It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ron Reagan, the Dems, and will the Republicans Let Nancy Speak?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Ron Reagan gave an heartfelt speech regarding stem cell research at the convention. One cannot help but to think that in caving in to the whims of the Ultra Right Wing, The Republicans have really dropped the ball on this one. Given his past liberal leanings, its no surprising that the Dems would allow him the stage, but the topic has the republicans looking pretty bad.

Ronald Reagan was the knight in shinning armor that brought his brand of conservatism to the main forefront in american politics. Not quite Goldwaters hard core conservative message, but a carefull blend that seemed to reach people of all opinions. Reagan was a pragmatic conservative, a far cry from the neocons that we have been inflicted with. The stem cell issue is just a case in point. No doubt, Reagan himself would have supported the cause had he been healthy

SO, my question is: Will the Republicans let Nancy speak? It makes me sick that my party is trying to cash in on Reagans death while denying the very research that while could not have saved him, has potential to save many others. IF anything, they should allow Nancy the oppurtunity to speak at teh convention to express her views. It wont happen, but I would still like to see it in any case.

For a text of his speech:
news.yahoo.com.../ap/20040728/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_reagan_text_1


BOSTON - Delivering a slap to his late father's political party, Ron Reagan told Democratic delegates Tuesday that voters in November face a choice between "the future and the past, between reason and ignorance, between true compassion and mere ideology," on the matter of embryonic stem cell research.

news.yahoo.com.../ap/20040728/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_ron_reagan_2

[edit on 28-7-2004 by FredT]

[edit on 28-7-2004 by FredT]




posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:07 AM
link   
The Republicans are desperately trying to get Nancy Reagan to speak at their convention, but it looks like she will not be there, let alone speak.


Stung by the appearance of Ron Reagan tonight at the Democratic National Convention, Bush campaign officials are trying to lure his mother, Nancy Reagan, to the Republican National Convention in New York next month.

Initial inquiries from Republicans who offered her a speaking role at the gathering have been rebuffed, a Reagan confidant told the Chronicle.

"I have made it clear to Mrs. Reagan that she is welcome at the Republican National Convention, and I know our delegates would love to see her and express their appreciation," Republican Party Chairman Ed Gillespie said.


Bush camp wants Nancy Reagan visit to GOP convention



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by donguillermo
The Republicans are desperately trying to get Nancy Reagan to speak at their convention, but it looks like she will not be there, let alone speak.


From the people I know in the party, they don't want her anywere near the convention. If she is allowed to come but not speak, it would look really bad. If she is allowed to speak, they won't like the message.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by donguillermo
The Republicans are desperately trying to get Nancy Reagan to speak at their convention, but it looks like she will not be there, let alone speak.


From the people I know in the party, they don't want her anywere near the convention. If she is allowed to come but not speak, it would look really bad. If she is allowed to speak, they won't like the message.



Reread my quote from the article. It contradicts both your points. It says Republicans offered her a speaking role. And it quotes party chairman Gillespie to the effect that Mrs. Reagan is welcome at the convention.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by donguillermo
Reread my quote from the article. It contradicts both your points. It says Republicans offered her a speaking role. And it quotes party chairman Gillespie to the effect that Mrs. Reagan is welcome at the convention.


Don Guillermo, Don't ask me about my business (Sorry I could not resist), I know what the official line the party is towing, but privatly its something else. Mrs. Reagans comments at Ronalds funeral hiot a nerve with the neocons that she would not be welcome. Publicly, however, they have to put up a good front....



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 02:45 AM
link   
poor Nancy. I hope she does what she feels is right, and not what she feels pressured into doing. ron jr's message is a good one. scientific policy should be determined by consulting with scientists, not the most vocal lobbyists. the US medical research sector took a big hit by not allowing stem cell research. i wonder how many stem-cell related technologies and processes have now been patented by non-US firms, and how long it will take the US to play catch up in this area.

-koji K.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
poor Nancy. I hope she does what she feels is right, and not what she feels pressured into doing.


I think that exactly why she is not going. The Rebub. are trying to dictate her message and she is not having any part of that. Yes its a sad day when religious objections dictate science policy's If we had allowed that historically we would still be in the middle ages.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:34 AM
link   
The Democrats chastise the Republicans after Reagan's death, telling them it would be a "terrible mistake" to use it in the campaign.

Then THEY trot Ron Reagan out to give a speech at the Democratic convention!

