Author Topic: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94  (Read 6025 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline musiclady

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,682
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #50 on: March 07, 2016, 06:48:30 pm »
Bottom feeders will never understand class.
Character still matters.  It always matters.

I wear a mask as an exercise in liberty and love for others.  To see it as an infringement of liberty is to entirely miss the point.  Be kind.

"Sometimes I think the Church would be better off if we would call a moratorium on activity for about six weeks and just wait on God to see what He is waiting to do for us. That's what they did before Pentecost."   - A. W. Tozer

Use the time God is giving us to seek His will and feel His presence.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #51 on: March 07, 2016, 07:00:14 pm »

Andrea Mitchell Uses Death of Nancy Reagan to Hammer GOP
By Kyle Drennen | March 7, 2016 | 12:10 PM EST
 

Calling in to an NBC special report about the death of Nancy Reagan on Sunday, correspondent Andrea Mitchell was eager to use the former First Lady’s passing to attack the current crop of Republican presidential candidates: “...we know that she did not believe in extremes. That she believed in compromise. That she believed, as did her husband, in walking – in working across party lines....So I would think that she would be pretty concerned about the state of the Republican Party.”

Mitchell admitted that she hadn’t spoken to Mrs. Reagan in recent years “about what has happened in the Republican Party,” but assured viewers that “it would certainly be hard for her to imagine the kind of Republican debates that we saw in the last couple of times and the language that was used, because if nothing else, she was a classy lady.”

In conclusion, Mitchell lectured: “So I think that she would not approve of the language, if nothing else, that is being used in this campaign....I don't think she could have been happy, or would be happy, about the tone that’s being taken in these debates and in this campaign.”

Earlier in the hour-long special, Mitchell praised Nancy Reagan for encouraging diplomacy between President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, however the chief foreign affairs correspondent also ripped into the Reagans over other foreign policy matters:

    And there were military deployments, which were controversial. Intermediate range missiles were deployed in Europe, very controversial within Europe. The Green Party grew up, there were protests all over. His only ally there was Maggie thatcher. The leader in France was Francois Mitterrand , a socialist. The other leaders, Pierre Trudeau – the father, ironically, of Justin Trudeau, who is coming for a state visit to Washington just this week – the leader in Canada very frustrated with the Reagan policies in 1982 and 1983....

    In other ways, she and her husband were more ridged. They had to be dragged into recognizing that in the Philippines, Ferdinand Marco, a dictator and his wife whom they got along with very well, were not the future. And that they had to think about democracy there, and it was Richard Luger, then a very prominent senator from Indiana on Foreign Relations, and others, and George Schultz, again the Secretary of State, who helped pull them along. Apartheid, they were very resistant to any changes in South Africa and any support of various boycotts in the United States against Apartheid.

Here are excerpts of Mitchell’s March 6 reporting:

    12:05 PM ET

    (...)

    ALEX WITT: Joining us now, NBC’s chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell. And Andrea, as we were speaking earlier, she really had quite a profound influence on international politics and the policies that were developed by her husband's administration, didn't she?

    ANDREA MITCHELL: She did. And most importantly, with the Soviet Union, what was then the Soviet Union, because there had been a series of Soviet leaders with whom Ronald Reagan had no communication, and there was potentially crisis after crisis, and she saw an opening when Mikhail Gorbachev, a younger generation Soviet leader came into power.

    And she is one of the key figures – was one of the key figures who pushed for the first summit between Reagan and Gorbachev, and it was in 1985. And she helped with George Shultz, the then-secretary of state, and others in the administration, to promote an atmosphere at a guest house in Geneva that would create the possibility of a real conversation where they went for a walk about, where they then stopped, there was a fire set in a small room, and they then had their first one-on-one conversation without all of the others hanging on. And it became really the template for future talks, which some went well, some didn't. Reykjavik, Iceland was a terrible further summit, but the fact is they were on a glide path toward at least communication and negotiation for arms control.

    And one forgets, during the Cold War, we were at times on a hair trigger with nuclear weapons aimed at each other. And all of that changed with the result of those conversations, those summits. A lot of other people, not only Shultz, but Jim Baker and others, who were interested in negotiations despite efforts at the Pentagon by the Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger and others in his close circle who tried time and time again to stop those engagements.

    And there were military deployments, which were controversial. Intermediate range missiles were deployed in Europe, very controversial within Europe. The Green Party grew up, there were protests all over. His only ally there was Maggie thatcher. The leader in France was Francois Mitterrand , a socialist. The other leaders, Pierre Trudeau – the father, ironically, of Justin Trudeau, who is coming for a state visit to Washington just this week – the leader in Canada very frustrated with the Reagan policies in 1982 and 1983.

