batting .500 with letters to the editor
Back when same-sex marriages were new in the US, conservative commentator Cal Thomas wrote a column titled “Marriage Massachusetts-Style”) laying out his anti-marriage stance. I’ve had some fun deconstructing his opinions before, so I wrote a letter to my local newspaper's editorial staff entitled “New England Wedding Bells.” I was disappointed to see the 50th anniversary of Brown recede into the past with no mention of the issues I had raised, either from my pen or anyone else’s.
Then Ronald Reagan died.
I knew that many people idolize Reagan and treasure memories of his presidency; I expected that the outpourings of emotion would be torrential. Despite the rosy-glassed hindsight that often accompanies loss and grief, however, I wasn’t prepared for the near-complete absence of any critical voices. I could only wonder: when Clinton dies someday, will the media only mention Monica, Whitewater, and the Lincoln Bedroom in passing, or will the infamous “Arkansas Project” lurch back to life, and – forgetting any now-inconvenient sensitivities – recount every dark and fevered tale of the 1990s? (Time will tell, but I have my suspicions…)
It was during this silent time that I wrote to my local newspaper (they published an edited version). My wife wants me to stop writing letters-to-the-editor if I get death threats, but if their aim is as poor as their rhetorical skills [see the "Quote of the Day" below from Ted Rall’s website] I needn’t worry.
Toward the end of last week, a blog entry from liberal cartoonist/columnist Ted Rall attracted some attention for suggesting a fiery destination for Reagan. Rall’s later, more considered (but no less inflammatory), piece titled “Reagan’s Shameful Legacy” received almost no mention in the major media. The Nation ran a few articles on Reagan this week, most notably David Corn’s “Reagan and the Media: A Love Story,” but most people still seem wary of being shouted down as politically incorrect and insensitive. In a 24x7 news cycle, though, only this moment exists. As Rall mentioned in his blog, “…the only time America will talk about Reagan's legacy is now. In two weeks, no one'll care. That's why we're talking about this now. On the other hand, if editors opened their pages to old topics, that would change.”
Reagan’s fans seem to want all negative comments to wait until after their mourning is complete. I can sympathize with their position, but mourning doesn’t seem to stop his acolytes from pushing their plans to memorialize him. Bearing in mind that Reagan already has an aircraft carrier, a huge federal office building, and Washington National Airport (re)named after him, it is fair to wonder when the media silence can be broken. After Reagan’s visage is carved into Mount Rushmore? Once he has a monument on the Mall in Washington DC? When he displaces Alexander Hamilton from the $10 bill, or FDR from the dime? (Or, as the Ronald Reagan Legacy Project wants, when he has a monument in every state and a memorial in every single county?)
As Charlie Sheen asked Michael Douglas in Wall Street, “How much is enough?”
Thanks for reading.
Quote of the Day:
“Fuck you! you cocksucker!... You piss ant twerp… I would shove those gay glasses up your ass… You Cocksucker FUCK YOU”(One of the many well-reasoned and articulate emails Ted Rall received after his appearance on “Hannity & Colmes” last week)