot out your little sermon when your ideological

>comrades said the most vicious, disgusting things about Ronald

>Reagan - how great it is that he's dead, how he's burning

>deservedly in hell, good riddance to bad filth -- that I have

>ever read. You participtaed in those threads, piled on with

>criticism, but said nothing about what you read. Your concern

>for humanity only suddenly arose when someone refused to

>pretend that Ray Charles was some patron saint of greatness.

>

 

You are right.

 

Many of the comments posted about Ronald Reagan crossed over the line from discussions about policy to ad hominem attacks on the man himself. It's possible that they're most properly viewed in light of the general political atmosphere of discord that characterizes our national politics today. But they were repugnant, especially during the time of the National Funeral. Such comments should be rejected, even by those who opposed Reagan's policies. And I speak as one who lost many friends to AIDS and has decried the Reagan/Bush policies in that area.

 

I found the comments you refer to as distasteful and unacceptable but I did not say so publicly. I should have.

 

You are right. I was wrong.

 

BG

[Doug69]

>I found the comments you refer to as distasteful and

>unacceptable but I did not say so publicly. I should have.

>

>You are right. I was wrong.

 

I can't tell you how much I appreciate - and respect - that you said this.

 

For the record, I have nothing against Ray Charles. I barely knew anything about him, as he was well before my time. All the negative stuff I said about him I found out by doing a Google search when I read this thread. What I said had nothing to do with him. It was a reaction to the fact that the same person who started this thread, and many of the people who joined in, to express solemn grief over a musician were the same people cackling disgustingly over Reagan's death, and that irony made me want to do to them what they did to Reagan - maybe not the most noble motive, but I thought that if they could see what it was like to have it done to someone they respected, they'd be able better to see why what they were doing with Reagan was so outrageous.

 

Anyway, thanks again.

[Doug69]

>I found the comments you refer to as distasteful and

>unacceptable but I did not say so publicly. I should have.

>

>You are right. I was wrong.

 

I can't tell you how much I appreciate - and respect - that you said this.

 

For the record, I have nothing against Ray Charles. I barely knew anything about him, as he was well before my time. All the negative stuff I said about him I found out by doing a Google search when I read this thread. What I said had nothing to do with him. It was a reaction to the fact that the same person who started this thread, and many of the people who joined in, to express solemn grief over a musician were the same people cackling disgustingly over Reagan's death, and that irony made me want to do to them what they did to Reagan - maybe not the most noble motive, but I thought that if they could see what it was like to have it done to someone they respected, they'd be able better to see why what they were doing with Reagan was so outrageous.

 

Anyway, thanks again.

[Boston Guy]

You're welcome.

 

Thank you for reminding me of the need to search my own conscience, something we all need from time to time.

 

I started this week with sort-of knee-jerk reactions to Reagan. There was a time when it almost seemed like he himself was responsible for my friends' deaths. That's nonsense, of course, and I don't recall any of them ever blaming him. But we did blame him and his government for not coming to the aid of people who really, really, truly needed help and we believed in our hearts that if it had been a different group of people who were sick, the national goverment would have done far more, far sooner. Who knows if it would have made a difference in the number of people who died? But it would have made a huge difference in the great frustration that we all felt, frustration that only added to the difficulties we were facing from the disease itself.

 

What has surprised me as the National Funeral has unwound is how my anger from those years has mellowed into something more like sadness and regret. It's hard to stay angry for 20 years and no one should want to, anyway.

 

I'm proud of my liberal leanings and I feel strongly about the need to try to help people who are in unfortunate circumstances. But some of my best friends are staunch conservatives who still see Reagan as the person who won the cold war. We respect each other and I think we learn from each other. Sometimes our discussions are spirited, but we don't like each other any the less because we disagree on politics. Life is complicated and I don't know anyone who has a lock on the all the right answers. And trying to find the right balance between guns and butter is not easy.

 

Looking back at Reagan now, I see him more for the pride he instilled in America and Americans, and do respect that he left America with more respect in the world than when he came into office. I regret that his successes set the stage for a resurgence of faith-based, unyielding conservatism in America, which I blame for at least the beginning of the current "win at all costs" kind of politics that we see everyplace today. And, ironically, Reagan was the last guy who would have wanted this, as his son Ron illuded to in his remarks at the Presidential Library.

 

Life is complicated and so is our understanding and memory of the men and women who lead our country.

 

BG

[Boston Guy]

And, by the way, if you really don't know the music of Ray Charles, do yourself a favor and listen to a little. There's a reason why a couple of generations of artists in all sorts of genres in popular music -- soul, R&B, rock, blues, gospel, including some of the biggest artists -- credit him with being an inspiration to them and to their music.

 

BG

[Scorpio]

>Of course there IS a little p.r. problem with Saint

>Ronnie,namely him stapeeng out with Nancy Davis while still

>married to Jane Wyman...

 

 

Curious about your source for this statement, I could find no references to it anywhere. According to my research, Ronald Reagan and Jane Wyman divorced in June of 1948 (or June 1949 depending on the source) and he did not meet Nancy Davis until at least the fall of 1949 or early 1950 (again depending on the source).