Reagan Threw Him Under The Bus
-
puirt-a-beul — 11 years ago(December 22, 2014 06:50 AM)
Read Romans 1 for clarification.
Let that delusional, recriminatory wackjob Saul of Tarsus tell you how to live? Are you insane?
And as for conservatives, it's the only group of people compassionate and honest enough to tell people the ugly truth.
Judgmental and self-righteous is nearer the mark.
Like it or not, people are going to have to deal with the consequences of their choices sooner or later.
Case in point.
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment. -
ChristmasReviewer — 14 years ago(November 30, 2011 10:46 PM)
Reagan nevr said the word AIDS until Rock Died. Reagan being a "Christian" never aproved Federal Money for AIDS research because of hias stupid "Christian Beliefs".
Reagan threw all gay men with aids under the bus. I was not sad when the SOB died. -
Kenneth-8 — 13 years ago(August 07, 2012 08:34 AM)
Exactly. In 1985, no one hardly knew of AIDS and the fatalities paled in comparison to many cancers. Plus it was relegated mostly to irresponsible sexual behavior, mainly in the homosexual community, and drug use. What was Reagan supposed to do, throw billions to finding a cure to a disease which was mostly preventable instead of leukemia or breast cancer, where the victim has little choice on whether they get it or not? I would still prefer my taxpayer dollars going to fund research on those cancers than AIDS since they are ways I can prevent getting AIDS that aren't too difficult. It was common sense, if you were going to sleep around with just anyone, wear protection or go get some tests done to check yourself or your partner. Reagan wasn't responsible to clean up the mess for people getting AIDS; they were for their own selfish and reckless behavior. In some people's eyes, it wouldn't have mattered what he did since he was a conservative Christian and that alone makes him guilty of being an intolerant bigot. I still think Reagan did quite a bit for his time by even giving funding for research considering a lot of people outside of the gay community could care less about AIDS research then.
-
dkgambler — 14 years ago(December 15, 2011 02:26 PM)
What should Reagan have done? Hudson's AIDS was brought on by his own behavior. People die every day as a result of the choices they make, does that mean a president should run to the podium each time and declare that government will confiscate trillions more of other people's money to fix some perceived problem? I prefer personal freedom and personal responsibility.
-
dvd89128 — 14 years ago(December 26, 2011 11:05 PM)
Smoking causes lung cancer so I guess we should not look for a cure for that. AIDS should up first in gay men if rich white teens in Beverly Hills first came down with AIDS there would be a cure by now. Reagan was a bigoted Christian. I am glad that last years of his life he had no mind JUSTICE
-
dkgambler — 14 years ago(December 27, 2011 09:49 AM)
Get over yourself. Typical leftist. FYI, I'm a Libertarian and since you think government is your ticket to a better life I strongly suggest you prepare for a lifetime of disappointment.
Funny that you would call someone bigoted, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if you hang out with the occupy moochers and spew hate towards the producers who presumably haven't handed over enough of their earned property to you.
Did I say get over yourself? Well, you should. -
dkgambler — 14 years ago(December 28, 2011 08:09 AM)
Typical leftist smear. Yes, I know Reagan is hated by many for slowing the growth of their beloved mommy government. Yes, he just slowed the growth, he didn't enact "painful, crushing cuts" as people like you claim.
But just the same, let's get specific. What should Reagan have dob68ne? Upon hearing that Rock Hudson had AIDS as a direct result of the choices he made, should Reagan have called a joint session of Congress to demand that they authorize government to take trillions of other people's money to immediately get started on finding the cure? Again, specifics only. What should Reagan have done? We're past the smears.
Choices, choices, choices, life is all about the choices we make. -
Agamemnon7 — 14 years ago(March 17, 2012 01:53 PM)
Rock Hudson was a Republican, too, and a fan and friend of the Reagans. According to their daughter, who has publicly disagreed with many of their positions, they had nothing against gays.
Reagan did, however, believe in a smaller government, so increasing funding for AIDS research was no higher (or lower) on his list than increasing money for anything else (except, sigh, the military).
Reagan spoke compassionately about Ryan White once he was out of the White House. I can't help but wish he had been more compassionate during his Presidency. He always spoke of America as the most progressive nation in the world. How much more progressive we would have been if we had acted faster to do something about this epidemic.
