The Billiken's Bluff

I know its not PC to dissent from the laudatory/mourning period we are currently in the midsts of, but it says fair and balanced at the top of the page, so I feel I must at least try to provide some peanut butter to complement N. Dot's jelly. What the hell am I talking about you ask?

N. Dot promised not too fawn over Reagan, but the entire country is doing it, so I won't blaim N. for writing the following about Reagan: Certainly one of the greats, the dollar bill kind. Then Secretary of War Stanton said at the deathbed of Lincoln, "Now he belongs to the ages." So we'll have to say about Reagan. (N. Dot let's take it back to Catholic Church Choir Days, sing with me now...Cue the choir, the trumpets, please... He will raise you up on eagle's wings, Bear you on the breath of dawn, Make you to shine like the sun, And hold you in the palm of His Hand)



N. Dot, like much of the nation has been singing the praises of former president Reagan for the past week. N. Dot told me over the weekend that Ronald inspired an entire generation of politicians and journalist, and after watching countless news segments recapping his presidency (and film career), it is easy to see why. Reagan was very well-spoken. And not just because he was an actor (although that does help). In fact, I always tell N. Dot that I wouldn't have such a problem with George W. Bush if he were a better, more fluid public speaker. N. Dot likes to respond by saying that Clinton was a smooth speaker, but told, what amounted to a bunch of beautiful lies. Like Clinton, Reagan can orate with the best of them. And like Clinton, or JFK for that matter, Reagan was easy on the eyes, you look at him and you want to like him, you want to believe in him.

But surely Reagan's merits as an orator alone do not justify the title "Greatest President" as the NY Post (a truly fair and balanced newspaper) referred to him as in this morning's paper. What is the point of all this? Why try and rank the presidents, as if someone were keeping score?

The "liberal media" has been conspicuously silent on the Reagan topic this past week. Well except for the good ol' Southpaws at the Village Voice. Tom Carson wrote this article, "The Death of a Salesman". Carson explains that this "week of mourning" was prepared and planned for years in advance:

"Overseen by Grover Norquist, the Reagan Legacy Project has had all this well in hand for years. Besides working to stick Reagan's name on as many buildings, streets, ships, and mountains as possible, the organization's goals include carving his face on Mount Rushmore and putting his face on the dime. Even George Will huffed at "trying to plaster Reagan's name all over the country the way Lenin was plastered over Eastern Europe, Mao over China and Saddam Hussein all over Iraq." Norquist's basically Stalinist propaganda technique—enough memorials, and it could take a century to unconvince future generations that this was a great man—is sure some way to honor the most famous anti-Communist of all time. But to be fair, Reagan only objected to the "Workers of the world, unite" part, not the cult of personality. "

N. Dot is better equipped than I to take you on a junket through Reagan's presidency and subsequent legacy (I don't doubt that he will wax poetic about Reagan in response to this). I was 6 when Reagan left office so I didn't have too much to stay about politics at the time. (Although I was hella pissed when the Olive North Trial kept pre-empting Sesame St., but I digress). I do remember that my liberal family (we are from NYC mind you, which is notorious for producing liberals), certainly didn't view Reagan as "One of the Greats." I know some of the catch-phrases that were coined during his tenure. Reaganomics, the ill-fated Star Wars Program (talk about the conflation of Hollywood and the White House), Trickle-Down Economics, and who can forget Crack Cocaine, and none of those are intended as compliments.



Friday is a national holiday of sorts. Federal buildings, banks, public schools, and even Wall St. is closed for the day. It is a day of mourning.

When my grandmother, age 87, heard about Reagan's passing, she said-

"It's about time."

"Grandma! The man just died!" I said, shocked at her impropiety.

"It was a blessing. He was 93. His mind has been gone for 10 years," she responded.

A day of mourning? We should all be so blessed as to live to 93. A day of reflection fine. But I know how the game is played. Whenever a teenager dies, the newspapers report that the adolescent was an honors student and beloved by all, even if the youth was nothing of the sort (even if the teen went around stealing pound cake!). I realize its in poor taste to speak ill of the dead. Reagan had many critics while he was alive, yet all of them seem to have vanished since Saturday.

So I pose this question to you... Can you have respect for the deceased and be honest about that person at the same time? Or do you have to walk around with blinders on?