A few years ago, I heard of a group called the Reagan Legacy Project whose mission was to ensure every U.S. county in had a street or building named after Reagan. They stuck his name on the airport in Arlington,Virginia, and a few years later forced the local transit agency to rename the adjacent Metro station. One idiot congressman from Texas wanted to name a major street in DC after Reagan, but that luckily got shot down quickly, as a Northern Virginia congressman politely pointed out there were plenty of streets in his home district to name after him.
Isn't there something rather Stalinist about naming so many things after one person? Perhaps if they didn't start naming things after him while he was still alive or so soon after his death, I wouldn't think so.
I don't want to hear about what he did--I'm well aware of his policies--but I want to know why conservatives seem to put all their eggs into the Reagan basket.
2007-12-05 14:40:22 · 21 answers · asked by VeggieTart -- Let's Go Caps! 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Cinner, they were naming stuff after him when he was still alive (although unaware of anything what with the Alzheimer's). It's one thing to name a street or two, maybe a building--and, might I add, AFTER he is dead--but to have his name plastered all over the country? Much of it before he died? Come on!
2007-12-05 14:55:15 · update #1
they don't have much to hang their hats on, so Reagan is it. for better or worse. that is all they have.
so here we are several years later and the "legend Reagan" is a giant compared to the "man Reagan".
2007-12-05 14:43:41 · answer #1 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 9⤊ 6⤋
By nature 'conservatives' are always looking back to a 'golden age' that never was. Reagan was elected to insure the ongoing fortunes of trans-national corporations that in the 1980 were already well on their way to political and economic dominance, not just in the US, but all over the world. But a funny thing happened on the way to what was supposed to be the 'end of history' and a permanent 'conservative' majority. The corporations failed to think about 'our' history. The auto, electronics, computer, steel making, clothes manufacturing and a lot of other industries that supported a thriving middle class vamosed to the 3rd world. They said this would 'trickle down a shower of gold. Well, it trickled down something, but it sure wasn't gold. The Reaganites saw this happening and via the right wing talk show buzzards and the Fox Network, they said...."it is good', and the people believed even when it was obvious they were being treated like sheep to be sheared. But, as always, eventually, 'sheep look up'. Now we know we got screwed royal by these mugs. The Reagan groupies simply can't believe how badly the Reagan Rangers screwed the pooch....they blame the non-existant liberals, the 'unions' and the Man in the Moon for the current mess we're in. No wonder they look back with longing when they had the US population where the hair is short......I guess history didn't end and there was no 'Golden Age'....sad, but true, but now we have to live with it!
2007-12-05 23:12:02 · answer #2 · answered by Noah H 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
This is a defence mechanism. Conservatives know the Reagan administration was full of failure and scandal. A supposedly fiscal president blew the budget. Tax cuts that were supposed to increase revenue sent us even further into debt. Strong on defence turned into cut and run in Lebanon and buy off our enemies in Iran. The War on Drugs and "Just say no" turned into "Just do it" as the administration knowingly funded drug cartels in Latin America. The Reagan doctrine instead of making the world safer simply gave us more smaller nasty evil dictatorships that hate us and turned supposed allies against us (Iraq is an example). Supposedly "compassionate conservatism" saw poverty grow.
The problem is a lot of rich people became even richer as a result of all this. So rather than admit that Reagan was a miserable failure, and so potentially not get to line thier pockets at the world's expense again, they rewrite history to make Reagan out to be some sort of god like perfect president. If we are constantly told there was no better president ever than Reagan - despite all evidence to the contrary- perhaps we will be silly enough to vote for the same failed policies again. Actually no perhaps about it - we did in 2000 and 2004.
2007-12-05 22:57:49 · answer #3 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I expect you'll give me thumbs down even though I will answer this honestly. I think it's obvious you don't like the man. But that's ok, it's a free country.
Conservatives are like any other group of like-minded people. Groups like this tend to honor and respect those who they believe to be great leaders among them. After the death of these leaders, people will want to memorialize the leader they have lost.
There's nothing sinister about this. Many groups do it. I believe it's called human nature.
2007-12-05 22:53:13 · answer #4 · answered by Cinner 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Well conservatives like to stay the course and forget the past--like why the heck we got into the mess in the first place..let's face it, Reagan seemed to have "forgetting the past" down real well...no wonder he's their hero. He was the perfect conservative: If anyone brought up anything unpleasant, he just smiled and said "I don't remember".
2007-12-05 22:49:41 · answer #5 · answered by edith clarke 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Dear Spinach for Brains,
If it isn't Reagan it's Martin Luther King.... Right?
Why ask why?
2007-12-06 12:40:40 · answer #6 · answered by raz 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why are Catholics obsessed with Mary?
Pot heads with Bob Marley?
Dems with FDR?
Blacks with MLK Jr. ?
It's called an Icon for your policies.
2007-12-05 22:45:35 · answer #7 · answered by David C 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
They have rewritten the cowardly debacle of Reagan's failed legacy.
They lie and say Reagan defeated communism. This would mean that the 40 years of counter intelligence was all a big waste for all we needed was to have Reagan tell the USSR to tear down that wall.
- largest federal government
- record deficit (until GW Bush)
- supported Saddam Hussein
- illegally sold weapons to Iran
- ordered marines to move into a death trap in Beirut where 241 marines were murdered
- cut and ran after the 241 marines were murdered
2007-12-05 22:44:55 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 11⤊ 5⤋
Reagan was the last good president we had!
2007-12-06 09:21:01 · answer #9 · answered by mjmayer188 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because they still feel the shame if his cut and run in Beirut after the Marine barracks was bombed and 241 were killed.
Then there is the shame of "iran/contra". How reagan was able to avoid prison by saying "I don't recall" about 250 times while under oath is still a thing of wonder.
2007-12-05 22:43:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 7⤋
Who else do they have? Really, he's their best example of conservatism. Sad, but they named it so.
2007-12-05 22:51:14 · answer #11 · answered by ? 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