But I would not call him intentionally harmful. I do not think he understood the magnitude of the AIDS crisis until it had spiraled out of control.
The irony is that Nancy Reagan's father was a very accomplished surgeon and man of medicine.
I think it is something he would have handled differently in hindsight.
I'm not an apologist for him, I just think it's unrealistic to depict him as being that contemptuous of anyone. As conservative as he was, he worked far more cooperatively with a Democratic congress than any of his Republican successors, and certainly more so than Obama has worked with Republicans. -
dkgambler — 14 years ago(March 20, 2012 10:46 AM)
Notice also that I never got an answer to my simple question regarding what specifically Reagan should have done. Of course, it's much easier to simply spout ad hominem nonsense about Reagan that it is/was to get specific. To AIDS specifically, and in all likelihood contrary to prescribed culture, AIDS is almost exclusively restricted to gays and intravenous drug users. I would think/hope that the blood transfusion problem has gone away with improved procedures at hospitals, etc.. Magic Johnson, certainly with the help of the AIDS lobby, propelled forth the "anyone, including exclusive heterosexuals, can get AIDS." I have zero doubt that Magic Johnson is either gay or bisexual, the idea that he contracted HIV from random heterosexual contact is BS and his fable has misallocated countless millions of dollars of resources. But don't believe me, just look at the numbers when you go to find the proof of the coming heterosexual AIDS epidemic that we were warned about in 1991. It hasn't happened, not even close, and any suggestion that the warning of the so-called epidemic made everyone fly straight is of course equal BS as the original claim.
Why do I say all of this? Simple, it's absurd to automatically suggest government is the one to look to for a solution to the AIDS problem or any other problem for that matter. Such a belief is based on emotion and not logic, which is238 what lovers of big government (mostly leftists, but also a large number of incorrectly-named "conservatives") want. Logic rarely if ever dictates, hell look no further than the Komen/pink ribbon/breast cancer lobby. The presumed belief is that breast cancer efforts are the best way to focus efforts on saving women's lives. Truth is, breast cancer kills a pittance of women compared to heart disease. If saving lives is the goal, the Komen organization would waste no time shifting its priorities to heart disease. Again, that's if saving women's live5b4s is the goal. Am I suggesting that Komen's number one goal in fact is not saving women's lives? Yes. -
Kenneth-8 — 13 years ago(June 13, 2012 07:34 AM)
Wow, you're just as hateful as any of the so called intolerant Christian bigots you describe. By all accounts, including Hudson's own lover BTW, Reagan was upset about Hudson's illness and called him up in the hospital in Paris. He even offered him a chance to stay at the White House while he was sick. At a time when your open-minded liberal friends in Hollywood wouldn't even look at someone with AIDS in fear of getting it, Reagan offered an open hand to Hudson for support. SO yeah, he was a real hateful, spiteful man who just wanted people to dies of AIDS because they weren't Christian. ANd he did provide funding for AIDS research, but since it wasn't 30 billion dollars, he was a bigot I guess. This was 1985, and it was a still a mystery illness that wasn't on a mainstream level, what was he supposed to do, allot a third of his budget to finding a cure? ANd him not mentioning AIDS until 1987, so what? No one probably asked him about AIDS publicly so he never said anything. I mean, the guy could have been in shelters giving water to sick AIDS patients and you a-holes would still have something to complain about him. And BTW, the President who donated the most to AIDS research was, yep, a bigoted Christian President named George W. Bush. He started PEPFAR and donated billions to finding a cure; guess somehow you conveniently forgot about him.
-
smjensen312-158-669840 — 13 years ago(June 15, 2012 09:29 PM)
The government of South Africa (where more than 30% of the population is HIV positive) was led by a man who doubted that HIV causes AIDS and espouses "alternate" theories. He was certainly approved of by most leftists, since it was a government led by the African National Congress. The fact that his ignorance costed lives (South Africa's population is actually declining, in large part due to AIDS deaths) is something that is not being criticized by the left.
There's no question that Reagan waited too long to publicly address AIDS. But was malice or callousness towards AIDS victims the primary reason for this? There were a lot of very ignorant attitudes that were rampant in the early 1980's- people who in one breath saw AIDS as "God's punishment to gays" and in the next breath theorized about transmission through casual contact. At least Reagan did not promote (or exploit) the hysteria.