0 members (),
16
guests, and
0
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,539
Members6,305
|
Most Online294 Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191 |
So if the GOP wishes to embrace the "principles" of Ronald Reagan, so be it - I wish the GOP well. I don't, for that way leads to madness.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,655
member
|
member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,655 |
I take umbridge in your characterization that I 'hated' Ronald Reagan. I can tell you one thing Senator, I felt nothing but hate coming from President Reagan as a gay man in the 1980s. I can never, ever forget how a President of the United States of America turned his back on thousands and thousands of sick and dying Americans simply for the fact that they had contracted AIDS - the "gay disease." Mr. Reagan wouldn't even utter words "AIDS" until halfway through his eight year term. The homosexual community has decided in retrospect that Pres. Reagan hated them because he did not do much for those who had the disease of AIDS. Why did Reagan not do much about the disease? Could it be because not much was known about the disease and therefore not much could be done about the disease? Or is it easier to blame the spread of the disease on Reagan because he did little to help when no one knew what to do? What the Center for Disease Control doing about AIDS back then? How much research was being done? When it was learned that the AIDS was and is spread primarily through sexual contact did the homosexual community urge people to abstain from sex? Or did the homosexual community prefer to continue to have multiple sexual partners? The spread of AIDS was something the homosexual community could have done a lot to prevent its spread but they have passed the blame to Pres. Reagan so that they don't have to take responsibility for their own behavior. The hatred they say they got from Pres. Reagan is actually the self hatred that due to a number of factors is more dangerous to the homosexual community then the disease of AIDS. Whenever one is angry with someone it is because they see something in others that they do not like in themselves.
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
I take umbridge in your characterization that I 'hated' Ronald Reagan. I can tell you one thing Senator, I felt nothing but hate coming from President Reagan as a gay man in the 1980s. I can never, ever forget how a President of the United States of America turned his back on thousands and thousands of sick and dying Americans simply for the fact that they had contracted AIDS - the "gay disease." Mr. Reagan wouldn't even utter words "AIDS" until halfway through his eight year term. The homosexual community has decided in retrospect that Pres. Reagan hated them because he did not do much for those who had the disease of AIDS. Why did Reagan not do much about the disease? Could it be because not much was known about the disease and therefore not much could be done about the disease? Or is it easier to blame the spread of the disease on Reagan because he did little to help when no one knew what to do? What the Center for Disease Control doing about AIDS back then? How much research was being done? When it was learned that the AIDS was and is spread primarily through sexual contact did the homosexual community urge people to abstain from sex? Or did the homosexual community prefer to continue to have multiple sexual partners? The spread of AIDS was something the homosexual community could have done a lot to prevent its spread but they have passed the blame to Pres. Reagan so that they don't have to take responsibility for their own behavior. The hatred they say they got from Pres. Reagan is actually the self hatred that due to a number of factors is more dangerous to the homosexual community then the disease of AIDS. Whenever one is angry with someone it is because they see something in others that they do not like in themselves. No you didn't. Revisionism is fine, but what you say is absolutely irrefutably false and malicious. You are not going to blame the victim like that and get away with it Senator. Reagan refused to even utter the word AIDS nor did he ever once acknowledge those who suffered from it. Plenty was know at the time he was President, even the CDC was speaking about it and reassuring people that it was not transmissible by casual contact. Pres. Reagan refused to do anything to comfort those afflicted or reassure those not so of their fears. His silence undoubtedly caused great suffering and death. He should have been impeached for his criminal neglect, but at the very least I will not stand by and let you blame the victims for this. I am frankly shocked that anyone at this time would even attempt to justify the silence of that horrible man.
