Skip to main content

As of today, this obituary of Reagan's deceased UN Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick has been on the recommended list. I'd like to begin by commending the author both for his writing skill, and more importantly for his keen grasp of history and broad knowledge of Reagan-era foreign policy, and the price we are currently paying for it.

I also beleive the diary is wholly inappropriate in the circumstance, and the comments trailing from it are making me physically ill.

Ms. Kirkpatrick is dead. What can come of piling insult on her corpse? Of demanding to know where she will be buried so we can piss on her grave, as one commenter did? This isn't about altering the course of the country. This isn't about righting wrongs. This is pure, unmitigated hate for the woman. And maybe she deserves it. I don't know. I personally am in no position to judge. But what is this public display of bile doing here? Is this our two minutes of hate? Is this how we're focusing ourselves these days? By picking a dead woman and thinking about how great it will be when we can all desecrate her corpse together? Is this kind of public venting of our collective dark side the most important thing we have to do? Is it something we want to do at all?

This is not the movement I'm part of. These are not the people I've spent the last years on this site with. This is not right.

Originally posted to ripzaw on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:12 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I mean no disrespect to anyone here (9+ / 0-)

    The diary appeared, and then it snowballed from there. But the collective sight of it all was like a punch to the gut.

    -4.75, -5.08 Be yourself. Imitation is suicide. -Andre Gide

    by ripzaw on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:13:18 PM PST

  •  Well nobody would (10+ / 0-)

    be nice if the death had been a better known evil person.

    She was an evil person, the fact that she wasn't as high profile evil as say some thrid world dictator doesn't mean that she deserves any more respect than any other evil person. Take Pinochet--I haven't read the diary comments, but I'm sure you wouldn't be complaining about people pissing on his grave.

    Yes, she's dead, but that doesn't mean people should not criticize her evil policies, even if it gets vitriolic at times. She represented everything evil in Reagan's disastrous foreign policy and as an architect of many of the problems we face today, I don't blame people for lashing out at such a monster.

    "People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution. They don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible." --J.R.

    by michael1104 on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:21:09 PM PST

  •  Whatever (10+ / 0-)

    After the so called media had a Reagan love-fest for a couple of weeks after he died, which was designed to help Bush in that election, and not once did they mention the Iran-Contras, Nicaragua, Hondoras, and so on, meanwhile somehow they used Wellstone's funeral against us, I say, fuck these double standards, and attack terrible Republicans whether they are dead or alive.

    •  Take back the Republican monopoly on public hate? (0+ / 0-)

      Is that what we're aiming for?

      -4.75, -5.08 Be yourself. Imitation is suicide. -Andre Gide

      by ripzaw on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:29:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Republican monopoly on public hate (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Night Owl, trashablanca, Allogenes

        is limited to imaginary demons designed for maximum propagandist impact.

        Public hatred of real abuses of power, hypocrisy and other breaches of the publuc trust at the cost of people's lives, property and livelihoods? I'm not seeing that as even a Republican minor interest group, much less a monopoly.

        You live and learn. Well, at least you live. -Douglas Adams

        by wandabee on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:41:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Clinton and Carter (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ripzaw

      When both Clinton and Carter die, then, will you be thus tolerant of freepers and right-wing people saying nasty things about them? It cuts both ways.

      When Reagan died, although I didn't agree with many of his policies, I showed respect. Whenever a former politican dies, Democrat or Republican, I show respect. There is an expression that someone taught me: God don't like ugly. That's why I afford respect to people who may not deserve it.

      There was a "Reagan love fest" because, rightly or wrong, a vast majority of Americans, including many Democrats, respects him. I know that the far left hates Reagan and everything associated with him, but 70-80% of the country respects him as being a great president.

      Now, again, I didn't support many of Reagan's policies. But there is an appropriate place and time to debate his historical legacy. When someone's body is still warm isn't the right time.
       

      http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

      by jiacinto on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 03:39:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Reagan doesn't deserve respect (0+ / 0-)

        His policies hurt (and yes, even killed) too many people.  People on the left hate him for very good reason.  As far as I can see, he reserved his compassion for sob stories he read about in Reader's Digest.  He certainly never showed any in his politics.

        •  Well (0+ / 0-)
          I have respect when people die. There is an appropriate place and time to debate Reagan's legacy. When he died wasn't one of them.

          http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

          by jiacinto on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 08:38:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  If you're not sure if she deserves it (7+ / 0-)

    why are you saying this?

    And to answer one of your questions, the "public display of vile" is called "venting." Nobody here, I promise you, actually means ot piss on her grave. They mean to very publicly, right here, show that the Miss Manners school of history will not stop people from speaking difficult truths. She did horrible things. She helped cause horrible suffering on people. Her death does not take away that truth.