    There was a summit in 1983 which went very badly in Williamsburg, Virginia, where Ronald Reagan for the first time hosted what was then the G-7 Summit and it was all about missile deployments in Europe and the controversy over whether or not there should be nuclear weapons and whether or not there should be a zero option of anti-nuclear weapons, but it was the first effort of Reagan and Gorbachev to start drawing down mutually these weapons that began to make Europe a safer place, America a safer place, and eventually led to better communication and to all of the changes we saw in what was then the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. So, major transformations on foreign policy.

    In other ways, she and her husband were more ridged. They had to be dragged into recognizing that in the Philippines, Ferdinand Marco, a dictator and his wife whom they got along with very well, were not the future. And that they had to think about democracy there, and it was Richard Luger, then a very prominent senator from Indiana on Foreign Relations, and others, and George Schultz, again the Secretary of State, who helped pull them along. Apartheid, they were very resistant to any changes in South Africa and any support of various boycotts in the United States against Apartheid.

    So there were pluses and minuses in foreign policy, but I think certainly, the biggest contribution was on east/west relations and what led to real negotiations to reduce nuclear weapons.     

    (...)

    12:33 PM ET

    WITT: And Andrea, as I welcome you back to the conversation, you’ve chronicled the incredible influence that our former first lady had on international politics, but I'm curious, your take on what she would think of the presidential campaigns that are underway today.

    MITCHELL: Well, it would be hard – I wouldn't want to presume to say what she would think about it. But from just all of her history, we know that she did not believe in extremes. That she believed in compromise. That she believed, as did her husband, in walking – in working across party lines. We once heard him say when he compromised on taxes that, “That sound you heard was the concrete breaking around my feet.” So I would think that she would be pretty concerned about the state of the Republican Party. I did not speak to her in, you know, the last year or two about what has happened in the Republican Party, but it would certainly be hard for her to imagine the kind of Republican debates that we saw in the last couple of times and the language that was used, because if nothing else, she was a classy lady.... So I think that she would not approve of the language, if nothing else, that is being used in this campaign....I don't think she could have been happy, or would be happy, about the tone that’s being taken in these debates and in this campaign.

    (...)

Source URL: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/kyle-drennen/2016/03/07/andrea-mitchell-uses-death-nancy-reagan-hammer-gop

Online Lando Lincoln

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,525
  • Gender: Male
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #52 on: March 07, 2016, 07:14:09 pm »
There was a time when media and society generally suspended speaking ill of such a public figure during mourning. No more.

I wonder what the contrast will be when Rosalynn Carter passes.
There are some among us who live in rooms of experience we can never enter.
John Steinbeck

Offline mrclose

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,233
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #53 on: March 07, 2016, 07:23:44 pm »
Lots of folks I know who are "pro-choice" - as a matter of civil liberty - are strongly against abortion.   The moral arguments against abortion are compelling, and coupled with increased access to effective contraceptions and support for adoption,  the abortion rate, which spiked after Roe v. Wade, has now come down to where it was at the time of that decision.   

Folks of all political stripes can and will work together to reduce the rate of abortion.  There really isn't anything inconsistent with recognizing a woman's legal right "to choose", while strongly advocating for the conditions that will effectively render the choice of abortion less and less common.   
Civil Liberty?

You mean Political Correctness don't you?

I'm sorry but those who say that they are against murder but support those in favor are either liars or at best .. delusional.



"Hell is empty, all the devil's are here!"
~ Self

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 383,106
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #54 on: March 07, 2016, 07:26:09 pm »
Please stay on topic...thanks
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 383,106
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #55 on: March 07, 2016, 08:47:52 pm »

Newsmax
Nancy Reagan Funeral Set for Friday
Monday, March 7, 2016 03:24 PM

 

The funeral for former first lady Nancy Reagan will be held on Friday at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation announced Monday that Nancy Reagan will lie in repose for public visitation on Wednesday from1 p.m. to 7 p.m. and Thursday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. Transportation to the library will be by shuttle from a bank property in Simi Valley.

Friday's funeral starts at 11 a.m. and will be closed to the public. Nancy Reagan will be buried next to her husband at the library.

She died of congestive heart failure on Sunday at her Los Angeles home. She was 94. Ronald Reagan died on June 5, 2004.
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Offline Paladin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,476
  • Gender: Male
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #56 on: March 08, 2016, 07:49:31 am »
Members of the anti-Trump cabal: Now that Mr Trump has sewn up the nomination, I want you to know I feel your pain.