Does anyone else appreciate the irony here?



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 06:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by gurnio
Then THEY trot Ron Reagan out to give a speech at the Democratic convention! Does anyone else appreciate the irony here?


There is irony here. The father of the conservative movement that enabled Dubya to reach office died of a illness that his own party is preventing full reasearch into.

Yes the dems did go to lengths to chastise the Rebublicans not to use Reagans death, but would the unltra right wing which seems to be pulling all the strings these days allow Ron to speak at the Republican Convention? Doubtful. Was Ron's speech political? Yes! As a republican am I glad that he made it? YES YES YES.

The majority of the republicans in the country are not the hard core neo conservative types. IMHO Bushes blatant attempt to apease the ultra right wing may backfire and leave us with Kerry



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   
I found Ron Jr.'s speech insightful and very, very well-done. He has some of his Dad's charisma.
I later heard Michael Reagan interviewed on Fox and his vitriol towards his half-brother just proves that family squabbles occur in high places as well as our own homes. (at least our family squabbles aren't televised)
It was, frankly, embarrassing.
I agree that Nancy won't go to the Republican Convention because she refuses to stick to the script. After all, she's a strong woman herself. I think she let Ron Jr. speak for her on the issue she cares most about.
joey



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I don't think there's an irony here. I don't think that the Dems wrapped themselves in the late Ronald Reagan's aura after warning the Republicans not to do so. They gave Reagan's son a venue to speak about stem cell research, but I don't see that Ron Reagan used his father's name or talked about his father's legacy. Not THAT would've been using Reagan's death for political purposes.

I very much admire Ron Reagan for sticking to the topic at hand - stem cell research - and not speaking overly about his father's plight. He gave a non-partisan speech, the farthest he went was to say very matter-of-factly that the choice in November was between the future and the past.

I didn't like Ronald Reagan, but I have to say... thumbs up Ron!!!



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 01:23 PM
link   


I didn't like Ronald Reagan, but I have to say... thumbs up Ron!!!


I loved Reagan, yes even before he died. He gave some of the best speeched, and he really believed in what he spoke about. there always a period of nostalgia following the death of a public figure, but I think Reagan legacy will endure.



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Well, I suppose it shouldn't suprise me that the irony is lost on this crowd.

Alzheimer's is a terrible disease, to be sure, but in reality very few serious researcher's think that stem cells will play any role in its cure.

Link

I see the whole charade as capitalizing on Ronald Reagan's struggle and death to link his name to the Democrats.

exactly what they accused the Republican's of doing...

[edit on 28-7-2004 by gurnio]



posted on Jul, 28 2004 @ 05:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

There is irony here. The father of the conservative movement that enabled Dubya to reach office died of a illness that his own party is preventing full reasearch into.


I find your response curious FredT.

As I mentioned above, there is no evidence to suggest that stem cells are particularly promising as a cure for Alzheimer's and yet you are willing to accept the "party line" that limiting the use of living embyonic tissue in research is somehow preventing a cure for this awful disease.

I would think that minds as curious as those found on this board would delve deeper into these issues to uncover the true motives of their suppoters, rather than parroting the party line.

But, alas, many members here refuse to "deny ignorance" when that ignorance comes from the mouths of the political party they support.



posted on Jul, 29 2004 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by gurnio
As I mentioned above, there is no evidence to suggest that stem cells are particularly promising as a cure for Alzheimer's and yet you are willing to accept the "party line" that limiting the use of living embyonic tissue in research is somehow preventing a cure for this awful disease.


We don't know. That is this point of this debate. The policies of the Bush Adminsitration is opting out the biggest funder of R&D int he world. More to the point, It may be a critical technology in the future. Can we afford to be behind? The one mandate of the US governemnt is to look out for all of its citizens. The Preamble to the Constitution puts it best: "promote the general welfare". You are correct in that we do not have evidence yet that embryonic stem cell research will find a cure for any of the diseases it is being touted for. However, one could have said the same thing to Jonas Salk......

In as far as towing the party line, If I were doing that, I would be chanting the typical "pro-life" slogans assosiated with the primary opposition to this topic. As a moderate to liberal Republican, I am troubled by the parties ever increasing shift to the ultra right. The bottom line is an easy one: Do we allow religion to dictate scientific policy? Are you in favor of a modern day inqusition?




top topics



 
0

log in

join