  •  As Bob Dylan once sang (8+ / 0-)

    regarding the 'masters of war: we want to stand on your grave to make sure that you are dead. Seems more appropriate than pissing, but was what came to mind when I heard that Pinochet was, at long last, no longer with us.

    All humans are missed, but some less than others.

    We have only just begun and none too soon.

    by global citizen on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:27:56 PM PST

  •  the diary you refer to (11+ / 0-)

    is in no way inappropriate. Comments about pissing on someone's grave are over the top but there are only a few comments like that.

    Kirkpatrick was one of evil Reagan's most evil henchmen and it is completely appropriate to remember exactly how much blood is on her hands. Necessary even, and we know the corporate media won't do it.

  •  Kirkpatrick could have been a Hitler associate (10+ / 0-)

    Jeanne Kirkpatrick was at the forefront of some of the most detestable, outrageous and unconscionable policies imagineable, including genocide in Guatemala and El Salvador.  Far from merely doing it because she thought it was necessary, she took evident glee in her role as Tormentor of the World's Oppressed.  

    It often seemed that Jeanne Kirkpatrick read the newspapers each morning, seeking the most heinous on international situations, and then intentionally entering the debate on the wrong side, making outragoues pronouncements that disgusted reasonable people while leaving only far-right reactionaries pleased.

    The diary you cited above has a long list of the horrors in which Jeanne Kirkpatrick participated with glee and gusto.

    I certainly do not think that we at DailyKos should celebrate the death or misery of any person.  But there are exceptions, and Jeanne Kirpatrick, because of her own heinous and internationally notorious career behavior, is one of those exceptions.  The death of Jeanne Kirkpatrick is the death of a torturer:  good riddance!

  •  Plus the reason she changed from Democrat (6+ / 0-)

    to Republican Reaganite and what followed, had everything to do with power and prestige and nothing to do with conviction or honor, which only makes her evil all the worse.

    I like the silence of a church, before the service begins better than any preaching. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

    by Norwegian Chef on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:44:04 PM PST

  •  We waited three days... (7+ / 0-)

    ..and she is a public figure who would appreciate the tough-minded approach we have taken to her death. Uncompromising, hightly critical, not very productive -- just like Jeanne Kirpatrick herself. I think, based on the way she lived her life, that she would have appreciated all of the horrid things we are saying about her.

    I will say this for her though: she was eloquent.

    And so are we. And we live. So long, hard-hearted sycophant!

    "I am my brother's keeper. I am a Democrat." -- That's your slogan, Democrats.

    by Bensdad on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:53:07 PM PST

  •  The evil that she and the Reagan regime (8+ / 0-)

    visited on this hemisphere alone entitles all of them to the condemnation they have earned. Hundreds of thousnads of victims in Central America alone. She and her ilk deserve the scorn they receive.

    To move back to the center, the country must move left.

    by slatsg on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:54:06 PM PST

  •  I understand how you feel, but . . . (0+ / 0-)

    read my post above.

  •  May she nourish many rats, worms (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sen bob, gmb, cometman, Mia Dolan

    and cockroaches.  Hell she's more productive while dead than she ever was alive.  I'll spare my good thoughts for her victims, yhanks.

    "Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John Lennon

    by trashablanca on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 02:57:04 PM PST

  •  How's Bill the Cat taking the news? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tiggers thotful spot, sidwood
  •  Those who ignore history are (6+ / 0-)

    doomed to repeat it.  Doesn't the saying go something like that?  Kirkpatricks was a hateful and arrogant co-conspirator in the early arch-conservative, neo-conservative movement.  I remember her vividly and disgustedly from the Reagan years.  Many of her ilk were brought back in bush junior's regime.  Worth remembering, and I don't begrudge those who spew hatred at her, nor too much younger folks who don't know and don't feel it that way.

  •  SHE DESERVES IT! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    judasdisney

    Hello- she viciously attacked progressives for hating America when she performed her "Blame America first" speech. Believe me, she gave us no mercy and in death, that CUNT deserves NO MERCY! Point closed!

  •  I wholly disagree (6+ / 0-)

    with your assessment of this diary.
    In the years since Regan's presidency, he has been "sainted" by the right, and remains largely venerated by the press. Many of those surrounding him enjoy similar treatment to this day (e.g. North).

    Much more timely accounting of the criminal activities of his administration was largely deferred, perhaps in deference to "his condition."  
    This undoubtedly allowed some of the revisionist fablery to proliferate.  

    It is certain that in days following, there will be numerous very generous recountings of Ms. Kirkpatrick's career. It's never too early for an accurate review of the tremendous adverse impact this career left.

