What a wonderful Funeral us Americans can put on

[The Weekenders]

I agree with Bill Chin, especially about needing MORE ritual, not less. To argue against a huge public funeral (including its cost) really is to question its value of engendering nationalism and patriotism, probably because one is uncomfortable with those concepts.

Do we need to feel unified as Americans? If so, what are the ways that will maintain it? A grand ceremonious memorial to a popular, two-term president seems appropriate to me. There are really only a few outlets that create this: ticker tape parades, inaugurations and perhaps large-scale permanent monuments, besides state funerals. FWIW, I will probably wince when Clinton gets similar treatment, if I live so long to see it.

The President was celebrated in the Capitol and out West, in an ultra-symbolic way. As sick as I was by the coverage, I was stunned by the effect of our setting West Coast sun on the hilltop ceremony. I only saw a small part of it but that a heroic departure that resonated deeply in my Californian (and to the cynical, perhaps Hollywood) heart. Our left-leaning paper published a wonderful full page photo of him on his white horse today. Somebody appreciates and wants a hero, I guess, even yet.

I know that some of the arguments against it are more personal, that this was more voyeuristic than idealistic and I can see that line of thought, too.

I felt that the coverage of the Princess Diana car accident remains the single-most overhyped event of my lifetime relative to its importance, that is.

But back to the original point, many post-Vietnam thinkers are so opposed to nationalism, distrustful of patriotism and suspicious of military ceremony (some even "loathe the military"), that this public outpouring causes discomfort. Having once had those inklings, I can relate.

I have been surprised and even suspicious at the major networks coverage of this event. I feel that they went so far over the top that a backlash and resentment was inevitable. And to an extent, here it is on the Chiffboard. I can barely believe that the irony-based talking heads of the media have contributed to possible hagiography and a general rehabilitation of the President (having heard them interviewed on other topics) that they probably loathed.

There were a lot of people who intensely disliked everything Mr. Reagan stood for in this country, right down to his mannerisms and delivery, especially here in California. To repeat myself, I have been surprised at how marginalized his detractors have been presented in the media.

But as a final thought I have to say that the presence of so many world leaders, especially Gorbachev, has to shake to the core the convictions of so many Reagan detractors. Nobody made him come, though apparently Putin asked him to represent Russia. I think that these leaders understanding of world affairs and maybe even their personal interactions with the man made them feel compelled to pay respects. That was noble indeed, especially if you caught any of Gorby's actual remarks to the press, etc. He did not need to say the things he did.

And the purposeful rejection by Chirac? That speaks clearly, too. Oh yes, and who can forget Fidel Castro's pronouncement that Reagan "should never have been born?" Indeed.

[cowtime]

Yeah, I think that I can deal with the attention that a past president receives at this time.

I hope all the federal people enjoyed their special day off on us though. :roll: That is a bit too much for me to bite off.

This is one federal person who thoroughly enjoyed my "Regan day".

[Chuck_Clark]

I'm kinda with Chuck Clark on this one. I respect and empathize with the personal grief experienced by family and close friends of RR...but I truly did not feel a need to watch it on tv, or personally grieve...perhaps in part because the death followed a long illness, and he was a very old person, and perhaps because I didn't know him.

A few months back, Illinois lost perhaps its last great statesman, Paul Simon, who I respected and admired and even knew personally in a very small way, having been introduced to him once or twice in the line of business. I was even somewhat saddened that with his passing passed an era of integrity and civility in State politics that we seem unlikely to ever see again.

But I was NOT grief-stricken, not impelled to publicly keen or rend my garments or join the procession by his coffin. I seriously wonder at someone who with the same very limited acquaintance with him that I had who would have felt compelled to such extravagant excesses.

In 1963, I was a great admirer of JFK, and saddened at his passing - but again not much interested in joining the public wake.

To address Weeks' comments, in the last week, I've not only watched the spectacle but also listened as Reagan detractors were attacked as unAmerican, unpatriotic and downright cockroach-like. I've watched as fervent followers have proposed putting his name and mug on everything from the ten dollar bill to Mount Rushmore. This naming and branding frenzy began as soon as he left the White House. Need I remind anyone that no other living ex-president ever had an aircraft carrier named for him"? All this for a president who was mediocre at best and controversial throughout.

What has struck me about the whole thing is that RR didn't have a political following so much as a religious cult! Badmouthing the pope isn't likely to get you attacked nearly as fast as mildly criticizing Saint Gipper. I honestly expect that before November rolls around we'll see Republican campaign posters with a giant, semi-trasparent, glowing and smiling "Dutch" with his hand on the shoulder of whatever candidate(s) the poster endorses.

And I still don't understand the concept of extravagant public grief for a stranger - no matter WHO it was!

[Caj]

I have been surprised and even suspicious at the major networks coverage of this event. I feel that they went so far over the top that a backlash and resentment was inevitable.

I agree. It seemed like the cable news networks were engaged in some sort of show-down, over who could come across as the most patriotic. As if consumers were keeping track of the exact number of hours of Reagan programming on each channel, and would dump MSNBC for Fox if MSNBC blinked first.