Offline EdinVA

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,584
  • Gender: Male
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #57 on: March 08, 2016, 10:42:33 am »


I forgot about his jelly beans...

Offline mountaineer

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 78,762
Re: NANCY REAGAN DEAD at 94
« Reply #58 on: March 08, 2016, 01:41:36 pm »
Undying Devotion: The Untold Story of How Nancy Reagan Would Have Taken a Bullet for Her Husband
March 7, 2016 | by Paul G. Kengor | Topic: American History & Presidents, Biography
Editor’s note: This article first appeared at FoxNews.com.
Quote
On March 30, 1981, at 2:25 p.m., President Ronald Reagan was leaving the Washington Hilton through a side door after speaking to a union group. Outside was a gaggle of staff, secret service, reporters, and bystanders, including one determined to end Ronald Reagan’s life at that moment.

As the president headed toward the car, a reporter barked out a question. With a smile, Reagan raised his left arm to deflect it. But he could not deflect what was about to fly in his direction. A few feet from the safety of the backseat of his presidential limo, Reagan heard what sounded like firecrackers. It was gunshots.
 
Secret Service agent Jerry Parr thrust Reagan into the car, landing on top of him. “Jerry, get off,” cried Reagan, “I think you’ve broken one of my ribs.” Noticing the frothy blood bubbles emerging through Reagan’s lips, Parr commanded the driver to get to a hospital fast. They reached George Washington University Hospital in minutes.

Only once Reagan was on the table did the doctors determine the terrible extent of the 40th president’s injury. John Hinckley had employed .22 Devastator bullets designed to explode on impact. One of the bullets had ricocheted off the armored car, flattened, and sliced into Reagan’s body through his left armpit—so tiny that surgeons only discovered it after finding a hole in the president’s jacket. The projectile traveled downward, bounced off a rib, punctured a lung, and finally halted in Reagan’s chest, less than an inch from his 70-year-old heart. The president lost a huge amount of blood and proceeded to survive a perilously close call.

Of course, nearly all of this has been reported before. Never reported, however, was the unique reaction of Nancy Reagan. It was shared with me in February 2006 by Louis Evans, the longtime pastor of the National Presbyterian Church, who kept it to himself for 25 years. Knowing my work on Reagan’s religious faith, the aging Evans decided to share the story with me.

The Reagans attended the National Presbyterian Church during their first weeks in Washington. Evans was their new pastor. The day after the assassination attempt, a distraught Nancy was in need of spiritual counseling. She asked Evans to track down Donn Moomaw, who for two decades had been the Reagans’ pastor at the Bel Air Presbyterian Church in California.

Evans picked up Moomaw at the airport and brought him to the White House, where they were greeted by Mrs. Reagan in a room that included a small group of close friends: Frank Sinatra and his wife, the Rev. Billy Graham, and a Los Angeles businessman, the name of whom escaped Evans.

Nancy began by uttering words that shocked her friends. “I’m really struggling with a feeling of failed responsibility,” she confided. “I usually stand at Ronnie’s left side. And that’s where he took the bullet.”

Yes, Nancy had deep regrets: If only she had been next to Ronald Reagan as he strolled to that limousine, positioned between him and Hinckley’s pistol, she could have taken that bullet for him.

Imagine that. It was a bracing thought to Evans then, and should be to us today.
 
When Evans informed me of this, I quickly shared it with the late Bill Clark. I was Clark’s biographer at the time. Clark worked literally side-by-side with both Reagans, beginning way back when he was Governor Reagan’s chief of staff in Sacramento. He knew both very well. He was not at all surprised by Evans’ account. In fact, Clark waxed Biblical, telling me without hesitation: “I agree with the Scripture that she would have laid her life down for her friend—for her best friend. She would have done that for him.”

It was always understood that Nancy was Ronald Reagan’s supreme protector, the one who played bad cop and watched his back as he trusted everyone, regardless of their loyalty. Their son Ron once said that his dad trusted everyone and his mom trusted no one. Reagan left the White House with the highest approval ratings of any president since Eisenhower; she would never win a popularity contest. Nancy received a lot of bad press, not all of it undeserved. Yet, what Evans told me adds a heightened appreciation for Nancy’s commitment to her spouse.

“Ronnie is my hero,” Nancy once glowed. “My life began when I got married. My life began with Ronnie.” She was willing to give that life for him.

Nancy Reagan’s reaction to her husband’s shooting should be seared into our memories of this First Couple, regardless of political differences. It is an inspiring image of one woman’s undying devotion to her life partner—a woman who now at last is reunited with her Ronnie.
Vision and Values, Grove City College
Support Israel's emergency medical service. afmda.org