Hillary Clinton can’t get out of her own way – says Reagans started a national conversation on Aids
I remember the 1980’s very clearly and neither Nancy nor Ronald Reagan were in any sense advocates when it came to fighting the aids epidemic. My take is that Secretary Clinton simply has bad political instincts.
Hillary Clinton said the Reagans “started a national conversation” about HIV and AIDS in the 1980s during a Friday interview before former first lady Nancy Reagan’s funeral in Simi Valley, California.
“It may be hard for your viewers to remember how difficult it was for people to talk about HIV/AIDS back in the 1980s. And because of both President Reagan and Mrs. Reagan, in particular Mrs. Reagan, we started a national conversation, when before nobody would talk about it, nobody wanted to do anything about it,” Clinton said at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.
Clinton also praised Reagan for her “very effective, low-key advocacy.”
“It penetrated the public conscience. And people began to say, ‘Hey we have to do something about this too,'” she said.
But many were quick to point out Reagan’s mixed legacy addressing the start of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Nancy Reagan reportedly turned down a request from her friend, the actor Rock Hudson, to be transferred to another hospital so he could receive necessary treatment for complications related to AIDS in 1985, according to BuzzFeed. Hudson died less than two months later.
*shudder*
That’s really a dumb statement.
I do know that every other week (when they were in Washington) Nancy went down to a farm in northern Virginia that specialized in therapeutic riding for severely handicapped and chronically/terminally ill children. She was always there as “Ms. Nancy” and generally worked for 6-8 hours with the kids; many of the parents never actually knew who she was, and the press was never allowed to cover it. I have been told by people who worked there that she personally paid travel costs for about 200 kids and their families to come there over the years.
There are many things that can be laid at the feet of the Reagans and a lot of us in the 1980s, but when I learned about this, I had a softer spot for Nancy as a person rather than as a collection of astrology advocate and strange policy. It doesn’t make her into an American icon or anything, but …
Go-Go-Goldwater Gal!
Clinton apologizes: “While the Reagans were strong advocates for stem cell research and finding a cure for Alzheimer’s disease, I misspoke about their record on HIV and AIDS,” Clinton said in a statement. “For that, I’m sorry.”
Ronnie and Nancy Reagan did start a “National Conversation” on AIDS — one that was incredibly toxic and utterly lacking in compassion for those who were suffering.
But Reagan did initiate the IATAP funding in 1987 to help combat the AIDS epidemic.
Here’s the Reagan administration on AIDS. They treat it as a joke:
https://thescene.com/watch/vanityfair/the-reagan-administration-s-chilling-response-to-the-aids-crisis
Plus, yet another example of horrible journalism:
“But many were quick to point out Reagan’s mixed legacy addressing the start of the HIV/AIDS epidemic.”
There was nothing mixed about it. He ignored it. Silence equaled Death.
Simple mistake while trying to think of something nice to say about a pretty horrible woman at her funeral. I am glad she immediately apologized with a clear, unequivocal apology saying I was wrong and I am sorry. I respect that more than continued feigned outrage you see on Twitter now saying that Hillary is now somehow anti-LGBT.
Also, when it first happened, I wondered if Hillary wasn’t trolling us by making all of us openly talk about how horrible Nancy Reagan was publicly and on air.
Nancy Reagan reportedly caused global warming by wearing her red dresses and once had affair with Hitler according to Buzzfeed.
Why do Democrats always fall into the trap of trying to say something nice about horrible people? It happens all the time. It is still 1988 in the minds of most Democrats. SMH
Because Democrats are decent, civil people.
They weren’t civil last night in Chicago.
This link is to a Chicago Tribune columnist. The Chicago Tribune has a long history as a right-wing voice in the daily press.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chapman/ct-trump-chicago-rally-20160312-column.html
Donald Trump has defended what happened by saying his supporters were “taunted,” which apparently opened them up to physical violence.
This, if I remember correctly, is what started the conversation on AIDS. It was a big tipping point I would venture that pulled AIDS talk out of the Liberal bubble and onto mainstream dining room tables… I remember Siskel and Ebert played the whole thing in their Oscar review…
(Anyways, thanks for the memory jolt.)
Jason, DD – Why do you refer to Nancy Reagan as a horrible person? What specifically were her faults.
Crack a book. I’m not doing your homework.
Whatever, was just wondering if you had anything to back up your bullshit with.
Fortunately it is an easily discoverable objective fact.
“I had a softer spot for Nancy ”
I honestly never thought that much about her either way, except that she was a product of her time and her position as a Hollywood actress. She met my low expectations as do many people.
I’m not pessimistic, but part of my philosophy is to always demand the best of myself and expect the worse of everybody else. I often disappoint myself in regards to achieving the best, but most people have never failed to live down to my expectations of them.
I didn’t expect much of Ronald Reagan either. He did not disappoint.