- Joined
- Sep 9, 2008
- Messages
- 26,096
- Likes
- 9,073
- Points
- 113
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So, I wonder what people actually think about Mandela. Would most people here agree with Reagan? Was he a terrorist? Do you support his legacy even in the face of his affiliation with communist regimes?
Cool story. Sounds like I wouldn't like either of them then. Why did you bring up JFK?
So, I wonder what people actually think about Mandela. Would most people here agree with Reagan? Was he a terrorist? Do you support his legacy even in the face of his affiliation with communist regimes?
It was JFK's CIA that got him arrested. He was arrested for terrorist acts (bombing public buildings).
I mean in comparison to Reagan. Why is it that if I like JFK, I have to like Reagan, otherwise you'd brand me a hypocrite?
I don't think Reagan was a typical US politician. He was a true conservative, of which I can count a handful. William F Buckley, PJ O'Roarke, Barry Goldwater come to mind...
Conservatism is based upon three principles: Libertarianism, anti-communism, and tradition.
You left out racism and elitism.
It was JFK's CIA that got him arrested. He was arrested for terrorist acts (bombing public buildings).
You like invading Cuba to overthrow Castro? But not Iran-Contra? I'd call that hypocritical.
Fwiw, I'm no fan of how we dealt with Cuba all along. Vicious sanctions like those imposed on S. Africa. And for decades, if not my whole life.
On the other hand, Castro was a left wing warmonger in his own right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_intervention_in_Angola
JFK never had a CIA, or an FBI. JFK's goals were opposite of the goals of Hoover and the CIA. They despised liberals and were accustomed to having free reign to operate above the law and the Constitution. They still do.
There was never any cooperation between them for JFK, and both agencies are up to their elbows in his assassination and the continual obstruction of any real investigation.
No, you're making stuff up. George Wallace was the racist, he was a Democrat.
I don't like any of it. I think you think I have some cultural context that I don't. That's okay though, I'd rather you argue with MARIS about all this since he is of that generation.
Reagan did not support federal initiatives to provide blacks with civil rights.[34] He opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964[35] and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson.[34] His opposition was based on the view that certain provisions of both acts violated the US Constitution and in the case of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, intruded upon the civil rights of business and property owners.[34]
Reagan did not consider himself a racist, and dismissed any attacks aimed at him relating to racism as attacks on his personal character and integrity.[34] He claimed his opposition to certain federal government civil rights acts were not because he was racist, but because he believed in states rights.
There are critics who claim that Reagan gave his 1980 presidential campaign speech, about states’ rights,[36] in Philadelphia, Mississippi. This also happens to be the place where three civil rights workers were killed in 1964.[37] However, despite the critics’ claims, Reagan had actually given it at the Neshoba County Fair, in the unincorporated community of Neshoba, Mississippi, seven miles away. It was a popular campaigning spot, as presidential candidates John Glenn and Michael Dukakis both campaigned there as well.[38][39]
He also said (while campaigning in Georgia) that Confederate President Jefferson Davis was "a hero of mine."[40] However, Reagan was offended that some accused him of racism.[40] In 1980 Reagan said the Voting Rights Act was "humiliating to the South,"[41] although he later supported extending the Act.[42] He opposed Fair Housing legislation in California (the Rumford Fair Housing Act),[43] but in 1988 signed a law expanding the Fair Housing Act of 1968.[44] Reagan was unsuccessful in trying to veto another civil rights bill in March of the same year.[45] Reagan engaged a policy of Constructive engagement with South Africa in spite of apartheid due to the nation being a valuable anti-communist ally, opposing pressure from Congress and his own party for tougher sanctions until his veto was overridden.[46] At first Reagan opposed the Martin Luther King holiday, and signed it only after an overwhelming veto-proof majority (338 to 90 in the House of Representatives and 78 to 22 in the Senate) voted in favor of it.[47] Congress overrode Reagan's veto of the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1988.[45][48] Reagan said the Restoration Act would impose too many regulations on churches, the private sector and state and local governments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ronald_Reagan
Prove it is wrong dumbass.This has to be the most inane thing I've ever read.
Prove it is wrong dumbass.
I don't think Reagan was a typical US politician. He was a true conservative, of which I can count a handful.
How on earth can you have a strong opinion about this if you admittedly don't know much about the subject?I know very little about pre- and post- apartheid SA, which is to say, I know enough to understand that Mandela neither "freed the blacks" nor allowed "socialism to be the dominant force." But if you did believe that -- which again is incorrect -- how on earth would you still be able to debate whether he still was a net positive or net negative?
Freaky, freaky stuff.
