Obama Reagan Imbroglio


Many progressive Democrats, including PhysioProf, are disgusted with Barack Obama’s comments regarding Ronald Reagan. Obama supporters are claiming that Obama is being misunderstood, that he wasn’t praising Reagan or his policies, and that therefore we shouldn’t be angry. This is a total load of horseshit.

For progressives who are disgusted with Obama’s comments about Reagan, it doesn’t matter what he said, how it was intended, or how it should have been interpreted. What matters is the undeniable fact that he mentioned Reagan–the most beloved halo-encircled icon of the motherfucking Republican Party–you know, those sick depraved bastards who have been successfully working day and night for the last 40 years to turn our constitutional republic into a feudal fucking kingdom–in a context other than one of avowed repudiation of his pernicious political strategies and governmental policies. Reagan was the leader of those sick depraved bastards as he presided over the early stages of enacting their perverted agenda, one that has now brought us to the brink of national disaster.

We don’t care what Obama meant; it is irrelevant to our disgust. And it is also irrelevant to the wisdom of his statements vis a vis advancing the goals of the Democratic Party, let alone advancing a progressive agenda. His statements were fucking stupid as a campaign strategy, and they impede the progressive agena by implying that Reagan, his tactics, and his policies should be the subject of anything but unmitigated scorn.

And for those Obama supporters who are claiming that it is unfair to criticize Obama about his statements about Reagan without also criticizing Hillary Clinton about the Clintons’ laudatory statement about Reagan on the occasion of his death, give me a fucking break. Does it really need to be explained that what politicians say about another politician on the occasion of his death is completely, utterly irrelevant to anything? It is meaningless happy talk, and everyone knows it. Statements made by a presidential candidate during a primary campaign about the revered icon of the opposition party, not so much.

Comments

  1. says

    My only issue with Obama using the reagan reference was his use of the word “Reagan”. Never should have been spoken. A bad error in any context.

    Busted – I don’t what part of that they don’t understand either. Probably the same part of bush/clinton/bush/clinton they don’t understand and the same part of DLC that doesn’t raise any red flags.

    I’m really unclear what are people really voting for here? How can so many connect with John Edwards’ message and words and yet, that connection doesn’t translate into votes for him? Its like someone telling you your wheels fell off and need replaced, a new transmission is required, and you won’t go anywhere without an engine overhaul, yet everyone is ooooo-ing and ahhhh-ing over sound system.

  2. says

    I think those who ignore the appeal of Reagan are doing so to the detriment of the Democratic party. Of course his policies were wrong and the course he set the country on was wrong. But until Democrats understand WHY he appealed so broadly to the population at that time, they will continue to lose the presidency. People do not want to hear bad news, they want to hear about hope and the “shining city on the hill.” Like it or not, Carter at the time was going around talking about “malaise.” We have to be very careful to separate policies from visions. A vision of hope, which Obama offers, can be very powerful. He probably shouldn’t have used the “R” word because it backfired; however, his point was obviously that “R” did understand that need in the American people and that other politicians often do not.

    BTW, came here via Blue Gal! Good blog.

  3. StonyPillow says

    Clinton and Obama are DLC and DLC Lite. Edwards is the only real Democrat left.

    By the way, welcome to the blogosphere.

  4. says

    I defended Obama in today’s blog post, though I certainly understand your argument and know where you are coming from as well.

    Reagan set a dangerous precedent in setting the tone for the current gang of thieves we have in power.

    However, I for one would like to have at least one blogger set out a laundry list of offenses. I see uniform hatred of Reagan in the lefty blogsophere and revulsion at everything he stand for, but few solid facts to back up these assertions. I think to strengthen the argument all the way round and re-frame the debate it would be fantastic to see a laundry list of what Reagan did and why it was destructive to us all.

    For better or for worse, Reagan is the hero of many and his mystique, though it may be built on lies is certainly potent in the minds of many Americans. Thus, I think it would do us all well collectively to return to history class and address what he accomplished, point-by-point, without embedding political opinions into them.

    Perhaps you could enlighten me?

  5. says

    “However, I for one would like to have at least one blogger set out a laundry list of offenses. I see uniform hatred of Reagan in the lefty blogsophere and revulsion at everything he stand for, but few solid facts to back up these assertions”

    Are you fucking KIDDING me? When the fuck were you born?

    There is only ONE critique of Reagan that needs to be made. Period. Iran-Contra. Done.

    Why? Because this was where it became a actual Constitutional breakdown. He directly violated the right and responsibility of the legislative to “cut off the purse strings” with his little end-run. A fundamental compromise of the Constitutional balance of powers. And look where that led. Cheney and his fucking Executive Overreach policy.

  6. says

    “For better or for worse, Reagan is the hero of many and his mystique, though it may be built on lies is certainly potent”

    Reagan, was a hero to most,
    Reagan, was a hero to most,
    but he never meant shit to me.
    A straight-up racist that sucka was simple and plain.
    Motherfuck him and John Wayne.

    (h/t and apologies to Chuck DJ)

  7. says

    “However, I for one would like to have at least one blogger set out a laundry list of offenses.”

    Dude, thanks for coming by; I really do appreciate it. There are *lots* of bloggers who have documented Reagan’s faults (to put it mildly). BikeMonkey gace you one example. Here’s another: Philadelphia, MI, ring a bell?

    The fact is, this blog does not exist to document “laundry lists of offenses” by right-wing fuck-ups and toadies. There are plenty of blogs that do that much, much better than yours truly ever could. This blog exists to indulge my–and apparently a handful of other kind interested souls’–passion for profane colorful political ranting.

  8. says

    Thanks, I needed that!

    Comrade Kevin – if you’re asking for yourself, I’d go to the Big Con site and read Rick Perlstein, hit Paul Krugman’s blog and read his latest book, hit Consortium News for their recent Reagan pieces, and read up on Iran-Contra. Anyway, it’s out there.

  9. NMRon says

    ahh, a new addition to favorites. Thanks bluegal.

    List of offenses? How about the coworker whose blind, paraplegic father was kicked off medicaid. Fuck Raygun and FUCK anyone who cites him as anything other than the godfather of rethuglican evil that he was.

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>