    That said, I am not a big fan of the personal attacks. I agree some are quite unfortunate. But it's life on the dK.

  •  So here is the thing... (11+ / 0-)

    Her legacy lives on at various very powerful Washington think-tanks.  Her legacy lives on scattered around single graves and mass graves throughout South and Central America and a few other continents too.  She was arrogant, unprincipled, dishonest, dangerous and was responsible for policies that not only terrorized and killed many people around the world, but also hurt America too.  If you did not live through the Reagan era or were not tuned into that era if you did, you have no concept of how distressing her "work" was to those of us who prefered to be proud of this nation as a citizen of the world and not utterly ashamed.

    People whoe express what I just did with vitriol in a one line sentiment make sense to me in this case.  She can hurt you - she is still hurting you - she played a part in creating Osama Bin Laden's power.  If you think that lady isn't reaching up from her grave to grab you by the throat still, you really need to learn a bit more about her and her accomplices.

  •  I agree with you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ripzaw

    Some of those comments have embarassed me. I didn't necessarily agree with all of the foreign policy decisions made during the Reagan era. Indeed many of those policies, especially in regard to Afghanistan, have come to literally bite us in the ass twenty years later.

    That being said some of the comments made toward her were inapporpriate. She has just died. It's crude--and downright disrespectful--to literally insult her while her body is still warm.

    That's the type of behavior that I'd expect to see at Free Republic or Lucianne.com, not here on DKos--and especially not on a blog trying to influence the Democratic Party. If the people on this site want to be taken sesriously by those in power, acting like immature children and disrespecting the dead is going to be counterproductive in achieving that goal.

    http://www.keen.com/jiacinto For DC related travel advice, please visit that link.

    by jiacinto on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 03:35:23 PM PST

  •  It is a public shaming (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ripzaw

    I understand this diary, and I do appreciate ripzaw's point of view.

    However, this is not about Jeane Kirkpatrick, it is about learning and remembering how evil happens, and what it can look like. Also, it is to make sure that people that do evil are shamed in the only eternity we limited earthlings can effect: collective memory.

    Evil actions come with a cost, and one cost is to forsake a gentle, respectful obituary or legacy.

    You present a nice idea, ripzaw, and I can't say you are wrong. But the People do have the power, and this is a woman who misused her hierarchical position to thwart the common good. So she will pay the price.

    It's not about hate, it is about justice.

    •  Maybe it's because I am getting up there in age (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ripzaw

      but I don't think justice is being served by writing crap about someone when they die. I don't necessarily feel bad about anyone criticizing Kirkpatrick like yesterday's diary did. I wouldn't have written any of those negative things, but you can't control what other people say or write, so why try. It is enough the diarist vented his/her displeasure because some of the commentary about Kirkpatrick did reflect a nasty side of this community. But, so what?

      •  Maybe God reads (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ripzaw

        Actually, I don't know how the downtrodden can ever have justice against such high-ranking wrongdoing as done by such a person.

        But one element of justice may be the howling. Sad, but maybe it comes down to just words. Or maybe it is cathartic.

        And maybe, perhaps just maybe, someone living will see and remember, and when faced with an evil choice, decide against a path that would gain them such vocal ridicule and enmity for the ages.

        •  One thing that happens when you die (0+ / 0-)

          is your days of evil deeds on earth are over, and the living live on. Legacies are bullshit except for the families and close friends the person's life touched. I think Kirkpatrick had 3 kids and some grandchildren. When you publicly lambaste someone during their death, you also hit their families too. That's why I personally don't care to be negative about anyone whose body isn't even cold in their grave yet.

          •  Again, Tazz, I repeat (0+ / 0-)

            The idea of shaming itself is to punish, and yes that would include families of the evil person. Kirkpatrick's family benefited from the limelight and payola. Never heard a squeak of complaint from them, either.

            The idea is to reduce evil by giving it a penalty. So again, if a person wishes to save their family from the unhappy feelings associated with the negativity, there is a solution.

            Stop doing evil.

            I know you do, but really, do you understand justice? It is not about making the wrongdoer feel good--justice is medicine for the crime. It heals, both parties. Unfortunately, Kirkpatrick's virulent crimes require her and her family to have ignominy attached to her name. It is the least she could do.

            A just person would, in the end, want to pay for their errors. It is not slander if it is true, so this public shaming gave Kirkpatrick a way to pay for her sins.

            I assume you do not mind having laws against crime. So what exactly is the punishment for someone who commits major evil from atop society? They have superseded jail, so what is the punishment?

            Or are you saying that the high and mighty are untouchable, by divine right? I just do not understand your position. What IS the correct punishment for a Kirkpatrick--and there needs VERY MUCH to be a punishment, and a harsh one, otherwise our society will be overrun with that sort of behavior.