But what really surprised me is that people were still criticizing the media for not being heartfelt enough in their coverage. Glenn McCoy published a political cartoon portraying Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw and Peter Jennings as impatient, yawning and checking their watches at the funeral while a "real" American, in military uniform, stood reverently.

That was just ridiculous. The TV media's contribution to this event was nothing short of phenomenal. They have Dan, Tom and Peter commentating during a funeral broadcast live nationwide, all across the TV dial. And previously, the days of valuable airtime spent on retrospectives---and thus, on a single story---was probably a substantial sacrifice in ratings and ad revenue. Here is someone complaining that they didn't cry enough or some such crap.

Caj

[oleorezinator]

post time! http://www.thestranger.com/2004-06-10/grab_bag.html

[Cayden]

I have read this thread now on and off for a week maybe. And am once again baffled by the total difference in opinions aired here as compared to the ones I am familiar with. Jim Stone referred somewhere to the fact that the perception of the reagan presidency was ver ydifferent i nEurope. He couldn't have been more right.

Thinking of the of the Reagan years the image that comes to my mind is this one:



My recollection is that of himself and Thatcher signifying a social ethos that was so contrary to everything around us for it's lack of compassion. I remember millions of Europeans going out on the streets in protest against the acceleration of the arms race he set in motion, saying 'keep your cruise missiles, we don't want them'.
I remember the fear [and jokes] of a man clearly in the first stages of Alzheimers sitting on the launch codes. There was a sigh of relief when he left office. And now it's 'Hero status'? it's beyond me.

[oleorezinator]

amen, peter.

[Quiet John]

Oleo, as per your request, I will not communicate with you via PM, since you seem to think it constitutes some form of harassment. However, the things said in PM have a reason for being in PM, and I am not going to waste space on the open forum with it. Therefore, I have nothing else to say.

[claudine]

My recollection is that of himself and Thatcher signifying a social ethos that was so contrary to everything around us for it's lack of compassion. I remember millions of Europeans going out on the streets in protest against the acceleration of the arms race he set in motion, saying 'keep your cruise missiles, we don't want them'.
I remember the fear [and jokes] of a man clearly in the first stages of Alzheimers sitting on the launch codes. There was a sigh of relief when he left office. And now it's 'Hero status'? it's beyond me.

Don't even try to understand, Peter. This must be an american thing.

[Guest]

I remember the fear [and jokes] of a man clearly in the first stages of Alzheimers sitting on the launch codes. There was a sigh of relief when he left office. And now it's 'Hero status'? it's beyond me.

And East Timor - Oil and Gas for Australia - I guess we should be nice haw?

Well I ain't bein nice today so here - while Muslim Indonesia did its ethnic cleansing of 300 000 East Timorese Catholics Reagan and Co were looking the other way AND supplying the fascists with arms -

Now where at the time was there ethnic cleansing of Catholics ? Try N Ireland by Ronnie's own church -Presbyterians - and how about this - Chile by S Americas Pol Pot - 'nether Jock...

sheesh!

[Pat Cannady]

I can't really picture Arnold singing anything , Can you imagine what it would be like to have Arnold sing "Happy Birthday"?

Or "California Über Alles"?

[Nanohedron]

And I still don't understand the concept of extravagant public grief for a stranger - no matter WHO it was!

I have a theory that in this case R.R.'s long bout of Alzheimer's served to expunge in some way those factors in his presidency which were seen as draconian by many. Why, I don't know, but mob mentality has resulted in strange things before. What is left, though, is the smiling image of a patriotic idealist. Whatever your political bent, you have to admit that he was one of the best cheerleaders ever in the presidency, and we Yanks seem to go for that. Now we are presented with an icon of The American Way. Ten to one his picture starts getting hung on walls in barber shops.

[Redwolf]

I remember the fear [and jokes] of a man clearly in the first stages of Alzheimers sitting on the launch codes. There was a sigh of relief when he left office. And now it's 'Hero status'? it's beyond me.

And East Timor - Oil and Gas for Australia - I guess we should be nice haw?

Well I ain't bein nice today so here - while Muslim Indonesia did its ethnic cleansing of 300 000 East Timorese Catholics Reagan and Co were looking the other way AND supplying the fascists with arms -

Now where at the time was there ethnic cleansing of Catholics ? Try N Ireland by Ronnie's own church -Presbyterians - and how about this - Chile by S Americas Pol Pot - 'nether Jock...

sheesh!

You are seriously confused, my friend, if you think there is any connection between American Presbyterians and Ian Paisley's insanity...or if you think Ronald Reagan ever would have countenanced the oppression of his fellow Christians (Catholic and Protestant) in Northern Ireland.

Redwolf

[Walden]

You are seriously confused, my friend, if you think there is any connection between American Presbyterians and Ian Paisley's insanity...

Even in Northern Ireland, Paisley's not affiliated with mainstream Presbyterianism, but founded his own denomination, the Free Presbyterian Church, which, to me, appears to incorporate some Baptist elements. Either way, his Free Presbyterian Church is virtually unheard of in the United States, where, so far as I know, only a few Bob Jones followers are members.

[glauber]

Presbyterians usually irritate people by being too tollerant, not the other way around.