Former First Lady Nancy Reagan Dead At 94 (nbcnews.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Former first lady Nancy Reagan has died, according to a spokeswoman with the Reagan Library. She was 94. The cause of death was congestive heart failure, according to her rep Joanne Drake. "Mrs. Reagan will be buried at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, next to her husband, Ronald Wilson Reagan, who died on June 5, 2004," Drake wrote in a statement. May she rest in peace.
Nancy Reagan had nowhere near the level of awesomeness that was Eleanor Roosevelt, but she did a few things.
After Ronald Reagan's term in office, she devoted most of her time to caring for her him. He was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease in 1994, until his death at the age of 93 in 2004. Nancy remained active within the Reagan Library and in politics, particularly in support of embryonic stem cell research, until her death in 2016.
She was also well-known for her "Just say no" campaign on drugs; for replacing the White House China with a full service order from Lenox for the first time since the Truman administration; and for renovating the White House when it was in a state of disrepair, largely with private donations.
But where would the scientific field of astrology be without her?
Once again, Slashdot is behind the curve, I read this on TMZ 5 hours ago!
Then read "firehose". Or become a patron and see news items after they're vetted but before they hit the front page.
I see two complaints a lot:
- It's not news for nerds / stuff that matters.
- It's slow.
You can't have both fast and filtered. It takes time to sift the jems from the slush.
Further: faster processing means more errors, while better (though still "imperfect") filtering means later stories. And there's no way to get the filtering right for all readers: I'm constantly finding stories I consider "news for me (a nerd) and stuff that matters (to me, a nerd)" to attract a chorus of one, or (as in this case) both, complaints.
I like Slashdot's setting of the fast - filtered tweak knob. I can always skip stuff *I* don't consider interesting, and it has a HELL of a lot of stuff I *AM* interested in, presented in a timely enough manner to be useful (when the rest of the media ignores it completely or warps it out of recognition).
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Oh man. Where to start?
http://listverse.com/2015/01/1...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The Reagan Administration stands as the only US administration that was ever convicted of crimes against humanity.
And that doesn't even count his domestic policies that hollowed out the middle class and started our slide into the economic inequality we have today. He dumped crack cocaine into the inner cities to fund illegal wars in Central America and turned the School of the Americas into a training center for hit squads that massacred innocent people, including Jesuit priests and nuns.
He was by far the president that did the most lasting damage to the United States of America.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Reagan did not govern like a liberal. That's the most ignorant thing I've ever heard and considering some of the conservative comments around here that's saying a lot.
Yes, he ran up huge deficits. So has every other modern 'conservative'. It's part of their playbook--literally. Look up the Two Santa Claus Theory. When conservatives are in power they spend like drunken sailors to pump up the economy and make themselves look good (and their corporate buddies rich). See Dick Cheney's 'deficits don't matter' quote. They don't matter--until a liberal is in office, at which point conservatives start screaming about the debt in an attempt to make sure that liberal programs don't get enacted.
See, liberal economic policies gave us a nation with a huge middle class, strong unions and worker protection, and massive economic prosperity because those things are how you get massive economic prosperity for all. So much so that the middle and lower classes started getting politically active in the 60s because they had the economic freedom to do so. This scared the hell out of conservative strategists because their policies only lead to bubbles followed by crashes and are generally deeply unpopular. The destruction of the middle class has been deliberate and cynical, to make sure people are too busy working multiple jobs and worrying about things like paying for college and retirement on salaries designed to support neither. Such things used to be benefits of living and working here.
The whole business of attributing things like massive debts to 'liberals' when it's actually conservatives doing it is just another part of the strategy. The federal government was cut in size while Clinton was in office and increased in size massively under W's frat boy administration, but people like you never admit that if you even know it because Fox News doesn't cover that.
So Reagan governed EXACTLY how conservatives govern. Hell, he wrote the modern book on it. His biggest 'failing' in that regard was he was pragmatic and actually worked with the other side. That is also unacceptable in modern conservative 'my way or the highway, even if I'm in the minority' thinking.
What exactly did Reagan do that previous administrations back to Truman's hadn't done?
Caused Americans to imprison more of its population than China.
Hmm. Maybe.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/U.S._incarceration_rates_1925_onwards.png
Reagan was president from 1981 to 1988. So, he started as President after the curve of prison rate started to rise, but before it has significantly diverged from baseline. The curve continued to get steeper after he left, with the steepest part right at the transistion from (George H.W.) Bush to Clinton
Yeah, I thought that too for years. But it turns out, like MK-ULTRA, the Reagain/Crack Cocaine connection is absolutely true. Documents have come to light since the 80s that prove it.
In fact, the Reagan Administration admitted to it in secret testimony to Congress.
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEB...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Do not forget to mention that she was responsible for the use of astrology in the decision-making process at the highest level.
To be fair, if we are to criticise people for consulting astrologers before making decisions, then we should do the same when they consult their imaginary friend. Astrology is as valid as any religion, which in my view isn't very much; and at least they can claim to make use of actual computations. And I think, also, that we shouldn't be completely blind to the fact, that things like prayer, meditation or consulting with oracles and horoscopes can potentially be a way to reflect more deeply over the decision you are about to make, regardless of whether your life-lie of choice is in itself bonkers.