            Do you not consider high crimes as punishable? Are families truly innocent of the crimes they condone and accept in fellow members?

            Does that not send a message that you may kill all you want and if you are highly-placed there will be no retribution? If so, why have jails or laws at all? Or are the wealthy and powerful simply immune in their actions against mere commoners?

  •  Delete this diary (6+ / 0-)

    But what is this public display of bile doing here?

    This is an open forum. I'm tired of these meta rants trying to associate the actions of a few with the  consciousness of the site as a whole.

    "Our collective dark side"? Please. There is no collective side to anytyhing here. Occasionally, a mass concensus emerges on certain issues -though it is rare.

    But by the most part, the views of this open forum are immensely diverse. And any attempt to attribute a broader character to the community as a whole from the postings or recommends of a few is wholly unfair and even a bit dangerous.

    Dangerous because if there is some overarching political character to the site as a whole, and that character is reflected in the sparce postings of a severe minority, then how easy it would be for trolls and sockpuppets to post in our good names offensive content to damage the reputation of the site.

    This diary, in perpetuating the myth of the "collective", contributes to the idea that the ravings of a couple hundred people reflect poorly on the other 90 fucking thousand registered users here.

    This is absurd and you should have addressed individual offenders in the comments of that diary.

    peace

    •  Don't delete it, this diary is proof (4+ / 0-)

      of how disconnected from reality many "well-intentioned" so-called Democrats are here on DKos.

      Kirkpatrick was a monster.

      Her policies were monstrous.

      Her regime (Reagan's) is sainted in the public and the press.

      Would FDR (or any great U.S. president) have us forget atrocities & their perpetrators?

      I'm glad to see a handful of us bearing witness over how twisted this diary is.

      Leave it up.  For all to see.

    •  As you may have guessed... (0+ / 0-)

      ...I'm not planning to delete it. I very much understand what you're saying. Consider, however, that this diary made it to and stayed on the recommended list over any number of more - or at all - constructive diaries that could have used the spot. More people wanted to talk about how glad they are that Jeane Kirkpatrick is burning in hell!!!!! than wanted to talk about most anything else. And yes, I think that's worth raising an eyebrow over.

      -4.75, -5.08 Be yourself. Imitation is suicide. -Andre Gide

      by ripzaw on Sun Dec 10, 2006 at 05:59:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

        I just hope we can seperate the actions of a few, or even a small army of posters from the community as a whole. I think some language making this seperation clear would serve future meta critiques well.

      •  Some of us don't believe in hell ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cookiebear

        ...and were just preempting the paeans that will be offered at her graveside.

        This is pure, unmitigated hate for the woman. And maybe she deserves it. I don't know. I personally am in no position to judge.

        With all due respect, if you are in no position to judge, then I suggest that your complaints about the comments of those of us who ARE in a position to judge are off-base.

  •  For God's sake, lighten up (0+ / 0-)

    This has nothing to do whatever with sex.  Jeanne Kirkpatrick was a self-important puffed up reactionary pig.  Goodbye, and good riddance.

  •  The diary itself was cool and circumspective (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sheddhead, esquimaux, J Royce

    The diary is right on, AND as others have pointed out in these comments, still (sadly) timely.

    It's funny how sometimes people are thinking the same thoughts.  A propos the idea that Ms. Kirkpatrick's spirit still walks among us, I'd just written a letter to the editor of the Dallas Morning News, and mused, "Perhaps the current Bush Admin foreign policy planners see the Middle East as the new Central America."

    To see a similar (if more sardonic) take on eulogy, see this pic.

    And, lest I be seen as some kind of piratical leech, I'll refer you to the wonderful artist who drew this.  He usually gets gigs with rad-left magazines (like 'Z'), but richly deserves a much, much wider currency in our culture:  The very insightful and talented Kirk Anderson

    I'll add a note of critique:  I love comix, and love a beautifully drawn line.  My real heroes are folks like Saul Steinberg, Yves Chaland, and ... Kirk.

  •  Pinochet's dead too (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    esquimaux

    As you know.

    He was not a nice person either.
    Thatcher is "saddened".

    Your mileage may vary.

  •  Hitler Loved Dogs. Mars Needs Women n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Get over yourself already (0+ / 0-)

    And maybe she deserves it. I don't know. I personally am in no position to judge.

    The purpose of the diary was to help you judge - to let you know that she deserves it.  It was a counter to all the whitewashed obitiaries we are seeing that fail to acknowledge what a monster she was.   A few of the commenters went over the line?  Boo hoo.  Maybe we should just send flowers and just pretend that she wasn't responsible for the deaths of thousands and oppression of millions.  

    There is a troll diary here, and its yours.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site