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,655
member
|
member
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,655 |
I take umbridge in your characterization that I 'hated' Ronald Reagan. I can tell you one thing Senator, I felt nothing but hate coming from President Reagan as a gay man in the 1980s. I can never, ever forget how a President of the United States of America turned his back on thousands and thousands of sick and dying Americans simply for the fact that they had contracted AIDS - the "gay disease." Mr. Reagan wouldn't even utter words "AIDS" until halfway through his eight year term. The homosexual community has decided in retrospect that Pres. Reagan hated them because he did not do much for those who had the disease of AIDS. Why did Reagan not do much about the disease? Could it be because not much was known about the disease and therefore not much could be done about the disease? Or is it easier to blame the spread of the disease on Reagan because he did little to help when no one knew what to do? What the Center for Disease Control doing about AIDS back then? How much research was being done? When it was learned that the AIDS was and is spread primarily through sexual contact did the homosexual community urge people to abstain from sex? Or did the homosexual community prefer to continue to have multiple sexual partners? The spread of AIDS was something the homosexual community could have done a lot to prevent its spread but they have passed the blame to Pres. Reagan so that they don't have to take responsibility for their own behavior. The hatred they say they got from Pres. Reagan is actually the self hatred that due to a number of factors is more dangerous to the homosexual community then the disease of AIDS. Whenever one is angry with someone it is because they see something in others that they do not like in themselves. No you didn't. Revisionism is fine, but what you say is absolutely irrefutably false and malicious. You are not going to blame the victim like that and get away with it Senator. What is the homosexual community a victim of? It is a victim of its own behavior! What did it do to stop the spread of AIDS? The homosexual community could have done one HELL of a lot more to slow the spread of the disease of AIDS but didn't! It has instead blamed the spread of the disease on Pres. Reagan. Reagan refused to even utter the word AIDS nor did he ever once acknowledge those who suffered from it. Plenty was know at the time he was President, even the CDC was speaking about it and reassuring people that it was not transmissible by casual contact. So what if Reagan had never said the word AIDS? How would his saying the word have changed anything? The CDC was not doing much to stop the spread of AIDS because other than abstaining from sex not much else could be done at the time. Pres. Reagan refused to do anything to comfort those afflicted or reassure those not so of their fears. His silence undoubtedly caused great suffering and death. What was Reagan supposed to do? Go to the funeral of someone that died of AIDS? How funerals of people that died from AIDS did Pres. Clinton go to? He should have been impeached for his criminal neglect, but at the very least I will not stand by and let you blame the victims for this. There was no criminal neglect on Reagan's part. The victims of AIDS had more to do with their illness or death from the disease than did Reagan. That is a fact that you refuse to accept! I am frankly shocked that anyone at this time would even attempt to justify the silence of that horrible man. He was not a horrible man. You are shocked because Reagan did not do something you think is important. Your opinion of him only makes him a horrible man to you.
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
Senator, I am afraid you have so completely misstated every point that my blood is boiling. I cannot respond and stay within RR guidelines.
If you had buried as many friends and lovers and seen the devestation wrought by this disease as I you would never dare make such ignorant comments. AIDS visits many whose only "fault" is being alive. Please inform yourself on this topic before uttering such offensive comments again.
There is a saying we adopted early in this illness when Reagan sat in silence.
SILENCE = DEATH
You besmirch the unprecedented heroic actions of the gay community in your ignorance. You blame the victim for a disease that attacked them before it was known the cause, those who contracted it through transfusions, or birth.
I see so much hostility toward gays in your comments that I simply cannot see any objectivity in them. Homophobic is far too kind a word.
Last edited by Phil Hoskins; 11/19/07 09:12 PM. Reason: temper
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 443
newbie
|
newbie
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 443 |
could help , but you might wanna simmer down
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1
veteran
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,740 Likes: 1 |
Some Republicans have a second coming fantasy about Reagan. for others its more of a nightmare.... ![[Linked Image from i180.photobucket.com]](http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x236/Schlackorama/secondcomingofreagan.jpg)
"The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." (Philip K.Dick)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
the second coming of Reagan... for those that were not Rapetured the first time around
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191 |
SH, I'm sorry, but your comments are either the result of stultifying ignorance or deliberate misstatement. You need to do a lot more research or at least think about your comments before you post them. As of January 2006, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) and the World Health Organization (WHO) estimate that AIDS has killed more than 25 million people since it was first recognized on June 5, 1981, making it one of the most destructive epidemics in recorded history. In 2005 alone, AIDS claimed an estimated 2.4–3.3 million lives, of which more than 570,000 were children.[5] AIDS - Wikipedia Oh, but those children must have borne the mark of Caine for the wickedness of their parents, I suppose.... I suggest you look at the article and note the chart: imated per act risk for acquisition of HIV by exposure route hich demonstrates that blood transfusion is almost guaranteed to result in infection. Heterosexual intercourse is the primary mode of HIV infection worldwide. Approximately 30% of women in ten countries representing "diverse cultural, geographical and urban/rural settings" report that their first sexual experience was forced or coerced, making sexual violence a key driver of the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In the absence of treatment, the transmission rate between the mother to the child during pregnancy, labor and delivery is 25%. The AIDS epidemic officially began on June 5, 1981, when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report newsletter reported unusual clusters of Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) caused by a form of Pneumocystis carinii (now recognized as a distinct species Pneumocystis jirovecii) in five homosexual men in Los Angeles.[40]
Over the next 18 months, more PCP clusters were discovered among otherwise healthy men in cities throughout the country, along with other opportunistic diseases (such as Kaposi's sarcoma[41] and persistent, generalized lymphadenopathy [42]), common in immunosuppressed patients.
