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?
the truth is that he was a terrorist, a communist, as well as the man that united a troubled and divided country, all at different stages of his life.
It was JFK's CIA that got him arrested. He was arrested for terrorist acts (bombing public buildings).
He was a terrorist. So was George Washington. Or hang together or hang separately. It's not necessarily a bad thing. The guy actually earned his Nobel prize. Of course his legacy is secure.
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?
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.
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
You asked about why I said its hypocrisy to like one and not the other. You don't seem to like either one, which is fine. I thought JFK was ill prepared for the job and idolized for no good reason. He was the son of a bootlegger and Nazi sympathizer who bought the presidency for his son. JFK's book was ghost written. The press buried his philandering ways to boost his image. Those are personal faults, though. What he ran on and his philosophy was Conservative. Until the 2 Bushes, all our wars and police actions were Democrats' affairs. At least going back to the Civil War, which started when Democrats seceded from the union. Republicans ended those wars where possible, like Nixon did in Vietnam or Ike in Korea. JFK's real legacy was boots on the ground war in Southeast Asia. Vietnam.
http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/11583d.htm Remarks on the Anniversary of the Birth of Martin Luther King, Jr. January 15, 1983 Thank you all for being here. And let me especially thank the Harlem Boys' Choir. From what we've just heard, I think that you fellows could show the famous Vienna Boys Choir a thing or two. But welcome, all of you, to the White House on this special day. Earlier today on my radio broadcast I spoke of Dr. King's character and contributions. Now let me speak a little more personally about the man who tumbled the wall of racism in our country. Though Dr. King and I may not have exactly had identical political philosophies, we did share a deep belief in freedom and justice under God. Freedom is not something to be secured in any one moment of time. We must struggle to preserve it every day. And freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. History shows that Dr. King's approach achieved great results in a comparatively short time, which was exactly what America needed. Let me read you part of what he wrote from a jail cell: ``When you suddenly find your tongue twisted as you seek to explain to your 6-year-old daughter why she can't go to a public amusement park that's just been advertised on television; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you're humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading `white' and `colored,' then you can understand why we find it difficult to wait.'' Martin Luther King, Jr., burned with the gospel of freedom, and that flame in his heart lit the way for millions. What he accomplished -- not just for black Americans, but for all Americans -- he lifted a heavy burden from this country. As surely as black Americans were scarred by the yoke of slavery, America was scarred by injustice. Many Americans didn't fully realize how heavy America's burden was until it was lifted. Dr. King did that for us, all of us. Abraham Lincoln freed the black man. In many ways, Dr. King freed the white man. How did he accomplish this tremendous feat? Where others -- white and black -- preached hatred, he taught the principles of love and nonviolence. We can be so thankful that Dr. King raised his mighty eloquence for love and hope rather than for hostility and bitterness. He took the tension he found in our nation, a tension of injustice, and channeled it for the good of America and all her people. Throughout my life, and especially my political life, I've spoken a great deal about the nature and spirit of America. I believe the vast majority of Americans share that spirit with Dr. King. He said, ``The goal of America is freedom.'' He said, ``The American people are infected with democratic ideals.'' And there he found hope. He said he believed there were great vaults of opportunity in this nation. He genuinely believed in the potential of America. Someone has remarked, the comfort of having a friend may be taken away but not that of having had a friend. Well, America may have lost the comfort and courage of Dr. King's presence, but we've not really lost him. Every time a black woman casts a ballot, Martin King is there. Every time a black man is hired for a good job, Dr. King is there. Every time a black child receives a sound education, Dr. King is there. Every time a black person is elected to public office, Dr. King is there. Every time black and white Americans work side by side for a better future, Dr. King is there. He's with us, and with us very much today. Martin Luther King used to speak of his abiding faith in America and the future of mankind. He rejected what is for what ought to be, and he dedicated his life to that dream. Much of his dream has become reality, but much is still to be achieved. Dr. King's faith will continue to be a beacon of hope for us all as we continue to serve together to make America the nation that we knew it could become. So, thank you for this very special day, for being with us as we gather here to remember a great American -- a man of vision, a man of peace. Thank you, and God bless you. Note: The President spoke at approximately 5:45 p.m. in the East Room at the White House. The Harlem Boys' Choir entertained the President and his guests prior to his remaks.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672 Reagan And Amnesty Nowadays, conservative commentators like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh often invoke the former president as a champion of the conservative agenda. Sean Hannity of Fox News even has a regular segment called "What Would Reagan Do?" Simpson, however, sees a different person in the president he called a "dear friend." Reagan "knew that it was not right for people to be abused," Simpson says. "Anybody who's here illegally is going to be abused in some way, either financially [or] physically. They have no rights." Peter Robinson, a former Reagan speechwriter, agrees. "It was in Ronald Reagan's bones — it was part of his understanding of America — that the country was fundamentally open to those who wanted to join us here." Reagan said as much himself in a televised debate with Democratic presidential nominee Walter Mondale in 1984. "I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally," he said.
Reagan 1986 speech on S. Africa and Mendela http://www.nytimes.com/1986/07/23/w...-by-reagan-on-south-africa-and-apartheid.html The root cause of South Africa's disorder is apartheid, that rigid system of racial segregation wherein black people have been treated as third-class citizens in a nation they helped to build. America's view of apartheid has been, and remains, clear: apartheid is morally wrong and politically unacceptable. The United States cannot maintain cordial relations with a government whose power rests upon the denial of rights to a majority of its people, based on race. If South America wishes to belong to the family of Western nations, an end to apartheid is a precondition. Americans, I believe, are united in this conviction. Second, apartheid must be dismantled. Time is running out for the moderates of all races in South Africa. ... To the black, colored and Asian peoples of South Africa, too long treated as second- and third-class subjects, I can only say: In your hopes for freedom, social justice and self-determination you have a friend and ally in the United States. Maintain your hopes for peace and reconciliation and we will do our part to keep that road open. We understand that behind the rage and resentment in the townships is the memory of real injustices inflicted upon generations of South Africans. Those to whom evil is done, the poet wrote, often do evil in return. Solutions in South Africa But if the people of South Africa are to have a future in a free country, where the rights of all are respected, the desire for retribution will have to be set aside. Otherwise, the future will be lost in a bloody quarrel over the past. It would be an act of arrogance to insist that uniquely American ideas and institutions, rooted in our own history and traditions, be transplanted to South African soil. Solutions to South Africa's political crisis must come from South Africans themselves. Black and white, colored and Asians, they have their own traditions. But let me outline what we believe are necessary components of progress toward political peace. First, a timetable for elimination of apartheid laws should be set. Second, all political prisoners should be released. Third, Nelson Mandela should be released to participate in the country's political process. Fourth, black political movements should be unbanned.
You're the one who made the claim, maybe you should try and support it instead of roid raging over people who don't agree.