In June 1982, a report of a group of cases amongst gay men in Southern California suggested that a sexually transmitted infectious agent might be the etiological agent,[43] and the syndrome was initially termed "GRID", or Gay-Related Immune Deficiency.[44]
Health authorities soon realized that nearly half of the people identified with the syndrome were not homosexual men. The same opportunistic infections were also reported among hemophiliacs,[45] heterosexual intravenous drug users, and Haitian immigrants.[46]
By August 1982, the disease was being referred to by its new CDC-coined name: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). So, so far most of the "facts" previously quoted have been shown to be absolutely wrong, but let's get back to Mr. Reagan: Although AIDS was first reported in the medical and popular press in 1981, it was only in October 1987 that President Reagan publicly spoke about the epidemic. By the end of that year 59,572 AIDS cases had been reported and 27,909 of those women and men had died. How could this happen? How could Reagan not say anything? Do anything?
The Reagan administration’s reaction to AIDS is complex and goes far beyond Reagan’s refusal to speak out about the epidemic. A great deal of his power base was born-again Christian Republican conservatives who embraced a reactionary social agenda that included a virulent, demonizing homophobia. In the media, people like Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell portrayed gay people as diseased sinners and promoted the idea that AIDS was a punishment from God and that the gay rights movement had to be stopped. In the Republican Party, zealous right-wingers, such as Representative William Dannenmeyer (CA) and Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), hammered home this same message. In the Reagan White House, people such as Secretary of Education William Bennett and Gary Bauer, his chief domestic advisor, worked to enact it in the Administration’s policies.
In practical terms this meant AIDS research was chronically underfunded. When doctors at the Centers for Disease Control and the National Institute for Health asked for more funding for their work on AIDS, they were routinely denied it. Between June 1981 and May 1982, the CDC spent less than $1 million on AIDS, but $9 million on Legionnaire’s Disease. At that point over 1,000 of the 2,000 AIDS cases reported resulted in death; there were fewer than 50 deaths from Legionnaire’s Disease. This drastic lack of funding would continue through the Reagan years.
When health and support groups in the gay community instigated education and prevention programs, they were denied federal funding. In October 1987 Jesse Helms amended a federal appropriation bill that prohibited AIDS education efforts that “encourage or promoted homosexual activity”(that is, tell gay men how to have safe sex).
. . .
Throughout all of this Ronald Reagan did nothing. When Rock Hudson, a friend and colleague of the Reagan’s, was diagnosed and died in 1985 (one of the 20,740 cases reported that year), Reagan still did not speak out. The Truth About Reagan And AIDS Now I know that I am going to get the objection that the author is biased, but the facts are not in dispute, only the interpretation. Other sources are even more biased. Part of the problem is that many sources - on both sides - use "retrospective" interpretations. There are claims, for example, that AIDS funding doubled each year of the Reagan presidency, failing to note that that was not for research, but for "discretionary" spending - much of it the result of the costs to treat victims.
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,290 |
It is hard to believe in this day and age that some still echo the hatdred and homophobia of Reagan. The religious whackjob types that do so may actually believe it is Gods punishment. But secular types that still promote the homophobic agenda, are in it either for the political power they hope is still in this issue, or because of that self hatdred projected outward attempting to defend against their own latent homosexuality, or a combination of both. Rove and others come to mind. To these individuals the best response is that suggested by David Salyer for what Reagan should have said to Falwell: "Rev. Falwell, You sanctimonious turd, sit down and shut up!" TAT
Ronald Reagan and AIDS, By David SalyerReagan, dubbed the Great Communicator, was excruciatingly, unjustifiably silent about HIV and AIDS. The media -- print and television, including the first 24-hour news network, CNN -- were all over AIDS in the 1980s. Histrionic televangelists like Pat Robertson and Rev. Jerry Falwell seized any opportunity to articulate and promote the idea that AIDS was God's wrath upon homosexuals. Even as the highly publicized illness and subsequent 1985 death of Rock Hudson made headlines and sent a shiver down Hollywood's spine, Reagan remained inexplicably quiet. His friend and colleague was dead from AIDS. No public comment. What was that about? Indifference? Some carefully chosen words might have squelched the homophobic rhetoric of the day. Some genuine leadership might have generated compassion to counter growing hostility and hysteria about AIDS in America. How profoundly different our world might be today if Reagan had pointed to one insufferable preacher and bellowed, "Rev. Falwell, you sanctimonious turd, sit down and shut up!"
There's nothing wrong with thinking Except that it's lonesome work sevil regit
|
|
|
|
|